What do you think?
Rate this book
Inteligenţa ecologică - Cunoaşte costul ascuns al fiecărui produs cumpărat şi cum influenţează acesta lumea în care trăim
Cum ar fi oare să se găsească în magazine produse care, pe lângă preţ, să afişeze pe etichete şi detalii despre modul şi condiţiile reale în care au fost fabricate? Clienţii ar putea astfel alege în cunoştinţă de cauză mărfurile, asigurându-se că nu au fost realizate cu ajutorul muncii copiilor şi că nu dăunează mediului înconjurător. Aceasta este doar una dintre întrebările de la care porneşte Daniel Goleman în încercarea de a dezvolta un nou concept - inteligenţa ecologică. Autorul propune un sistem în care cumpărătorii sunt precis informaţi asupra produselor pe care doresc să le achiziţioneze. Prin aplicarea transparenţei totale, unul dintre conceptele-cheie ale cărţii, vom putea face un prim pas către schimbarea modului de gândire şi spre responsabilizarea noastră, a tuturor, faţă de mediul înconjurător.
248 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
109 people are currently reading
3162 people want to read
About the author
Daniel Goleman
386 books5,508 followersAuthor of Emotional Intelligence and psychologist Daniel Goleman has transformed the way the world educates children, relates to family and friends, and conducts business. The Wall Street Journal ranked him one of the 10 most influential business thinkers.
Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence was on The New York Times best sellers list for a year-and-a-half. Named one of the 25 "Most Influential Business Management Books" by TIME, it has been translated into 40 languages. The Harvard Business Review called emotional intelligence (EI) “a revolutionary, paradigm-shattering idea.”
Goleman’s new book, Focus: The Hidden Driver of Excellence, argues that attention — a fundamental mental ability for success — has come under siege. Leadership that gets results demands a triple focus: on our inner world so we can manage ourselves; on others, for our relationships; and on the outer forces that shape our organizations and society itself.
His more recent books include The Brain and Emotional Intelligence, and Leadership: The Power of Emotional Intelligence - Selected Writings.
Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence was on The New York Times best sellers list for a year-and-a-half. Named one of the 25 "Most Influential Business Management Books" by TIME, it has been translated into 40 languages. The Harvard Business Review called emotional intelligence (EI) “a revolutionary, paradigm-shattering idea.”
Goleman’s new book, Focus: The Hidden Driver of Excellence, argues that attention — a fundamental mental ability for success — has come under siege. Leadership that gets results demands a triple focus: on our inner world so we can manage ourselves; on others, for our relationships; and on the outer forces that shape our organizations and society itself.
His more recent books include The Brain and Emotional Intelligence, and Leadership: The Power of Emotional Intelligence - Selected Writings.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 196 reviews
July 10, 2023
این کتاب و من انتخاب کردم برای گروه محیط زیستی ای که داریم
گروه «برای پیروز» برای بخش کتابخوانیش،کتاب خیلی علمی به بحث محیط زیست میپردازه، کلی اطلاعات جدید درباره زباله و زندگی سبز تر دستتون میاد ایده درباره این که چطوری میتونید خودتون با امکانات کم زندگی سبز تری داشته باشید تا بتونیم محیط زیست کشورمون رو بهتر حفظ کنیم، گرچه کتاب خیلی کشور های توسعه یافته رو مثال زده و با خوندن کتاب میفهمید که ما چقدر در این زمینه عقب هستیم و چقدر کار هایی هست که میشه انجام داد.
گروه «برای پیروز» برای بخش کتابخوانیش،کتاب خیلی علمی به بحث محیط زیست میپردازه، کلی اطلاعات جدید درباره زباله و زندگی سبز تر دستتون میاد ایده درباره این که چطوری میتونید خودتون با امکانات کم زندگی سبز تری داشته باشید تا بتونیم محیط زیست کشورمون رو بهتر حفظ کنیم، گرچه کتاب خیلی کشور های توسعه یافته رو مثال زده و با خوندن کتاب میفهمید که ما چقدر در این زمینه عقب هستیم و چقدر کار هایی هست که میشه انجام داد.
June 8, 2010
I really enjoyed this one and had a hard time putting it down! Goleman writes about how "green" really isn't "green." We may think we are buying green, but he says that nothing made industrially can be utterly green, only relatively more so. He talks about how "freegans" are green, as they try never to buy anything new, try not to drive, etc. Not a way of life that most of us will live, especially when it comes to food.
Good Guide is evaluating a lot of the chemicals found in the products we use everyday, ones that the US has grandfathered in, saying they are safe, even though no testing was ever done on them! In 1979, the newly formed Environmental Protection Agency drew up a list of about 62,000 industrial chemicals and ruled that their use could continue without any testing or review of any sort! Some of these are known to be highly toxic. Thirty years later, only a few hundred of them have actually been tested!
The Skin Deep database is another valuable resource that covers cosmetics. We are buying toxic shampoo for our babies, not even realizing what we are doing! Europe has a program called REACH which is testing these grandfathered chemicals and have already banned a large number of them.
BodyBurden.org will let you know what industrial chemicals we carry around in our bodies, not only from the products we use, but to the chemicals we are breathing in the air on a daily basis.
Things will only begin to change when we vote with our dollars and refuse to keep buying all these toxic products.... Let us all spread the word and make these companies change for the good of all of us!
Good Guide is evaluating a lot of the chemicals found in the products we use everyday, ones that the US has grandfathered in, saying they are safe, even though no testing was ever done on them! In 1979, the newly formed Environmental Protection Agency drew up a list of about 62,000 industrial chemicals and ruled that their use could continue without any testing or review of any sort! Some of these are known to be highly toxic. Thirty years later, only a few hundred of them have actually been tested!
The Skin Deep database is another valuable resource that covers cosmetics. We are buying toxic shampoo for our babies, not even realizing what we are doing! Europe has a program called REACH which is testing these grandfathered chemicals and have already banned a large number of them.
BodyBurden.org will let you know what industrial chemicals we carry around in our bodies, not only from the products we use, but to the chemicals we are breathing in the air on a daily basis.
Things will only begin to change when we vote with our dollars and refuse to keep buying all these toxic products.... Let us all spread the word and make these companies change for the good of all of us!
September 20, 2022
این پنج من به معنای پنج بودن کتاب نیست تنها به این معناست برای من که خوندن این کتاب واجبه.
https://taaghche.com/book/114838
https://taaghche.com/book/114838
March 20, 2023
Беше интересно четиво! Представя се идеята за пълна осведоменост на потребителите и радиална прозрачност на производствените процеси. На хартия всичко звучи лесно и бързо, но е точно обратното.
Това да се проследи, една тениска например, от засаждането на памука, производството във всичките му процеси, спедирането, употребата, та чак до изхвърлянето, да се пресметне ел.енергията, вода, химикалите вложени в производството й, причинените емисиите от въпросната тениска, е невъобразимо! Ще трябва да се вложат страшно много време, усилия, знания и средства. И докато за големите компании (Кока кола често беше давана за пример) е възможно, то за малкия бизнес ще е непосилно.
Така или иначе по нашите мили географски ширини за това ще се заговори след около 50 години, и след още толкова ще започне да се прави нещо по въпроса...евентуално. Трябва да се пречупи мисленето както на потребителите, така и на производителите.
Тъй като глобалното затопляне не е скорострелно поразяващо бедствие, а си напредва с неумолими, но бавни темпове, отказваме да поемем отговорност. Отказваме да действаме на момента. Да вземем например едно земетресение – времето е най-важното за спасяването на човешки животи. Всички мобилизират сили и започва да се действа.
А за замърсяването на околната среда, глобалното затопляне и т.н. - мисленето е: последствията ще се появят след години, нас вече може да ни няма, другите да му мислят!
Информативна и полезна!
Това да се проследи, една тениска например, от засаждането на памука, производството във всичките му процеси, спедирането, употребата, та чак до изхвърлянето, да се пресметне ел.енергията, вода, химикалите вложени в производството й, причинените емисиите от въпросната тениска, е невъобразимо! Ще трябва да се вложат страшно много време, усилия, знания и средства. И докато за големите компании (Кока кола често беше давана за пример) е възможно, то за малкия бизнес ще е непосилно.
Така или иначе по нашите мили географски ширини за това ще се заговори след около 50 години, и след още толкова ще започне да се прави нещо по въпроса...евентуално. Трябва да се пречупи мисленето както на потребителите, така и на производителите.
Тъй като глобалното затопляне не е скорострелно поразяващо бедствие, а си напредва с неумолими, но бавни темпове, отказваме да поемем отговорност. Отказваме да действаме на момента. Да вземем например едно земетресение – времето е най-важното за спасяването на човешки животи. Всички мобилизират сили и започва да се действа.
А за замърсяването на околната среда, глобалното затопляне и т.н. - мисленето е: последствията ще се появят след години, нас вече може да ни няма, другите да му мислят!
Информативна и полезна!
July 20, 2016
I kept wishing this would be more interesting.
It's such an earnest book that details how we can make purchasing more transparent, such that consumers will spur an ecological revolution by buying only goods made in an ecologically safe fashion. The problem with the book, for me, as with many such 'green' books, is that - by the time I've finished reading it - I feel overwhelmed by the number of toxic chemicals in our environment and completely incapable of doing anything about it.
Good quote:
"To tout a product as green on the basis of a single attribute - while ignoring numerous negative impacts - parallels a magician's sleight of hand."
It's such an earnest book that details how we can make purchasing more transparent, such that consumers will spur an ecological revolution by buying only goods made in an ecologically safe fashion. The problem with the book, for me, as with many such 'green' books, is that - by the time I've finished reading it - I feel overwhelmed by the number of toxic chemicals in our environment and completely incapable of doing anything about it.
Good quote:
"To tout a product as green on the basis of a single attribute - while ignoring numerous negative impacts - parallels a magician's sleight of hand."
March 25, 2011
If individual readers and businesses haven't heard previously about Life Cycle Assessment, radical transparency, and websites like Good Guides and Skin Deep, this book is worth a look.
Toxins accumulating in the environment and our bodies could be a depressing topic, but the author presents a hopeful message and a vision of how to move forward to improve things.
Some changes have, in fact, already begun using information technology and consumer power. More change is on the horizon to give individuals quicker knowledge access (maybe even on the store shelves or products themselves!!) about the health, environment, and human impacts of thousands of products to help individuals make their buying decisions to reflect their health concerns and/or values. The businesses that are prepared and responsive to the new realities will be more likely to thrive, Goleman asserts.
A reading note: the writing, while not mesmerizing, is plenty good-enough to endure, but you will want to use your quick reading skills for parts or examples that don't interest you or seem repetitive, but don't abandon ship too early -- some later chapters contain info that is worth running into.
However, if you don't read this book, at least take a look at web sites like Good Guides and Skin Deep. Is that product you are using for your baby or yourself a health risk you want to be taking or not? You might be able to locate alternative products that better reflect what you want, in essence voting with your dollars.
P.S. Three stars doesn't seem quite enough -- I'd like to add another half star, but the system doesn't permit that.
Toxins accumulating in the environment and our bodies could be a depressing topic, but the author presents a hopeful message and a vision of how to move forward to improve things.
Some changes have, in fact, already begun using information technology and consumer power. More change is on the horizon to give individuals quicker knowledge access (maybe even on the store shelves or products themselves!!) about the health, environment, and human impacts of thousands of products to help individuals make their buying decisions to reflect their health concerns and/or values. The businesses that are prepared and responsive to the new realities will be more likely to thrive, Goleman asserts.
A reading note: the writing, while not mesmerizing, is plenty good-enough to endure, but you will want to use your quick reading skills for parts or examples that don't interest you or seem repetitive, but don't abandon ship too early -- some later chapters contain info that is worth running into.
However, if you don't read this book, at least take a look at web sites like Good Guides and Skin Deep. Is that product you are using for your baby or yourself a health risk you want to be taking or not? You might be able to locate alternative products that better reflect what you want, in essence voting with your dollars.
P.S. Three stars doesn't seem quite enough -- I'd like to add another half star, but the system doesn't permit that.
July 11, 2025
I picked up this book about 3 years ago and have avoided it ever since because it felt to me like one of those “salad reads”, the book that you should read to educate yourself but a fantasy book is just so much more juicy and filling. However, it actually turned out to be a thoroughly enjoyable read. One of my favorite things about Goleman is he writes in a very scientific manner but you don’t have to be a Harvard graduate to understand his arguments. He breaks everything down to the root of an issue and provides a lot of other resources mentioned in this book to educate yourself. In terms of nonfiction writers, he and Malcolm Gladwell are the most enjoyable.
Stand out line
“Ignorance cripples market efficiency”
Stand out line
“Ignorance cripples market efficiency”
November 22, 2009
The thesis is that buying power can change the world. Goleman may have slightly over-extended his argument, but he makes a persuasive case.
July 26, 2022
Subsided some of my existential dread for a while. 10/10 recommend.
November 28, 2015
“Ecological Intelligence” by Daniel Goleman was such an inspirational book for me. Before reading this book I thought I knew enough how to take care for my health, to save environment and to treat it well, but this book was an “eye-opener” for me. I learnt a lot about health, environment, activism, or entrepreneurship.
“Ecological refers to an understanding of organism and their ecosystems, and intelligence connotes the capacity to learn from experience and deal effectively with our environment.”
“Ecological Intelligence”, Chpt.4, P.43.
I also faced many concepts in this book that weren’t familiar to me, such as, Industrial Ecology, Radical Transparency and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). All of these concepts evaluate the interconnections between a product and the environment in various stages.
I believe that if we knew the hidden impacts of our buying or selling, we could be better shoppers of a more positive and ecology-friendly future.
As we are living a “technological world”, the author provides also for his readers a website called goodguide.com where the consumer can find much faster the information about the goods they buy.
"The data we need to compare these impacts has for the most part gone missing. We can check cost and usually, quality. But apart from organic or 'eco' brands and labels, shoppers can rarely express a preference for less toxic or more environmentally sound alternatives."
Chapter 6, The Information Gap, page 71-72
This is something that is changing and there are tools to help us find information.
Goleman, sets out to make the "radical transparency" of our consumer choice a reality.
Beginning with Coca Cola's 1960's Life Cycle Assessment methodology (used to assess the impact of glass and plastic bottles) he show it is not as clear cut as we would like.
That organic pesticide T-Shirt wonderfully un-polluting was made by incredibly thirsty cotton using 2,700 liters of water to produce.
Goldman believes radical transparency may help to turn the challenge into opportunity.
Goleman describes also how within the capitalist global economic institution we've essentially got in place today, a new value order known as "radical transparency" (mostly via "an informed consumer") will provide the essential piece to uncover the impacts of external costs and benefits on our ecological systems create sustainable "virtuous cycles" to have an environmentally sustainable economy. The information technology revolution is the enabling mechanism that has allowed this economic internalization of ecological impacts to be more explicitly revealed.
Goleman provides good examples of how we are seeing a dramatic increase in more finely-tuned, data-driven "transparency" such as, Information Technology; For instance, internet, software, gadgets, etc., it brings us more capability to peer inside how stuff gets made.
So, Ecological Intelligence is a good theme for the broader environmental movement and environmentally-minded people should build on this aptly-named theme to broaden the discussion to include the social institutions that matter just as much as the consumer-to-business relationship. Mike Hardiman says that that at the University of Wisconsin they are trying to be leaders in improving the world. I believe that this is a part of everyone’s mission.
“Ecological refers to an understanding of organism and their ecosystems, and intelligence connotes the capacity to learn from experience and deal effectively with our environment.”
“Ecological Intelligence”, Chpt.4, P.43.
I also faced many concepts in this book that weren’t familiar to me, such as, Industrial Ecology, Radical Transparency and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). All of these concepts evaluate the interconnections between a product and the environment in various stages.
I believe that if we knew the hidden impacts of our buying or selling, we could be better shoppers of a more positive and ecology-friendly future.
As we are living a “technological world”, the author provides also for his readers a website called goodguide.com where the consumer can find much faster the information about the goods they buy.
"The data we need to compare these impacts has for the most part gone missing. We can check cost and usually, quality. But apart from organic or 'eco' brands and labels, shoppers can rarely express a preference for less toxic or more environmentally sound alternatives."
Chapter 6, The Information Gap, page 71-72
This is something that is changing and there are tools to help us find information.
Goleman, sets out to make the "radical transparency" of our consumer choice a reality.
Beginning with Coca Cola's 1960's Life Cycle Assessment methodology (used to assess the impact of glass and plastic bottles) he show it is not as clear cut as we would like.
That organic pesticide T-Shirt wonderfully un-polluting was made by incredibly thirsty cotton using 2,700 liters of water to produce.
Goldman believes radical transparency may help to turn the challenge into opportunity.
Goleman describes also how within the capitalist global economic institution we've essentially got in place today, a new value order known as "radical transparency" (mostly via "an informed consumer") will provide the essential piece to uncover the impacts of external costs and benefits on our ecological systems create sustainable "virtuous cycles" to have an environmentally sustainable economy. The information technology revolution is the enabling mechanism that has allowed this economic internalization of ecological impacts to be more explicitly revealed.
Goleman provides good examples of how we are seeing a dramatic increase in more finely-tuned, data-driven "transparency" such as, Information Technology; For instance, internet, software, gadgets, etc., it brings us more capability to peer inside how stuff gets made.
So, Ecological Intelligence is a good theme for the broader environmental movement and environmentally-minded people should build on this aptly-named theme to broaden the discussion to include the social institutions that matter just as much as the consumer-to-business relationship. Mike Hardiman says that that at the University of Wisconsin they are trying to be leaders in improving the world. I believe that this is a part of everyone’s mission.
December 27, 2014
Two recommended apps for concerned consumers: Skin Deep for personal hygiene products and Good Guide for everything else. The triple bottom line is evaluated: toxicity, social responsibility and environmental responsibility.
Otherwise, here's what stands out in this book: notions of life-cycle assessments (LCAs), the triple bottom line (health, society, environment), and most of all radical transparency - the notion that if we had more information available at point of purchase, we would make better decisions for ourselves, for each other, and for the planet. It's hopeful thinking. I'd like to believe it's true. On the other hand, today was boxing day and I happen to be in a city, so we tried to go to the shopping centre to find a special needle for my sewing machine and gave up after 20 minutes of parking lot incredulity.
Favourite passage: "Reducing unsustainability, though critical, does not create sustainability. The planet needs to be restored to a healthy state. We should go beyond the goal of merely lessening our harmful impacts and seek true sustainability - the flourishing levels of health, vitality and resilience that allow both humans and Earth's ecosystems to thrive."
Otherwise, here's what stands out in this book: notions of life-cycle assessments (LCAs), the triple bottom line (health, society, environment), and most of all radical transparency - the notion that if we had more information available at point of purchase, we would make better decisions for ourselves, for each other, and for the planet. It's hopeful thinking. I'd like to believe it's true. On the other hand, today was boxing day and I happen to be in a city, so we tried to go to the shopping centre to find a special needle for my sewing machine and gave up after 20 minutes of parking lot incredulity.
Favourite passage: "Reducing unsustainability, though critical, does not create sustainability. The planet needs to be restored to a healthy state. We should go beyond the goal of merely lessening our harmful impacts and seek true sustainability - the flourishing levels of health, vitality and resilience that allow both humans and Earth's ecosystems to thrive."
April 6, 2011
Honestly, after this, I feel ashamed of making ANY purchase (including local, organic vegetarian foods)! Believing I'm a conscientious shopper has apparently only been vanity on my part. No matter how much I keep my lights off, turn my heat down, take public transit, refrain from making frivolous purchases, and don't contribute to population growth, it's not enough. I feel discouraged by this book.
There is a lot of information contained in the book and it could be well used to fuel the fire for a 'deep' green movement but it's much more extreme I think than most people can (or are willing to) cope with. Would people really make the tough choices when given radical transparency? Even the 'vague transparency' that is pointed out to us NOW is too much for us to radically change consumer/human habits on the do-able stuff. Clearly taking the Easy Way is not working when it comes to curbing consumerism or reducing/recycling but ... one can only wear so many sweaters in the house when it's -30C in the winter. Alas, even the stuff that I think I'm doing well is not going to make any difference.
I'm going to curl up into a ball in the corner now....
There is a lot of information contained in the book and it could be well used to fuel the fire for a 'deep' green movement but it's much more extreme I think than most people can (or are willing to) cope with. Would people really make the tough choices when given radical transparency? Even the 'vague transparency' that is pointed out to us NOW is too much for us to radically change consumer/human habits on the do-able stuff. Clearly taking the Easy Way is not working when it comes to curbing consumerism or reducing/recycling but ... one can only wear so many sweaters in the house when it's -30C in the winter. Alas, even the stuff that I think I'm doing well is not going to make any difference.
I'm going to curl up into a ball in the corner now....
July 14, 2022
To be clear, I only really read the first 80 pages before I started skimming, and then ultimately gave up.
This book, as far as I read, is highly repetitive. It was sentence after sentence of the same idea worded in different ways. A chant of "it would be really good if..." made up the bulk of what I read though I was hoping for more concrete examples of what could actually be done and specifically what were the worst culprits and the best solutions, and what's actually being done. The author spent an awful lot of time talking up one particular website, yet when I looked the site up, it had been shut down for two years, which makes dozens and dozens (and maybe more) of pages that have no relevancy, that are a waste of time to read.
This book could have more effectively been written as a lengthy magazines article. If you're really looking for something more clear and detailed, try "The Story of Stuff" or "Overdressed" (and probably several others) instead. There are better books on this topic out there.
This book, as far as I read, is highly repetitive. It was sentence after sentence of the same idea worded in different ways. A chant of "it would be really good if..." made up the bulk of what I read though I was hoping for more concrete examples of what could actually be done and specifically what were the worst culprits and the best solutions, and what's actually being done. The author spent an awful lot of time talking up one particular website, yet when I looked the site up, it had been shut down for two years, which makes dozens and dozens (and maybe more) of pages that have no relevancy, that are a waste of time to read.
This book could have more effectively been written as a lengthy magazines article. If you're really looking for something more clear and detailed, try "The Story of Stuff" or "Overdressed" (and probably several others) instead. There are better books on this topic out there.
September 7, 2020
A solid 3.5 stars
(rounded up)
FINALLY
REVIEW SECTION
In terms of the length, this book was about the right length. The content was at times obvious or slow--or I just wasn't sure where the author was going or what point he was trying to come to. I think this book should really be named 'Ecological Transparency' because it's mostly about how transparency in the market could impact purchasing decisions and help the environment; it doesn't really cover what I would imagine ecological intelligence to deeply be (looking at our relationship with the planet BEYOND capitalism, with a potentially more spiritual or grand scheme view). It's mainly just about designing products better, fixing system inefficiencies, and being transparent so consumers can take mass action and vote with their dollars.
There wasn't a clear flow for some of the chapters and the path of the book was a little random (it wasn't super organized/there wasn't exactly a progressive build). At times the book was super interesting and there were some amazing facts I didn't know in it, whereas other times the content was obvious (to me at least), went on a bit too long, or wasn't super engaging.
*summary*
Collective Ecological Goals
1. Know your impacts
2. Favour improvements
3. Share what you learn. (50)
Consequences in three realms:
1. Geosphere (including soil, air, water and climate)
2. Biosphere (our bodies, those of other species, plant life)
3. Sociosphere (human concerns such as conditions for workers) (57)
"We as consumers lack a sound way to know the harm or good a product might do, and let that sway our preferences. Instead, the companies that make stuff most cheaply--and shun the expense of environmental or other virtues--can capture more of the market or achieve more profitable margins. Too often, they are in a race to the bottom" (73).
"The inequality between consumers and companies in terms of access to key data has been dubbed 'information asymmetry' by Joseph Stiglitz, who won a Nobel Prize in economics for his theory of how information shapes the operation of markets. Stiglitz sees any data gap between buyers and sellers as a major market flaw: ignorance cripples market efficiency, while sound data lets buyers make smarter choices. When sellers know something consumers do not--in other words, always--the information inequity hampers market fairness and efficiency." (73).
Goleman argues that things like style, low prices, aromas, etc.--"These sensory impressions drive our shopping decisions far more than some vague memory of the latest alarm over global warming, that news story about yet another toxin scare, or a grim scene of an Asian sweatshop glimpsed on some website" (95).
About young people: "[Y]ounger people are acutely aware of the need for an environmental bottom line. In 2007, a survey of American teenagers found half of the teens said that the degradation of the environment scared them. Almost 2/3 felt their generation will be more environmentally responsible than previous ones... This motivational difference makes younger generations more likely than older consumers to act on ecological transparency in their purchasing decisions, and to do so with greater urgency as the years go by. For starters, 80% say corporations should be held to a mandatory ethical code on their impact on the environment. ... 83% said if it were easy to do, they would take action to help the environment--if someone showed them how. And that, in essence, describes the function of radical transparency: making it easy to help." (126).
"When it comes to knowing which ingredient might be a medical concern, it's largely a guessing game. In some cases, science can identify certain ill effects from specific toxins... But most of the apprehension centres on the simple fact that no synthetic chemicals are integral to the body, and at a high enough level/in various combinations, their presence might not be good. Science cannot always predict what specific effects these exposures will have in a specific person; the body's biological maze is simply too complex. These chemicals engage tissues in multiple ways - some imitate the molecular structure of the body's own hormones, ending up lodged in the endocrine system; others mimic the chemical messengers that keep cells in the brain and body working smoothly together. Some are readily absorbed into body fat, while others--particularly the large number made from petroleum--readily slip through the oil-based membranes that surround cells (petroleum-based chemicals harbor carcinogenic benzene rings). Once absorbed into the body's tissues, these chemicals can wreak havoc in any number of ways, none of which may be immediately obvious." (145)
"An emerging consensus in oncology holds that a person's lifetime exposure to many small amounts of cancer-causing agents can be just as toxic as a few big doses of carcinogens. This model of causation rejects the search for a single smoking gun--some substance that in itself fosters cancer--but rather looks to a person's lifetime, cumulative exposure to a wide range of chemicals that trigger cell mutation. The continual barrage of mutagens can finally overwhelm the immune system's ability to kill off mutant cells and resist cancer. Our risk of cancer reflects the sum total day-to-day doses of carcinogenic molecules shed into our air, food, water." (148).
"This emerging causal model holds that all these diseases [COPD, heart disease, diabetes, etc.] share a single root phase, chronic inflammation. Years of steady inflammation undermine the endocrine and cardiovascular systems, and the immune system's ability to fight the beginning of some cancers..." Now, 'chronic systemic inflammatory syndrome' has been coined by the scientific community to denominate potentially-life threatening chronic inflammation. (151).
"Such findings create a paradigm challenge for toxicology: an exposure just one time to one of these chemicals resulted in no discernable damage. And up to this point that method--assessing the tissue damage from exposure to a single chemical or class of chemicals for a limited time--has been the gold standard in tests of a chemical's toxicity, our early warning system for protection. But it tells us nothing about how a given chemical might damage tissue if we are exposed to it in combination with others or over the course of a life span. The reality is that we are all exposed to a mix of countless chemicals continually, a predicament for which toxicologists have no assessment method for yet." (155).
"Fun" (aka disturbing) Facts
1. Bisphenol-A, used to harden plastics, has a chemical structure similar to that of the hormone estrogen. (94-95)
2. Who knew not eating sugar was eco-friendly - "sugarcane requires some of the most intense water use of any crop." (184)
Interesting case studies/stories/inventions
1. HSBC bank--students with bank accounts there started organizing protests in front of the bank's headquarters. ("This tale demonstrates the marketplace power of lowering the cost of information combined with information sharing... the digital revolution catalyzes new forms of information sharing, and its networks are far larger and more widely distributed than any in human history. Customers are no longer lone individuals, isolated and voiceless. The ability to share information freely creates a collective awareness that can trigger a coordinated reaction. Consumers can talk back to business in a far more powerful way than ever, en masse and synchronized.") (102)
2. Sustainability Wikipedia--a group in Europe has begun to develop this, "a version of the open-source dictionary that would focus on the backstory of everyday products. Enter 'peanut butter', and it would tell you everything about its impacts on health and the environment and its social dimensions. The goal is an ever-evolving update of ecological product knowledge, fed by a stream of inputs from experts and the public at large..." (107).
3. Microwave popcorn case study - popcorn worker's lung (page 143)
4. Shampoo composition (pg. 158)
5. Coke water consumption (pg. 184)
6. Tide Cold Water concept (pg. 188)
Extra Notes
"Perhaps the most powerful market force inherent in the GoodGuide system--in tandem with radical transparency--may be the built-in capacity to notify your e-circle about a product's ratings in a single click. Anyone in your e-circle can spread the news to his or her e-circle, again in one click, ad infinitum." (103)
"These digital tools threaten the standard veils that have hidden the raw facts about manufacturing processes, toxicity of ingredients, workers' conditions, and the like-for better or worse-from consumers' eyes. They alter the very ecosystem of marketplace info... inexorably, the internet is shattering the walls companies have set up to keep info about products locked away..." (103)
The author was asking about the idea of a website where consumers could go to get detailed information about a product with business professor Bill George. George said, "The first thing I'd want to know is, what motivates the people who rate the products? What's the motivation behind the website? What's the site's business model? Why can you trust this site?" (103).
Student said: "If we had more knowledge about the things we buy, would it make a difference? If we knew that the washwater from the dye of one t-shirt might contribute to nearby children's risk of leukemia while another did not, would we care? I think so. My generation likes to do good by buying differently. When given the option to be virtuous, we take it." (124).
😬...
! Yes, it is good in some ways to have a shampoo bar made of only palm oil, cacao seed butter and coconut oil (159)--but it's pretty ironic in a book about ecological impacts/intelligence that you did not mention that the harvesting of palm oil is often done through clear-cutting, destroying animal habitats and ruining rainforests... palm oil MUST be sourced sustainably if you care about eco-impacts! (it may not be toxic to human health, but it's definitely morally toxic to use destructively-sourced palm oil).
! Interesting mention: New Zealand researchers discovered genes that regulate flatulence in livestock, in order to develop a vaccine that will "reduce flatulence emissions from livestock - which now account for 28% of human-related methane buildup" (215). I mean, first of all this is the same moral issue as GMOs and playing with genes (we may think we know what we're doing, but we don't). Animals release gas for a reason, so trying to manipulate genes to reduce this seems like a dumb idea from the get-go. Most of all, this DOESN'T ADDRESS THE ACTUAL PROBLEM OF ANIMAL-RELATED GHG EMISSIONS--THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TOO MUCH LIVESTOCK BECAUSE TOO MANY OF US EAT TOO MUCH MEAT AND ANIMAL PRODUCTS. The real issue needs to be addressed!! Which was not addressed at all in the book. WE CONSUME TOO MUCH. WE ABUSE TOO MUCH. WE WASTE TOO MUCH and this is one of the biggest problems in our society, morally, environmentally, emotionally, etc.
Physician Ian McCallum says, "We have to stop speaking about the Earth being in need of healing. The Earth doesn't need healing. We do." (great quote to have at the end of the book btw)
In Conclusion: Recommendation
I would recommend this to environmentally-interested people/consumers. It's not the most life-changing or amazing book out there and it may spark some kind of interest in being aware of the impacts of your shopping (although it doesn't provide too many currently available and developed tools to help). It kind of talks about the subject generally and educates you on it generally, rather than providing action steps. It talks a lot in theory and in the future, not as much in present day. There are useful tidbits of information, case studies and examples though. I would say it was worth reading. It's also ~250 pages so not an incredibly long read. So would recommend to people in general, especially if you're trying to be an aware consumer (since we are all consumers anyway).
(rounded up)
FINALLY
REVIEW SECTION
In terms of the length, this book was about the right length. The content was at times obvious or slow--or I just wasn't sure where the author was going or what point he was trying to come to. I think this book should really be named 'Ecological Transparency' because it's mostly about how transparency in the market could impact purchasing decisions and help the environment; it doesn't really cover what I would imagine ecological intelligence to deeply be (looking at our relationship with the planet BEYOND capitalism, with a potentially more spiritual or grand scheme view). It's mainly just about designing products better, fixing system inefficiencies, and being transparent so consumers can take mass action and vote with their dollars.
There wasn't a clear flow for some of the chapters and the path of the book was a little random (it wasn't super organized/there wasn't exactly a progressive build). At times the book was super interesting and there were some amazing facts I didn't know in it, whereas other times the content was obvious (to me at least), went on a bit too long, or wasn't super engaging.
*summary*
Collective Ecological Goals
1. Know your impacts
2. Favour improvements
3. Share what you learn. (50)
Consequences in three realms:
1. Geosphere (including soil, air, water and climate)
2. Biosphere (our bodies, those of other species, plant life)
3. Sociosphere (human concerns such as conditions for workers) (57)
"We as consumers lack a sound way to know the harm or good a product might do, and let that sway our preferences. Instead, the companies that make stuff most cheaply--and shun the expense of environmental or other virtues--can capture more of the market or achieve more profitable margins. Too often, they are in a race to the bottom" (73).
"The inequality between consumers and companies in terms of access to key data has been dubbed 'information asymmetry' by Joseph Stiglitz, who won a Nobel Prize in economics for his theory of how information shapes the operation of markets. Stiglitz sees any data gap between buyers and sellers as a major market flaw: ignorance cripples market efficiency, while sound data lets buyers make smarter choices. When sellers know something consumers do not--in other words, always--the information inequity hampers market fairness and efficiency." (73).
Goleman argues that things like style, low prices, aromas, etc.--"These sensory impressions drive our shopping decisions far more than some vague memory of the latest alarm over global warming, that news story about yet another toxin scare, or a grim scene of an Asian sweatshop glimpsed on some website" (95).
About young people: "[Y]ounger people are acutely aware of the need for an environmental bottom line. In 2007, a survey of American teenagers found half of the teens said that the degradation of the environment scared them. Almost 2/3 felt their generation will be more environmentally responsible than previous ones... This motivational difference makes younger generations more likely than older consumers to act on ecological transparency in their purchasing decisions, and to do so with greater urgency as the years go by. For starters, 80% say corporations should be held to a mandatory ethical code on their impact on the environment. ... 83% said if it were easy to do, they would take action to help the environment--if someone showed them how. And that, in essence, describes the function of radical transparency: making it easy to help." (126).
"When it comes to knowing which ingredient might be a medical concern, it's largely a guessing game. In some cases, science can identify certain ill effects from specific toxins... But most of the apprehension centres on the simple fact that no synthetic chemicals are integral to the body, and at a high enough level/in various combinations, their presence might not be good. Science cannot always predict what specific effects these exposures will have in a specific person; the body's biological maze is simply too complex. These chemicals engage tissues in multiple ways - some imitate the molecular structure of the body's own hormones, ending up lodged in the endocrine system; others mimic the chemical messengers that keep cells in the brain and body working smoothly together. Some are readily absorbed into body fat, while others--particularly the large number made from petroleum--readily slip through the oil-based membranes that surround cells (petroleum-based chemicals harbor carcinogenic benzene rings). Once absorbed into the body's tissues, these chemicals can wreak havoc in any number of ways, none of which may be immediately obvious." (145)
"An emerging consensus in oncology holds that a person's lifetime exposure to many small amounts of cancer-causing agents can be just as toxic as a few big doses of carcinogens. This model of causation rejects the search for a single smoking gun--some substance that in itself fosters cancer--but rather looks to a person's lifetime, cumulative exposure to a wide range of chemicals that trigger cell mutation. The continual barrage of mutagens can finally overwhelm the immune system's ability to kill off mutant cells and resist cancer. Our risk of cancer reflects the sum total day-to-day doses of carcinogenic molecules shed into our air, food, water." (148).
"This emerging causal model holds that all these diseases [COPD, heart disease, diabetes, etc.] share a single root phase, chronic inflammation. Years of steady inflammation undermine the endocrine and cardiovascular systems, and the immune system's ability to fight the beginning of some cancers..." Now, 'chronic systemic inflammatory syndrome' has been coined by the scientific community to denominate potentially-life threatening chronic inflammation. (151).
"Such findings create a paradigm challenge for toxicology: an exposure just one time to one of these chemicals resulted in no discernable damage. And up to this point that method--assessing the tissue damage from exposure to a single chemical or class of chemicals for a limited time--has been the gold standard in tests of a chemical's toxicity, our early warning system for protection. But it tells us nothing about how a given chemical might damage tissue if we are exposed to it in combination with others or over the course of a life span. The reality is that we are all exposed to a mix of countless chemicals continually, a predicament for which toxicologists have no assessment method for yet." (155).
"Fun" (aka disturbing) Facts
1. Bisphenol-A, used to harden plastics, has a chemical structure similar to that of the hormone estrogen. (94-95)
2. Who knew not eating sugar was eco-friendly - "sugarcane requires some of the most intense water use of any crop." (184)
Interesting case studies/stories/inventions
1. HSBC bank--students with bank accounts there started organizing protests in front of the bank's headquarters. ("This tale demonstrates the marketplace power of lowering the cost of information combined with information sharing... the digital revolution catalyzes new forms of information sharing, and its networks are far larger and more widely distributed than any in human history. Customers are no longer lone individuals, isolated and voiceless. The ability to share information freely creates a collective awareness that can trigger a coordinated reaction. Consumers can talk back to business in a far more powerful way than ever, en masse and synchronized.") (102)
2. Sustainability Wikipedia--a group in Europe has begun to develop this, "a version of the open-source dictionary that would focus on the backstory of everyday products. Enter 'peanut butter', and it would tell you everything about its impacts on health and the environment and its social dimensions. The goal is an ever-evolving update of ecological product knowledge, fed by a stream of inputs from experts and the public at large..." (107).
3. Microwave popcorn case study - popcorn worker's lung (page 143)
4. Shampoo composition (pg. 158)
5. Coke water consumption (pg. 184)
6. Tide Cold Water concept (pg. 188)
Extra Notes
"Perhaps the most powerful market force inherent in the GoodGuide system--in tandem with radical transparency--may be the built-in capacity to notify your e-circle about a product's ratings in a single click. Anyone in your e-circle can spread the news to his or her e-circle, again in one click, ad infinitum." (103)
"These digital tools threaten the standard veils that have hidden the raw facts about manufacturing processes, toxicity of ingredients, workers' conditions, and the like-for better or worse-from consumers' eyes. They alter the very ecosystem of marketplace info... inexorably, the internet is shattering the walls companies have set up to keep info about products locked away..." (103)
The author was asking about the idea of a website where consumers could go to get detailed information about a product with business professor Bill George. George said, "The first thing I'd want to know is, what motivates the people who rate the products? What's the motivation behind the website? What's the site's business model? Why can you trust this site?" (103).
Student said: "If we had more knowledge about the things we buy, would it make a difference? If we knew that the washwater from the dye of one t-shirt might contribute to nearby children's risk of leukemia while another did not, would we care? I think so. My generation likes to do good by buying differently. When given the option to be virtuous, we take it." (124).
😬...
! Yes, it is good in some ways to have a shampoo bar made of only palm oil, cacao seed butter and coconut oil (159)--but it's pretty ironic in a book about ecological impacts/intelligence that you did not mention that the harvesting of palm oil is often done through clear-cutting, destroying animal habitats and ruining rainforests... palm oil MUST be sourced sustainably if you care about eco-impacts! (it may not be toxic to human health, but it's definitely morally toxic to use destructively-sourced palm oil).
! Interesting mention: New Zealand researchers discovered genes that regulate flatulence in livestock, in order to develop a vaccine that will "reduce flatulence emissions from livestock - which now account for 28% of human-related methane buildup" (215). I mean, first of all this is the same moral issue as GMOs and playing with genes (we may think we know what we're doing, but we don't). Animals release gas for a reason, so trying to manipulate genes to reduce this seems like a dumb idea from the get-go. Most of all, this DOESN'T ADDRESS THE ACTUAL PROBLEM OF ANIMAL-RELATED GHG EMISSIONS--THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TOO MUCH LIVESTOCK BECAUSE TOO MANY OF US EAT TOO MUCH MEAT AND ANIMAL PRODUCTS. The real issue needs to be addressed!! Which was not addressed at all in the book. WE CONSUME TOO MUCH. WE ABUSE TOO MUCH. WE WASTE TOO MUCH and this is one of the biggest problems in our society, morally, environmentally, emotionally, etc.
Physician Ian McCallum says, "We have to stop speaking about the Earth being in need of healing. The Earth doesn't need healing. We do." (great quote to have at the end of the book btw)
In Conclusion: Recommendation
I would recommend this to environmentally-interested people/consumers. It's not the most life-changing or amazing book out there and it may spark some kind of interest in being aware of the impacts of your shopping (although it doesn't provide too many currently available and developed tools to help). It kind of talks about the subject generally and educates you on it generally, rather than providing action steps. It talks a lot in theory and in the future, not as much in present day. There are useful tidbits of information, case studies and examples though. I would say it was worth reading. It's also ~250 pages so not an incredibly long read. So would recommend to people in general, especially if you're trying to be an aware consumer (since we are all consumers anyway).
April 5, 2025
In Ecological Intelligence Daniel Goleman (American psychologist, author, and science journalist) makes the case that if the public were aware of the environmental, health and safety issues associated with the manufacture and use of consumer products, that they would purchase products that were less harmful. This would drive manufacturers to produce products that were better for the environment, leading to a virtuous cycle of improvement.
There are certainly historic examples of public pressure causing businesses to change their practices. The question is whether this can be broadly implemented for all manufacturing sectors based upon environmental considerations.
Personally, I’m skeptical. Some people will avoid products that they deem to be harmful to themselves (such as cigarettes), but the ‘environment’ is an abstract concept for most. It’s also quite complicated to boil a product’s environmental impact down to a simple metric that the public can understand (Goleman provides several examples in the book, though none of them has caught on to any meaningful extent). Finally, there’s a large segment of the public that simply doesn’t care about the environment (about half of US citizens aren’t concerned about climate change for example).
Finally, I’ll just point out that Goleman’s solution relies on voluntary action by the public. I can’t think of a single example where voluntary action has solved any global problem ... ever. It has simply never worked in practice. A far better approach, with a proven track record of success is governmental regulation, though I suppose this would not make for a particularly compelling book.
There are certainly historic examples of public pressure causing businesses to change their practices. The question is whether this can be broadly implemented for all manufacturing sectors based upon environmental considerations.
Personally, I’m skeptical. Some people will avoid products that they deem to be harmful to themselves (such as cigarettes), but the ‘environment’ is an abstract concept for most. It’s also quite complicated to boil a product’s environmental impact down to a simple metric that the public can understand (Goleman provides several examples in the book, though none of them has caught on to any meaningful extent). Finally, there’s a large segment of the public that simply doesn’t care about the environment (about half of US citizens aren’t concerned about climate change for example).
Finally, I’ll just point out that Goleman’s solution relies on voluntary action by the public. I can’t think of a single example where voluntary action has solved any global problem ... ever. It has simply never worked in practice. A far better approach, with a proven track record of success is governmental regulation, though I suppose this would not make for a particularly compelling book.
June 9, 2022
Muy útil para educadores ambientales, con tips, ejercicios y relatos inspiradores.
March 18, 2012
I found this book to be repetitive at the beginning and pretty depressing. As I continued reading I was appreciative of information about links such as GoodGuide which consumers can use to help make decisions about what they purchase based on a number of parameters.
"GoodGuide can evaluate a company's policies, its disclosure of key information on products, and ultimately a company's impacts on consumers, workers, communities, and the environment."
Warning: GoodGuide can eat up a lot of your time. It is fascinating checking out various companies and products.
Goleman does make the point that small individual changes won't save the world, but the impact of many consumers speaking with their social media voice and purchasing dollars does make a difference, as illustrated by the recent decision of Pepsi and Coke to change their coloring formula.
The other important site mentioned is Earthster which allows companies to share what they've learned about solving environmental problems and which rates businesses re their progress in making improvements rather than just declaring them bad guys.
"If that environmental manager finds out they are worse than the average toxic release for their industry, and wants to keep the Texas business, then we would record their present levels as a benchmark for progress. Once they find ways to lower their release, they can show a reduction from that benchmark in pollution per product sold."
'Progress is a game that every company can play,' says Norris. 'Everyone can get better incrementally-and we need them to. The idea is not just to make a few green companies rich but to spread progress everywhere in the economy.'
As huge institutional buyers and retailers pressure their suppliers to improve, those suppliers will pass that pressure down their supply chain. Anyone who has a way to improve some aspect of products' LCAs can let that be know on Earthster."
The tools are out there and it's a question whether they will be used by enough businesses and consumers to make a difference. My hope is the power of social media will tip the balance toward transparency and ecological intelligence.
"GoodGuide can evaluate a company's policies, its disclosure of key information on products, and ultimately a company's impacts on consumers, workers, communities, and the environment."
Warning: GoodGuide can eat up a lot of your time. It is fascinating checking out various companies and products.
Goleman does make the point that small individual changes won't save the world, but the impact of many consumers speaking with their social media voice and purchasing dollars does make a difference, as illustrated by the recent decision of Pepsi and Coke to change their coloring formula.
The other important site mentioned is Earthster which allows companies to share what they've learned about solving environmental problems and which rates businesses re their progress in making improvements rather than just declaring them bad guys.
"If that environmental manager finds out they are worse than the average toxic release for their industry, and wants to keep the Texas business, then we would record their present levels as a benchmark for progress. Once they find ways to lower their release, they can show a reduction from that benchmark in pollution per product sold."
'Progress is a game that every company can play,' says Norris. 'Everyone can get better incrementally-and we need them to. The idea is not just to make a few green companies rich but to spread progress everywhere in the economy.'
As huge institutional buyers and retailers pressure their suppliers to improve, those suppliers will pass that pressure down their supply chain. Anyone who has a way to improve some aspect of products' LCAs can let that be know on Earthster."
The tools are out there and it's a question whether they will be used by enough businesses and consumers to make a difference. My hope is the power of social media will tip the balance toward transparency and ecological intelligence.
March 18, 2012
I really liked the treatment of incremental improvements:
"Finally, are radical transparency and all its incremental improvements enough? The adequacy of perpetual upgrades alone was questioned from a surprising source: John Ehrenfeld, the executive director of the International Society for Industrial Ecology. One of the founders of the field, Ehrenfeld fears that in terms of the massive challenges facing our planet, these gradual improvements may be too little, too late. Ehrenfeld points out that simply reducing our unsustainability results in a host of technological fixes that leave untouched the underlying causes of these problems. Increasing the fuel economy of cars as the main strategy for reducing the environmental impacts of driving is such a partial solution: Although gasoline needed per mile has dropped over the years, the number of miles driven (at least before the oil price shock) has risen so greatly that it has canceled out any benefits to the environment. Says Ehrenfeld, “This strategy is shortsighted to the extent it shifts the burden away from developing better transportation alternatives... The global industrial system is broken; the environment would rather not have us here at all. Reducing unsustainability, though critical, does not create sustainability. The planet needs to be restored to a healthy state. We should go beyond the goal of merely lessening our harmful impacts and seek true sustainability”—the flourishing levels of health, vitality, and resilience that allow both humans and Earth's ecosystems to thrive."
"Finally, are radical transparency and all its incremental improvements enough? The adequacy of perpetual upgrades alone was questioned from a surprising source: John Ehrenfeld, the executive director of the International Society for Industrial Ecology. One of the founders of the field, Ehrenfeld fears that in terms of the massive challenges facing our planet, these gradual improvements may be too little, too late. Ehrenfeld points out that simply reducing our unsustainability results in a host of technological fixes that leave untouched the underlying causes of these problems. Increasing the fuel economy of cars as the main strategy for reducing the environmental impacts of driving is such a partial solution: Although gasoline needed per mile has dropped over the years, the number of miles driven (at least before the oil price shock) has risen so greatly that it has canceled out any benefits to the environment. Says Ehrenfeld, “This strategy is shortsighted to the extent it shifts the burden away from developing better transportation alternatives... The global industrial system is broken; the environment would rather not have us here at all. Reducing unsustainability, though critical, does not create sustainability. The planet needs to be restored to a healthy state. We should go beyond the goal of merely lessening our harmful impacts and seek true sustainability”—the flourishing levels of health, vitality, and resilience that allow both humans and Earth's ecosystems to thrive."
March 15, 2012
I liked the topic more than the book. The book did provide significant useful and interesting information about the difficulty in understanding the environmental impact of the things we consume, and the efforts to more systematically analyze those impacts, then reduce them. I particularly enjoyed learning of studies indicating that about 2/3 of consumers do care about the social and environmental impact of what they buy but don't have the time, inclination or wherewithal to do their own research. Based on this information, a lot of consumer and environmental groups are working to create databases and corresponding easy-to-use apps that will bring the information directly to the point of sale.
But the information in the book was presented in a bit of a jumble, and as a result there was some redundancy. It was longer than necessary too. [I'm finding this with a lot of nonfiction lately.] Also, I'd have liked more discussion about the fact that no matter HOW we consume, the impact is unsustainable, which is why we need to consume much less. Still, worth a look for those concerned about the environmental and social impacts of stuff.
But the information in the book was presented in a bit of a jumble, and as a result there was some redundancy. It was longer than necessary too. [I'm finding this with a lot of nonfiction lately.] Also, I'd have liked more discussion about the fact that no matter HOW we consume, the impact is unsustainable, which is why we need to consume much less. Still, worth a look for those concerned about the environmental and social impacts of stuff.
July 27, 2013
Warning: not for the faint of heart. The more I read books like this, and start thinking about the thousands of environmental effects connected to even the simplest of everyday activities, the harder it gets to live in the world. Although a little redundant at times, Goleman presents critical information and ideas about how we can start moving toward a less toxic, more sustainable world. I especially appreciated the section on how many modern diseases, including autism, COPD, multiple sclerosis and other states of chronic inflammation may be a reflection of environmental toxic overload. We've been looking fruitlessly for one single "smoking gun", all the while failing to appreciate how the cumulative effect of many low-level toxin exposures over time can overwhelm the body's ability to resist disease once the tipping point is reached. Goleman does not talk about the growing problem with death of the honeybee population and colony collapse disorder, but I couldn't help but think of the parallels. We are those bees.
January 18, 2015
As I picked it up at the library having not carefully reading the subtitle, I thought if was more along the lines of Gardner's multiple intelligences, so it was quite a bit different from what I was expecting. That being said, generally the topic interests me so I kept reading. He makes a case for "radical transparency" (making clear the environmental and social impact of goods), but I don't have his faith that making such a database will massively impact peoples' spending habits. Some of the things that the 2009 book saw in infancy (easy-to-use apps or websites to rate products) are now present and commonplace, so that was interesting. I do think he's right that a "ratings" app is very useful...I know that no matter what I'm purchasing I check out what other people have written about it. So I do see his point, just not sure if environmental/social issues will triumph over availability and price. We'll see!
April 5, 2010
Assumes you know the ecology. This book is focused on the idea that 'radical transparency' regrading the origins and production processes of the goods we buy would allow us to make market choices that would create more sustainable consumption. It shows some interesting examples of what market pressure can do when the public is informed. But we are far from the state of information Goleman considers necessary and would take a lot of activism in people demanding the information which many, if not most, companies want to withhold. And it is still based on the idea of a heavily consumerist society with not much emphasis given to the idea that humans might have to radically limit that consumption. Still, it is well worth reading and show how complicated considering all the factors to determine the ecological cost of any given product is.
July 8, 2010
This book is a must-read for every consumer! The author talks about how we really don’t have a transparent marketplace – meaning that we really don’t know the labor force that goes into making our products and the true carbon cost of items since companies hide this information and we don’t do our best to look for it. If we did, we could make wiser decisions as consumers. Goleman talks about how this is changing and how to support the change.
One of the BEST things I learned in this book is to go to http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/inde... to look at ingredients in products I purchase. Your skin is your largest organ and many products you buy (like shampoos, sunblock, makeup, etc…) contain biohazards. You can go to this website and look up which ones may be in the products you use. I’ve already emailed two companies and asked them to remove the offending ingredients!
One of the BEST things I learned in this book is to go to http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/inde... to look at ingredients in products I purchase. Your skin is your largest organ and many products you buy (like shampoos, sunblock, makeup, etc…) contain biohazards. You can go to this website and look up which ones may be in the products you use. I’ve already emailed two companies and asked them to remove the offending ingredients!
November 21, 2017
كتاب رائع جدا .. اروع ما فيه انه دسم بالمعلومات وانه يكسب القارئ فعلا شيء من الذكاء البيئي المطلوب في عصرنا الحالي
December 29, 2017
Some interesting points about transparency improving ecological impacts, but fails to address shortcomings and flaws in this approach. Too long for what it is.
June 26, 2021
👉 La sinceridad ante todo 👈
El 28 de enero es el Día Mundial de la Reducción de Emisión de CO2. Por ese motivo, estaba leyendo este libro para hacerles una reseña motivadora e inspiradora. No obstante, como dijo el innombrable: "veníamos bien, pero pasaron cosas".
Al principio parecía un libro interesante. El autor exponía una serie de herramientas y formas de ver la sustentabilidad y la "inteligencia ecológica" que son muy innovadoras. Comenzaba estableciendo el papel del consumidor dentro de esta gran cadena de contaminación y desperdicios que ejerce cualquier producto de consumo diario, y sus reflexiones eran admirables y profundas.
El problema fue, que al proseguir con la lectura fui descubriendo que, en realidad, todas sus premisas ponen como centro de conflicto y acción al consumidor. "Percibo dejos de neoliberalismo", le dije a mi compañero mientras leía. Y sí, efectivamente, al pasar páginas y páginas comenzaron a aparecer términos como "libre mercado", "capitalismo y libertad", etc.
Además, todas las voces que aparecen en el libro son de ejecutivos empresariales (quienes, por supuesto, no serán imparciales a la hora de opinar) y de organizaciones autónomas. Es decir, el papel del Estado, de los organismos de salud internacionales y de ciertos grupos científicos relevantes parecen no tener importancia.
Toda la situación es vista desde el ángulo empresarial, llegando incluso a naturalizar el hecho de que una empresa tomará medidas ecológicas solo sin son rentables financieramente. Además, se les otorga una cierta "ingenuidad" o "inocencia" a los altos mandos de las mismas que, desde mi punto de vista, pueden interpretarse de dos maneras: inocencia de quién escribe o complicidad.
Por otro lado, por momentos el argumento presenta varias contradicciones. El autor expone (sobre todo en los últimos capítulos) opiniones profesionales de gente que básicamente refuta su pensamiento y que instan a ver las cosas de una forma más global y estructural. Sin embargo, su conclusión no se ajusta a estas ideas, sino que son reformulaciones de lo ya dicho que no se relacionan con los puntos analizados. Es extraño...
Debo decir que me decepcioné. Que esperaba encontrar herramientas eficaces para obtener una inteligencia ecológica que nos hiciera avanzar como sociedad y como seres humanos, y me encontré con propaganda neoliberalista y poca reflexión crítica del problema.
Y bueno, por ser una reseña de GR, me quedan muchas cosas en el tintero. Este debate da para rato, sobre todo en temas tan complejos como el verdadero papel del sistema capitalista en la problemática ambiental, los sistemas agropecuarios anti-ecológicos (monocultivo), los efectos de la industria ganadera, las repercusiones de la modificación genética y tantos otros temas que Goleman toca muy por encima en la obra.
El 28 de enero es el Día Mundial de la Reducción de Emisión de CO2. Por ese motivo, estaba leyendo este libro para hacerles una reseña motivadora e inspiradora. No obstante, como dijo el innombrable: "veníamos bien, pero pasaron cosas".
Al principio parecía un libro interesante. El autor exponía una serie de herramientas y formas de ver la sustentabilidad y la "inteligencia ecológica" que son muy innovadoras. Comenzaba estableciendo el papel del consumidor dentro de esta gran cadena de contaminación y desperdicios que ejerce cualquier producto de consumo diario, y sus reflexiones eran admirables y profundas.
El problema fue, que al proseguir con la lectura fui descubriendo que, en realidad, todas sus premisas ponen como centro de conflicto y acción al consumidor. "Percibo dejos de neoliberalismo", le dije a mi compañero mientras leía. Y sí, efectivamente, al pasar páginas y páginas comenzaron a aparecer términos como "libre mercado", "capitalismo y libertad", etc.
Además, todas las voces que aparecen en el libro son de ejecutivos empresariales (quienes, por supuesto, no serán imparciales a la hora de opinar) y de organizaciones autónomas. Es decir, el papel del Estado, de los organismos de salud internacionales y de ciertos grupos científicos relevantes parecen no tener importancia.
Toda la situación es vista desde el ángulo empresarial, llegando incluso a naturalizar el hecho de que una empresa tomará medidas ecológicas solo sin son rentables financieramente. Además, se les otorga una cierta "ingenuidad" o "inocencia" a los altos mandos de las mismas que, desde mi punto de vista, pueden interpretarse de dos maneras: inocencia de quién escribe o complicidad.
Por otro lado, por momentos el argumento presenta varias contradicciones. El autor expone (sobre todo en los últimos capítulos) opiniones profesionales de gente que básicamente refuta su pensamiento y que instan a ver las cosas de una forma más global y estructural. Sin embargo, su conclusión no se ajusta a estas ideas, sino que son reformulaciones de lo ya dicho que no se relacionan con los puntos analizados. Es extraño...
Debo decir que me decepcioné. Que esperaba encontrar herramientas eficaces para obtener una inteligencia ecológica que nos hiciera avanzar como sociedad y como seres humanos, y me encontré con propaganda neoliberalista y poca reflexión crítica del problema.
Y bueno, por ser una reseña de GR, me quedan muchas cosas en el tintero. Este debate da para rato, sobre todo en temas tan complejos como el verdadero papel del sistema capitalista en la problemática ambiental, los sistemas agropecuarios anti-ecológicos (monocultivo), los efectos de la industria ganadera, las repercusiones de la modificación genética y tantos otros temas que Goleman toca muy por encima en la obra.
January 11, 2019
I do not recall the specifics of how this particular gem of a book found its way into my hands; it was , however, highly fortuitous event, even if it was heartbreaking to loose my ignorance of at least the basics of this novel science industrial ecology. And there is no dancing around it - this book is as hard-hitting as "Silent Spring", and it is at the same time undeniable, impossible to argue with, laden with facts and nothing but the facts, but these are facts most people don't know (and that is the crux of the problem). This subject has to be taught at schools, and despite the fact that I majored in biology, and considered myself very knowledgeable of the crisis that is the sixth extinction (the sum total of the current, ever worsening ecological problems that, for many species we share this world with have already been the equivalent of an extinction level event) , I was shocked at the extent of my ignorance when it came to the very complex matter of industrial ecology. That is not to say that the book is difficult to read - it is remarkably condensed, to the point, and understandable. That is what astonished me so much - that there existed such a simple introduction to such a vital part of ecology, which had somehow eluded me completely for years. Anybody with any knowledge in ecology will be thinking among the same lines of "How didn't I think of that?", so if you harbor any interest in the environment, or any concern for it even a passing one, I consider this read to be quintessential in the understanding it will give you. With very little effort, you will learn to harness this knowledge to help you make choices less damaging for the environment based not on narratives, but on data science and industrial ecology; the resources for that purpose are freely available online. What I couldn't believe was how these resources and the understanding that industrial ecology gives had completely eluded me, proving again that ignorance is very difficult to detect, especially when one is under the illusion of expertise.
November 6, 2021
Acum catva timp am cumparat ceva din impuls: o masinuta de curse din lemn de un galben stralucitor, cu o bila verde ce ținea loc de cap al soferului si patru discuri lipite pe pat in loc de roti. Jucaria costa doar 99 de centi. Am cumparat-o pentru nepotelul meu de opt luni, cu gandul ca-i va placea la nebunie. Dupa ce-am ajuns acasa cu masinuta de curse din lemn, am citit din intamplare ca, datorita faptului ca plumbul din vopsele face culorile (in special galbenul si rosul) sa para mai stralucitoare si sa fie mai rezistente in timp — si costa mai putin decat alternativele —, e mai probabil ca jucariile mai ieftine sa-l contina. Apoi am dat peste un articol de ziar in care se semnala ca un test facut pe 1200 de jucarii luate de pe rafturile magazinelor — inclusiv lantul de magazine din care cumparasem acea masinuta — a scos la iveala faptul ca un mare procent dintre jucarii contineau plumb in diferite cantitati. N-am nici cea mai vaga idee daca vopseaua de un galben stralucitor de pe masinuta de jucarie contine sau nu plumb — dar eram mai mult ca sigur ca, o data ajunsa in mainile nepotelului meu, acesta o va baga imediat in gura. Acum, la cateva luni dupa acea masinuta de jucarie se afla inca pe biroul meu, pentru ca nu i-am mai dat-o nepotelului. Lumea noastra, a abundentei materiale, are un pret ascuns. Nu ne putem da seama de masura in care lucrurile pe care be cumparam si pe care le folosim zi de zi au si altfel de costuri...
July 26, 2017
Illuminante! Mi aspettavo un approccio molto più psicologico, solo "l'amigdala va a fare la spesa" è intrinso delle spiegazioni che cercavo, ma onestamente non fa nulla: l'ecologia industriale è dannatamente interessante!
Si vede benissimo che l'autore ha incluso ogni tanto qualche considerazione nel suo campo di studi solo per combinare il meglio possibile ciò a cui sono stato abituati i suoi lettori e ciò che voleva realmente scrivere, infatti nella sua spiegazione dell'intelligenza ecologica mi sembrava avesse qualche difficoltà e non ha precisato immediatamente che si trattava di un'intelligenza collettiva e che non rientrava nei canoni classici della psicologia per essere considerata un'intelligenza, e infatti questo mi ha lasciata perplessa per un po' di pagine finché non ha specificato. Confusionario da questo punto di vista.
In ogni caso, mi ha lasciata molto soddisfatta e sono ancora in adorazione. Daniel Goleman è uno di quegli autori che vorrei tanto conoscere di persona. In conclusione: questo saggio merita una rilettura fra qualche anno 😍
Si vede benissimo che l'autore ha incluso ogni tanto qualche considerazione nel suo campo di studi solo per combinare il meglio possibile ciò a cui sono stato abituati i suoi lettori e ciò che voleva realmente scrivere, infatti nella sua spiegazione dell'intelligenza ecologica mi sembrava avesse qualche difficoltà e non ha precisato immediatamente che si trattava di un'intelligenza collettiva e che non rientrava nei canoni classici della psicologia per essere considerata un'intelligenza, e infatti questo mi ha lasciata perplessa per un po' di pagine finché non ha specificato. Confusionario da questo punto di vista.
In ogni caso, mi ha lasciata molto soddisfatta e sono ancora in adorazione. Daniel Goleman è uno di quegli autori che vorrei tanto conoscere di persona. In conclusione: questo saggio merita una rilettura fra qualche anno 😍
May 13, 2018
هوش محيط زيستي توانايي ما براي سازگاري با جايگاه اكولوژيكي مان در طبيعت شمرده ميشه.
حرف حساب اينه كه بيشتر روي مصرف كننده كار بشه تا اينكه بخوايم براي توليد كننده ها قوانين محيط زيستي صادر كنيم. مثلا در كنار جدول حقايق تغذيه اي كه ما الان روي اقلام خوراكيمون داريم، جدولي باشه و ميزان توليد دي اكسيد كربن رو با سه رنگ نشون بده. و اينكه در كنار توليد گازهاي گلخانه اي شرايط اجتماعي توليد مثل حقوق مكفي، كار كودكان و محيط كاري ايمن براي كارگر هم در نظر گرفته شده باشه. كتاب اطلاعات خيلي خوبي در مورد سايت هاي مفيدي كه اين خدمات رو ميدن ارائه ميده.
نويسنده معتقده تاثير گذاري بايد توسط خريدار انجام بشه، بايد جريان شفافي از اطلاعات محيط زيستي به دست خريدار برسه و شركت هاي خصوصي اي بايد اين كار انجام بدن، تا خريدار از يك قرباني بي خبر از همه جا، به شخصي فعال تبديل بشه و با خريد خودش به فعاليت هاي محيط زيستي راي بده. بعبارتي شركت ها براي از دست ندادن بازار و مشتريهاشون مجبور ميشن تغييرات مورد نظر اعمال كنن.
حرف حساب اينه كه بيشتر روي مصرف كننده كار بشه تا اينكه بخوايم براي توليد كننده ها قوانين محيط زيستي صادر كنيم. مثلا در كنار جدول حقايق تغذيه اي كه ما الان روي اقلام خوراكيمون داريم، جدولي باشه و ميزان توليد دي اكسيد كربن رو با سه رنگ نشون بده. و اينكه در كنار توليد گازهاي گلخانه اي شرايط اجتماعي توليد مثل حقوق مكفي، كار كودكان و محيط كاري ايمن براي كارگر هم در نظر گرفته شده باشه. كتاب اطلاعات خيلي خوبي در مورد سايت هاي مفيدي كه اين خدمات رو ميدن ارائه ميده.
نويسنده معتقده تاثير گذاري بايد توسط خريدار انجام بشه، بايد جريان شفافي از اطلاعات محيط زيستي به دست خريدار برسه و شركت هاي خصوصي اي بايد اين كار انجام بدن، تا خريدار از يك قرباني بي خبر از همه جا، به شخصي فعال تبديل بشه و با خريد خودش به فعاليت هاي محيط زيستي راي بده. بعبارتي شركت ها براي از دست ندادن بازار و مشتريهاشون مجبور ميشن تغييرات مورد نظر اعمال كنن.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 196 reviews