Eco-Business Partners, However Uneasy, a Boon to Planet, People

Newt Gingrich’s fond embrace has made Alvin Toffler’s vision of the “Third Wave”--a post-agricultural, post-industrial civilization based on information and knowledge--the hottest intellectual property around.

But most public attention has focused on the Third Wave’s immense economic dynamism and potential for wealth creation. What’s been overlooked is its profoundly ecological character.

The strong connection between Toffler’s philosophy and environmentalism goes back to 1970, the year Toffler’s first best seller, “Future Shock,” was published, and the year of the first Earth Day. Both the book and the event embodied similar--and then-radical--critiques of technology. And in the quarter of a century since, Toffler’s philosophy and environmentalism have co-evolved.

Thus it is that Toffler’s Information Age economy substitutes knowledge for material resources. Take integrated pest management, for instance. In essence, this is a system of biological knowledge, a way of growing things differently that greatly reduces the need for pesticides. Using it, farmers can feed more people at less cost and with less pollution.

The Third Wave is also decentralist. It disperses, rather than concentrates, production. People doing brain work, not muscle work, can work wherever they can think. They’re not tied to the land for agricultural production or to the factory for industrial production. They can telecommute to the office, keeping them off the roads. There’s also less product packaging, transport and storage involved. Again, less pollution.

A Third Wave economy is predicated upon energy efficiency, which prevents pollution and saves money. For example, new technologies now available can cut energy use in commercial and industrial buildings by more than 40%--a savings in the United States alone of $28 billion per year. And $28 billion saved is $28 billion earned.

A Third Wave economy recycles everything it can lay its hands on. “Wealth creation is increasingly recognized to be a circular process,” says Toffler, “with wastes recycled into inputs for the next cycle of production.” A specific example cited by Joseph J. Romm in his new book, “Lean and Clean Management,” is Baxter Healthcare Corp., a manufacturer and packager of sterile solutions for intravenous use. Baxter Healthcare recycles 99.9% of its plastic scrap for its own use or for sale. This has saved the company $9 million over the past decade.

The Third Wave already has embraced much of the American economy. “America’s fastest-growing and most important industries are information-intensive,” Toffler asserts. He mentions computer and electronics firms, finance, software, entertainment, the media, medical services, consulting, training and education. “The people in this sector,” Toffler adds, “will soon be the dominant constituency in American politics.”

This powerful new eco-economy was made possible by the revolution in communications technology. What made it necessary was the environmental revolution. As usual, to induce a change in behavior, it was necessary to employ both a carrot and a stick. The stick, of course, was government law and regulation. The carrot was consumers’ demand for eco-friendly products. (In his book, “Guerrilla Marketing,” Jay Conrad Levinson cites a 1992 study indicating that 83% of shoppers said they had changed brands based solely on environmental concerns.)

Indeed, looking back at the 25 years since the first Earth Day, it’s plain that the greatest “green” triumph has been winning the hearts and minds of consumers. Elections can be won or lost, laws can be weakened or repealed, but ecology’s place in consumer affections grows all the more secure.

What’s more, in the Information Age, a business’s adverse environmental impact quickly becomes fodder for the news media. Nowadays, not a mahogany tree falls in the rain forest without consumers hearing it. Thus it is that businesses that know how to promote economic growth without environmental damage now enjoy a competitive advantage over those that don’t.

Back in 1970, who would have thought such a thing possible? Then, most environmentalists were rabidly anti-business, and most business people were rabidly anti-environment.

True, the collaboration which over time produced this new eco-business hasn’t often been acknowledged, let alone friendly. But even with the partners working at (apparent) odds, all this adds up to a big boon for people and the planet. That’s not bad work for a mere quarter of a century.