Monthly Archives: January 2015

The more things change. . .

DSC_0058

No generation is immune from the hubris of exceptionalism; we imagine that the march of human progress is inevitable and forever upwards as we naturally strive to better ourselves and our societies.

Still, history is a cruel headmaster.

How far have we come in, say, 100 years, or 50? How much changed is the world of 2015 – the world of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and Vladimir Putin’s virtual annexation of the Crimean Peninsula – from the one the late encyclopedist, James Trager, described in 1979?

The author of “The People’s Chronology” had no favorite years, preferring, instead, to view all of civilization’s pageant through a slightly warped lens. Indeed, 1915, was, in his estimation, remarkable only for its consistency.

“The Great War in Europe,” he wrote, affecting the diarist’s first-person narrative, “grows more intense. Casualty lists mount for both sides on the eastern and western fronts and a German U-boat blockade of Great Britain begins February 18.”

Later that year, an enemy sub would sink the English passenger liner S.S. Lusitania, sending nearly 2,000 passengers and crew (including 128 Americans) to their watery deaths in less than 18 minutes, provoking such outrage in the United States that public neutrality towards the European conflict would soon shift convincingly to widespread saber-rattling.

Meanwhile, as Trager noted, “British income taxes rise to an unprecedented 15 per cent as the Great War drains the nation’s financial resources.”

Yet, all was not exclusively mired in, or tainted by, battlefield follies:

“The Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and research is founded by the University of Minnesota with a $2.5 million gift from C.H. and W.J. Mayo of the Mayo Clinic at Rochester, Minn. . .The disposable scalpel is patented by U.S. inventor Morgan Parker. . .Long-distance telephone service between New York and San Francisco begins. Alexander Graham Bell, now 68, repeats the words of 1876 (‘Mr. Watson, come here. . .’) to Thomas Watson in San Francisco. The call takes 23 minutes to go through and costs $20.70.”

From 1915, flash forward 50 years, and consider the actual substance of the advances: one great war had ended, only to lay the foundation for another. Europe at been destroyed and restored twice in the span of two generations. American power,  which had been rising steadily since the turn of the 20th century, was now ascendent.

In 1965, Trager wrote, “U.S. bombers pound North Vietnamese targets in retaliation for a National Liberation Front attack on U.S. ground forces in South Vietnam. Washington announces a general policy of bombing North Vietnam. . .Some 125,000 U.S. troops are in Vietname by July 28 and (U.S.) President (Lyndon) Johnson announces a doubling of draft calls.”

Meanwhile, the American president “asks the UN to help negotiate a peace, but U.S. troops take part in their first major battle as an independent force in mid-August and they destroy a Viet Cong stronghold near Van Tuong.”

Again, though, as in 1915, there were peaceable – sometimes even noble – distractions.

“President Johnson,” Trager reported, “outlines programs for a ‘Great Society’ that will eliminate poverty in America in his State of the Union message and he signs a $1.4 billion program of federal-state economic aid to Appalachia into law.”

The move was blessed, perhaps, by perfect timing. By 1965, the number of people on welfare in New York City had swelled to half-a-million. That number, wrote Trager, “will grow to 1.2 million in the next 10 years and by 1974, the city’s welfare agency will account for $3.4 billion of the city’s $12 billion budget.”

Today, we greet the dawning new year with strange mixture of trepidation and deja vu. We don’t exactly know where we are going, but we sure know from whence we came, and though the players and locations continue to change down through the generations, the game remains essentially the same.

We still fight our vainglorious wars and pay for them with money extracted and  diverted from our more tranquil, constructive obligations to each other.

In this, we are not unique.

If, however, we finally determined to change the rules of the game we’ve been playing ever since we began to stand upright on an African savannah, that might just make this generation exceptional, after all.

Tagged , ,

Shale gas greets new catchwords in 2015

DSC_0052

There is, as Ecclesiastics declares, nothing new under the sun; there is only the same, old trend, fashion or fad, freshly washed, dried, dressed, shod and shoved, once again, onto the super-highway of human history and told to survive if, indeed, it dares.

And, so, welcome to 2015 my dear “social licence to operate”. May we call you “social licence”? It’s shorter and that might be good for your image. Lord knows you’re going to need all the help you can get this year.

Actually, as shibboleths go, this is not a bad one. It’s not especially jargony. It seems reasonably comprehensible. In fact, New Brunswick Premier Brian Gallant is confident enough in his own understanding of the term, he’s started to deploy it as invocation whenever he talks about the on-again, off-again shale gas industry in the province (which is now off again).

“There shall be no drilling,” he says (or in words to that effect) until the companies responsible for hydraulic fracturing obtain the appropriate amount of social licence to proceed.

To which Corridor Resources’ CEO Steve Moran recently shrugged: “Huh?”

His actual words to CBC News were: “Even the premier when he was asked didn’t really have an answer in terms of what that means.”

Tory Opposition Leader Bruce Fitch concurred, as Premier Gallant attempted to clarify his position, telling the CBC, “We’ll certainly do the best we can to get the pulse, and the sense of New Brunswickers on whether any of these operations. . .have a social license.”

In fact, though, there’s no great mystery around the meaning of “social licence”. The mining industry has plumbed the nuances of its definition for years, or so says the Fraser Institute, an economic and public policy think tank with offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal:

“The  social licence to operate (SLO) refers to the level of acceptance or approval by local communities and stakeholders of mining companies and their operations. The concept has evolved fairly recently from the broader and more established notion of ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ and is based on the idea that mining companies need not only government permission [or permits] but also ‘social permission’ to conduct their business.

Indeed, the Institute states, “Increasingly, having an SLO is an essential part of operating within democratic jurisdictions, as without sufficient popular support it is unlikely that agencies from elected governments will willingly grant operational permits or licences. However, the need for and ultimate success of achieving an SLO relies to a large extent on functioning government and sound institutions. . .Many mining companies now consider gaining an SLO as an appropriate business expense that ultimately adds to the bottom line.”

If all this seems broadly familiar – just another way to renovate good, old “corporate social responsibility” (or CSR) and slap a “priced-to-sell” sticker on the front door – experts in these matters beg to differ (naturally).

“CSR is often too peripheral to the core business model, too much of a side-show, too far from providing real ‘shared value’,” writes John Morrison, executive director of the Institute for human rights and business, in a recent issue of the Guardian online. “Even more fundamental are the false dichotomies that CSR has set up. There’s the voluntary versus mandatory debate, companies that are ‘good at CSR’ are valued regardless of the impact of their core operations.”

What’s more, Morrison insists, “Social licence can never be self-awarded, it requires that an activity enjoys sufficient trust and legitimacy, and has the consent of those affected. Business cannot determine how much prevention or mitigation it should engage in to meet environmental or social risk – stakeholders and rights-holders have to be involved for thresholds of due diligence to be legitimate (sometimes even if these are clearly determined in law).”

Herein, of course, lies the rub.

Like its predecessor and memetic forebear CSR, social license, as a concept, is not especially difficult to comprehend or articulate.

What challenges policy makers, politicians, community representatives and industrial players, themselves, is making it work well or long enough to produce sufficient benefits to satisfy all competing competing interests at the table.

This is rendered all the more complicated by the fundamentally revokable nature of social licences. A company that meets its obligations in one area on any given day may not be deemed to have done the same elsewhere at another time.

Then what?

Under such circumstances, Premier Gallant’s shale-gas moratorium may be the lesser of two evils facing the industry in New Brunswick.

Then again, what else is new?

Tagged , , , , ,