Sunday, January 22, 2012

Canada, Kyoto, and False Accusations

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
type="html">

To the editor,

?I would like to take this opportunity to respond to the allegation, posted by The Mark on Jan. 9 ("Environment and Economics: A False Dichotomy"), that members of the Canadian delegation were trying to “cajole” other countries to pull out of the Kyoto Protocol during the international climate-change talks in Durban, South Africa.

As Canada’s chief negotiator and ambassador for climate change, and a member of the Canadian delegation to the 17th Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), let me emphasize that no members of our delegation made any attempt to convince any country to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol. Canada has always made it clear that, while we do not agree that the Kyoto Protocol represents the path forward, we would not stand in the way of any country that supports it.

?In Durban, we actively supported the efforts to launch a new round of negotiations to reach a new single, comprehensive, and effective agreement that would include all major emitters. It is our hope that these negotiations will be concluded by 2015.

I would also note that the confirmation by Canada in Durban that we will spend $1.2 billion between 2010 and 2012 to support climate-change mitigation and adaptation efforts by developing countries was very well received.? Canada will continue to work constructively with its international partners to achieve a fair, comprehensive, and effective post-2012 agreement that moves us beyond Kyoto and includes legally binding commitments from all major emitters. Furthermore, we will be fully transparent in reporting on our greenhouse-gas emissions and the efforts made by the federal and provincial governments to meet our 17-per-cent emissions-reduction target by 2020.

?Sincerely,

?Guy Saint-Jacques

Canada’s Chief Negotiator and Ambassador for Climate Change

The Difference a Package Can Make

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
type="html">

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, approximately 925 million people in the world are underfed. Furthermore, UNICEF reports that 22 per cent of children are underweight. In countries where poverty and food insecurity are widespread, daily assistance is required to meet basic needs. Something as simple as milk, which is vital to a child’s development, has trouble reaching communities where poor infrastructure makes transportation and refrigeration a challenge. It is becoming increasingly evident that food processing and packaging innovation are critical to providing safe and nutritious food to communities in need.

One solution, an innovation called aseptic technology, which Tetra Pak introduced widely, allows for traditionally perishable food products, even sensitive ones like milk, to be shelf-stable without the need for refrigeration, chemicals, or preservatives. Tetra Pak’s aseptic processing and packaging are currently being used to help develop and support school milk programs in over 50 countries across different continents, delivering safe, nutritious foods to schools in need. Such programs have proven to have political, economic, and social benefits. In Thailand, for example, over a period of 15 years, the school milk program increased milk drinking per capita by 10 times, improved health conditions for children, created approximately 250,000 new jobs, and reduced reliance on imports of milk.

Similarly, through the Zambia Milk for Schools program launched in June 2011, 15,000 students each receive 250ml of milk two to three times a day in aseptic cartons. The program – which Tetra Pak launched in partnership with the Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency, World Food Programme Zambia, Parmalat Zambia, the Zambian government, and local stakeholders – provides a market for the smallholder dairy sector, diversifies the agricultural sector, and creates demand for high-quality, locally produced milk. It is expected that this project will not only increase per-capita milk consumption and economic growth along the value chain, but will also increase school attendance and improve children’s health and academic results. This will lead to general productivity improvements for the entire country.


Related: Stretching Foreign Aid Dollars


Something as simple as aseptic carton packaging has revolutionized how consumers drink milk. Aseptic technology, which the Institute of Food Technologists has described as the greatest food-science innovation of the 20th century, continues to be beneficial for people from all geographies, economic backgrounds, and social groups. The cartons are lightweight and easy to produce, transport, and distribute, their value lasts longer, and they help make food safe and available everywhere. Ready-to-drink packaged products also eliminate concerns about storage, hygiene, and water quality.

Aseptic technology ensures that food and packaging materials are free from harmful bacteria. During processing, products like milk are sterilized using ultra-high temperature systems. The product is then packaged in aseptic cartons, also known as shelf-stable cartons, which ensure that air, light, and harmful bacteria are kept out.

Whether you are in Zambia, Thailand, or Canada, food safety and nutrition are important concerns. Technology and packaging innovation continue to play a pivotal role in creating packaging systems that improve food safety around the world.

Photo courtesy of Reuters.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Leaping Forward With One Foot in the Past

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
type="html">

When you think of Facebook, the last image that comes to mind is newsprint. When you try to explain Twitter to someone, the feathered quill isn’t the first thing you reference. When you answer an iPhone, you are not at all reminded of picking up the handset of a big rotary phone. Yet these are the icons that are used to represent such cutting-edge platforms and devices. (Facebook’s “news-feed” icon depicts a newspaper, Twitter’s newly redesigned “publish” icon features a feathered quill, and iPhone’s phone app is illustrated with an old-fashioned handset.) The use of this old-fashioned imagery is puzzling. Logic would dictate that the creators of these cutting-edge platforms would try to distance the new from the old, but that’s clearly not the case.

This phenomenon of reaching into the past to describe the future goes beyond the iconography of new media – it’s also part of our lexicon. Marshall McLuhan, in Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, briefly comments on this trend. He says that terms such as “wireless” and “horseless carriage” illustrate how innovations must “pass through a primary phase in which the new effect is secured by the old method amplified or modified by some new feature.” In more modern times, a prime example is the cordless phone, a term that David Foster Wallace pokes fun at in Infinite Jest through a character that invents a gag joke called the “phoneless cord.” The cordless phone, the “newspaper” Facebook feed, the “quill” Twitter button, and the horseless carriage are all instances of this trend. However, neither McLuhan nor Wallace offer explanations as to why this happens.

I think we can learn a lot about the nature of innovation and communication by dissecting these symbols and phrases. Is this imagery that leans on the past to communicate something new just lazy graphic design, or is there something deeper going on here? Why are the most nuanced and advanced media platforms falling victim to iconographic regression?


Related: In the Facebook Era, It's Friends Forever


In his book The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins defines a meme as a “unit of cultural transmission.” A meme, like a gene, is inherently a replicating machine. But while genes transmit biological information, memes transmit cultural information (in the form of tunes, ideas, catch-phrases, fashion – anything that propagates by leaping from brain to brain). This conception of memes optimizes the idea of media going “viral” as it spreads through the popular culture. A meme is the idea or symbol that catches on. It represents the human capacity to make a lasting imprint on the world through invention. A successful meme, like a successful gene, is one that is perpetuated.

Dawkins’ conception of memes is fascinating on a purely communicative level, as an explanation of how popular ideas spread. One of the keys to successful transmission, according to Dawkins, is copying fidelity (for, “the more faithful the copy, the more will remain of the initial pattern after several rounds of copying”). In a digital era where the competition for mind space is fiercer than ever, and the ability to replicate content in identical forms is ubiquitous, Dawkins’ formula for creating successful memes proves truer by the Tweet.

Dawkins also argued that a fundamental notion of evolution is that the new is built upon the old. All our genes are based on what came before them. They are mixed and mutated and changed, but they are fundamentally derivative. When we apply this concept to the idea of memes, we start to get a sense of what it means to innovate.

There are two ways to look at creativity and innovation. One is the method put forth by Terry Gilliam, who says that ideas just appear: “I’d go to bed, and I’d leave my shoes by the bed. And I’d wake up and there’d be these little elves that would come in and put ideas in my shoes, and I’d just use them.”

The other way to look at creativity is to assume that innovation and creativity come from looking at the world and making new connections. According to Steve Jobs:

Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn't really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. That’s because they were able to connect experiences they’ve had and synthesize new things.

Of the two, Jobs’ perspective on creativity is much more aligned with Dawkins’ notion of memes. Creativity is the process of connecting circumstance and experience to spark a new meme that leaps from one brain to another. The key to a meme’s success is its ability to spread – to be communicated.


Related: Technology Vs. the Brain


With this in mind, our old-fashioned icons make more sense. Facebook, Twitter, and the iPhone are all new memes. These memes represent something different than what came before, and so need to lean on the vocabulary and symbolism of the past in order to communicate their new functions. The historical references make it easier for these memes to leap from one brain to another: Similar to how a virus integrates itself with the existing DNA of a cell, these new memes integrate themselves with the iconography of memes that came before them.

In order to design something new, we need to look to our past so that we can understand where we come from and authentically acknowledge the fundamental traits and behaviours that we want to harness in our “next big thing.” More importantly, though, we mustn’t fall victim to the hype. We must recognize that what appears to be game-changing or revolutionary is anything but. Our memes are built on the past, and on the fundamental characteristics of human psychology. Twitter is not a new human experience – it is just a new tool that allows us to expand on, and continue to do, what we have always done: communicate.

Photo courtesy of Flickr.

Friday, January 20, 2012

The Modern World and Scandalous Ideas Lost

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
type="html">

Like the paunchy couch potato of a certain age who is happy in the conviction he has the makings of an outstanding baseball manager, more than a few academics share the secret conviction that they contain a bestseller somewhere within, if only time and circumstances allowed. But the feat is not easily managed – even by literary critics, who study what it is that makes writing good. One who has mastered the trick, however, is the distinguished Renaissance scholar Stephen Greenblatt, whose latest book, The Swerve, accomplishes the shift from an academic audience to a less specialized – and more lucrative - readership gracefully enough to make the whole thing look ridiculously easy. The book is a page-turner of epic scope, ranging from Greek philosophers of the fifth century BC to the author’s own youth, stuffed with vivid characters and dramatic discoveries. And, if anyone doubts that Greenblatt has done his homework, there is a 27-page “selected” bibliography to back up his story.

The Swerve’s subtitle, “How the World Became Modern,” is a somewhat misleading description, promising at once too much and too little. The book is an extended associative ramble, here describing the ancient Roman book trade, there analyzing the ruthless politics of the Renaissance Vatican curia, now recounting in gruesome detail the burning of Giordano Bruno during the Inquisition, and later discussing Michel de Montaigne’s reflections on his “favorite subjects: sex and death” (247). What pull this all together are Greenblatt’s two foci: first, the ambitious and cunning humanist scholar Gian Francesco Poggio Bracciolini and his 1417 discovery of a copy of pre-Christian philosopher Lucretius’s forgotten epic poem, “On the Nature of Things”; and second, the extended underground network of influence that the scandalous ideas elaborated in this poem exerted on thinkers and writers from the 15th century on.


Related: The Book as Artifact


What made “On the Nature of Things” such an outrageous and troubling threat was the radical alternative it offered to the vision of the world sanctioned by the Catholic Church, a view enforced, when necessary, by appalling violence. Lucretius was a philosophical follower of Epicurus, who held that our world is thoroughly materialistic, the result of the perpetual interaction of atomic particles. His views allowed room for neither an immortal soul nor a spiritual afterlife. For the Epicureans, this was an immensely liberating perspective: Freed from a superstitious and oppressive fear of the afterlife, human beings were able to cultivate with pleasure and dignity the good things of this world. Such an interpretation was a far more serious threat to the moral authority of the Catholic Church than any amount of mere sinfulness, since it deprived religion of its very purpose. Bracciolini’s fortuitous discovery thus represented a very great threat to the established order.

It is well to be reminded, at a point in history when it is possible to carry virtually the whole of western literary history in one’s pocket, of the slender thread by which our intellectual heritage once hung. All written texts have a limited lifespan, and before the invention of the printing press their survival depended on the constant copying of manuscripts. Neglect was as effective as active destruction, and if the chain was broken, the loss was irrecoverable. Furthermore, after their hitherto obscure cult had become the official religion of the Roman Empire, Christians had little desire to perpetuate the decaying traces of rival intellectual traditions now properly consigned to oblivion.

Among the most reviled of pagan texts for the Christians were those of the Epicureans. The atomists did not simply set up one conception of the afterlife against another, contesting their opponents’ mysterious doctrines with their own equally mysterious claims. Rather, they scoffed at the notion that the universe was organized for the sake of humanity and that a god should self-sacrifice to provide this particular animal with everlasting life. For the early Christian fathers, writes Greenblatt, the immortality of the soul was indispensible – deny it, and “the whole fabric of Christian morality unravels” (101). According to them, anyone believing such a doctrine must be not simply misguided, but quite obviously insane. In fact, the only biographical reference to Lucretius, by St. Jerome, describes him as a man who was “driven mad by a love-philtre and, having composed between bouts of insanity several books (which Cicero afterwards corrected), committed suicide at the age of 44.” Needless to say, there was little to encourage either the preservation or study of “On the Nature of Things,” and things remained much the same for the next thousand or so years.

Enter Bracciolini – humanist scholar, wily bureaucrat, and book-finder extraordinaire. He had risen rapidly in the duplicitous and cynical inner world of the Vatican, finally landing the coveted position of personal secretary to Pope John XXIII. When his master was deposed and imprisoned, however, Bracciolini fell back on his true love, the pursuit of forgotten manuscripts.


Related: A Turning Point for the Publishing Industry


Greenblatt does an excellent job of conjuring up the spirit in which the humanists pursued their quarry. Spending days in a cold library poring over barely legible script may not seem like a very glamorous activity, but the humanists, writes Greenblatt, “managed to invest this search with a new, almost erotic urgency and pleasure, superior to all other treasure seeking” (119). The seekers approached their task with an enthusiasm that touched on the religious – they were, after all, resurrecting a glorious portion of the life of humanity long thought dead. So when Bracciolini, during a visit to a monastic library in southern Germany in January 1417, came across a document no longer believed to exist, it was a pregnant moment. But he couldn’t have known all that would emerge from that pregnancy when he quickly arranged for a copy to be made of the manuscript.

According to Greenblatt, Lucretius’s poem played a profound, if occult, role in shaping Renaissance and early modern thought. While few were prepared to express any public support for the scandalous philosophy it contained, Greenblatt contends that its dangerous ideas “percolated and surfaced wherever the Renaissance imagination was at its most alive and intense” (220).

Greenblatt’s book is lively and informative, but it is also timely. At a grim point in history when religious extremisms of many stripes are again on the march, determined to enforce an intolerant dogmatism that lusts to persecute any hint of enlightened skepticism, The Swerve serves as a reminder that it is possible to accept the reality of mortality and still value life, to recognize the transience of the world and still admire its beauty and grandeur. The topic of Greenblatt’s story may be the fate of a book, but its real theme is death, and its message is that a dignified and fully human life is still possible if we accept with gratitude our limited time on this earth.

Photo courtesy of Flickr.