Requirement in the file Instructions This assignment requires you to write an essay connecting at

  

Requirement in the file

Instructions

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Requirement in the file Instructions This assignment requires you to write an essay connecting at
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

This assignment requires you to write an essay connecting at least one additional reading or podcast to at least one of the two books for this course: 
The Future We Choose and 
Manifesto for a Moral Revolution. Your essay should

· respond to ONE of the essay questions included below

· begin with a clear 
thesis statement (i.e. a one or two sentence description of what your essay will argue) in the first paragraph or two

· include the essay’s thesis in bold formatted text (to identify this statement for your instructor)

· include detailed reference to the course materials to support the essay’s analysis

· address at least three 
counterarguments (i.e. three fairly presented potential 
objections to your analysis)

· underline the three objections that you address (to identify these statements for your instructor)

· include responses (either refutations or concessions) for the three counterarguments 

· use correct APA in-text citations and Reference list entries to cite sources

· be 1250-1500 words and include the word count on the essay’s final page

· be submitted on time (10% per day late penalty).

Note: Additional credible secondary research is welcome, but not required, and the three hyperlinks in the above list lead you to three writing skills support sites that define and explain the important elements of a persuasive essay.  When preparing your essay, consider using resources on these three sites beyond the specific pages referenced above.  

Essay Questions

1. With reference to the mindsets, actions, and practices presented in 
The Future We Choose or 
Manifesto for a Moral Revolution, define Jane Goodall’s leadership style (as presented in the 
On Being interview “
What It Means to Be Human”), and explain how Goodall’s specific leadership style is or is not appropriate for the private sector to adopt if it is to take bold action to address the climate crisis.

2. In an episode of
 
How to Save a Planet
“We Can’t Solve the Climate Crisis Without Gender Equality. We’ll Prove It To You,” Dr. Katherine Wilkinson, Vice President of Project Drawdown says, “there is a leadership crisis at the heart of the climate crisis. And that’s not just about who is leading, but also how we are leading—by moving beyond ego, linking arms, leading with heart and centering a deep commitment to justice.” With reference to this podcast episode and the mindsets, actions, and practices presented in either 
The Future We Choose or 
Manifesto for a Moral Revolution, explain the leadership style that sustainable business leaders must adopt to contribute to a just transition to a regenerative economy.

3. With reference to at least two of the three Indigenous Knowledge texts (
Kimmerer
Mazzocchi, and 
McGregor), provide a high-level summary of the worldviews presented by Indigenous Knowledge and Western science in these texts, and explain how each worldview is reflected and/or challenged in 
The Future We Choose or 
Manifesto for a Moral Revolution.

4. Do you agree with Sarah Kaplan’s argument in ”
Beyond the Business Case” that the effectiveness of the business case justification for social responsibility may “do more harm than good”?  With reference to the mindsets, actions, and practices presented in 
The Future We Choose or 
Manifesto for a Moral Revolution, explain what you think the role of the business case is in a just transition to a regenerative economy.

5. With reference to the mindsets, actions, and practices presented in 
The Future We Choose and/or 
Manifesto for a Moral Revolution, explain Brené Brown’s assertion that “shame is not a social justice tool” (as presented in the “
Shame and Accountability” episode of 
Unlocking Us), and recommend specific practices that sustainable business leaders can use to move from shame/blame to accountability/action.

Grading Criteria

Your essay grade will be based on the following criteria for content, organization, writing mechanics, and citations.  


Content & Organization

·
Title: The essay begins with a unique title that effectively introduces the essay’s main topic.

·
Thesis: Near the beginning, the essay includes a clearly argumentative thesis statement (i.e. a statement that the essay goes on to convince the reader is true).   

·
Claims: Each of the essay’s claims is introduced, explained in detail, and supports the essay’s overall thesis.

·
Evidence: The essay includes persuasive evidence for each of its claims, including quotations, paraphrases, and summaries of sources.

· Each quotation/paraphrase/summary/example is introduced and discussed an appropriate amount to detail to support the relevant claim.

· Each paraphrase is re-written completely in your own words and does not mimic the word choice or sentence structure of the original.

· Each quotation/paraphrase/example helps to support the paragraph’s central claim.

·
Transitions: Transition words, phrases, and sentences are used within and between paragraphs to show relationships between ideas.

·
Counterarguments: The essay includes a minimum of three opposing arguments (i.e. fairly presented potential objections to your analysis). Each opposing argument is

· explained in detail

· neutrally stated

· persuasively refuted or effectively conceded.


Writing Mechanics & Citations

· The essay uses clear and correct sentence structure and writing mechanics.

· The essay includes correct APA References list. 

· Each quotation/paraphrase is accompanied by a correct APA citation (i.e. author, year, and, if applicable, page number).

· The essay includes a header with your name and the page number on every page.

 

Begin Reading

Table of Contents

About the Author

Copyright Page

 

Thank you for buying this

Henry Holt and Company ebook.

 

To receive special offers, bonus content,

and info on new releases and other great reads,

sign up for our newsletters.

 

Or visit us online at

us.macmillan.com/newslettersignup

 

For email updates on the author, click here.

The author and publisher have provided this e-book to you

for your personal use only. You may not make this e-book

publicly available in any way. Copyright infringement is

against the law. If you believe the copy of this e-book

you are reading infringes on the author’s copyright,

please notify the publisher at:

us.macmillanusa.com/piracy.

 

To my parents,

Bob and Barbara Novogratz,

who taught me to love the world,

and

to all who aspire to give more

to the world than you take from it

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We make our lives with each other. This book has been

nurtured by multitudes. To all of them I am grateful.

Thanks to my brilliant editor, Barbara Jones, and the

great team at Holt. Barbara, you pushed me to

uncomfortable places, edited with insight and care, and

talked me off a few cliffs. And the book is better for it.

Thanks, too, to Ruby Rose Lee and the copy editor, Jenna

Dolan, who reviewed the manuscript. Thank you to my

irrepressible agent Elyse Cheney and your team for

believing in and fighting for this book. And for being

dreamers who do.

Cyndi Stivers, you are a miracle. Thank you for

accompanying me from the very first days of Sunflowers to

the final editing with thrilling speed and surety. William

Charnock, the shepherd, you always said yes, made my

challenges yours, remained impossibly positive, and kept

me sane. Bavidra Mohan, your thoughtful feedback

illuminated those early, messy drafts. Seth Godin, your

creativity and friendship put wind beneath my wings that

carried me across the world and back. Thank you.

My sister Beth supported my spirit throughout, just as

she did with The Blue Sweater. Beth, I love our

collaborations, and your generosity astonishes.

Carlyle Singer, Acumen’s fearless president, is my

partner in building both an institution and a movement. She

made it possible for me to write this book while remaining

close to the work. Thank you, Carlyle, for modeling shared

leadership and for being a friend.

I could not have completed the book without the

bighearted support of a small and mighty group at Acumen

who helped do whatever it took to organize and reconsider

fragments and journals of stories told and untold: Lindsay

Camacho, Charlotte Erb, Sonya Khattak, and Maureen Klein.

Lynn Roland helped make this our shared book. Thank you

to patient readers who gave truthful, constructive feedback:

Sophia Ahmed, Wei Wei Hsing, Esha Mufti, Chee Pearlman,

and, of course, my mother, the most voracious reader I

know. Thanks to Regional Directors for your patience

through this process, for your ideas, for teaching me more

than you know. Thanks to Sunny Bates, Karie Brown, Leslie

Gimbel, Jeanie Honey, Otho Kerr, and Taylor Milsal for your

endless support.

I feel like the luckiest woman on earth to do work I

adore with people I love. Thanks to the entire Acumen team

across the globe. You model the principles of this book,

teach me daily, and inspire me to be a better version of

myself. Your commitment to excellence has helped build

four new organizations in our extended family—Acumen’s

off-grid energy fund KawiSafi, our agriculture resiliency fund

ARAF, our Latin America Growth Fund, and our spin-off from

Lean Data, 60 Decibels. Each of those teams, too, have

influenced the ideas in this book, and for all of you, I am

grateful.

I interviewed many Acumen entrepreneurs and fellows

both on-site and at distance and appreciate every visit,

every interaction. Each one of you has taught me more than

I can say. And though many of your stories and lessons

about making capital work for us are not included here,

nothing is wasted. Indeed, the collection of Acumen’s nearly

130 entrepreneurs and 600 fellows around the world

represents a treasure trove of human possibility; all of you

have lessons worth sharing.

Many thanks go to Acumen’s phenomenal board of

directors who encouraged me to write this book in the first

place: our indominable chair Shaiza Rizavi, Andrea Soros

Colombel, Cristina Ljungberg, Hunter Boll, Julius Gaudio,

Kathleen Chew Wai Lin, Kirsten Nevill-Manning, Margo

Alexander, Nate Laurell, Pat Mitchell, Stuart Davidson,

Thulasiraj Ravilla, as well as Dave Heller, William Mayer,

Robert Niehaus, Mike Novogratz, and Ali Siddiqui, who only

recently rolled off the board after many years of service.

Thank you to every advisory member (I’m including those

not acknowledged elsewhere): Jawad Aslam, Diana Barrett,

Tim Brown, Peter Cain, Niko Canner, Jesse Clarke, Beth

Comstock, Rebecca Eastmond, Paul Fletcher, Katherine

Fulton, Peter Goldmark, Per Heggenes, Katie Hill, Arianna

Huffington, Jill Iscol, Maria Angeles Leon Lopez, Federica

Marchionni, Felipe Medina, Susan Meiselas, Craig Nevill-

Manning, Noor Pahlavi, Paul Polman, Kerry J. Sulkowicz, Vikki

Tam, Mark Tercek, Pat Tierney, Daniel Toole, and Hamdi

Ulukaya. For your constant support, thank you. And, of

course, none of this learning would have been possible

without Acumen’s remarkable community of partners,

course takers, supporters, and friends around the world.

When all is said and done, you are the vanguard.

These pages carry the written wisdom of individuals far

wiser than I will ever be. I cannot possibly name all of them,

but the writings of Chinua Achebe, David Brooks, John

Gardner, Anand Giridharadas, Seth Godin, Jon Haidt, Marie

Howe, Chris Lowney, Maria Popova, Bryan Stevenson,

Pádraig Ó Tuama, Elaine Pagels, Amartya Sen, and Krista

Tippett especially have been a gift. I also owe much to the

Good Society Readings and friends from the Aspen Institute,

where I am a trustee and proud Henry Crown fellow.

Thank you to the Rockefeller Foundation who supported

me with a monthlong residency at its Bellagio Conference

Center. That time helped me get started and introduced me

to a community of encouraging friends. Thanks to Akhil

Gupta as well.

Belonging to a big, crazy, loving family not only grounds

me but makes my life richer and my work more effective

and expansive. I’m forever grateful to my parents, Barbara

and Bob; to my siblings, Robert, Michael, Elizabeth, John,

Amy, and Matthew; my in-laws, Sukey, Cortney, Tina,

Nadean, and Mike. To my stepdaughters Elizabeth and Anna

and their spouses, Joseph and Sam. And to the next big

generation of family members who will change the world

along with their peers. It is for you and every other young

person on this planet that I ultimately wrote this book.

Finally, to my darling Chris, for your patient ear, your

constant support, for your forever love, for everything.

INTRODUCTION

1986. Kigali, Rwanda. I am standing in a field on a blue-sky

day, surrounded by tall, yellow sunflowers. I am a twenty-

five-year-old former banker dressed in a flowy skirt, wearing

flat, mud-speckled white shoes, my head filled with dreams

of changing the world. Beside me is an apple-cheeked,

bespectacled nun in a brown habit smiling broadly. Her

name is Felicula, and I adore her for taking me under her

wing. Along with a few other Rwandan women, she and I are

planning to build the first microfinance bank in the country.

Today, we’re visiting a sunflower oil–pressing business, the

kind of tiny venture our bank might one day support. We

plan to call the microfinance organization Duterimbere,

meaning “to go forward with enthusiasm.”

All I see is upside.

2016. Kigali, Rwanda. I am standing at an outdoor reception

on a starry night, surrounded by men and women in dark

suits. I am the fifty-five-year-old CEO of Acumen, a global

nonprofit seeking to change the way the world tackles

poverty. Rwanda’s president, Paul Kagame, and his top

ministers are at the reception to meet potential investors in

a new $70 million impact fund Acumen is building to bring

solar electricity to more than ten million low-income people

in East Africa.

I have become all too familiar with the risks of making

and then trying to deliver on big promises. Yet I’m confident

Acumen and its partners can launch and implement this

fund, and thus prove the power of innovation to help solve

one of the continent’s most intractable problems.

Just before I begin to make a formal presentation to the

group, a young Rwandan woman wearing a navy suit and

low-heeled pumps approaches me.

“Ms. Novogratz,” she says, “I think you knew my

auntie.”

“Really?” I ask. “What was her name?” I haven’t a clue

to whom she is referring: too many of my friends were

murdered in the genocide.

“Her name was Felicula,” she responds brightly.

My eyes well with tears. “I’m sorry,” I stammer. “Would

you remind me who you are again?”

“My name is Monique,” the young woman answers with

soft-spoken confidence, her eyes holding mine. “I am the

deputy secretary-general of Rwanda’s central bank.”

Words fail me completely. I am transported back to the

days when Felicula and I dreamed together of a world in

which women would have greater control over their lives.

Of course, we started with a low bar: until 1986, it was

illegal in Rwanda for a woman to open a bank account

without her husband’s permission. Although Felicula and I

and our other cofounders had big dreams to make a

difference, had you told us in 1986 that within a generation I

would be standing before a young Rwandan woman charged

with overseeing her nation’s financial system, I’m not sure

we would have believed you.

In addition to being an enterprising nun, Felicula

Nyiramtarambirwa, along with two other cofounders of

Duterimbere, was among the first three women

parliamentarians in Rwandan history. Early in their

parliamentary tenures, while Duterimbere was just getting

started, the three women felt compelled to take on the issue

of bride price, a system whereby men presented three cows

to a potential father-in-law in exchange for marrying his

daughter. Felicula especially respected the power of

tradition, but not as an excuse for reducing women to

chattel.

The bill to ban the payment of a bride price passed

easily, but a backlash erupted. Rural women felt diminished.

In their eyes, their economic value had been decimated

overnight. Women and men across the country raised their

voices in protest, and many parliamentarians blamed the

outcry on the rashness of their freshmen colleagues. The

women parliamentarians had failed to understand the depth

of cultural practices in their own nation. They focused on

what could be, but neglected to recognize the world that

was, including the high-stakes realities of politics. In 1987,

just a few days after the bride-price fiasco, Felicula was

killed in a mysterious hit-and-run accident. Some assumed it

was a government-orchestrated killing. The murderer was

never found.

I mourned Felicula, and grieved over losing a person

who gave me a sense of belonging without consideration of

my tribe or religion or ethnicity. But if I had lost a chunk of

my innocence with her death, I also had learned the folly

and danger of unbridled optimism not grounded in the

realities of the communities we wish to serve. I grew in

understanding. And thanks to the elemental work

contributed by Felicula and others, our microfinance bank

expanded, reaching borrowers not only in Kigali but across

the nation.

Then, in 1994, the Rwandan genocide ripped the

country apart, resulting in the slaughter of more than a half

million people, mostly from the minority Tutsi tribe.

Shockingly, one of the cofounders of our beloved institution

of social justice emerged as a leader of that horrendous

bloodbath. After that, I couldn’t help but question all those

platitudes I’d heard about women being more nurturing and

caring than men. Some women, I’d think. Not all women.

Yet, soon enough, like shoots of fragile flowers creeping

upward through granite cracks, a small group of women

leaders came together from across the country to put

Duterimbere back together again. The quiet, resolute

actions of these women who had lost everything but hope

rekindled their resilience and helped repair the nation’s

broken heart.

Thirty years later, not only is Duterimbere surviving, but

it is thriving, and continuing to play its part in Rwanda’s

remarkable recovery. And though the history of the

country’s first three women parliamentarians ended

tragically, Rwanda now has the highest percentage of

women parliamentarians of any country on earth.

Back in Kigali on that night in 2016, I reconnected with

the memory of Felicula, who had started work she could not

complete in her lifetime. She was taken too early, but her

work continued anyway—because she cared, fought fiercely

for her convictions, and brought others along with her. I was

reminded that every one of us stands on the shoulders of

those who have gone before, that every one of us has a

chance to build on the collective knowledge of remarkable

human beings, their achievements, the principles they

cherished. And I was there to reassure myself that we have

infinitely more knowledge, connection, tools, skills, and

resources to tackle the world’s injustices today than we did

back in Felicula’s time.

Or at any other time in history.

The poet T. S. Eliot wrote, “We shall not cease from

exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive

where we started and know the place for the first time.”

That night in Kigali, I renewed my commitment to working

toward dreams so big that they may not be completed in my

lifetime.

And I resolved to write a love letter of sorts to anyone

daring to take action in our deeply flawed world.

We are made from what came before. We make

ourselves out of the promises that lie ahead. And we are

always in the process of becoming.

When I lived in Rwanda as a younger woman, cell

phones, the internet, and social media had yet to be

invented. I listened to the news twice daily via the BBC on a

shortwave radio. It was a world of separation: separate

nations, religions, ethnicities, tribes, and genders. Though

that world was terribly unequal and unfair—nearly 40

percent of humanity subsisted on less than a dollar a day—

most of us were blissfully unaware of what was happening in

other parts of our own countries, let alone what was

happening on other sides of the world.

The revolutions in technology and globalization in the

past three decades have changed everything. The rate of

extreme poverty has fallen to 10 percent and cell phones

have connected nearly every individual on the planet. We

can see into each other’s living rooms and gain a view into

one another’s lifestyles. Rights for human beings—and

nonhumans—are expanding. On so many dimensions, the

world has gotten better.

Yet, the same forces that have shaped this world—

technology and shareholder capitalism—hold within them

the potential to destroy us. We are dangerously unequal and

divided. We collectively face the ultimatum of our climate

emergency. And many of the institutions devoted ostensibly

to improving the lives of the many, not the few, are broken,

yet we have not envisioned their replacements.

We need a new narrative. We are too entangled to abide

worldviews based on separation, nor can we look to simple

technological or market solutions. Those stories have run

their course. We will be so much richer, productive, and

peaceful if we learn not only to coexist but to flourish,

celebrating our differences while holding to the

understanding that we are part of each other, bound

together by our shared humanity. That narrative will come

not from above but from all of us.

What we need is a moral revolution, one that helps us

reimagine and reform technology, business, and politics,

thereby touching all aspects of our lives. By “moral,” I don’t

mean strictly adhering to established rules of authority or

convention regardless of consequence. I mean a set of

principles focused on elevating our individual and collective

dignity: a daily choice to serve others, not simply benefit

ourselves. I mean complementing the audacity that built the

world we know with a new humility more attuned to our

interdependence.

Of course, the very notion of moral revolution is a tall

order. Some might call it naïve. But I am not writing with

wide-eyed idealism. Over three decades I have fought many

fights for social and economic change. Much of this time has

been spent building Acumen, investing in social

entrepreneurs who seek to provide essential goods and

services at affordable prices to people living in poverty. The

work has given me a front-row seat to the realities of

making sustainable change in some of the most challenging

places on the planet. What I’ve learned from these

individuals has deeply inspired me; and I want to pass on

those lessons, because they apply broadly.

None of this is easy, of course. I have accompanied

hundreds of change agents through challenges and

sometimes crushing defeats. My face wears the lines of

failures, losses, and far too many sleepless nights.

However, hard battles do not account for all my face’s

creases. Some are etched from smiles and laughter shared

with people who insisted on striving for freedom,

opportunity, and justice against all odds. I have partnered

with good people who have changed their communities,

their companies, their nations, and ultimately, themselves. I

have witnessed people making what others might consider

hopelessly romantic dreams come true—and true not just

for a few, but for millions (in some cases, hundreds of

millions). The actions of these people, not their slogans or

pretty words, have kept alive for me the ideas of purpose, of

impact, of dignity, of love—all separate points on a moral

compass.

A new generation is rising, one that is more conscious of

how they live, what they buy, and where they work. Many

are unwilling to work for companies unless those companies

are committed to sustainability and recognize that with

power must come accountability. And a growing number of

companies are listening. I’ve been heartened to see some

CEOs move to stakeholder models, partly in response to

prompting by their younger employees, and because they

themselves recognize the need to change. If you are

working in a corporation, you have ample opportunity to

act.

Cynics might point to a system of governments,

corporations, and technologies so broken that attempts to

change it from the edges are futile. But cynics don’t build

the future. Instead, they often use their jaundiced views to

justify inaction. And never before have we more desperately

needed their opposite—thoughtful, empathetic, resilient

believers and optimists on a path of moral leadership.

This book assumes that you are interested in being part

of world-changing human capital that will help solve

problems big and small. Maybe you are a teacher or a

communicator, an activist or a doctor, a lawyer or an

investor, or some new force for positive change. I have seen

people like you alter the lives of schoolchildren and street

children, refugees, the formerly incarcerated; of people

living in forgotten communities and in places ravaged by

war, poverty, or toxic industries. I’ve witnessed you not just

doing but improving the often-unseen work of serving the

sick, healing the heartbroken, sitting with the dying to

remind others that they, too, are good and worthy of love.

Or you might be a philanthropist. The hard work of

changing systems requires financial resources. And just as

there is a new generation of entrepreneurial individuals

focused on solving complex issues, so there is a new

generation of philanthropists, men and women willing to

give not just money but time, commitment, connections,

and big parts of their hearts and minds.

Change is the domain of all of us.

In every country on earth, people are refusing to

acquiesce to the exhausting, deadening news cycles filled

with catastrophe and cynicism, seeking to make good news

instead. These people are deliberately expanding their

circles of compassion, reaching across lines of difference

with a quiet strength forged in all that we have in common.

Our problems are so similar, so solvable. And we are better

than we think we are.

Those I’ve known who’ve most changed the world

exhibit a voracious curiosity about the world and other

people, and a willingness to listen and empathize with those

unlike them. These people stand apart not because of

school degrees or the size of their bank accounts, but

because of their character, their willingness to build

reservoirs of courage and stand for their beliefs, even if they

stand alone.

Of course, this kind of character isn’t built overnight. It

is honed through a lifelong process of committing to

something bigger than yourself, aspiring to qualities of

moral leadership, defining success by how others fare

because of your efforts, embedding a sense of purpose into

your daily decisions.

Change is possible. And because large-scale,

sustainable change is possible, I have come to see it as a

responsibility to be part of that change.

When it comes to a life of making change, there are no

shortcuts. It is hard work, but it is time well spent. And when

you reach the other side of the difficult-to-see tangible

transformation, it is like nothing in the world: a deep,

abiding sense not just of accomplishment but of joy.

I wrote this book because I believe that our fragile,

unequal, divided, yet still beautiful, world deserves a radical

moral rejuvenation. This revolution will ask all of us to shift

our ways of thinking to connection rather than

consumerism, to purpose rather than profits, to

sustainability rather than selfishness. We must awaken to

see workers not as inputs, the environment not as our

personal domain, and shareholders not as all-powerful. And

we need to move away from old models of doing what is

right for me and assuming it will turn out right for you.

If you are looking for a simple how-to guide or step-by-

step instructions for building a company or a nonprofit

organization, this is not the book for you. Rather, this book

is my attempt to bring forward and share the principles I’ve

learned from thousands of change agents, based above all

on the value of human dignity. Each of their stories makes

manifest the kind of moral leadership that looks to the

future not with blind optimism but with a hard-edged hope.

The people whose work I describe in this book have had to

learn to deal with ugly truths while singing songs of the

possible. They recognize that every problem is an

opportunity for us to act.

A manifesto is a public declaration of intentions. This

one is for all who hear the call of moral leadership—guiding

principles to dream and build a better world, coordinates of

a moral compass set by those already leading this journey

of change.

Hopefully, this is for you.

Chapter 1

JUST START

A few years ago, I spoke at a small women’s university in

the American South. After my talk, I had the privilege of

sitting with a number of the school’s top students. For

several hours, we talked about what was wrong in the world

and what each of us might do about it. “What do you dream

of doing?” I finally asked a bespectacled blond woman who

had been listening intently without uttering a word.

“I want to change the world.”

“How might you do that?” I asked.

“That’s the problem,” she said. “I have no idea.”

Tears welled in her eyes. For a moment, I caught a

glimpse of my younger self.

I remembered looking out at a world I wanted to change

and having no clue as to how to do it. I was at once wildly

bold and quietly frightened, feeling that a bull and a dove

coexisted inside me, worried that I lacked the skills or the

know-how to pull off my ambitions. And some of those

feelings continued even when I became more certain of

possible paths forward.

In fact, many of the words and questions from the

students that night sounded familiar. How can I be of use?

How can I find my purpose? Where will I make the most

impact?

When we look back on our lives, we construct sense-

making narratives of who we are and how we’ve chosen to

spend our time. But when we look forward, the path ahead

can feel overwhelmingly elusive. While the fearful student

and her friends pushed for answers, I could offer only

questions and a single piece of advice. For while there are

skills to gain and character traits to develop, there is only

one way to begin.

Just start—and let the work teach you.

Too many who yearn to make a difference become

paralyzed by the fear of leaping without having worked out

every detail. Yet the decision we face is not to chart the

perfect way forward; it is simply to embark on a journey.

Once we’ve taken a step forward, the work will teach us

where to take a second step, and then a third, and so on.

Purpose does not reveal itself to those sitting safely at the

starting block. In other words, you don’t plan your way into

finding your purpose. You live into it.

Childhood memories and reveries, however distant, can

provide clues to our innermost yearnings. As a little girl, I

read stories of the saints. They were printed on cards that

my beloved first-grade teacher, Sister Mary Theophane,

gave me for doing well on tests. Many decades later, my

friend the poet Marie Howe suggested that the stories of the

saints marked the first time we little Catholic girls read of

women who wrote the narratives of their own lives. The

saints were also the first people I encountered who lived for,

and were often willing to die for, an idea bigger than

themselves. Their resolution and valor infected me with a

desire to be of use; I wanted to be like them somehow.

When I was ten, my fifth-grade teacher, Mrs. Howerton,

introduced me to a row of biographies of heroic figures, little

yellow books hidden in a corner of the school library. There

I’d sit cross-legged on the floor and disappear into the

worlds of the abolitionist Harriet Tubman, the pioneering

doctor Elizabeth Blackwell, the human rights advocate

Eleanor Roosevelt, and so on. These women refused to be

limited by small dreams, and though I was not yet able to

point to a living example of a woman like them, they stood

as beacons of the possible, of lives lived to make a

difference.

But if I dreamed of becoming a warrior for love and

justice, my first job out of university hardly fit the bill. For

more than three years, I spent my days on Wall Street as an

analyst at Chase Manhattan Bank. Though I hadn’t planned

on becoming a banker, I discovered a delight in building

financial skills and in understanding the workings of

economic systems, not to mention the side benefit of

traveling the world. Until then, I had never left the United

States. That banking job took me to forty countries, and

exposed me to political and economic realities that I’d

previously only studied in books.

What I didn’t like about banking, though, was the way

our financial system excluded low-income people from

borrowing funds that could change their lives and contribute

to their local economies. Banks required borrowers to put up

twice the value of their loans as collateral, a requirement

out of reach for even the lower-middle class. The private

sector was set up to earn profits, not to ensure that multiple

stakeholders, especially the poor, were well served.

Understanding they had little chance of being part of the

mainstream financial system, most low-income people

dared not even walk through the doors of the major banks.

As the months at Chase passed, a yearning to do

something for lower-income people took root inside me.

That yearning was a clue to the thread I should follow, a

stirring driven by a growing sense of injustice and a desire

to contribute. A weekend in mid-1985 spent walking in the

favelas of Rio de Janeiro, conversing with hardworking

people about their aspirations and realities, convinced me of

what I already knew to be true: nations would develop

equitably only if their low-income citizens could save and

borrow.

Around that time, a friend showed me an article about a

little-known economist named Muhammad Yunus who had

started a tiny operation in Bangladesh called the Grameen

Bank. Grameen was part of a fledgling sector called

microfinance, which included the Self-Employed Women’s

Association, in India; the Bangladesh Rural Advancement

Committee (BRAC); and Women’s World Banking, in the

United States. These institutions made small loans (from

thirty to one hundred dollars, on average) to millions of low-

income people, mostly women, so that they could build tiny

businesses to support their lives.

Though only about ten years old at the time, the

microfinance sector already was yielding noteworthy results.

Grameen Bank had accumulated data showing that poor

women repaid their loans at much higher rates than their

wealthy counterparts. That got my attention. I started to

dream of leaving Wall Street to work in microfinance.

However, I first had to overcome my fear of diminished

personal income and an even stronger fear of my parents’

disappointment. I was raised the eldest of seven in a

military family and had had to pay my way through

university and take on debt to graduate. Chase had set me

squarely on the path to wealth and a vision of a future with

the bank was tempting. Also, a senior officer at Chase had

recently offered me a fast-track position that would give me

the chance to break barriers for women in the financial

world.

My father did not want me to pass up what he saw as a

once-in-a-lifetime career opportunity. My mother worried

that something bad might happen to me if I worked in a

developing country—or worse, I might never get married.

And, of course, neither of them wanted me to move to

another continent; parents want to keep their children safe.

It did not help that my friends worried that our relationships

would change, and some simply thought I’d lost my mind.

The small voice inside me was shouted down by the

cacophony. I was a born pleaser and cared about what

others thought. But this tendency naturally butted heads

with another side of me, which was daring, justice-seeking,

sometimes even reckless, determined to make a difference

in the world.

Somehow I knew that if I didn’t dare then, I might never

take the risk. Though only twenty-five years old, I could

already name peers who lived provisionally, promising

they’d follow their dreams after they paid off their debts …

or married … or got an MBA. Over time, their lives had

become more expensive to manage, making it even harder

for them to take the leap. I feared living a life of quiet

desperation, to quote Thoreau, and was hungry for a life rich

in adventure.

Some people felt wholly alive in the world of finance;

that wasn’t me. I needed to venture toward a different life.

Yes, I had significant student debt to repay, but I would

figure out the dollars and cents of it all later.

After a few months of research, I discovered what

sounded like an amazing opportunity: to work with

numerous fledgling microfinance organizations across a

whole continent, providing management support and

serving as an ambassador to women interested in using

small business as a tool for change. However, there was a

hitch: the job was based in Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa, not in

Brazil, where I’d hoped to work. If I was going to make a

sacrifice of career and income, I reasoned, I should sacrifice

for a place whose intoxicating rhythms and colors held

special appeal to me. I knew almost nothing about the Côte

d’Ivoire.

Alas, no opportunity in Brazil was on the table, and I had

to make a choice. I could focus on the substance of my

desire, to become a bridge between low-income people and

the world of finance, or I could obsess over my fantasy of

living in Brazil. I couldn’t do both.

The Jesuits have a powerful saying: “Go where your

deepest yearning meets the world’s greatest need.” I

yearned to contribute to the economic development of low-

income people, to learn about the world, to live in a new

culture. For whatever reason, the world seemed to need, or

at least want, me more in West Africa than in Brazil.

So, I took the job in West Africa. I just started.

I don’t mean to sound cavalier when I say “just start.” I

was lucky to grow up with parents who ultimately supported

my decisions. That is not the case for many who face heavy

implications for rejecting the wishes of their families, clans,

and religious leaders. Indeed, for some people, just starting

a conversation can take gumption. Moreover, there was

truth in my parents’ fears: bad things did happen to me, and

it did take much longer for me to tie the knot than they (or I)

would have imagined.

But no one escapes life without being wounded and

scarred; and I had multiple chances to wed, including when I

lived in Africa. Over the years, I came to see that there are

many ways to live a life. I was “enough” on my own terms. It

would take until I was forty to meet my husband, Chris, and

only then did I realize that I’d been waiting for the love of

my life.

Young people sometimes ask, “But what if I dare and

then fail?” I failed more times than I can count. I moved to

Côte d’Ivoire and was met with outright rejection from those

I had hoped to serve. Yet I learned from my failures, and

came to understand that to rule out failure is to rule out

success.

With each experience, the good, the bad, and even the

ugly, I added tools to my toolbox. More important, I honed

my understanding of myself and how others perceived me,

preparing to listen, learn, and work in partnership. I began

to comprehend that the world does not need another hero—

sustained change results from multiple heroic acts across a

community—and that it was my job to help others shine.

Of course, there are times when nothing seems to be

working, when you don’t understand what is going on

around you, and no one trusts you enough to tell you. But

what separates those who dabble in feel-good endeavors

and those who actually nudge the world forward has nothing

to do with intellect, connections, or specific skills. The ones

whose actions and ideas produce positive consequences are

the ones who stay in the game.

Try. Fail. Then try again. Follow the thread as it unspools.

Just start.

After my bumpy start in Côte d’Ivoire, I moved to Kenya for

a few months, where I continued to stumble in my efforts to

“do good.” Finally, in early 1987, when I was still twenty-

five, I accepted a three-week consultancy in Kigali, Rwanda,

to research the state of credit for low-income women. It

became clear that the only way to change the financial

standing of the women there was to build an institution

tailored to their needs. I didn’t slow down to ask myself who

was I to try to create a financial institution based on a

measly three years’ credit experience as a baby banker at

Chase. I saw a problem to be solved—the banking system

excluded people who were just asking for a fair chance to

borrow and contribute to the economy. And I was already

meeting extraordinary local women who would partner with

me.

Who was I not to dare?

Duterimbere, Rwanda’s first microfinance bank, which I

cofounded with Felicula and others, carved a lending path

for the country’s low-income women and touched the lives

of many thousands. It also changed my life, for good.

Experiencing firsthand the power of markets from the

perspectives of low-income women reinforced my belief in

using the tools of capitalism to enable individual freedom.

The work gave me new insights and skills. In 1987, I

witnessed how global market fluctuations caused local

coffee prices to plunge, devastating the livelihoods of 80

percent of Rwandan farmers—an episode that woke me to

the perils of unbridled capitalism. Had I not taken that first

leap from Wall Street, I would not have learned this. And

had I not persevered after failing in Côte d’Ivoire, I might

have gone home without confronting my own limitations or

discovering my truest gifts. We grow when we stretch, when

we are willing to embrace the uncomfortable.

“Just start” is a mind-set that belongs not only to the young,

but to anyone who hopes to remain productive, vibrant, and

relevant throughout their lives. No one taught me about the

elixir of self-renewal like my mentor, the venerable public

servant John Gardner. I met John during my first year of

business school, just after my initial stretch of work in Africa,

and he represented precisely the kind of leader I aspired to

become. Though I didn’t fully understand it at the time, I’ve

discovered that when you don’t know where to start,

following a leader who inspires you can be a powerful

strategy.

John started and restarted throughout his life,

participating in his generation’s most momentous decisions,

yet remaining free from society’s pressures to be what

others thought he should be. The sole Republican in

President Lyndon Johnson’s cabinet, John served as

secretary of health, education, and welfare during America’s

civil rights movement, during which he started the White

House Fellows program and launched Medicare, among

other initiatives. In 1968, he resigned his prestigious

position in protest of the Vietnam War and had to start

again.

Two years later, at age fifty-four, John founded Common

Cause, a grassroots citizens’ movement to hold government

accountable. And in 1980, he cofounded Independent Sector

to support the nonprofit sector. Though in his seventies

when I met him, John would go on to cofound a nonprofit

organization, now called Encore, that inspires older people

to just start again themselves by getting involved in service

organizations across the country.

John’s was a lived and practical wisdom. “The self-

renewing man,” he wrote, “looks forward to an endless and

unpredictable dialogue between his potentialities and the

claims of life—not only the claims he encounters but the

claims he invents.” He was a half century older than me, but

John’s enduring curiosity, his sense of possibility and

willingness to try made him seem the youngest person I

knew.

So, just start. Find mentors you can learn from, whether

in person, online, or in print. And let your experiences teach

you what you have to do next. All in all, it took me nearly

twenty years of apprenticing, putting new tools in my

toolbox, and expanding my understanding of the world

through jobs in banking, development, and foundations,

before my skills, aspirations, and networks came together to

create Acumen in 2001.

I was ready to just start again. I had a theory of how we

might revolutionize philanthropy by investing it as long-

term, patient capital in intrepid entrepreneurs daring to

build financially sustainable solutions to poverty where

markets and governments had both failed the poor. But I

didn’t have many proof points. I remember privately

thinking that I would spend three years doing all I could to

build a “blueprint for change,” and then decide whether

Acumen was an idea worth trying beyond that.

Luckily, I was part of a group of pioneering individuals

who were willing to risk their philanthropy and give their

time for an idea most considered crazy.

That early group cheered on every move forward. At

each step, the work, and sometimes the world, taught us

what we had to do. When the 9/11 terror attacks changed

the global landscape, my team and I decided to work in the

Muslim world. That same thread of human dignity that had

pulled me into microfinance drew my team to invest in

Pakistan, a place previously unknown to me. After ten years

of work in South Asia and Africa, we wanted to do more to

attack the poverty of inequality, and so we expanded to

Latin America and the United States. Each new geography

was a risk, each an adventure.

Each new investment deepened our understanding of

how the world works—and gave us confidence to push the

edges of our work even further. When our companies

identified the need for talent, not just money, we launched a

Fellows program to support entrepreneurial leaders. When

more people applied to become fellows than we could

directly support, we developed an online school for social

change. When we found ourselves unsatisfied with

conventional impact measurements, we created our own

approach to measuring what matters. One thing led to

another, each new step made possible because we had

started in the first place.

Nearly twenty years have passed with Acumen. When

we started, I couldn’t have dreamed the kinds of companies

we would help build: rule-breaking, yet highly successful

enterprises unleashing the potential of millions of low-

income people. I wouldn’t have understood the kinds of

partnerships needed to bring critical services not to just

some people but to all. And though we made a few false

starts, to be sure, because of our efforts and those of so

many others around the world, a new sector exists, called

impact investing. And a new generation has a newer, better

set of tools with which to reimagine and build models of

inclusive and environmentally sustainable capitalism.

All these years later, I am still just starting. I am honing

my purpose, clarifying who I am and want to become.

And I have found in the idea of human dignity a purpose

for which I am willing to live—and, if necessary, to die. And

that has made all the difference.

You may not yet have a crystal-clear sense of your

purpose. That’s okay. It will grow with you. But if you have

an inkling that you’d like your life to be about something

bigger than yourself, listen to that urge. Follow the thread.

The world needs you.

Just start.

Chapter 2

REDEFINE

SUCCESS

On the morning of India’s winter solstice in December 2015,

Ankit Agarwal could not have imagined that a bunch of

floating flowers would change his life’s trajectory. Ankit was

showing Jakub, a friend visiting from the Czech Republic, the

sights of his hometown, Kanpur, an industrial city known for

its textile and leather tanning factories, built on the banks of

the great Ganges, one of Hinduism’s most sacred rivers. The

two young men sat on the steps leading down to the

Ganges, musing on the meaning of life. As the two

conversed, thousands of the faithful and tradition-bound

entered the waters to mark the shortest day of the year with

blessings and ablutions—and flowers. It was a scene Ankit

had witnessed throughout his life, a colorful but blurry

backdrop to his days.

Despite recent success in his early career, Ankit was full

of angst. He was pondering aloud what it would take to find

contentment and success when Jakub interrupted him,

pointing to the river as if he’d not heard a word from his

friend. Little did Jakub know that his distraction would be the

key to Ankit’s destiny. “Why is India’s most sacred river so

polluted with an endless float of dead flowers?” Jakub asked.

Ankit had always taken for granted the sight of

marigolds, roses, jasmine, and other blossoms drifting in the

Ganges. Daily, millions of people across India brought

flowers and foodstuffs to Hindu temples as blessings for the

gods. Unwilling to desecrate these blessings by disposing of

them in the trash, priests dumped them in sacred rivers.

Rotting flowers and foodstuffs in the water was just the way

things were.

“But look at the scum of chemicals floating on the

water’s surface,” Jakub rejoined, surveying the clothed men

and women wading in the river. “And imagine what those

pesticides and chemicals emanating from the flowers are

doing to those believers as they wade in carcinogenic

water.”

At first, Ankit shrugged off his friend’s observation. He

knew the Ganges was highly polluted; he had even visited

some of the factories along the river’s banks. But the sight

of those riotous rotting flowers got under his skin. How, he

wondered, could a tradition considered so essential and so

gentle have such ugly ramifications? And how bad could it

be?

That moment awakened Ankit’s curiosity and offered

him a thread to follow, one that drove his sense of

possibility and unleashed his powers of innovation. The

deeper he dove into the question of solving the “flower

issue,” the more he began to open himself to a more

profound meaning of success. And for him, the timing was

right.

Four and a half years earlier, Ankit had reported to his

first job after university as a newly minted engineer. Waiting

in the company’s reception area, he had noticed a wall filled

with portraits of every employee who’d won patents. “I want

this. I want my picture there,” he told himself. Success, or at

least happiness, began to look like a portrait with a metal

plate inscribed with his name.

So, Ankit drove himself relentlessly, staying late to

complete tasks, often sleeping in the office. Just three years

later, he became one of the youngest engineers in the

company’s history with a plaque on that wall. The whole

team applauded.

Then a strange thing happened. “Instead of jumping

with happiness, it was as if suddenly everything seemed

meaningless,” Ankit explained to me in an email. “I started

to ask what I wanted to do in life, and began to feel the

whole rush was meaningless.”

There had to be more to life than prizes, awards, titles,

or salaries. At age twenty-five, Ankit understood that his

success would come only from focusing on a “challenge that

would improve lives or the earth, really, anything that would

bring about real change.”

Those flowers floating in the river transformed into

blessings for Ankit. Here was a chance to solve a problem

that mattered. Changing the ancient practice of dumping

flowers into the rivers would require confronting a status

quo solidified over many generations. Ankit knew he would

go from being viewed as successful to being considered

crazy by some. But he had attempted the conventional

route to success and found it less than fulfilling. Now he had

a chance to redefine success for himself. Crazy might be just

the ticket.

In researching the “temple flower problem,” Ankit

discovered that Indians discarded more than eight million

tons of flowers yearly into rivers such as the Ganges. The

flowers are covered in a variety of pesticides, including

arsenic, lead, and cadmium, all of which contribute to water-

borne diseases. The more complex the problem revealed

itself to be, the less Ankit connected success to himself and

instead focused on changing the entire system.

He partnered with his best friend, Karan Rastogi, to

create Phool, a company that would solve multiple problems

at once. Phool, in Hindi, means flower. Success to the

company meant the improved health of the Ganges,

measured by the number of tons of flowers the company

was able to retrieve from the temples. Success would also

be measured by the number of jobs the company created,

and particularly by the quality of jobs for disadvantaged

people.

To realize these elements of success required a for-profit

model, according to the two entrepreneurs, one that

ensured financial sustainability and attracted enough capital

to meet the scale of the problem they were trying to solve.

Profits were an important indicator, but the true measure of

their venture’s success would be its impact on all

stakeholders, including employees and the earth.

And, of course, customers. To this end, Ankit and Karan

needed a salable product. They reasoned that a growing

group of consumers was interested in products built on

principles of the circular economy, systems that removed

“waste” from the production cycle by finding ways to reuse

and repurpose it. Ankit and Karan asked themselves what

they could produce from the flower waste that people would

want to buy, and how that product would improve people’s

lives. They spent eighteen months listening to potential

customers and trying to understand what they might value.

One ingenious product they settled on was incense

sticks. Used for cultural and religious practice, incense is

burned daily in many Indian households; however, the

majority of sticks are made from charcoal, which negatively

affects respiratory health. Ankit and Karan reasoned that

they could use what was already being treated as waste to

make flower incense sticks that were healthier and of lower

cost. The flower incense sticks would require minimal skills

to produce and would embody the spirit of the temples from

which the flowers came.

Phool now collects about ten thousand pounds of

flowers daily from Kanpur’s temples. The company provides

each temple with large bins, which are routinely picked up

and taken to a plant, essentially a warehouse and drying

area. To eliminate the flower waste’s toxicity, the company

sprays it with an organic Bioculum. Scores of women then

separate the petals to transform dried organic waste into

incense sticks and warming compost.

As part of their commitment to sustainable business

practices, Phool’s founders dedicated themselves to hiring

women from the manual scavenger caste, one of the most

marginalized groups on earth. Though the caste system is

technically outlawed in India, more than three-quarters of a

million “scavengers” are still consigned to removing

untreated human waste (using flimsy tools such as

cardboard, tin plates, and buckets) from toilets and pit

latrines, which they then must sometimes carry several

kilometers before reaching a disposal site.

These “scavengers” suffer extreme prejudice, often

living at the margins and carrying a heavy yoke of poverty.

Especially in the company’s early years, the Phool founders’

commitment to hiring women from this caste added

complexity and cost to building their business. The

scavenger community was located at the edges of town, so

the company sought to hire a bus to transport the women to

and from work. But it took two months to convince a bus

company to drive them. Then, when the owner of Phool’s

first rented space got wise to the employees’ caste, he

destroyed the factory’s equipment and summarily threw the

company out.

Though Phool sustained devastating financial losses,

Ankit and Karan started over, persisting through clenched

teeth. Ankit’s dream of success had evolved from the days

when only traditional honors mattered to him, and the

founders weren’t going to be cowed by other people’s

narrow-mindedness. As the level of difficulty rose, so did

their commitment to realizing their dream.

In January 2018, Acumen’s India director Mahesh

Yagnaraman and I visited Ankit, an Acumen fellow, at his

factory. Wearing a black leather jacket and jeans, he greeted

us in the open-air courtyard of his factory, where rows of

women sat on tiny plastic stools, concentrating as they

sifted through tangerine, bright yellow, and white flowers.

Inside the warehouse, other women stood in long lines

rolling incense sticks with speed and precision. I tried my

hand at rolling the sticks, and gained instant respect for the

women who worked at Phool. Meanwhile, the women

couldn’t stop laughing at the mess I made.

Our little Acumen group sat for a while in a small room

that abutted the courtyard with Ankit and his wife, Ridhima,

discussing Phool’s business fundamentals. Ankit spoke with

both toughness and tenderness, making it clear that Phool’s

mission to clean the rivers and provide dignified jobs drove

every decision the company made. Only then do they make

the numbers work, understanding that it may take a long

time to build a profitable business that stays true to all its

goals.

The company is committed to its employees first. In

addition to providing daily transport, Phool pays well,

provides health insurance, and serves the women tea twice

daily. It also encourages the women to take a bottle of clean

water home to their families at the end of each day. I asked

Ankit why he sent the water home with them.

“Society reminds these women nearly every moment of

their lives that they are outcastes. They are unwanted. But

when you can drink the same water as others do, finally you

can feel equal,” he responded.

We soon moved to the courtyard outside the warehouse,

where a vibrant, multicolored carpet of flowers had been

laid out for drying. A group of women sitting by the flowers

had taken a break for lunch. I requested to join them and

asked how their lives had changed since working with Ankit

and Karan. “I love coming here,” said a freckled woman with

smiling eyes, her hair pulled back. “Before this company, I

had to move from house to house for work and never feel

respected.Life was very difficult. Here, we learn new skills.

We’re with friends.”

Another jumped in: “This is the first time anyone has

tried to teach us something. Sometimes I worry that I’m not

learning fast enough. But these people believe I can do it,

and that gives me confidence. I’m bolder now at home and

in my community. I’m able to keep up with school fees for

the first time, too.”

Another woman added, “I bought my family our first

television, and now the neighbors come over to my house to

watch.”

A fourth chimed in, stating, “They respect us in this

place. We don’t have to sit on the ground.” I told her I didn’t

understand. “This seat,” she said, pointing to the two-dollar

plastic stool beneath her, “is the first one anyone has ever

offered to me.”

As our discussion continued, the women avoided any

talk of caste, understandably distancing themselves from

all-too-recent humiliations and heartbreaks engendered

from belonging to a group deemed “untouchable.” They

euphemistically referred to their past jobs cleaning up waste

as “domestic work,” and quickly steered the conversation to

their present states of happiness. I was touched by the

women’s gratitude for the opportunity of decent work that

entailed neither degradation nor abuse.

A woman in a caramel sweater over a yellow kurta,

quiet till then, added her voice to the conversation. “It is so

good here,” she said. “We feel fresh being around the

flowers. I like the smell. And it is good that our work brings

blessings back to the gods.”

She was referring to the virtuous cycle of these flowers,

collected from temples and converted into incense sticks

before being returned to the temples as a second round of

offerings. The woman did not mention that many

households that purchased the sticks would nonetheless

refuse to allow the women who produced them to enter

their homes.

“Is there anything you would change at the company?” I

asked.

The woman with smiling eyes responded, “I only want

this place to succeed. We must work hard here to help it

grow. That’s all. I only worry that one day it might move

from here.”

By then, Ankit had walked up, himself a paradox of

presentation and values. His somber mien belied the

tenderness with which he spoke to the women. “We’re not

going anywhere,” he assured them gently.

To some, Ankit and Karan’s choice of whom to hire and

how to manage those employees seemed noble but,

ultimately, misguided. It is challenging to make any

company profitable, and they could have taken a much

easier path to building a business. But Ankit and Karan

define success in terms that include more than money.

Imagine the women gossiping and laughing as they

travel in the bus driven specifically for them. Consider what

it might feel like to have tea served to you when you’ve

been considered less worthy than other people your entire

life. Or the joy that comes from earning enough money to

experience a level of self-reliance you’ve never before had.

Picture their children, who now receive fresh drinking water

each night, some of them for the first time. Laughter,

respect, the security of productive work, a sense of

belonging, dignity—these are things that matter the most to

our experience as human beings, yet our financial and

economic systems too often fail to acknowledge them when

calculating “success.”

Although it may take time to change ancient practices,

Phool is using modern market incentives grounded in moral

values. This combination of fundamentals bodes well not

only for the company’s long-term financial sustainability but

for a sense of shared success. The temple priests feel proud

that they no longer are polluting rivers in the name of the

gods. The men who collect the flowers have good, decent

jobs. The rivers are cleaner, making the pilgrims who bathe

in the Ganges and other rivers less likely to fall sick. And

consumers know that by purchasing these high-quality

goods, which have been produced sustainably, they are

providing jobs and dignity to some of the most

disadvantaged women in India. That is the kind of success

everyone can feel good partaking in.

Success doesn’t just wait for us on a distant horizon.

Success is within all of us, waiting for us to live into it. It

exists in the beauty we create, the goodwill we offer, the

ideas we spread, the causes for which we stand, and the

lives we help transform. It shows up in the health and well-

being of our children, our communities; in the way we love

the world and one another. Even if this particular venture

fails, Ankit is already a very successful man, allowing

curiosity and a desire to serve others to guide his life

choices.

Of course, the notion of redefining success rubs against

the status quo. Humans are status-seeking beings. We yearn

to be accepted, respected, loved. Our current systems

(economic, political, and social) reinforce a definition of

“winning” based on money, power, and fame. Rather than

being rewarded for what we give, we’re too often affirmed

by what we take.

What if our Golden Rule were not only “Do unto others

as you would have them do unto you” but also “Give more

to the world than you take from it”? That would change

everything. If enough of us pursued that path, the world of

inequality, exploitation, and injustice would slowly be

replaced by a world of inclusion, fairness, and dignity.

The point is this: We are the system. We decide how to

define success, and we can reject purely individualistic

terms. There is much to learn from cultural approaches that

value sustainability over economic progress, or that build in

practices to keep the community more equal. Shiroi Lily

Shaiza, an Acumen fellow from Nagaland, a state in

Northeast India, shared with me how her ancestors

practiced “the feast of merit.”

“When a community member earned significant wealth,

he would be required to host enormous feasts for the

community,” she said. “The person would consider it the

highest honor. He would be entitled to wear a special cloak

and ornament his house to signify his high social standing.

And the villagers revered that person as the pinnacle of

success, especially those wealthy people who, by the end of

their lives, had given everything away.”

Every generation has the opportunity to renew the

values, systems, and structures that define their societies,

and to jettison those that no longer serve. The most

enduring systems are those grounded in fundamental

values based on human flourishing. We can disagree on the

specifics of what humans need to succeed, but if our

starting point is an environmentally sustainable world that

enables all its inhabitants to flourish, then we’ve got the

foundation for a moral framework. Unequal systems persist,

yet they can be reimagined and reformed when people

muster enough awareness and collective determination to

do something about them.

It goes without saying that systems do not change

overnight. In the meantime, the world needs brave people

to create models of companies, organizations, schools,

religious institutions, hospitals, prisons, and governments

designed for a world interdependent and environmentally at

risk. The best will drive themselves relentlessly, exposing

their hearts to the world, understanding that others’

resistance to change is part of the deal we make when we

sign up to reject the status quo. Setbacks are inevitable, yet

as most anyone who has ever tried to change anything will

tell you, it is the difficult, not the easy, that underlies those

accomplishments that ultimately imbue our souls with the

kind of success that sustains.

Sometimes, when we are pursuing intrinsically-driven

accomplishments, progress can feel so unbearably slow that

even those who have already redefined success for

themselves must reevaluate before renewing their

commitment to the work they know is right for them. Benje

Williams spent 2011 in Lahore, Pakistan, as an Acumen

fellow building an outreach team for a drinking water

company that served local slum areas. Less than 5 percent

of Pakistani youths are educated beyond high school, and as

Benje explained, “I was unprepared for the difficulty of

hiring a workforce trained not just in technical skills but in

critical life skills.”

Benje began to dream about building a leadership and

workforce development institute that would train millions of

young unemployed and underemployed Pakistanis—part of

the “youth bulge” defining Pakistan and most of the

developing world. (Sixty-four percent of Pakistan’s

population is under age thirty, the highest percentage of

young people in the world.)

“Pakistan’s youthful generation is a national asset,”

Benje explained during one of my visits, “but only if young

people are able to obtain the necessary skills to widen their

opportunities. Otherwise, an untrained, excluded, and

frustrated youth population will pose a serious problem for

the country and beyond.”

A few years subsequent to his Acumen Fellowship

experience and after earning a degree from Stanford

Graduate School of Business, Benje returned to Lahore and

founded Amal Academy, a nonprofit leadership organization

to train first-generation graduates from secondary- and

tertiary-level universities and place them in good jobs.

This work challenged Benje on every front. He was a

foreigner with no financial resources of his own, there was

no institution of its kind in the country, and those he served

had little or no income to spend. Nonetheless, Benje created

several partnerships that provided revenue and trained

hundreds of young people in the organization’s first few

years. His reputation for effectiveness was spreading, and

his commitment to his work made him beloved in the local

community. Yet, to Benje, something was amiss.

Despite meaningful progress, there are times in every

change-maker’s journey when questions and doubts grow,

multiplying like weeds until you feel you might suffocate. In

January 2016, three years after he founded Amal Academy,

Benje asked if he could come see me when he was passing

through New York. I invited him to join me for a 6 a.m. run

along the Hudson River. The bitter cold, windy morning was

matched by a heaviness in Benje’s usually sunny demeanor.

“What’s up?” I asked.

“I’m not sure we’re doing enough,” he said.

The statement stopped me in my tracks.

“I started Amal to change the education system, not

simply to help a few young people,” Benje explained.

I reminded him that “hundreds” did not constitute a few.

From my perspective, he was right on track, three years in,

building a business model that could significantly impact

lives and cover its costs. I’d always found Benje exceptional

in every way—relentless in focus, uncomplaining, effective,

always putting others before himself. I wondered what was

eating at his soul.

Then I remembered: when Benje studied at Stanford, he

was confronted by the lure of conventional success as

defined by outsized salaries and enviable job titles. Some

students there convinced themselves that they had

competed in a “meritocracy” and “earned” whatever they

got. But Benje lived with a different ethos. He understood

that the lottery of life puts humans in a great variety of

starting positions and that luck often trumps merit. Benje

yearned to be of use. To make the right career choice, he’d

had to limit his options.

“The only way I knew to stay true to myself,” he once

told me, “was to wear blinders during the job recruitment

season, and not apply for a single job. I didn’t want to be

tempted by a position with a huge salary. I even deactivated

Facebook and Instagram because the comparison game can

be so paralyzing.”

Many of us will repeatedly face the choice of whether to

make money or make a difference. And though you can

have both, there nonetheless will be times when you must

decide which value is of greater priority. Benje had gone all

in to serve the disadvantaged and make a positive

difference. Given how long it can take to create a significant,

sustained impact, for people with grand ambition, that

decision undoubtedly leads to moments of great stress.

“You’re doing what you set out to do,” I reminded him.

“Be proud of what you’ve built. Most people talk about

change. You’re doing it. And you’ve only started.”

I hated seeing Benje be so hard on himself. I also could

recognize my younger self in him. I, too, had gone all in for

a life of social impact, and I knew well the feeling that the

marketing genius Seth Godin “calls “the Dip,” that moment

(which can feel like forever) when the thing you think you

want to do has gotten so hard that you don’t know if it will

ever work or become enjoyable.

Problems seem much easier to solve from a distance.

New jobs seem easier to obtain; new organizations, easier

to navigate. But that is not how most turn out to be. When

confronting on-ground realities, our expectations regarding

not only results, but also rewards, both psychological and

financial, diminish.

There have been periods in my life when the work felt

so hard for so long that the Dip threatened to take up

permanent residence inside me. Those were not times of

crisis—for emergencies focus my energies. In those times,

like many entrepreneurs, I can muster the power to break

through walls. Instead, the Dip would present itself during

the doldrums like a weighty tumor growing thicker and

heavier, making even fairly minor tasks feel Sisyphean.

My blues hurt more because everyone around me

appeared to be doing fabulously. During my thirties in

particular—I was around the same age as Benje at the time

of our morning jog—I saw many friends from business

school go to work at technology start-ups likely to make

them wealthy or marry people who were themselves

financial success stories. If they didn’t have a powerful

career, they had a beautiful house filled with perfectly

behaved, well-dressed children. Single, without kids,

financially stressed, and unable to describe my work in ways

most could understand, I spent more than a few lonely

nights asking myself if I was enough.

Three years into something new is often just the

moment you hit the Dip: the excitement of your ambition to

change the world somehow fades into the reality of daily

frustrations and creeping fears. Staff members don’t show

up. Funders tell you they’d like to see more proof of your

concept, yet you need the funding to do the work that would

provide the proof. Parents and friends start to ask how

things are going, worried looks stretched across their faces.

You count the number of people you’ve impacted, and it

feels small, insignificant. Those moments can feel

devastating. But they also are precisely when to remember

why you are doing this work in the first place. Friends and

mentors, part of a successful life, help, too.

In the end, as Seth Godin writes, “persistent people are

able to visualize the idea of light at the end of the tunnel

when others can’t see it.” Dips are an inevitable part of life

as an agent of change. The key is to use them to enliven

and inspire a better future.

“Look, Benje,” I said. “You’re right. You are a long way

from denting Pakistan’s broken education system. That work

will require a lot of different people, and it still may not

happen in your lifetime. But don’t get paralyzed thinking

about the entire system. Do what you do well. Once you’ve

trained five thousand of those young people—who not only

will have good jobs but will demonstrate character, practice

lifelong learning, and feel part of something bigger than

themselves—you will have created a platform. And once you

have a platform, you can change the system. But first, build

something beautiful.” With that, we hugged and each

rushed off to our mornings.

When I saw Benje again in 2018, this time in Lahore, he

had built a small group of influential Pakistani backers to

provide financial support and mentorship, championing

Amal’s work. Amal Academy had grown into a team of thirty

young, driven team members, including ten of their

fellowship graduates. The organization had trained

thousands of fellows, and forged partnerships with

corporations and universities across the country. Benje had

started a podcast to spread the message that education is

about developing both character and critical thinking skills.

He and his business partner, Ali, had become sought-after

experts on developing workforces—employees as leaders,

as agents of change, rather than workers who simply follow

directions. Tens of thousands of lives are different because

Benje redefined success for himself, and navigated

uncompromisingly toward his north star.

That day in Lahore, I thought of a blogpost Benje had

written, sharing sage advice from a mutual friend: “The

question isn’t just what problem do you want to solve, but

how do you want to spend the next forty years of your life?”

A couple of years had passed since Benje experienced the

Dip. That gentle, brilliant man had become surrounded by

erudite young Pakistanis, each of them committed to service

and to building their nation from a place of values, with

twenty-first-century skills in hand, all of them looking to him

as a role model.

D.light, one of the companies Acumen has supported from

its beginning, has brought solar light and electricity to more

than one hundred million people across the globe. By all

definitions, d.light’s founders, Ned Tozun and Sam Goldman

(whom I describe further in chapter 4), are successful. But

their success goes far beyond the many lives their work has

impacted. By tackling one of the world’s great challenges,

the replacement of kerosene with clean, affordable energy,

the company has offset millions of tons of carbon, created

jobs for thousands of people who contribute to their nation’s

development, and laid the groundwork for a new market in

off-grid energy.

One of d.light’s sales agents is a young woman named

Everlyne. I met her in August 2017, in the city of Nakuru,

Kenya, as part of a visit to examine some of Acumen’s

energy investments. Sharply dressed in a black-and-orange,

collared d.light shirt, black trousers, and heels, her hair in

neat plaits pulled into a ponytail, Everlyne resembled any

young professional you might see in any city.

Everlyne confidently guided us on a thirty-minute drive

outside the city before stopping by the side of a dirt road.

Still in heels, she led us across muddy cornfields until we

reached a village that turned out to be hers. She beamed

with pride as customers in house after house told us how

their lives had changed now that they were able to switch

on a light at night, read, talk to their families—in short, do

the things most of us take for granted. By the time we left

the village, I had no doubt that this young woman was a

born salesperson, able to achieve anything she set her mind

to doing.

It wasn’t until we were in the jeep on our way back to

town that Everlyne told her own story of growing up in one

of the country’s most conservative tribes. “Girls in my

community were not permitted to attend schools. But my

father was different: he wanted me to study. Because there

were no schools for me at home, he sent me to another

village to live with my uncle’s family and do my schooling.

That time in my life was terribly lonely at times, but now I

understand that my education meant a difficult life for my

father as well: the other men in the village rebuked him for

educating me.”

I asked her what the men thought of her father’s

decision now.

“Now they tell their sons to grow up to be like Everlyne.”

In redefining success for his daughter, despite the

obstacles, Everlyne’s father changed the definition of

success for the whole village.

“And what do you dream for yourself?” I asked her.

“First, I want to ensure that I bring electricity to every

household in my village. I want to serve my community and

my country. Once that is done, I want to go to university and

study marketing so that I can start my own company.”

This African dreamer will not allow herself to focus on

individual goals until she fulfills her promise to serve her

community.

Thrillingly, there are people like Everlyne in every town

and hamlet around the planet.

No matter who you are, the world offers you a thousand

opportunities for deeper success. Daily, you might

encounter moments to teach the person in front of you as if

she herself could change the world, to listen with the

reverence that expands the soul of another, to help

someone who cannot help himself. At the end of your life, I

hope the world says that you cared, that you showed up

with your whole self, and that you couldn’t have tried

harder. I hope they say you helped those who had been left

out; that you renewed yourself, living with a sense of

curiosity and wonder; learning, changing, and growing till

you took your last breath.

In the meantime, we’ve got a world to change.

Chapter 3

CULTIVATE

MORAL

IMAGINATIO

N

About twenty miles east of the Blue Ridge Mountains and

home to the University of Virginia, in the early 1980s

Charlottesville was a town divided. The locals, many of

whom lived in an economically depressed area about a

thirty-minute drive from the university, saw the students as

rich and privileged. Many locals worked at UVA, where they

seemed either invisible to students or served as objects of

ridicule, one-dimensional figures with thick Southern

mountain accents and humble clothing that separated them

from students attired in the requisite Fair Isle sweaters and

khaki trousers.

In the fall of my second year at UVA, a popular fraternity

threw a huge party asking everyone to dress like a local.

The very idea hurt me to think about, and I didn’t attend.

But I also didn’t protest. Then, around Thanksgiving, I

chanced upon a flyer inviting students to donate Christmas

dinner and toys to a family in need. At least this was an

opportunity to do something positive. Inspired, my

roommate and I decided to host a holiday party and asked

everyone to bring food and a toy.

Our band of friends danced and made merry long into

the night. As drinks flowed, a large pile of playthings and

foodstuffs burgeoned beneath our scraggly Christmas tree. I

went to bed smiling, then rose just a few hours later to pack

up my roommate’s red car with a veritable Christmas feast,

complete with a turkey and all the trimmings, and a big

Santa bag full of toys for our “family.” We then took off for

the edges of town, a bit worse for wear but filled with

Christmas spirit and a drive to be of service.

In less than an hour, we arrived in another world: dirt

roads and trailer parks, a couple of gas stations, a

convenience store with a barely visible street sign. We

pulled into one of the gas stations to ask for directions to

the family’s home. I had trouble understanding the thick

accent of the attendant and was mortified to ask him to

repeat himself, though I wondered whether he had trouble

understanding me as well.

Without a road map, my roommate and I managed to

lose our bearings a second time. We pulled the car to the

side of the road, stopping a man clad in overalls, his head

bent downward and his hands in his pockets as he walked

along the street. To our request for directions, he responded,

“Go down that road till the end.” He wore a quizzical

expression as he pointed at a dirt road that appeared to

lead nowhere. “Take the second left and keep going till you

see a sign for Earl’s Woodshed. The house is right behind

that.”

Another few errant turns, past some stray dogs and

abandoned cars, and we finally found a big white sign with

“Earl’s” written in red. Sure enough, right behind it was a

humble shack constructed of slatted wood, with small

windows and a porch out front. I stared at the house and

suddenly, desperately, hoped no one was home.

Only then did I imagine how our presence might make

the family feel. Here we were, two hungover coeds with no

connection to this community, arriving from out of nowhere

with Christmas in a bag—or at least our version of

Christmas. Presumably, someone in the family had signed

up for this “service,” but we knew little about the lives of

the people we were hoping to grace with a visit.

And who knew whether they had a clue about us.

A wave of shame engulfed me. “I don’t want to meet

them,” I said.

My roommate looked at me, thought for a moment, and

then agreed. With the car still running, I took a deep breath,

opened the door, ran as quickly as my legs would carry me,

deposited the bags on the porch, and hightailed it back to

the car. We then sped off, driving in silence until we found a

diner where we could talk about what had just happened.

Our conversation ranged from somber recognition to

embarrassed laughter at our own ignorance. We’d

sleepwalked into a situation with the best intentions to do

something positive for our neighbors, though we’d lived in

their city for just over a year and they’d been there forever.

We were glad to bring fresh food and toys to a family that

might otherwise have gone without, but this kind of drive-by

charity felt wrong somehow, for everyone.

Years later, I’ve thought about what I might say to my

younger self about that long-ago day. I would commend the

instinct to make a contribution, however small. But well-

meaning acts of kindness are not enough. I would push my

younger self to move from the blanket statement “I want to

help disadvantaged people” to visualizing herself in the

shoes of those she wanted to serve.

This is where moral imagination begins. But it doesn’t

stop there.

Moral imagination means to view other people’s

problems as if they were your own, and to begin to discern

how to tackle those problems. And then to act accordingly. It

summons us to understand and transcend the realities of

current circumstances and to envision a better future for

ourselves and others.

Moral imagination starts with empathy, but it does not

content itself simply to feel another’s pain. Empathy without

action risks reinforcing the status quo. Rather, moral

imagination is muscular, built from the bottom up and

grounded through immersion in the lives of others. It

involves connecting on a human level, analyzing the

systemic issues at play, and only then envisioning how to go

beyond applying a Band-Aid to making a long-term

difference.

Moral imagination is the basis of an ethical framework

for a world that recognizes our common humanity and

insists on opportunity, choice, and dignity for all of us. Had I

approached the Christmas food and toy drive with moral

imagination, I might have started by learning about the

community and the realities those who lived there faced. If I

couldn’t spend time with the families we wanted to serve, I

could at least have asked for information beyond just the

children’s genders and ages, which was the only data

provided. And I might have tried to connect with the family

beforehand, ensuring even the barest of relationships. I

could even have asked to meet just the parents, so as not to

risk spoiling the children’s dreams of a magical Santa-

delivered Christmas.

Listening to voices unheard, a value I discuss in the next

chapter, is fundamental to the moral imagination. So is

gathering knowledge about those we intend to serve. If my

roommate and I were unwilling to gain such knowledge, I

should have found an organization with a long-term

commitment to the community and supported it so that it

could do a better job than we could do ourselves.

The world has changed dramatically in the thirty years

since that winter day in the Blue Ridge Mountains. For one,

technological advances have given us GPS, so that we rarely

have to ask for directions. And the divide between classes

has become a chasm. For the privileged, everything seems

possible: sending spaceships and inhabiting Mars,

enhancing human capabilities by merging with robots, living

forever. But this world of infinite possibility and space travel

can seem impossibly distant to those who feel irrelevant,

vulnerable, or just plain poor. And if the demise of easily

automated, repetitive work engenders dreams of growing

creative endeavors for the highly educated, the end of

stable employment may feel understandably precarious for

those without university degrees.

What is needed, whether you are working in high tech or

in low-income communities, is the moral imagination to

ensure that our future solutions and institutions are

inclusive and sustainable. That takes a particular kind of

capability, one driven by empathy, immersion, connection,

and the willingness to challenge the status quo.

One of the great privileges of my life is to work with

remarkable individuals whose leadership is grounded in

moral imagination. Gayathri Vasudevan of Bangalore, India,

is one of them, though I wouldn’t have guessed that when I

first heard about her company, LabourNet.

In 2012, Acumen decided to invest in education, but we

were having a hard time finding financially viable

investment candidates. A colleague suggested LabourNet,

which already had trained more than a hundred thousand

workers. I was skeptical: I’d seen hundreds of millions of aid

dollars spent on vocational training and “technical

assistance” (nonfinancial training provided by consultants,

usually), most of it wasted. Such programs tended to be

poorly run, with little focus on training workers in the skills

that hiring companies actually needed. That said, I’d not yet

encountered Gayathri Vasudevan, who, I would discover,

defined herself not by the size of her budget but by the

changed lives of those she served.

I met Gayathri on a construction site just outside

Bangalore in December 2014. LabourNet had undertaken a

contract to train workers there, and Gayathri planned to

introduce me to some of her trainees. Dressed in a black-

and-gold silk sari, her salt-and-pepper hair in a pragmatic

bob tucked beneath a bright orange construction hat, she

cut a memorable figure.

I laughed. “Do you wear beautiful saris to every

construction site?”

“Why not?” she responded with a smile that was at once

self-effacing and mischievous. “I wear saris daily. They are

just a part of who I am.”

I was glad Gayathri didn’t feel she had to be anyone but

herself. “Then, how did a nice girl like you end up in a place

like this?” I replied with a laugh, sensing already that I could

go beyond political correctness and be myself as well. “I’d

love to hear your story.”

“For the first three years of my career, I lived in remote

rural villages,” she began. “I was always interested in policy

reform for India, but I couldn’t bear the thought of trying to

influence policies from the safe perch of an office. I needed

to understand on-the-ground realities.”

Now Gayathri was singing my song. First step:

immersion.

“You know, Jacqueline,” she said, “I had my own

arrogant assumptions when I lived in the villages. I thought

the poor could solve their problems through

entrepreneurship alone. But spending time with people in

their own environments showed me a different reality. The

most vulnerable people tend to be risk averse: when you

live at the edge of survival, life itself can be a risky

proposition. The poor value the stability and predictability of

a consistent job. Most people, wealthy or poor, want to

avoid the potential windfalls and painful losses associated

with entrepreneurship.”

Gayathri continued: “Over the next decades, I also

witnessed well-educated Indians gain lucrative jobs in the

tech sector while three hundred million untrained, unskilled,

uneducated people were left behind with little attention

focused on them.” Armed with enhanced understanding,

Gayathri set out to reimagine a better system. She and her

cofounder, Rajesh AR, started LabourNet to take on the

massive problem of India’s unskilled and underemployed,

which includes 90 percent of the workforce. She was

realistic about the rise of automation, among other

challenges, but it hurt her to see employers treat untrained

workers as merely replaceable inputs.

As in many countries, the informal sector in India exists

beyond the realm of regulation or taxation. Informal laborers

may be self-employed street vendors, beauticians, domestic

workers, personal service providers, mechanics, bricklayers,

tailors, and the like, or they may work for the subcontractors

that form an increasingly complex web of the global

economy. These workers stitch fabric for hours at a stretch;

toil over vats of lye in leather tanneries, inhaling toxic fumes

without gloves and masks; or labor as bar benders,

ironworkers, or cement mixers, forgoing personal safety on

hazardous half-built construction sites.

These are the people too often hidden in the basement

of a global marketplace that demands faster, cheaper

goods. They are the invisible, the nobodies—and there are

more of them all the time. A constant wave of entrants into

India’s labor economy, nearly twenty million people a year,

makes this precarious situation even worse for those who

see no choice but to accept low-status, low-wage jobs at

high risk to their health and, sometimes, their lives.

Consequently, Gayathri has focused her attention on

giving informal workers opportunities to imagine and then

build more predictable futures with some potential for

upward mobility. Doing this required training and supporting

workers with the skills to help them navigate an

unstructured, unstable informal labor market. To achieve

this, she built structures where few existed.

“Shall we go up?” she asked, gesturing to a rickety

bamboo ladder nearby. We ambled up it, reaching the

exposed second floor of the concrete behemoth before

walking across an open platform, past pillars and piles of

concrete blocks, until we saw a wooden door with the

LabourNet logo on it.

Inside, in a small room, forty or so young men, most of

whom looked like schoolboys except for the telltale clothing

of their trade (jeans, neon orange vests, and bright blue or

yellow hard hats) sat five to a bench in front of skinny

tables. The construction workers fixed their eyes on

Gayathri, who walked to the front of the room and greeted

the men with a smile as they stood to welcome her.

Gayathri then proceeded to give a pep talk in Hindi, a

second language to most of these men, who had come from

the far reaches of the country. She told the men that it was

up to them to build skills that could lead to more control

over their lives. I couldn’t help but reflect on the fact that

these men were earning so little, living so far away from

their homes, working on a structure that would soon house

million-dollar apartments because of their sweat.

“Is this training really enough to change the workers’

lives?” I asked Gayathri after her lecture. And then I added—

lightly, for I know there must be days when this heroic

woman is daunted by the sea of unemployed young people

rising monthly—“or will the system inevitably grind them

down?”

Instead of answering, she suggested we speak with the

men themselves. A nineteen-year-old with dark brown eyes

and a fringe of black hair pushing out of his blue hat,

smartphone in hand, spoke confidently of all he’d learned.

“The training is an important start,” he said. “At home, I

couldn’t take care of my family from the farm’s income. Now

I send enough money for my children to attend schools. I

want my children to have better lives than I did. I want to

make them proud.”

“How far away from your family do you live now?” I

asked.

“Maybe two thousand kilometers,” he responded—a

four-day trip each way, if all goes well.

The earnest worker reminded me of my grandfather,

who immigrated to Pennsylvania from Austria as a young

man, married at twenty, and hauled ninety-pound bags of

cement each day to give his six children the chance for a

life he was not lucky enough to have. I thought, too, about

the correlation between the right kind of training and the

confidence it imparts. LabourNet’s ethos requires reinforcing

in every worker the notion that they are important enough

for someone to invest in them. Only when we dare to

believe that our future can be different do we have a chance

of making it so.

I wished the young man every success.

As I write this, LabourNet has trained more than seven

hundred thousand workers in fields ranging from

construction to automotive repair to tailoring. Yet, Gayathri

believes this training alone is not enough. From among the

workers LabourNet educates, her team identifies those who

are interested in entrepreneurial opportunities, and then

reaches out to help develop their ideas. The company has

already enabled more than seven thousand people to start

their own companies. I’ve met several of these

entrepreneurs, each of whom employs at least ten people.

LabourNet supports them, mitigating the risks of

entrepreneurship by connecting them with large companies

that need their services, whether they sew school uniforms

or distribute beauty products. In essence, the company

extends its “social capital,” or networks of connections, to

low-resourced but well-trained entrepreneurial individuals

who can, in turn, provide vital services and finally earn

levels of income that are commensurate with their efforts.

By immersing herself in the realities of low-income

laborers and using her moral imagination, Gayathri came to

understand the larger system of workforce development. As

her understanding and effectiveness grew, she gained

legitimacy and a voice that enabled her to advocate for

worker-oriented policies. LabourNet has influenced skills

certification and performance standards in a number of

sectors such as automobile, leather, and infrastructure. The

company has also played a role in prodding the Indian

government to include vocational training as part of the

country’s national education curriculum. Over time, Gayathri

has become a national voice for the unheard. Her work is an

example of moral imagination in action.

From urban India to post-conflict Colombia, moral

imagination is providing a springboard to creative solutions

that acknowledge the vulnerable and respect our natural

resources. The steps that effective, pragmatic, idealistic

change agents take, from empathy to action, tend to be the

same, regardless of how or where each story begins.

In 2009, Carlos Ignacio Velasco, a soft-spoken, whip-

smart young Colombian working as a representative of his

country’s coffee industry in Tokyo, met Mayumi Ogata, a

passionate chocolate connoisseur who had just completed a

four-year pursuit to identify the world’s finest varieties of

cacao.

After working for years in a premium chocolate

company, Mayumi had wearied of the toll the industry took

on farmers and the earth. More than 90 percent of the

world’s chocolate is produced by about five million

smallholder families, 90 percent of whom earn less than two

dollars per day. And 70 percent of cacao is cultivated in

West Africa, often through unsustainable farming methods

that have worn down the soil. Faced with these alarming

statistics, Mayumi sought new areas where high-quality

varieties of the cacao fruit could be cultivated more

profitably for the farmers and without harming the planet.

Of the many places she’d visited, from Indonesia to

Bolivia, Colombia ultimately captured Mayumi’s heart.

There, she found diverse, delicate varieties of cacao in a

number of regions. But these same regions also had

suffered a half century of civil war, and still bore wounds

from the violence of drug lords, FARC (Revolutionary Armed

Forces of Colombia) guerrillas, and paramilitaries. The lands

rich in cacao also are geographically isolated from

Colombia’s main cities, and education and skills levels are

quite low. Despite the risks, Mayumi assessed that

prospects for cacao production were phenomenal there.

Besides, she loved a challenge.

Carlos had already been thinking about what more he

could do to contribute to his country: those early meetings

with Mayumi in Tokyo set his imagination alight. If Colombia

could be known for some of the best coffee beans on earth,

he wondered, why couldn’t it also build a world-class

chocolate industry? After all, coffee was introduced to

Colombia from Ethiopia in the nineteenth century. Cacao, on

the other hand, was part of the region’s natural inheritance.

Moreover, the post-conflict areas of the country needed

deliberate investment in the land and its people if peace

were to flourish. What better way to contribute than to build

a company that would produce some of the world’s finest

cacao in partnership with local communities? Here, Carlos

believed, was a chance to demonstrate the power of

business, if infused with moral imagination, to produce not

just profits for the few, but prosperity and peace where

communities had for too long felt abandoned.

Carlos and Mayumi cofounded Cacao de Colombia that

same year, 2009, and began to work on building trusted

relationships with farmers’ groups in four different post-

conflict regions. This process would take years, but time

plus conscious effort infused with moral imagination enables

possibility.

In 2017, two years into Acumen’s investment in Cacao

de Colombia, I had the privilege of visiting a farming

community in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, one of the

highest coastal mountain ranges on earth, located in

Colombia’s far north. There lie the ancestral lands of the

Arhuacos, an indigenous people known for their

commitment to living in harmony with the universe. In those

mountains, Mayumi had come upon an exquisite rare white

cacao guaranteed to produce some of the world’s finest

chocolate. She and Carlos dreamed of forming a partnership

with the Arhuacos to produce a world-class chocolate and

export a philosophy, not just a product, to the rest of the

world.

It was certainly not a given that the Arhuacos would be

interested. They had kept their traditions intact despite

terrors imposed by colonizers, drug dealers, and soldiers.

And they considered the white cacao a sacred fruit, no

longer cultivated or commercialized. Greed-oriented

capitalism posed a new threat. Carlos and Mayumi would

therefore have to earn the Arhuacos’ trust, designing a

transformative partnership—and that took time. The work

required starting with an understanding of local history,

customs, and values before proceeding with mutual respect.

As Acumen’s Latin America director, Virgilio Barco, and I

drove with Mayumi along Colombia’s coast to our meeting

point with the Arhuacos, I asked Mayumi how the

partnership had been built. How had she and Carlos and the

Arhuacos weighed what would be gained and what would be

lost by partnering to grow and commercialize the rare

cacao?

Mayumi spoke about the spirituality of the Arhuacos,

who believe in the interconnection of all living things. “I feel

a resonance with this idea,” she said. “I was raised with

Shintoism in Japan. We also see the connection between

ourselves and the natural world. Between my own belief

system and the Arhuacos’, I can count more than eight

hundred divinities inspired by water, wind, and earth. I

respond to their spiritualism. I respond to their worldview.

Our mutual understanding helped build trust. They could

feel both my respect and my connection to them.”

A spiritual connection is one way to transcend lines of

difference and locate commonality. Mayumi and Carlos

could also have connected based on other strands of their

identities (their love of nature, their commitment to

learning), but for Mayumi especially, spiritual bonds created

the basis for her deep curiosity and respect.

We arrived at a modest village nestled by the pale blue

sea where it greets a sudden rise of green, towering

mountains. I thought to myself: No wonder the Arhuacos

believe this place to be the center of the universe.

Mamo Camilo, a spiritual leader, and several of his

associates welcomed us warmly and guided us to sit with

them beneath a tree. The Arhuacos wear simple, homespun

white tunics and loosely fitted trousers. The men’s long

black hair cascades out of their white woven caps, which

symbolize the snow-capped peaks of the sacred mountains.

Mamo Camilo, distinguished and serene, though

undifferentiated in dress, clearly garnered the respect of the

other Arhuacos, who made way for him when he walked by

and hung on his words when he spoke.

The mamos (wise guides) exert powerful influence

within Arhuaco communities. Selected as boys, they train

for a decade, learning the philosophy of the Arhuacos, along

with traditional medicinal practices and the arts of listening

and arbitrating differences among people. The day I first

visited the Arhuacos with Carlos and Mayumi, the mamos

spent three hours with us, providing a master class in the

Arhuaco cosmology. The Arhuacos believe that nature and

society are united by a single immutable law of the universe

that has always existed and always will, even after human

beings have left the planet.

“We see your culture as the world’s little brother,”

Mamo Camilo said, with no trace of scolding. “Your people

think the land is for their pleasure alone. Ours is a

philosophy that must grow with maturity. We the Arhuacos

are the elder brothers. We come with understanding that we

must respect all living creatures of the earth. We seek

harmony. Now the land has given us the rarest cacao, and it

is to all of us to nurture and ensure its preservation.”

As Mamo Camilo expounded on the cosmology of the

Arhuacos, he modeled something else: how to own your

power. His confidence and worldview were essential

components of his negotiations. Though economically

“poorer,” his community was arguably richer in spirit and

happiness. And he understood that the Arhuacos had

something to give—not just materially, but in terms of their

philosophy. After acknowledging and affirming the respectful

way in which Carlos and Mayumi had entered negotiations,

Mamo Camilo shared some of his worries about partnering

with those who operate in a modern capitalist system. What

happens to the earth if we see it as a resource but not a

responsibility?

As we walked back toward the village center together, I

noticed some of the young men holding cell phones. I

wondered aloud how the tribe ultimately would draw the

line between needs and wants, and whether entering a

contract with the company might open a Pandora’s box of

temptations.

“We understand that we cannot live in the past,” Mamo

Camilo said. “To survive, we must engage with the larger

world. Today, our people need phones if they are going to

interact with others beyond the Arhuacos. We need a few

other essential things, like batteries and solar lights. And we

need to continually remind ourselves of our responsibility for

the earth.”

Then he added that they would not have made a deal

with anyone but Cacao de Colombia, because of an earned

mutual respect, but he added a caveat: “We will partner

only so long as our project does not disturb our balance with

nature. If we lose the balance, we will end the partnership.

Do you understand?”

“Yes,” I said. I believed I did.

This was a negotiation based not on extraction or profit

alone. The agreement between the Arhuacos and the

company was more covenant than contract, a moral

commitment to remaining accountable to each other, to

showing up, to listening. Spending immersive time together

had enabled each side to understand what the other needed

in order for the relationship to work. For the Arhuacos,

participation with the company was a means to sustaining

their community, enabling it to continue transmitting its

ancestral wisdom to benefit humanity. For Cacao de

Colombia, it was the opportunity to build a successful

business that valued human and natural resources, not only

financial rewards. Both community and company will be

changed by the partnership, just as any relationship of

equals changes both partners over time.

As the company grows and the Arhuacos become

wealthier as a tribe, pressures to conform to “business as

usual” and cut corners or demand faster growth will

inevitably increase. Finding values-aligned investors steeped

in their own moral imagination will be key. But had the

company’s founders not dared first to imagine what could

be, Cacao de Colombia would never have gotten started.

In 2018, the International Chocolate Awards, honoring

the best chocolates in the world, gave Arhuaco chocolates

gold and silver medals in the Single Bean and Micro-Batch

categories. This achievement was possible because of a

Shinto-observing Japanese cacao whisperer; a Catholic-

raised, Shinto-aspiring Colombian entrepreneur; and an

indigenous community adhering to a philosophy based on

oneness with the cosmos. Each had the moral imagination

to extend a hand to those who were different, seeking what

united them and bonding in purpose.

Moral imagination offers a powerful lens through which

to see the world’s potential, recognize its disparities, and

work to address them. Use it widely and practice it wisely.

Chapter 4

LISTEN TO

VOICES

UNHEARD

On a Sunday afternoon in 2015, I sat with my colleague

Bavidra Mohan in one of India’s thousands of red-and-white

Coffee Day shops. This one was on the corner of Carter Road

in Bandra, a trendy suburb in the western part of Mumbai.

We’d arranged a meeting with Vimal Kumar, newly elected

to the Acumen Fellowship in India. But it was a quarter past

the hour, with no sign of Vimal. I’d usually attribute such

tardiness to Mumbai traffic, but this was a Sunday.

I knew little about Vimal then, except that he hailed

from the same low caste, the scavengers, as the women

Ankit employed to transform temple flowers into incense

and other products. Unlike the women, who felt relatively

voiceless before working for Ankit, Vimal was an established

community leader with a megaphone. He was an activist

founder of the Movement for Scavenger Community, a

grassroots Indian NGO focused on improving conditions for

scavengers and standing for the rights of all people. He was

also earning a PhD, which seemed a Herculean achievement

to me. I wanted to understand what obstacles Vimal had

overcome, and how he had integrated his many facets.

There was much the world could learn from a man like him,

if he first understood himself.

The longer we waited at the coffee shop, the more I

wondered if Vimal might be waiting for us outside. Had I

missed him on my way in? The privileged tend to take for

granted our right to enter most places, including

department stores, banks, elite universities, upscale

restaurants, or even lines at immigration counters. For those

who have been shunned repeatedly, however, or even

“politely” informed that their kind doesn’t “fit,” nothing is

taken for granted. Though already a man of many

accomplishments, Vimal, accustomed to being unseen and

unheard, experienced “the rules” differently than I did.

I left the coffee shop and, sure enough, found him

standing outside, dressed in a yellow shirt and long

trousers, his face moist with sweat. I could have recognized

him from photos I’d seen of his broad, open face, his

penetrating eyes and dark hair parted neatly on the side.

But his smile was a dead giveaway.

“Hello, Vimal!” I said enthusiastically. He extended his

hand. I was unprepared for his soft, gentle grasp.

Instinctively, I pulled him into a hug, and was struck again

by his tentativeness. “Let’s go inside and get out of the

heat,” I said, and he smiled in agreement. As we were

walking into the cafe, I asked him what he’d like to drink

and eat. I pointed to the glass cabinets of croissants,

muffins, and sandwiches. Vimal insisted that all he wanted

was water.

Back at our table, Bavidra and I mostly listened as Vimal

shared stories of his childhood. He counted himself among

the lucky ones. Boys and girls from his caste were typically

denied education and rejected by schools. Sometimes

parents’ own fears—of rejection or failure—were enough to

keep children out of school.

Vimal said he considered himself fortunate to have a

mother who wanted desperately for him to learn what had

not been available to her. She cleaned the toilets at a good

private school whose headmaster allowed Vimal to attend

classes—provided he sit in the back of the classroom. And

though he loved learning, Vimal endured a lonely

separateness from the rest of the boys. Everyone knew he

was considered “untouchable,” and his status was made

more visible by the fact that he could afford only patched,

ragged clothes, in sharp contrast to the school uniforms

worn by the other students.

As he grew, so did his anger at the injustice of a system

that would deny his people the opportunities considered

normal for everyone else. When the first cable company

came to his area, everyone got access to satellite TV except

for those belonging to his caste. Vimal responded by

organizing a group of local boys to tear down every installed

satellite dish. When the company replaced the satellites,

Vimal, now a street fighter, tore them down again,

promising to continue the cycle until the company agreed to

serve scavengers.

“We weren’t asking for any favors,” he said. “We just

wanted the chance to pay like everyone else.”

When the company agreed to make the satellite dishes

available to everyone, Vimal felt vindicated. Though he

wasn’t proud of an approach that involved the destruction of

property, he internalized that the powerless can sometimes

engage the powerful and “win.”

I said that our fellowship focused on nonviolent

approaches to change, yet acknowledged that history is full

of incidences of violence and wars fought by frustrated,

resentful young men with few reasons to hope for their

futures. Vimal admitted that part of him was still motivated

by anger.

“Angry with the system in general?” I asked, “or with

specific groups of people?”

“I’m angry that so many people believed India’s

problems were solved when caste was supposedly

abolished. I’m angry that my community is denied

opportunities for reasons that have nothing to do with our

abilities and everything to do with the circumstances of our

birth.”

I could feel Vimal seething as he spoke, though there

also was something so gentle about him. I imagined the

warring parts of himself, his own bull and dove, the side that

could take on the world versus the side still battling the

weight of trauma and stigma. Where might he be complicit

in holding himself back? What beautiful parts from his life

experiences might he bring forth to offer the world? How

could our community help him unleash his potential?

“What are you going to do with all that anger?” I asked.

“I’m going to fight for change,” he said.

As we were leaving, Vimal thanked me for hugging him

when we first met. “This is the first time in my life,” he said,

“when I have met someone new and been welcomed as a

friend rather than interrogated as a stranger.” He went on to

say that Acumen was the first organization he’d

encountered where people actually physically touched him.

I was elevated by this opportunity to listen to Vimal

across so many generational layers of structures and

traditions intended to marginalize people like him. I felt

humbled by his humility and elated that he was now part of

our community. Yet, though I consider myself a good

listener, I realized only later that I heard only his emotional

hunger that day, and failed to hear what Vimal could not

say, failed to recognize how physically hungry he was. As

we were in a simple coffee shop and Vimal was officially part

of our fellowship, I had unmindfully assumed that when I

asked Vimal if he wanted food or drink, he’d give me an

honest reply, knowing that I would pay and that the bill

would not set me back much. What the poet Seamus

Heaney would call my “creeping privilege”1 collided with

Vimal’s utter lack of entitlement.

A few years after our first visit, Vimal admitted that he

had waited outside for me because he had no money in his

pocket. What if a server had asked him to buy a coffee or a

pastry? The thought of being seen as a loiterer panicked

him. Then, when I asked him if he wanted something to

drink or eat, he feared I might later request that he split the

bill. Though he’d not eaten in many hours, pride, or shame,

overtook his hunger.

Privilege can deafen us to those who feel less worthy or

valuable. Those for whom the system “works” can easily

become accustomed to the world rolling out a welcome mat

and learn to behave as if every place were our exclusive

domain.

Meanwhile, outsiders or those deemed “other,” who’ve

been told repeatedly that they are unworthy or don’t

belong, often internalize negative beliefs imposed on them

by others and make themselves smaller, unable to give

voice to their true feelings, opinions, or desires. If we want

to see someone more fully and demonstrate that we respect

him or her, we must learn to listen not just with our ears,

but with all of our selves—our eyes, the emotion we sense

in the other, our knowledge of their history, of their very

identity. Listening deeply and hearing all that is unsaid is

crucial to gaining awareness of self and of others.

It was another year before I had the chance to talk

directly with Vimal again. The time seemed to have changed

him. His unassuming smile was still there, but the anger was

gone. He described the various seminars he had attended,

how in the early Acumen Fellows sessions he’d start every

conversation by throwing a figurative punch.

“I kept trying to fight,” he said. “I didn’t know how to be

any other way. But none of the fellows would fight back.

Finally, I had to recognize that the other fellows were

genuinely interested in what I had to say. They wanted to

know me. When I finally paid enough attention to accept

their interest, to accept myself, I in turn wanted to listen

more to them.”

If privilege is a possible roadblock to deep listening, so

is clinging rigidly to an outsider identity. We risk holding

ourselves hostage to outdated stories of being unwanted or

underappreciated, failing to hear even direct invitations to

the proverbial table as an equal participant. Only when

Vimal allowed himself to believe that the other fellows saw

him as part of themselves could he in turn see those same

people as part of him. When individual listening is ingrained

in collective culture, the whole community is more likely to

shine.

Empowered by a sense of belonging and acceptance,

Vimal began to expand his trust to people beyond the

group, slowly taking greater risks. While running his

organization on behalf of the scavenger community and

studying for his PhD, he also started consulting on questions

of diversity for companies such as Microsoft. He broadened

his view of the world, standing for issues related both to his

caste and to other marginalized groups.

A few months later, in 2016, Vimal and I met again in

Mumbai, this time at the tail end of a weeklong Acumen trip

across India with a group of donors (or partners, as we call

them). My team wanted the group to meet not only with

Acumen investee companies, but also with the fellows, both

to understand the purpose of supporting such a diverse

cohort of emerging leaders and, we hoped, to forge new

friendships and reinforce the idea of a single community

bound by shared values.

The Friday afternoon sun was bright as about ten

partners and ten fellows gathered in Acumen’s offices, a

light-filled space above a major thoroughfare in Bandra. The

office windows, covered with shades in Acumen’s colors

(fuchsia, lime green, violet, and royal blue), overlooked a

handful of trees, though you could hear the sounds of auto-

rickshaws and cars jamming the streets below. The partners

and fellows were there to practice deep listening.

In an exercise inspired by the nonprofit oral history

project StoryCorps, we paired each partner with a fellow and

sent them on a walk along Carter Road, a path that winds

along the Arabian Sea. We hoped the chance to look

outward while moving side by side would soften edges and

enable more intimate exchanges.

Each duo was instructed to walk for half an hour as one

person listened to the other’s story (twenty minutes of

sharing, then ten minutes for questions); they would

exchange the roles on the walk back. A Swedish filmmaker

accompanied an Indian woman engineer; an American

business leader walked alongside an Indian schoolteacher.

The goal was to discover not what made them different, but

what they shared.

Back at the office, the group reunited. The air felt

electric. A number of attendees remarked on the rare gift of

having someone give you their undivided attention. Active

listening, we agreed, is one of the deepest forms of respect.

I asked each person to introduce his or her partner,

emphasizing any common ground they had uncovered. We

had paired Vimal with the American social psychologist

Jonathan Haidt, whose work focused on how we speak to

one another, in part because they were both so interested in

the role of culture in society. And as they were chatting

happily when they rejoined the group, I calculated that they

would be a good duo to kick off the discussion.

Jonathan offered to start. He smiled as he referenced

the good fortune of meeting Vimal, but his voice became

more serious as he spoke. “I know I’m supposed to talk

about all that Vimal and I share,” he said. “But truthfully,

our lives have little in common. I grew up in a privileged

environment as a well-educated American. My parents gave

me every opportunity and every advantage. My children

have even more privilege.

“Vimal,” he continued, “has had to fight disadvantage

his entire life. His mother carried human waste in a basket

on her head, cleaning the village and finally the school.

Vimal was allowed to attend classes, but his mother had no

idea how isolated he was. When he was eight years old, she

invited her son’s entire class to their home to celebrate

Vimal’s birthday. She cleaned and cooked for two whole

days, all the while imagining the joy her little boy would feel

with his friends celebrating him. But they waited all day,

and not a single student showed up.”

Jonathan’s eyes welled with tears. “I have an eight-year-

old son, and I can’t bear the thought of what it would mean

for him to be in a similar situation. No, you see, Vimal and I

aren’t alike. My life has been so easy in comparison.”

Vimal reached over, putting his arm on Jonathan’s

shoulder.

“No, Jon,” Vimal softly admonished, “there is much that

we share. You love India. I love India. We both have studied

marginal groups. We both have two children. Plus, you are a

Jew. You know what it means to be persecuted for no reason

other than something you were born into being. You know

how unfair and unproductive that is.” He paused.

“And besides”—now Vimal smiled—“we both have

PhDs.”

When we dare to meet another as a friend, willing to

hear painful and uncomfortable truths, we can discover the

parts of our identities that overlap. We can acknowledge the

other person’s—and our own—yearning to be seen. True

listening is more than the act of hearing another’s words. It

is the unspoken recognition of our shared humanity.

Today, we exchange more words with one another than

at any time in history. Yet how many people are really

listening? Not only are we distracted by our devices, but we

see leaders everywhere doing everything but listening,

becoming louder and shriller in their arguments. With those

who seem opposed to our views, we can be especially like

strangers, acting as if those who speak a different language

should easily understand our words. Our hearts and our

heads are divided at precisely the time when we most need

them to work in tandem.

Those in positions of authority—anyone whose words

might carry greater weight than the voices of others—need

to listen more, and not assume that because the rules work

for them, they know what works for everyone. Yet I’ve also

witnessed nonprofit leaders and entrepreneurs undervalue

the experience and knowledge of donors and investors

based on their own narrow assumptions.

Listening effectively can influence the way we perceive

others in all directions. Just as being poor says nothing

about a person’s character, neither does the bank account

that marks someone as rich. In the world of fund-raising,

I’ve witnessed grant or investment seekers categorically

write off the person who failed to approve their request

rather than take the time to listen to the former’s

constructive feedback. Strategically, as my friend and

founding Acumen board member Stuart Davidson says, “If

you want advice, ask for money. If you want to raise money,

ask for advice.” We all yearn to be recognized.

Markets, too, can be a powerful listening device,

efficiently allocating resources to places where customers

are saying most clearly, “We want this.” Think of it this way.

If I offer you a gift, how likely are you to turn it down, even if

it doesn’t quite meet your needs? But what if I treat you as

a customer? You and I might haggle over the price, but as

the seller, I will know a lot more about your likes and

dislikes, about where you want to spend your resources,

than if you were simply a passive recipient of my

benevolent intentions.

Yet markets fail the poor, especially those who lack

enough income to meet even basic needs. When it comes to

health care, education, drinking water, or housing, low-

income people desperate to address critical needs may

have no choice other than turning to moneylenders or

mafias for loans, often at usurious rates. The poor must

accept prices that are many times what the middle class or

wealthy might ever be required to pay. And though well-

intentioned charities might step in, seeing the pain points of

the poor, these nonprofits often bring the services they

believe low-income people need rather than the services the

poor truly require. Few stop to listen to what the poor

actually want, causing those in need to get stuck between

the cheats and the charities, their problems often

multiplying as a result.

It doesn’t have to be this way. A growing group of social

entrepreneurs is turning conventional models of capitalism

upside down and reimagining business from the perspective

not only of the wealthy, but specifically, of the vulnerable.

These entrepreneurs start by listening to the poor with the

understanding that we can solve our problems if we begin

by treating low-income people not as passive recipients of

charity but as customers who desire and deserve a greater

sense of agency to make their own decisions and chart the

courses of their own lives.

Consider the issue of electricity. Thomas Edison

developed the incandescent lightbulb in 1879 and

commercialized its production the following year. It has

been more than 140 years, and nearly a billion people on

earth still have no access to electricity. On the African

continent alone, more than six hundred million people live in

darkness once the sun goes down, losing productivity and

security as well as a thousand other things the rest of us

take for granted.

Energy poverty, as the gap in global electricity is called,

is not just a market failure. It is a moral failure. The world

possesses the technology, the know-how, and the financial

resources to solve the challenge of universal electricity. Our

individual and collective will has been the single most

important impediment to lighting the world. But this is

slowly changing as a small group of social entrepreneurs

combine exciting new clean-energy technologies with

financially sustainable business models that have opened a

path to electrifying homes of the poor while helping to avert

long-term climate crisis. The best of these of models are

grounded in values of listening and paying attention to

behaviors of low-income people as well as their words.

All people desire at least some level of light, and all

require a heat source for cooking. Most low-income Africans

still depend on kerosene-fueled hurricane lamps, a

technology America and Europe ditched a century ago.

Though a ten-billion-dollar market, kerosene as an energy

source is dirty, dangerous, and expensive, but that market

has remained strong because there have been no good,

affordable, accessible kerosene alternatives available to the

poor.

There are structural and practical reasons that kerosene

remains in widespread use. First, households are able to

acquire it in tiny amounts. In Kenya, for instance, the

average low-income household spends about forty cents a

day to light a hurricane lantern in the evenings. If a family

falls on hard times, they can skip a night or two of light and

purchase more when better times return. Second, because

such small amounts are sold at a time, merchants build in a

very high profit margin. Mafias, or predatory businesses,

control access to kerosene and often have strong ties to

local government officials. These officials use tax dollars to

subsidize the price of kerosene for low-income people in

exchange for votes. Kerosene is therefore widely available,

and often the only option a poor household has. It provides

energy for light, but at a high cost to the individual in terms

of income, health, and quality of life.

However, despite ingrained hurdles, any system can

change if we care enough. Sam Goldman and Ned Tozun are

two entrepreneurs determined to reject the status quo that

has kept more than 1.5 billion people dependent on

kerosene. And they know how to listen.

Raised in a household of aid workers, Sam grew up

mostly in the developing world playing with boys and girls

who, though woefully lacking in opportunity, wanted to do

the same things he did. After university, he lived in an

unelectrified village in Benin, West Africa, as a Peace Corps

volunteer. He saved money by wearing a small LED

headlamp at night so that he could read and go to the

outdoor latrine without suffering the effects of the

expensive, smoky kerosene that wreaked havoc on his

neighbors.

“For years, I accepted that a state of darkness went

hand in hand with village life,” he once told me. Until, one

night, a kerosene lantern toppled over in his neighbor’s

home, burning down the house and severely injuring the

eldest son.

Sam decided to do something. He began by writing to a

number of companies that sold portable lights, hoping he

might become a distributor. No one responded. His next

move was to apply to Stanford Business School with the

intention of learning how to start the company he could not

yet find. There, he met Ned, an engineer who had recently

worked in Malawi recording the stories of AIDS victims. He,

too, wanted to start a business that would empower the

poor. Both Ned and Sam understood the system that kept

people in poverty as it was, but they focused instead on

what could be done to change it.

Many young entrepreneurs might have been

overwhelmed by the complicated dynamics of low-income

markets. The most economically disadvantaged live in

places dominated by vested interests engaged in the

“industry” of poverty—not just local mafias, but local

politicians, who often have a personal stake in controlling

the funds allocated for a community or region; religious

leaders; and even mothers-in-law who often prefer to

maintain their own privileged status within a social system

that, though broken for most people, works for them. But in

such a corrupt and complicated system, there is almost no

top-down way to solve a problem like electricity access.

From the start, Ned and Sam’s entrepreneurial

advantage was embedded in their experiences in Africa and

their respect for the poor as customers. They started small

and listened closely, all the while imagining the world they

hoped to create. While still at Stanford, they developed a

single prototype for a solar-powered lantern.

In 2007 when Sam and Ned first brought their idea to

my team at Acumen, we didn’t have a lot to work with. Their

business plan for a company called d.light rested on their

assumption that they could sell their lantern for thirty

dollars, the two reasoning that if the average household

paid about forty cents daily for kerosene, it would take them

less than three months to save up for the lamp. The young

entrepreneurs had built some networks, but it was their

character that ultimately convinced Acumen to invest. Our

intuition told us that they were seekers like us, driven by the

right ideals and prepared to back those up with grit.

The d.light founders listened right from the outset. They

asked their customers for ways to improve the product itself

—though at first they learned very little. Real listening is not

a onetime event. If you want to build a solution for a group

that has traditionally had no voice, be prepared to listen

continuously. It may take you longer than you think to hear

what people are actually saying, especially when they have

no reason to trust you.

Of course, Ned and Sam made mistakes and found

themselves in dead ends—for years. That is the price of

building an entirely new market. While, theoretically, low-

income people could pay off a thirty-dollar light over three

months, given the precariousness of their lives, they could

not save enough to meet the monthly payments. And even

if they loved the product, most of them had doubts about

this newfangled way of lighting their homes. Why should

they risk their hard-earned money on something that might

break in a month? Few had seen a product like this in the

marketplace. Better to stay with something they knew.

Sam and Ned took failure in stride, listening for clues as

to what might succeed. They knew they would have to work

harder to earn trust. Building a company infused with

purpose was the founders’ antidote to wariness. That meant

inculcating in every employee a definition of success based

on more than just selling whatever they could to earn a

day’s income; this company was going to light the world.

And every employee needed to believe in that vision

and internalize it. They had to treat every potential

customer with deep respect, showing up repeatedly, asking

questions, and listening to people, even if they didn’t like

what they had to say. In time, d.light began to earn

customers, and the company learned to build real

relationships.

I remember, years later, when d.light had become an

established company, sitting in a rural hut in central Kenya

with an unlikely trio: Teresia, a pint-size grandmother; her

sweet one-year-old grandson, on her lap; and David, a burly

Australian with a shock of white hair, the company’s Africa

director. We were there because Teresia and her daughter

had purchased one of the lanterns a few months prior, and

we wanted to hear her impressions.

Teresia’s face—calm, lined, square—make me think of

my Austrian grandmother, who also grew up on a rural farm

and knew the sweat of hard work. Though Teresia lived in a

small house that could feel like midnight inside in the

middle of the day, she lit up as she turned on her solar

lantern, telling us how it had changed her life, how even

during daily brownouts in her village, when the grid stopped

working, she was still able to see.

“So, how could the company improve the light?” I asked.

She hesitated for a second, then placed her hand on her

hip, cocked her head to the side, and spoke directly to

David. “It would be good if the light could charge the cell

phone while charging itself as well,” she said. I smiled at the

glint in her eye, the seriousness of her intent. I’d witnessed

so many encounters in which well-intentioned charities

asked people if they appreciated the services delivered and,

inevitably, the beneficiaries nodded their heads and told

them all was well.

But this time, Teresia was giving us advice. We were

listening to her, and not the other way around.

I thanked her for her good comments.

She responded by raising her eyebrow and giving me a

look to indicate that she was not finished making

suggestions.

I loved it.

“Two,” she continued, “you know, batteries for the radio

are too expensive. We couldn’t listen to the presidential

debates this time around. It would be better if the light

could also charge a radio.”

Now she was on fire, waving her arms. Two other

modifications to improve the lantern came in quick

succession.

I watched David’s face: he listened to each question and

answered respectfully. And then, inspired by Teresia, he, too,

told the truth, explaining in understandable terms what the

company could try to change and what would be too

expensive. She may not have liked every answer, but she

respected his candor.

Though this simple scene should be the norm in

business–customer interactions, two human beings

considering each other’s best interest—the level of mutual

listening felt extraordinary to me. I’d become accustomed to

witnessing people avoiding telling one another the truth. I’d

seen too many low-income “beneficiaries” pander as

privileged benefactors spoke with arrogant certainty.

This scene was different. The towering man and tiny

woman from disparate worlds were not just listening, they

were seeing each other. They were speaking as absolute

equals. In the space between them, call it love or divinity,

were the seeds of mutual respect, the opportunity for each

of them to be transformed.

By listening, Sam and Ned discovered that once their

customers made the first step from kerosene to solar, they

quickly wanted more. D.light went on to design a suite of

products, ranging from a simple five-dollar lamp for the

poorest up to full home systems that included multiple

lights, a cell phone charger, a radio, and, if they could afford

it, a flat-screen television. As investors, we began to

understand that there was an “energy ladder”: once people

got a taste of clean energy, they wanted more of it.

And why wouldn’t they? Imagine living in utter darkness

once the sun goes down in your home, regardless of where

you live. Now visualize living in a rural area, lying on a mat

on hard ground, hearing the sounds of animals and of

howling winds, not knowing what creatures are crawling

around or over you. Think of being a woman alone with her

small children while her husband works far away to earn

their daily bread; consider her fears that an intruder might

be lurking outside her isolated hut, hidden in the night’s

blackness. Such troubles and terrors add layers of stress to

the weightiness of poverty.

Then picture the dignity of flicking a switch and

illuminating your room. For anyone who lives without

electricity, the feeling can be miraculous. The scores of

customers I have met over my years investing in d.light

have reframed the way I understand the power of electricity.

A radio can stave off loneliness and bring the outside world

into a postage stamp–size room. A light can quell a dark

night’s fears and insecurities. A charged cell phone can

connect you to love and protection.

We miss many opportunities by assuming we have the

answers. Ned and Sam succeeded where many other

endeavors did not because they approached the poor as co-

creators in solving the problem of energy access. Through

repeated listening, they helped their customers realize that

they were there to serve them, not simply to take their

money.

And because the d.light team listened, and did the hard

work to follow up on what they’d heard, more than one

hundred million people now have clean light and,

increasingly, electricity. That is about one-third of the entire

population of the United States.

Sam, Ned, and the d.light team also helped ignite a

clean energy revolution that could change how Africa brings

electricity to all its people, averting long-term climate

change effects in the process. Imagine the human potential,

the human energy, that might be unlocked by this solar-

powered electricity.

Listening is a lifelong process. It requires continual

practice, especially when we’ve become too accustomed to

believing that our own assumptions are correct. I learned

this truth for the umpteenth time on an incredibly hot day in

Bahawalpur, Pakistan, an agricultural center in one of the

country’s most fertile areas, also known for its extremist

madrasas. I’d gone there to meet a group of women

weavers. They were sitting by their looms outside, beneath

a thatched shelter. Their husbands were farmers who

borrowed from our agricultural bank investee, so I knew the

families were building savings.

At the time of my visit to Bahawalpur, d.light was selling

a seven-dollar solar lantern with great success, especially in

East Africa. I hoped to see d.light come to Pakistan, where

the electricity grid reaches only about 65 percent of the

nation’s two hundred million people and, even then, might

bring electricity for only two or three hours a day in some

areas. I enthusiastically described the solar light to the

women’s group, marketing its attributes and asking if they’d

be interested in buying one if we could bring it to their

country.

Twenty pairs of tired eyes stared at me. No response.

I asked again. This time, a heavyset woman with a

husky voice, a brown veil draped loosely over her hennaed

hair, her face shining with sweat, leaned forward on ample

haunches. “We don’t need a light,” she said flatly. “Bring us

a fan.”

For a moment, I was speechless and stared back. “A

fan? I don’t have a fan. I have a light.”

“We don’t want a light. We want a fan.”

“But this is a great light. It will allow you to stay up later.

Your children can study. You can work in the evenings.”

She cut me off: “We work enough. We’re hot. Bring us a

fan.”

Until that moment, I’d never considered the importance

of a fan as opposed to a light. When it is so hot that even

the cows lie down, a fan can matter more than a light. Plus,

people already had light, even if it came from dangerous,

smelly, expensive kerosene. In East Africa, where the nights

are cool, people don’t ask for fans. But customers are not

the same in every market. Once again, I was reminded that

if you want to serve, you must begin by listening, not

assuming.

That night at my guesthouse, I took a cold shower and

lay beneath the ceiling fan, grateful; never before did I so

appreciate a fan.

Fast-forward a few years. Acumen began to invest in

solar companies in Pakistan. I visited a family compound in

the Punjab region that appeared unchanged since the

sixteenth century: men in turbans, women in purdah,

farmers using hand tools and plows in their endless fields of

mustard and sunflowers. The family I spoke with had

recently purchased a solar home system from a local

company that included multiple lights, a cell phone charger,

a radio … and a fan. The woman of the household told me

that the fan impacted her children’s ability to study more

than the lights. “The fan keeps the air moving at night and

the insects at bay. My children can sleep, which makes them

better students.” I nodded, remembering what I had learned

during my visit to Bahawalpur.

We miss so much by assuming we have the answers.

Instead, learn to listen with your whole body. Listen with

your ears, your eyes, all your senses. Listen not to convince

or to convert, but to change yourself, spark your moral

imagination, soften your hardened edges, and open yourself

to the world. When we fail to listen to those the world

excludes, we lose the possibility of solving problems that

matter most to all of us. But when we succeed at listening

with all our attention and empathy, we have a chance to set

others and ourselves free.

Chapter 5

YOU ARE

THE OCEAN

IN A DROP

If deep listening enables seeing beyond another’s words,

understanding identity can provide potent tools to empower

and unite. Identity can also be a trap, dividing us from one

another, sometimes with toxic or even deadly

consequences. Learning to navigate the many layers of your

own identity, while also expanding your awareness of the

multiple layers of others’, is an essential twenty-first-

century skill, one that can take a lifetime to acquire. Begin

on the path to mastery by discovering the many stories that

can be only yours.

I was born the eldest daughter in a patriotic American

immigrant military family. My childhood memories are filled

with identity-shaping moments: Catholic school and Mass on

Sunday, elders telling me to “be a good girl” (and to earn

good grades), and the constant rhythm of warm, boisterous

family events that usually included polka music and folk

dancing. Each school day, I pledged allegiance to the

American flag; weekly, I made the Girl Scout pledge “to

serve God and my country, to help people at all times, and

to live by the Girl Scout law.” That my dad did several tours

in Vietnam reinforced the ideas of self-sacrifice and

commitment at the core of my sense of self.

On Sundays, I would sit in church next to my mother,

who always dressed up and sometimes covered her head

with a black mantilla, her beautiful face serene. While at

church, she did not reveal the spitfire woman so familiar to

me the rest of the week. Priests and nuns encouraged us to

give “to the hungry children in China,” and though I was

only five or six years old, I regularly dropped half my fifty-

cent allowance in the poor box at the back of the church. An

empathetic child, I grew increasingly aware of the disparities

around me, though I still saw the world as divided between

good guys and bad guys—and I assumed I was one of the

good guys.

As I grew older, my life choices added contours to my

sense of who I was, challenging what I had believed and my

understanding of where I belonged. By my mid-twenties, my

work experience in scores of countries across Asia, Africa,

and Latin America made me yearn to know the world in its

manifold layers. I wanted to belong to the world, too.

The more I encountered, the more I questioned and,

unsurprisingly, the more I changed. With each change, I

came closer to my true self. This required jettisoning beliefs

and practices that no longer served my expanding

understanding of the world or of the identities I was

choosing to inhabit.

At the age of twenty-six, I sat down with my beloved

father and told him that I was questioning whether I could

continue to call myself a Catholic. I still remember the

disappointed, confused look my questioning caused. I loved

the stories and the Gospels, the rituals and music—in so

many ways, I was religious—but I didn’t love how the Church

excluded; its actual practices too often countered my own

beliefs. I could not reconcile that some people were

welcomed into the Church’s community, and others were

not; nor that women were so diminished within the Church’s

hierarchy.

I asked him, “I’ve worked alongside people in Muslim

and Hindu and other religious communities and want to

understand more about them. Aren’t their ‘essential truths’

the same as ours?” And didn’t true spirituality have to do

with seeing yourself in every other human being, and they

in you?

Life had been teaching me what sages and saints had

written about for centuries. As the American poet Walt

Whitman wrote in “Song of Myself” in 1855, “I am large. I

contain multitudes,” singing through his poetry to an

expansive identity reminiscent of the words of the

thirteenth-century Sufi poet Rumi: “You are not a drop in the

ocean. You are the ocean in a drop.”

By this time, I could no longer embrace the idea that my

truths were of a higher or even separate order from those of

people practicing other religions. I was grateful for my

religious education but yearned to explore beyond its solid

edges. I had begun to see myself as entangled with other

peoples and other faiths, ideas I carried within myself: the

ocean in a drop.

It devastated me to hurt my father. The conversation I

had with him challenged me much more than when I

informed my parents that I was leaving Wall Street to work

in Africa. Our debate about religion threatened our family’s

core identity, potentially puncturing the heart of my most

personal community. My heart ached, for I wanted no one’s

approval more than my father’s and mother’s.

“Will you ever go to church again?” my father asked, not

with anger but with quietude.

“I will when I am home with you,” I responded. I didn’t

want to renounce or fully abandon parts of what I’d been

given, but I understood the need to embrace the new as

well. I promised that my deeds would make my parents

proud. I hope to this day that they have.

As I went on to experience more people and places, the

various parts of my identity became more nuanced. As the

saying goes, you will never know the East Side till you move

to the West. By working and living in other countries, I

began to see America, the land of my birth, in more

complex ways. I loved my country’s ideals and felt grateful

daily to be an American woman. We are a can-do nation of

immigrants from all corners of the globe, exuberant in our

sense of possibility, proud to be a place where anyone,

regardless of birth status, can achieve greatness. Even

today, when I run alongside the Hudson River, I silently

salute Lady Liberty, gratefully acknowledging her welcoming

promise to all peoples seeking to make their lives on her

shores and to contribute to the American experiment.

Yet, just as with Catholicism, I also grew in awareness of

the more shameful parts of my American identity, which

continue to limit the nation’s full potential. This includes the

legacies of American imperialism suffered by Native

Americans, the still-open wounds of slavery, and the unjust

number of incarcerated young men of color. I began to

recognize that every one of us, and every society as a

whole, is a mix of light and shadow. In that realization, I

found, and continue to find, extraordinary potential for

growth, for relationships and self-discovery, for a new

idealism grounded in the gritty, sometimes ugly realities of

everyday work to be done.

Thirty years after that conversation with my father, I

feel profoundly grateful for my multiple identities, both

inherited and chosen. Each part of me is a chance to

connect to others. Growing up in a big immigrant family

made interacting with more community-oriented people in

Africa, Asia, and Latin America feel closer to home for me.

My Catholic upbringing helped me connect to other

traditional religious communities, as I understood what it

meant to prioritize family, daily rituals, and prayer, and to

honor religious leaders who interpret holy texts. The

daughter of an army colonel, I am comfortable considering

myself a citizen soldier, and I respect the discipline,

diversity, and leadership grown by the military. As a New

Yorker, I feel a kinship to residents of big cities such as

Mumbai and Karachi, Nairobi and Lagos. My inherited love of

literature has connected me to new places by making

conversations with strangers easier, providing a means of

conveying curiosity rather than tired assumptions about

their societies.

Each of us contains a multitude. The more identities we

carry within, the more chances to discover that we are at

once unique and bound by commonalities. So, as the

Nigerian writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie asks, why, then,

do we reduce individuals to a single story, a single identity

that can too easily be infused with our greatest fears about

one another?

I witnessed firsthand the fragility and potential

deadliness of reductive identity during the aftermath of the

Rwandan genocide. I sat in foul prisons listening to women

whom I had considered friends rant about the evil of the

Tutsis while fully believing the Tutsis would have murdered

the country’s other main tribe, the Hutus, had not the Hutus

killed them first. Those encounters taught me that monsters

and angels exist in every one of us.

Our monsters are the broken parts of ourselves, the

shames and hurts and grievances often carried from

generation to generation. If we do not confront them

peacefully yet directly, those broken parts make us

vulnerable to externalizing our pain through anger, violence,

or a deadening bitterness. In times of insecurity, the divisive

language and policies of demagogues prey upon our

weaknesses, urging us to cast blame for our problems on

those who are deemed “other.” Too often, such language

successfully entreats us to do horrendous things to one

another.

I have lost too many friends to violence in the name of

identity. Perhaps this is why I believe so strongly in the

Lebanese French writer Amin Maalouf’s explanation (in In

the Name of Identity) of how identity operates within each

of us. According to Maalouf, we each maintain a “hierarchy

of identities” that rise and fall depending on whether a

particular identity is threatened. When one of our identities

is attacked, it becomes easy to perceive ourselves only as

that identity, for how others see us can have a significant

impact on how we see ourselves.

Think about your own diverse identities—your gender,

religion, race, ethnicity, tribe, sexual identity, citizenship or

refugee status, your schools. Which parts give you pride?

Which parts shame? I’d be surprised if most didn’t give you

both. You might be a vegetarian or a carnivore; an extrovert

or an introvert; an athlete; someone who loves classical

music or hip-hop, novels or nonfiction; a nature lover or an

urbanite—likely, your mix includes at least a few

contradictions. Our personal commitments form aspects of

our identities, too. Now think of those times when a single

part of you felt threatened and you were reduced, either by

others or yourself, to a single identity. The world plays along

in these moments, flattening our sense of self to the point of

caricature.

My own identity shape-shifts when confronted with the

world around me. I feel more American when I am being

questioned at a dinner party in Karachi about U.S. drone

policy. When I am held at U.S. immigration for questioning

because of all the Pakistan stamps in my passport, I become

equally a global citizen and an American who wants my

country to treat immigrants with greater respect. Perhaps,

instead, we could start by understanding the many

identities inside ourselves, avoid the temptation of labels

and the demonization of others, and search for common

ground in those who might seem different at first blush.

If holding our multiple identities and recognizing that all

people carry myriad identities within themselves is a crucial

step toward navigating difference in an interdependent

world, a second essential skill is understanding how others

perceive you, especially with regard to power and privilege.

Throughout my twenties, I sharpened the first skill by

interacting with other cultures. In my early thirties, a painful

confrontation with the more privileged parts of my identity

had to take place before I could fully learn the second skill.

In 1996, Peter Goldmark and Angela Blackwell,

president and senior vice president, respectively, of the

Rockefeller Foundation in New York, determined to build a

leadership program to confront “the fault lines of race, class

and ideology in America.” Four years earlier, Los Angeles

had exploded with riots over the acquittal of police officers

who’d brutally beaten Rodney King, an African American

motorist. The 1991 beating had been caught on video and

seen hundreds of millions of times (before smartphones or

Facebook). Because of the riots that followed the beating,

more than 2,300 people were injured, 62 were killed, and

the city experienced a loss of more than a billion dollars.

Over the next four years, across the United States, identity

politics grew more hostile.

The Rockefeller Foundation’s most senior leadership

wanted to try to do something about a deteriorating civic

conversation in America. The two leaders of the foundation

tapped me to create and lead this new program. I had

already learned something about navigating differences

while working in Rwanda, and I had tried to become a

respectful listener as well. I loved the idea of confronting the

fractures of American democracy through investing in

diverse young leaders and was elated to build a program

that would support their development. At the same time, I

also felt that I was exactly the wrong person to lead that

program. I was white. My orientation was more global than

local. I had dreamed of investing in businesses that served

the poor, not supporting individuals to lead.

However, the need was there, the opportunity was

there, and no one else had stepped in to build something

like it. My mentor John Gardner, whom you met in chapter 1,

reminded me to be more interested than interesting. “You

will learn to understand the rest of the world better if you do

the work to know your own country,” he said to me. “You’ll

be able to speak with greater humility if you can speak from

experience about the challenges that your own country

faces.”

After much thought, I decided to start a new chapter in

my life and let the work teach me. Together with a small,

diverse and mighty team, I helped create the Next

Generation Leaders program. The scope of our ambition

thrilled me, though when we started, I had no idea of all

that I’d have to learn to give the program even the slightest

chance of success.

On the first evening of the NGL fellows gathering, as

everyone sat down to dinner, I formally introduced myself.

Twenty-four fellows sat around a horseshoe-shaped table,

representing diverse slices of the American pie, including a

Korean American leader of a community group from New

York City, an African American leader fighting to eliminate

the death penalty, a fighter pilot in the marines, and a gay

Latina activist for immigrant rights, just to name a few. After

welcoming these fellows, I began: “I hope we will use the

group itself not only to explore differences but to

understand one another, so that we in turn might better

understand ourselves.”

Heads nodded as I spoke. Though I was nervous, I

thought, So far, so good.

Given our diversity, I continued, we also hoped to define

rituals as a means of creating shared experiences and, thus,

bonds among us. Each night, before dinners together, I

suggested that a different fellow start the meal by sharing a

poem, a blessing, a quote, or silence. Each fellow could

choose whether to share his or her own tradition, whether

religious or atheist, or to honor another one. What mattered

was the fellow’s gift of reflection and an openness from the

rest of the group to receive it.

An African American minister from Chicago stood up

that first evening, choosing traditional words of thanksgiving

for the meal we were about to eat and ending with a quiet

“Amen.” Many in the group repeated the amen, but a young

African American activist stood and accused me of “making

this a Christian thing.” I reiterated that we hoped to create

the space not for what separated us but for what we shared.

He fired back that people shouldn’t be forced to hear

dinnertime prayers. Heads nodded in agreement.

The evening had barely begun, and I’d lost the group.

Over the next few months, the group regularly devolved

into arguments about identity rather than focusing on how

we might actually solve problems. I hired two elderly white

scholars to lead “Good Society” sessions, a powerful

exercise taken from the Aspen Institute, in which

participants reflect on their own values by interacting as a

group with the writings of philosophers and activists

spanning from Plato to Hobbes, Rousseau, King, and

Mandela. Upset that the readings mostly came from “dead

white men,” some of the fellows refused to participate.

I did not know how to handle the situation, and the two

facilitators ultimately left the session. The same young man

who had raised issues around having a minister share a

prayer made it clear from the beginning that I, a white

woman of privilege, should not run a program built for a

diverse collection of emerging American leaders.

Part of me thought he was right. My own insecurities

stunted my ability to bring my whole self forward, though

that was precisely what I was asking the group to do.

Ultimately, the group avoided rigorous debates about how

society might do better at encompassing our diversity.

Opinions, not reason, dominated. Some fellows remained so

busy defending their own identities that we collectively

failed to make the effort to engage with the identities of

others.

The lowest point of the year occurred at the end of a

seminar, during a go-round in which each fellow shared an

insight or question from the week’s activities. When it was

the African American activist’s turn, he suggested that this

was the right moment for me to resign. I thanked him for his

comments, but I had no answers, not for the unasked

questions swirling in the room and not even for the

questions I’d posed myself.

The weight of the room’s silence and the staring eyes of

the fellows pressed in on my chest, intensifying my feelings

of shame and guilt. Even though I’d put heart and soul into

working with my team to create and fund this program, and

had delivered on the promise of a group that reflected

America’s diversity, I had failed to facilitate difficult yet

constructive conversations. For nearly an entire year, I had

been unable to build a sense of wholeness and a connected

group that could learn from itself. And rather than share the

burden of failure with the group, I erred in thinking that the

program’s deficiencies were the sole responsibility of me

and my team.

Later that night, after a good cry, I finally came to a

reckoning with myself. The young activist had pinpointed

one of the most unresolved parts of my identity: my

privilege. It didn’t matter how I perceived myself. What

mattered in that moment was how others saw me. Until that

experience, I saw myself as an industrious woman from a

big, middle-class family who had paid her way through

college and business school and who would face the

monthly stress of school debt repayments for yet another

decade. As a young person, I was aware that being a white

American afforded me vastly better opportunities, but I also

wanted to claim the “scrappy independent woman” part of

my identity that was unafraid of sweat and hard work.

Yet, if I did not fully see myself as a woman of privilege,

my identity had expanded to include working at the

Rockefeller Foundation with a well-used passport and a

Stanford MBA. If I hadn’t been born an elite, I had certainly

become one, regardless of how I saw myself. Only when I

was able to integrate the person I had become with the

person I once was would I be able to serve in ways that

mattered.

Finally, I understood: by hiding parts of my identity, I

had been denying myself and others what I could bring to

the table. Because I had not laid the groundwork to know

myself and claim a legitimacy for running the program, I

had never been able to address the polarization that held

the room hostage to identity politics and made it difficult for

everyone to focus on the other issues at hand. I had failed

to recognize that identity, our own and that of others, is

always in the room.

Given all this, should I then resign? My resolve came

slowly but clearly. No. Absolutely not. That young activist did

not have the sole hold on what was right and fair. There

were many in the group who told me privately, and

repeatedly, that they were acquiring new insights and skills,

and they urged me to stay the course. So, I would take this

as an opportunity to grow personally and to expand my

understanding of both the challenges and opportunities

identity brings. I also realized in those days and weeks of

reflection that we would succeed in building a cohort of

diverse leaders who worked across lines of difference only if

we selected people who were open to changing themselves.

Without personal transformation, a moral revolution is

impossible.

By the second year of the fellowship, I was able to lead

with greater self-awareness and confidence. Rather than

simply “checking,” or distancing myself from, my privilege, I

learned to know when and how to use that privilege of

authority as an asset to create space so that other voices

could be heard. I was more able to recognize, and call out,

when a fellow, holding tightly to an ideological stance on

either extreme of the political divide, was making

constructive conversation impossible. When a fellow

complained in that first year that the Rockefeller Foundation

represented the imperialist capitalist elite, I simply stared,

almost fearing to respond. But during the second year, I

made it clear that everyone in the room, by virtue of

choosing to join the fellowship, would have a new element

to his or her identity. As fellows, they would have greater

access and privilege that, in turn, required additional

responsibilities.

I understood that my job was to make the conversation

safe enough for all sides to feel deeply uncomfortable at

times, and to grow from it. It was to challenge anyone who

was throwing around easy assumptions, asking them

instead to ground their perspectives in principles for which

they stood. It was to remind myself and every one of the

fellows that if every one of us was not open and willing to

change ourselves, we would never be able to change the

world.

My painful stumbles at the Rockefeller Foundation gave

me a powerful new set of skills with which to navigate

identity. First, know yourself. Second, be open to the

multiple identities others might carry within themselves.

Third, the person or organization with greater power in a

particular moment must be the bridge that extends

understanding to those with less power. Without this bridge,

real conversations won’t happen.

Keep in mind that privileges tend to fluctuate depending

on context. Every one of us might feel powerful in certain

situations and powerless in others, based on how we

perceive ourselves and how others impose on us their ideas

of who we are. The more you are aware of the power you

maintain in each situation, the more likely you are to gain a

truer understanding of others.

Though I could not have known it at the time, in pushing

me way beyond my comfort zone, that painful year with the

Rockefeller Foundation’s leadership program broke me open

and allowed me to stretch to find new parts of myself. I

don’t say this lightly; I realize that knowing all the parts of

ourselves and being aware of how others see us is more of a

struggle for some than for others, and it can be more

challenging at various stages of our lives. Moreover, some

people have single identities imposed on them in ways that

can be life threatening. This is precisely why understanding

identity—which is wholly different from learning to play

identity politics—is such an important skill to learn and

teach. We grow not in easy times but in difficult ones. In our

moments of greatest division and fear, might we all become

less comfortable and forge more nuanced understandings of

our own identities, thereby opening ourselves up to explore

the identities of others?

In 2015, I traveled to Bahawalpur, Pakistan, to discuss

values and principles of moral leadership with a group of

young Pakistani Acumen fellows who hailed from all parts of

the country. Some young men wore jeans and polo shirts;

others, traditional Pakistani shalwar kameez, long tunics

with loosely fitted cotton trousers. Women, representing

about 40 percent of the room, wore a mix of modern and

traditional clothing as well. It was the first time I was

meeting this particular group, but I felt a kinship given our

shared global community.

After I asked which living people would qualify as moral

leaders, I mused that the youngest Nobel Peace Prize winner

in history, Malala Yousafzai, Pakistan’s own daughter, was

the Antigone of our times: courageous, noble, and powerful

in her pursuit of justice.

Half the room agreed with me, some with a sense of

national pride. Half shook their heads in disgust.

“She is a CIA agent,” one young man said.

Another chimed in: “She’s simply a tool of the West. The

rich Americans love her because it fits within their story.”

When I pushed to understand, the group began arguing

with one another, their words flying past me. One of the

members, a young bearded man, sat silently, scowling. I

asked the group to quiet down, and I turned to him: “Why

have you opted out of the conversation?”

“Malala is no hero of mine,” he explained. “Her story

has been manipulated to make the West feel good about

itself.”

People around the table jumped in, both to protest and

to agree. I asked them to hold back and give the young man

space to say more.

He continued: “I’m from Swat, just near Malala’s village.

We were one of the most progressive places in the country.

We educated our daughters and sons in our valley. But after

the 2004 earthquake, the Taliban came down from the

mountains. They said Allah was punishing us for our evil

ways and began to rule the area. Since then, we have lived

with violence and fear in our midst. Schools were shut. Life

became more difficult for us. Yet the world sees Malala and

thinks we are barbarians who need to be saved by the West.

It is not right. Those same people who love her and despise

us don’t want to acknowledge that the U.S. created the

Taliban to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. And now the

U.S. blames the Taliban for any of the violence to justify

dropping drones on Northern Pakistan, on civilians. Why

don’t we ever hear about girls who escaped U.S. drone

attacks? Why don’t we ever make them heroes?”

He didn’t stop there, but instead described wounds

inflicted on his sense of identity from Pakistanis themselves.

“Even those Pakistanis who say Malala is an angel,” he said,

“don’t hide their surprise that she is so educated. They think

our region is backward, that we are second-class citizens. It

makes us feel more separate and, somehow, disgraced.”

We could have paused, agreed to disagree, honored his

reaction as one justified by his being part of a wounded

community. But we would have lost the chance to dive into

the layers of what Malala represents to so many in Pakistan.

We would have lost the chance to collectively unpack the

statement that “the West loves Malala and despises people

from Pakistan’s northern territories.” Moreover, had we

stopped, that young man may have been known from then

on through the single story of being a Muslim from Swat.

And he is so much more than that. He is a proud Pakistani; a

lover of literature, of dancing, of sports; a university

graduate. He is a father, a son, a brother, too. Also

important, he’s a teacher who runs a school for boys and

girls in his home city, and he has gone to great lengths to

protect girls’ rights to education.

The conversation about Malala threatened his Pashtun

identity. As Amin Maalouf would have predicted, in that

moment, the Pashtun man spoke only from the part of

himself that felt personally wounded—and thus, “Pashtun”

was raised to the top of his “identity hierarchy,” reducing

his story to a single narrative. If we had not had time as a

group to consider the complexities of this man’s life

experiences and the story of Malala herself, we could have

become even more divided. Instead, we deliberately created

space and time for uncomfortable conversations among

people who, above all, valued listening and moral

imagination.

You might be wondering what happened next, whether

either side was convinced by the other. We never fully

agreed as a group as to whether Malala was an angel or an

agent. Yet most of the fellows admitted later that during

that uncomfortable conversation, something within them

individually, and in the group as a whole, shifted. At the very

least, the larger group came to understand the hurt of

Pashtuns in a more personal way. And at the end of our time

together, one of the more privileged members of the cohort

spoke about the shame he felt for remaining silent in the

past when friends had insulted Pashtuns.

That unresolved conversation also elevated how we saw

ourselves as a group. At the essence of the Malala exchange

was the interplay of human dignity and identity; a yearning

to be recognized and acknowledged; an unspoken promise:

if you do not attempt to reduce me to a single identity, I will

try to see you as a more integrated person as well. While we

may not have fully resolved whether Malala was a hero, this

was the resolution we needed: a commitment to

acknowledge one another not just within the confines of the

room but in the open spaces of the world.

The conversation about Malala prepared me for a

surprising interaction I had in Dubai a few weeks later. I had

been invited to speak to twenty professional women at a

steel-and-glass restaurant atop one of the city’s imposing

skyscrapers. The scene could not have felt more different

from our simple retreat in the agricultural fields of southern

Pakistan. The middle-aged women were dressed

traditionally in abayas (long, flowing black robes) and hijabs

(head scarves), and obviously were very wealthy, exuding

the confidence that comes from operating at the highest

levels of political and professional achievement.

I spoke about my work and my hope to contribute to a

new kind of philanthropy in the region. When I finished, the

elder stateswoman of the group thanked me, then posed an

unexpected question: “What do you think about Malala?”

she asked. She clasped her hands and placed them gently

on the table in front of her.

This time I was prepared. I started from a place of

identity, acknowledging that while she was just a young

woman, Malala had come to symbolize a tension between

the West and the Muslim world, at least for some. I

acknowledged that young women and men have been killed

by the Taliban and by U.S. drones, and that with such

violence, our children and the poor are the ones who lose

most.

And then I shared my own belief that regardless of the

circumstances that made Malala a teenage celebrity, she

was using her privilege as a platform to stand for young

people across the world, and doing so with respect for her

religion, her parents, and her country. She may have been

born a Pashtun girl from Swat, but now she belongs to all of

us, and the world is better for it. I ended with another

acknowledgment of my hosts: “I love this region and

recognize the unholy partnership between fair-weather

friends in both Pakistan and the United States. Both sides

have dirty hands. It is our children who bear the brunt of

violence and despair. It must be to us as women, as citizens,

as mothers and sisters and aunts, to stand for building a

peace that goes beyond politics, so that all children can

grow to become what they deserve to be.”

The elder woman smiled and said, “Yes.” And then she

was quiet for another moment. I wasn’t sure what was

coming next.

Finally, she said, “Thank you. Now we can talk.”

Being aware of and acknowledging the identities others

hold is a key skill for navigating complex conversations.

Once that group of twenty professional women in the room

had become even slightly more trusting, we could speak

more freely of politics and philanthropy, of the situation of

women in the Middle East, and of problems in international

development.

Ultimately, our future as a human race depends on all of

us subscribing to a revolution of morals in which we each

commit ourselves to something beyond ourselves. We spend

so much time focused on what we believe to be true rather

than opening ourselves to the ways others perceive the

world. A peaceful, sustainable planet demands that we

celebrate our individual multiple identities while recognizing

the one thing we have in common: we are all human beings.

We are born equal by virtue of our precious, blessed, wild

humanness—and that is enough to bind us to one another.

Each of us is the ocean in a drop.

Our shared humanity is strong and vast enough to

encompass our beautiful diversity. Think of yourself as a

bridge extending forward so that others might walk across.

Commit to stretching beyond your comfort zone to meet

those whose realities are different from your own. You might

be surprised at what you find on the other side.

Chapter 6

PRACTICE

COURAGE

I was a child of the 1960s, a time of heaving change, when

cracks surfaced in ancient institutions and the tightly woven

fabric of society began to loosen. In fourth grade, girls were

allowed to wear “nice pants” on Fridays to public schools,

and even my Catholic elementary school stopped requiring

uniforms. Through Vatican II, Pope John XXIII transformed

the Catholic Church’s relationship to the modern world. The

birth control pill was introduced, and movements for civil

rights and human freedoms broke out across the globe.

Even then, most girls refrained from sports, took home

economics in school to learn to cook and sew, and were

taught to be polite at all times.

Luckily, my parents believed that their growing tribe of

boys and girls could do anything. When I was nine, my

father coached a middle school football team in Fort

Leavenworth, Kansas. He brought me to practice one day,

and some of the boys teased him: “Coach,” they said, “you

didn’t tell us you had a girl.”

“Yup,” he said, “but she’s as tough as you are.” He then

challenged two of the boys to a pull-up competition with me.

I wanted to die of embarrassment—until I was actually in

the competition; then I wanted to win. And, at least in my

dad’s memory, I did. My mortification gave way to a secret

pride in being physically strong, a self-perception that

became a superpower. In an age when most girls were

cheering on the sidelines for boys playing sports, I wanted

to be nowhere but on the field itself.

Necessity prompted my parents to instill a scrappy

entrepreneurial courage in their brood. Raising seven kids

on a military salary was no easy feat. When my brothers

and I complained that “everyone else’s moms” bought them

Levi’s jeans or Converse sneakers, our mother would give us

the evil eye for wanting to be like everyone else. “You don’t

need to wear brand names,” she’d say, disappointed. “You

are Novogratzes. But if you seriously feel the need to be like

other people, I’ll make a deal with you. I’ll cover the cost of

plain jeans or sneakers at the Army Post Exchange, and you

pay the difference for the branded ones.”

My parents believed that each of us was capable of

doing anything we set our minds to. And having someone

play the role of encourager is one of the biggest gifts any of

us can receive. It reinforces the courage that comes just by

believing you count, that you’re capable of something. (It

doesn’t really matter what that something is.)

As a result of my mother’s deal making, we were always

looking for entrepreneurial ways to earn income for greater

independence and, sometimes, to buy those Levi’s. I started

babysitting when I was ten, then went on to work behind the

ice-cream counter at a Howard Johnson’s at fourteen before

ultimately bartending while still in high school. And I made

and sold Christmas ornaments door to door to earn enough

money for school trips. Each experience required facing into

discomfort—knocking at the houses of strangers to

introduce myself, to ask people to buy things I’d put my

heart into making. I had to learn to deal with rejection, to

make decisions for myself and to handle money. And while

the first or second or sometimes tenth time I tried

something might still feel uncomfortable, each experience

expanded my worldview, even the most incremental of

victories imparting me with the belief that life could be a

great adventure if you were willing to dare.

Courage is not the absence of fear. Courage is the

ability to look fear in the face and continue to walk forward.

All of us have something that frightens us, whether or not

we admit it, and there are as many forms of courage as

there are of fear. Only by nurturing our courage will we

prevent our fears from making and then keeping us small.

Childhood gave me the courage to take physical and

entrepreneurial risks, but it did not prepare me to speak

truth to power. The institutions that grounded my youth did

just the opposite, in fact, reinforcing the idea that girls

especially were supposed to be “good” and respectful.

Though I might have imagined myself a maverick, I also was

groomed to be polite and considerate, without being honest

or tough enough to ask for what I truly needed.

As a child, when I most needed courage to use my

voice, I lacked any skill or sense of my own power

whatsoever. After a long night of babysitting, a

neighborhood father drove me home. He parked the car in

our house’s driveway, turned to me as if to say good night,

and suddenly began kissing and forcing himself on me. I

pleaded for him to stop, and fought to get out from under

him, but I was also, somehow, polite until I managed to

wriggle free.

I was twelve years old. I can still remember my outfit: a

pink gingham button-down shirt tucked into bell-bottom

jeans with little houses embroidered around the waistband

and an oversize pink comb in the back pocket, my long hair

in braids tied with little white ribbons. I had never before

kissed a boy nor really even considered the possibility.

I rushed into the house and saw my brave, loving father

talking at the kitchen table with one of his best friends. The

only word I could muster was hello. I scrambled up the

golden shag-carpeted stairs to the bathroom and jumped in

the shower wearing all my clothes. Sitting in the bathtub,

the water pouring over me from overhead, I felt dirty and

ashamed, confused and hurt. I never babysat for that family

again, coming up with all sorts of excuses to avoid doing so.

For decades, I gave no external voice to my internal

hurt, at least not to adults. I must have believed, or known,

somehow that saying aloud what had happened would upset

the social order of my world. I knew that my parents would

have been devastated. My father was the kindest man I

knew, and he had returned from Vietnam only months

before. My mother was fierce, fearless, and focused when it

came to raising her brood. I could not bear the thought of

hurting either of them.

I dreaded the very notion that my father might injure

the neighbor in his desire to avenge me. And what of the

man’s wife and children? I convinced myself that silence

was a better option. I had neither permission nor practice to

say aloud the true things that might need to be said, even if

they harmed the reputation of a respected member of the

community.

Forty years later, when I heard the news of the

neighbor’s death, I felt an unexpected sense of freedom.

Now I understand that I was caught in a system that

required the silence of the weak in order to protect and

maintain the privilege of the strong. We remain voiceless

because we fear rejection, shame, or letting others down.

We stay silent when bad things happen to us or to those

around us, afraid of losing status or love or the security of

home. We want to keep our jobs or maintain the peace or, in

some situations, stave off further violence.

Thankfully, systems that privilege some groups over

others have begun to erode. A generation is more willing to

confront ugly truths, openly recognizing that acts by some

to denigrate or hurt others are unacceptable. People are

finding others to stand in solidarity with them, even if they

live in different communities. For any of us to be free, we

must all be free.

Finding one’s own voice and using it is one of the most

difficult kinds of courage to develop. It grows from

discovering and valuing our most authentic selves,

regardless of the systems and structures that otherwise

might attempt to define us. For those who’ve been injured,

this requires courageously confronting our own trauma and

injuries. But courage is a muscle. The more we exercise it,

even in small ways, the more courageous we become.

Sometimes life gives us opportunities to do the right

thing, even at a possible cost to ourselves. In my first job, I

recognized a worrying pattern in a Swiss bank that had

significant loans outstanding with Chase. It looked to me as

if the bank would fail. The country director in Geneva

ridiculed me as a baby banker who clearly had no

understanding of the way Swiss banks operated. My boss

discouraged me from politically ruffling powerful feathers.

But I had triple-checked my work, and I knew that my job

was to raise concerns, even if the worst-case scenario never

happened.

And so, I did. After an anxious, wakeful night, I sat at a

big wooden desk across from the bank’s towering, powerful

country head. My knuckles were white from gripping the

seat beneath me, and I felt as if I were in a roiling storm at

sea. My voice quaking, and resisting the urge to vomit, I

relayed my conclusions to the disdainful country leader.

Later, I submitted my report to the global credit committee.

I didn’t sleep for the next two nights, anxious that my

findings might result in the loss of my job.

A few days later, the bank failed. My reputation was

burnished, and I internalized the importance of speaking my

truth, even through trembling lips. I also tried to remind

myself that things could have gone differently. The bank

might have stayed afloat, and my boss could have seen me

as a troublemaker. But at least my integrity, even if known

only by me, would have remained intact.

That experience fueled my courage to stand up for my

beliefs when I switched from banking on Wall Street to

microfinance in Rwanda. A local priest had accused our

microfinance organization, Duterimbere, of usury (charging

illegally high interest), though we charged women just 12

percent a year to borrow versus the informal moneylenders,

who charged as much as 10 percent per day. Knowing I’d

survived my initial discomfort at Chase, I was more

prepared to confront the cultural guardians in Rwanda. In

Rwanda, the stakes were higher, for they were about not

just my career but our organization’s very mandate.

Even after I was gaining the courage of my convictions

and learning to fight for my beliefs, I still lacked confidence

in another area of my life: public speaking. When it came to

speaking in front of groups, it took me longer to learn that

fear is conquerable if you confront it, understand what lies

beneath it, and then face it, often repeatedly, until you

make it a friend. As with most hard things, that takes

practice.

The particular fear of public speaking showed up early in

my life and persisted. When I was a teenager, my knees

would knock whenever I had to make a presentation. On

Wall Street, we had to study public speaking as part of our

training. After witnessing my nervous laughter and rapid-fire

speech, my instructor told me that I was perhaps the worst

public speaker she’d ever encountered. That single

comment set back my confidence even further. But I knew

that public speaking would be an essential skill for leading

change, so I looked for opportunities to present to small

groups, sometimes staying up half the night to practice. If a

speech went well, I’d gain a bit of confidence. If it was a

flop, I’d think about what I could learn from the experience.

It took years to get to the point where I sometimes even

enjoyed public speaking.

During this process, I also learned to calm my nerves. As

a young woman, I’d listened to the advice of those who told

me to “pump myself up” before speaking. That only

stressed me further. “Imagine the audience naked,”

someone else suggested. But that image distressed me.

Pretending I was a superhero served to keep the attention

on myself, and didn’t work, either.

It took years to realize that I had it all backward. Rather

than focus on myself, I needed to direct my attention to the

audience. I was speaking, after all, as a messenger, not a

protagonist. My job was simply to be an instrument of love,

I’d remind myself, whether to inspire thought or provoke

action. Rather than attempting to stare down my ego, I

would try to allow my ego to dissolve. This approach turned

out to be a grounding mechanism, enabling me to get out of

my own way and do what I had come to do.

All of us are at times strong and at other times fragile,

certain and unsure—these contradictions are part of the

human condition. Sometimes, the same people who display

nerves of steel when negotiating high-stakes deals find it

almost impossible to provide difficult feedback to beloved

employees. Each act requires its own kind of courage, and

few of us are fearless in every situation. Some people fear

being viewed as imperfect or unworthy; instead of

courageously communicating mistakes or failures, they hide

small problems, denying partners or friends or investors the

chance to help rectify the situation. Sometimes those same

problems grow into full-blown disasters, making manifest

the very fears the person tried to avoid.

At Acumen, we’ve lost important investments because a

team member lacked the confidence to advocate for a risky

deal, assuming others would think him crazy for proposing

it. But if you want to play it safe, you shouldn’t get into the

business of change. Change involves risk, and risk, which is

not the same as recklessness, requires courage.

Institutions can try to make it easier for people to take

risks, but it is up to each of us to practice small acts of

courage so that we build muscles to do the right thing.

Regularly, we should ask ourselves, what is the cost of not

daring? Of not trying? Of not speaking up when it matters?

Practice courage until you become courageous. Think of

fear not as a bad thing, but simply as a mechanism to alert

you to emotional or physical danger. The more you confront

what lies beneath the fear, the more you can tackle it

through repeated confrontations and small victories. Those

wins, ultimately, will prepare you for the times when the

world needs you to stand bravely in the fire and take on the

seemingly impossible.

And even then, for some, there are times (hopefully

rare) when the stakes of change suddenly rise to a matter of

life or death, when you have only fraught options and you

find yourself flying without a net. In such situations, what

separates those who are able to master their fears from

those who run or hide is purpose.

One leader with this gritty, muscular courage, one

fueled by a singular purpose and commitment to

community, is Andrew Otieno. A mild-mannered man of

slender build, Andrew worked as a senior leader at Jamii

Bora Bank, a Nairobi-based nonprofit microfinance

organization imbued with an ethos of self-help and mutual

support. In addition to serving as a senior leader of Jamii

Bora, Andrew also founded and ran a health clinic close to

where he was born in Kibera, the largest urban slum in

Africa.

Life threw many challenges at Andrew, giving rise to a

steely toughness to backstop his temperate demeanor. But

even he could not have imagined the gut-wrenching

fortitude he’d have to muster after Kenya’s 2007

presidential election caused an eruption of tribally driven

violence that left Andrew’s cherished community raging with

riots and fires.

Andrew oversaw Jamii Bora’s office in Kibera. The

lending operation served tens of thousands, including the

more than 1,700 merchants who operated out of the fabled

Toi Market, one of East Africa’s largest open-air bazaars.

Known for selling secondhand clothing and just about

everything else, Toi was a vibrant, colorful, glorious mosaic

of tiny kiosks that enabled millions of dollars to flow through

the marketplace, supporting the livelihoods of nearly a

hundred thousand people each year. It was there, on the

edge of the market, that Andrew’s office sat, witness to an

artery of economic growth and opportunity. For some, that

market provided the best route out of poverty.

One night, during the raging post-election weeks of

rioting, a couple hundred young men looted and razed the

market in a massive brawl that left many wounded and

several dead. In the morning, all that was left on the

hallowed ground of Toi were ashes and charred stumps that

indicated where market stalls had once stood. The

community was not only traumatized, but left with no place

to work, and most were at risk of falling deeper into poverty.

Toi could easily have become a war zone.

The young men’s night of destruction had been fueled

by wounds of identity and a desire for vengeance. With their

rioting, the men—mostly unemployed, and many of them

gang members—had aimed to “reclaim” land they believed

was rightfully theirs. Kibera had been established as a land

grant to Nubian soldiers who’d fought on behalf of the

British Army in World War I—albeit without a formal title to

show this. Over time, other tribes migrated to Nairobi, and

Kibera, its population exceeding two hundred thousand, was

declared an informal settlement in which all land belonged

to the government. Presumably, many of these young men

were descendants of the Nubian soldiers and thus wanted

“their” land back.

Yet, without Toi Market, the community as a whole lost

its primary economic artery, its lifeline to commerce, and its

connection to the larger city. Merchants had lost their wares,

which for most accounted for nearly everything they owned.

Some residents had lost family members. All of them lost

some sense of security, for there was no one visible to

protect them.

Andrew Otieno could have only one purpose at this

point: rebuild the market.

How to do that, though, in the face of the young vandals

who had terrorized the community? Since the post-election

violence, the international NGOs and even the police had

stayed away. And the community had been left on its own.

But Andrew understood that he was not fully alone. The

founder of Jamii Bora, an irrepressible Swedish woman

named Ingrid Monro, had spent decades committed to

building an organization in which people helped and

accompanied each other. Because she had immersed

herself in the Kibera community, Ingrid also understood the

life-or-death importance of the marketplace. She recognized

that while Andrew and other local leaders had to lead the

rebuilding of Toi Market, she had a form of social capital to

offer them: connections to international agencies. While

Ingrid traveled to Europe to raise money to rebuild Toi

Market, Andrew remained in Kibera to navigate at the local

level.

In early 2008, soon after the worst of the riots, I met

Andrew in Jamii Bora’s bright offices in a more central part

of Nairobi to discuss a different matter related to Acumen’s

investment in the organization. The calm and beauty of the

city stood in stark juxtaposition to what I’d heard about the

ugly violence and danger in the slums just a few miles away.

Andrew and I spoke about the Toi Market situation and how

so many people in Nairobi were going about their business

as if nothing had happened to their neighbors.

“For many,” Andrew said, “Kibera is both in our own city

and a different world altogether.”

He asked me to go with him to see the market. No, I

said. I didn’t want to show up as a voyeur, and I knew there

were enormous security risks. But Andrew would not hear of

it. “No outsiders will go and witness,” he said, “so no one

understands the situation. We are left on our own. If Mama

Ingrid fails to find the money, you might need to help us,

too.”

The fires were still burning in Kibera when we arrived,

and reports of continuing violence jangled my already tense

nerves, though I found comfort in Andrew’s calm and sober

grace. The Jamii Bora lending office, situated at the market’s

edge, had been ransacked. There was not a single desk or

chair or computer in sight. Still, a long line of women sat on

the floor, hoping they might borrow again, or at least speak

to someone.

Andrew and I, along with his colleague Gabriel Kadidi,

ventured into the empty marketplace, past young men

hammering stakes into the ground to mark their territory. A

number of merchants shuffled around their old work spots. A

man folded newly washed baby clothes on a tiny bench that

he carried in and placed in the spot he’d rented when there

was still a market. “Who do you think will risk the danger to

come here to buy baby clothes?” I asked, needlessly

reminding him that violence was still widespread.

He sighed. “Probably no one. But I’ve no food for my

family and nothing left but hope.”

As if on cue, a man in a tan jacket ran over to Andrew to

tell him that, on the other side of the market, a few hundred

feet from where we stood, a muscular young man in a dark

blue T-shirt and jeans had struck an older man’s bald head

with a machete. The man in the tan jacket and another

resident then carried the wounded elder to a beat-up car

parked by Jamii Bora’s office. In the chaos, I never learned

what happened to the perpetrator, but the injured man

survived. There were no police in sight.

I couldn’t help but juxtapose the scene with the

perfectly folded baby clothes piled amid the burning embers

of the marketplace. I desperately wanted to flee.

“How will you get this market built in light of the danger,

these tensions?” I asked Andrew. “Who will help you do it?”

I could understand Andrew’s urgency, but I could not

see how he would pull off the reconstruction—not soon

anyway, and not without more violence.

“We will find a way,” Andrew whispered, his face

strained.

I hated to leave him. I was returning to a place that

provided me every opportunity and liberties I too often took

for granted—freedom from fear, freedom from abject

poverty, freedom to travel. Here in Kibera, despite the

destruction and even the deaths, despite the burned-out

storefronts, razed marketplace, and marauding young men,

ordinary citizens would still get up, get dressed, and go to

work. They would find a way to bring their children to

schools taught by heroes—more ordinary citizens doing

extraordinary things. This experience with Andrew renewed

my commitment to become braver myself, to show up more

fully, to be more compassionate.

A few months later, I was back in Kibera. Astonishingly,

so was the market. Ingrid had raised the money, and

Andrew had overseen a peace process that would rival the

Oslo Accords in bringing sworn enemies into cooperation

and agreement. I asked him to walk me through how he’d

managed to erect a thing of beauty from a heap of ashes

and rage.

“It wasn’t easy, but I took one step at a time,” he said.

First, he’d searched the refugee camps and discovered the

leaders of the looting: a local gang member and his

sidekick, let me call them David and Jonah. Andrew

explained his plans to rebuild the market and restore peace,

and he told the men he hoped for their blessing. The men

shouted that they wanted revenge, not peace. Their

intention was to build two hundred houses where the

market stood, one for each member of the gang. Waving a

machete, Jonah threatened to kill Andrew if he didn’t

comply. Andrew didn’t move. He recognized the men’s

grievances and restated his goal to rebuild the peace—and

that he needed their help.

I’d meet David later that day. He was handsome, with

dark skin, high cheekbones, cool black eyes, and a steely

expression. His hair was cut close to his head, and his

muscular arms were as solid as granite. If Jonah could

threaten with his weapon, David’s eyes made it clear to me

that he’d killed people before.

Andrew had neither the tools of a trusted judicial system

nor the funds to offer reparations. The currents of identity

tore differing truths through the tortured landscape, and

Andrew could see only imperfect options each way he

turned. He understood from the start that without security,

he’d have to find a solution to peace that included the

young vandals. The thought sickened him: rather than

punishment, these men were being rewarded for the

destruction they’d wreaked. But the trade-off for that

injustice was a functioning marketplace that served

thousands.

A few days after the failed first meeting with David and

Jonah, Andrew had returned to the refugee camps. David

and Jonah still thought he was nuts, but David decided they

might as well listen to this man who was willing to be as

crazy as they were, just in a different way.

By that time, the residents at the camps were starving.

The UN agencies were slow in distributing foodstuffs, and

the market was not functioning. Jamii Bora had been given

the job of distributing food to residents in the camps, but

Andrew knew the food itself was vulnerable to looting now

that the market was gone. He also understood that those

most likely to create trouble were the same young men who

had razed the market in the first place. So, he made the

risky, albeit strategic, decision to hire David and his guys,

both ensuring that residents could access needed food and

taking a step toward building goodwill with the young men.

As he said to me, “No outsiders were securing the peace. I

had few options, so I chose one with the greatest chance of

meeting the community’s most urgent needs.”

In time, Andrew, stressing the potential gains each

would make, negotiated a deal in which all sides would

contend with some loss. He aimed for solutions grounded in

realities of the community itself that positively touched the

broadest swath of people. He hired the gang members to

rebuild the market, and then negotiated with the market

residents to allocate two hundred stalls to the gang, one for

each of its members. The utmost he could achieve was

imperfect, and the imperfect would claim almost everything

Andrew could muster within himself.

The young men didn’t quite get houses, but they now

each owned a business and a chance to rebuild their lives.

To the market residents, Andrew offered an uneasy peace

and the chance to get back to work, to stand again on their

own two feet.

“Look, if you help these boys, we will have the market

running again,” he said. “If you don’t, there will be trouble,

because the boys believe this is their rightful territory. And

there is nowhere else for them to go.” To me, Andrew

acknowledged that he had struggled mightily to find a way

to arbitrate between competing truths. What made that

arbitration possible was focusing on his goal and

communicating as often as he could—with everyone.

With no good options, Andrew found the courage to

make a compromised decision, acknowledging it was the

best he could do. His effectiveness at bringing the

community along with him was a master class in leadership.

While many organizations temporarily left Kibera after the

violence, Andrew committed personally to keeping Jamii

Bora operational. He showed up daily to his empty office at

the edge of the market in case problems or disagreements

arose, aware that while the short-term fix was a new

marketplace, healing the tensions and wounds beneath

could take much longer.

Andrew survived unimaginable pressures. He risked his

reputation and his life for his community. And he himself

seemed surprised by his bravery, which was ignited and

sustained by an abiding commitment to his people, his

place, his nation. We cannot choose what happens to us, but

we can choose how we respond. In courageously confronting

ugly realities, and by knowing not only what he stood for but

for whom he stood, Andrew collaborated with other brave

men and women. Together, they prevailed in rebuilding a

market and restoring peace.

Andrew’s challenges were extreme, but they are not

unique. Leaders all over the world must contend with

situations in which they must “navigate the gray” or look

unflinchingly at ugly truths and make a decision anyway.

The only way to survive and thrive is to acknowledge the

imperfections, to say aloud that you could not be trying

harder, and sometimes, to compare your outcomes to what

would have been had you done nothing at all.

All this takes courage, and gaining courage requires

practicing it.

The same night that the young man lifted his machete

and struck an innocent elder in the Toi Market, I flew to

Switzerland. The next morning, surrounded by happy,

wealthy children bundled in warm winter coats against a

backdrop of fluffy snow, I suddenly experienced a sense of

vertigo. Images of the violence I had experienced over many

years rushed through me: a farmer holding the barrel of a

shotgun against my throat on a lonely road in Mexico; three

men in Tanzania attacking me on a beach; a random guy

waiting at a bus stop in Guatemala City pointing his gun at

me. My brain was in overdrive. I thought of the man who

inexplicably punched me in the gut as I walked down Fifth

Avenue early in the morning on Valentine’s Day, and the

man in Malaysia, physically smaller than me, whom I think I

hurt more than he hurt me. I was always a fighter in the

moment, but these incidents were rising up to haunt me.

I wept for my younger self, for the friends I’d known

who’d been wounded or murdered for their beliefs or for

merely being in the wrong place. I wept for the images of

the bodies of people slain in Rwandan churches and the

layer upon layer of violence that is part of human society.

Since that night, there have been other moments when

an image, whether in the newspaper or on the streets,

summoned these painful memories, bringing back the taste

and smell of fear. The fears would arise like Harpies,

screaming. It took years for me to recognize that I would

defeat those demons not by using the fallback skills of my

early identity (courageously confronting the “enemy” and

shaking off the pain or, more truthfully, running away from

it), but by accepting my own vulnerability and self-doubt. It

was only when I began to love the imperfect and broken

parts inside of me that I could show up with my whole self.

I’m still working on it.

I finally understand today what I wish I had known long

ago: If we see ourselves only as victims, we risk failing to

recognize our own fallibility, and this makes it impossible to

accept the flaws of others. If we see ourselves or others only

as perpetrators, we extinguish possibilities of redemption. If

we refuse to see at all, we trap our diminished selves in

darkness, relinquishing hopes for growth and renewal. In all

such cases, we thwart our potential for wholeness.

The neighbor who attacked me as a twelve-year-old girl

may have been told he was worthless his entire life. I’ll

never know. The man with the machete in Toi Market may

have internalized a sense of irrelevance and invisibility,

making it easier for him to cast blame for his hurts on

another tribe than to take personal responsibility for them—

just as it is easier for the wealthy people in his larger

community to blame him alone rather than acknowledge the

structural impediments to this young man’s flourishing as

well. The cycle of violence, internal and external, individual

and structural, can be endless.

Unless we have the courage to stop it.

No one escapes life without broken parts. When we find

the courage to repair what is broken inside ourselves, to

reconcile the hurts we’ve internalized and the hurts we’ve

inflicted on others, we can finally renew our fragile world.

We can finally comprehend that our individual and collective

wholeness is necessarily enmeshed. This kind of repair

requires moral courage, the will to face fears and to fight for

those who are unlike us, especially those outside our own

families or tribes.

So, practice courage. It will prepare you for those times

when you, and the world, need it most.

Chapter 7

HOLD

OPPOSING

VALUES IN

TENSION

“I would be happy to give you money if you promised you’d

build five million houses, but five hundred?” The wealthy

venture capitalist spoke with an almost comic level of

disbelief. “Can’t you be a little more audacious?”

It was 2004, and I had traveled to Palo Alto, California,

to an office on Sand Hill Road, the storied “Main Street” of

Silicon Valley. I sat in a large glass room across from a man

with a mien of certainty and the insistent mannerisms of

someone for whom time is definitely money. The venture

capitalist had made a gazillion dollars betting big in fast-

paced technology start-ups, a few of which had created

billionaires, at least on paper, seemingly overnight. The

irony that I was there to pitch the idea of “patient capital” to

this person was not lost on me.

“Patient capital,” I said, “is an approach to early-stage

investment in entrepreneurs who are stepping in where

markets and government have failed the poor. Acumen’s

patient capital approach is straightforward, but new.” I went

on to explain that we raise philanthropic donations and

invest for ten years (or more) in companies that serve the

poor. We bring management support, introduce new

markets and networks, and make a long-term commitment

to partnering in order to impact the lives of the poor. Patient

capital focuses not simply on maximizing profits but also on

holding the tension of both social impact and financial

returns.

The VC did not conceal his allergic reaction to the idea

of trade-offs. “If you build a highly profitable business that

people value, it will grow virally,” he said, using a popular (if

overused and misunderstood) Valley term.

“Yes,” I said, “but we can’t assume that we’ll build a

profitable model in the short term. Reaching people with

limited income and hobbled trust requires a balance that

harvests the strengths of both markets and philanthropy.

Finding that balance doesn’t happen overnight.”

I started to explain that we had just invested in a new

development community outside Lahore, Pakistan, that

aimed to construct five hundred houses. Building a

development for slum dwellers on land so barren it

resembled a moonscape would require not just

infrastructure such as water and electricity, but also

creating Pakistan’s first-ever mortgage product for low-

income people that was sharia-compliant (governed by

Islamic religious law).

The VC stopped me again. “But five hundred houses?

That’s not very interesting.”

“It will take time to build trust among low-income

people who have had scam artists sell them houses on

paper and then disappear,” I said. As in most developing

countries, Pakistan’s urban poor tend to live in large,

informal slum settlements on the outskirts of town, with

little or no government infrastructure. It took time to

navigate the bureaucracy and corruption endemic to low-

income housing everywhere. And the product had to be

priced so that people who paid forty or fifty dollars per

month in rent could afford to buy a house.

I could hear myself growing defensive. Something in the

VC’s manner made me feel rushed and inarticulate. I was,

clearly, failing to persuade him.

“I still don’t understand why you’re thinking so small,”

the VC repeated. “This is the problem with social enterprise:

you work at the margins without really changing anything.”

He said he might be interested in five million houses. “But

five hundred houses?” he repeated. “Why even bother?”

Now it was my turn to be frustrated. Hadn’t the VC

heard the challenges I’d just described? By then, I’d spent

more than twenty years trying to make change in low-

income communities, and understood the complex ground

realities that made solving poverty so challenging. When

you are investing in a technology platform company such as

Google or Amazon, yes, you can reach millions of people

seemingly overnight. But housing for the poor? If it were

that easy, there wouldn’t be a seven-million-housing-unit

shortfall in Pakistan. (Today, the number is closer to ten

million.)

“Why even bother?” I responded. “Because if you don’t

bother, we’re stuck with the status quo. And that isn’t

working for the people who most need change.” I repeated

the reasons we needed to be both patient and urgent. “We

will be audacious,” I said, “as soon as we have a model that

can grow to scale. Creating that model requires innovating

in unknown territory.”

The VC was unconvinced; he passed on the opportunity.

My conundrum was one common to anyone introducing

a new approach to solving old problems. While I could paint

a vivid picture with lived experiences of what had not

worked in international development, I had no proof of how

the patient capital model did work. I could only describe

what could be. And there was little my team and I could do

about that except to continue to seek and support

innovations that might succeed, and accompany them until

they did.

I left the meeting feeling diminished by my failure to

convince the VC of the merit of the patient capital model

and daunted at the thought that it might take years before

the model was taken seriously.

It was even more confounding for me to see investors

who had rejected a patient capital model turn around and

give millions in philanthropy to splashy top-down ventures

with little chance of long-term success. In the early 2000s, a

number of well-intentioned entrepreneurs-cum-donors made

grand proclamations about building thousands of schools,

adopting communities, or fashioning merry-go-rounds as

creative ways to pump water. These were big bets on

scaling solutions, with audacious promises of massive short-

term payoffs. Missing from the equation was the humility to

start by listening to what the poor actually needed and

wanted, to focus on building a business model that actually

worked, and only then, to focus on growing the solution to

reach millions.

After a few years of enormous spending, many of the

projects failed, leaving empty schools, broken wells, and

more disenfranchised and mistrustful communities. The

philanthropists moved on—some having learned from the

experience, some blaming the communities rather than

examining their own choices. Solving complex problems is

rarely accomplished with a silver bullet or a single approach.

Effective leaders looking to bring about change have no

choice but to hold opposing values without rejecting either.

The venture capitalist was right in that we must have

the audacity to imagine a different future. John F. Kennedy’s

audacious vision for landing on the moon inspired a nation

to do the impossible. We must have the kind of audacity

that drove a new generation to build technologies that

changed the way humans interacted across the globe. And

we must balance that audacity with a new humility that

considers and is accountable for the unintended

consequences of our actions.

If audacity and humility must be balanced to shift

systems, so must accountability and generosity. Our current

institutions have traditionally leaned toward one or the

other rather than encompassing both. We assume the

business sector is more accountable and efficient; the

charitable sector, more generous. Because Acumen bridges

both the nonprofit and for-profit sectors, co-investors have

phoned me more than once to demand that Acumen make a

grant to help an ailing company we were both supporting.

One memorable call came from an irate co-investor in Africa

who reached me on a Saturday morning at my home in New

York City. He was unhappy with my team’s insistence that all

co-investors work with the troubled company on the same

financial terms. The investor believed that Acumen alone

should bail out the company, which was navigating

treacherous financial waters.

“Why us alone?” I asked. “Why wouldn’t you also

support the company?”

“You are patient capital,” he responded. “You can afford

to help.”

I almost laughed out loud, for he represented a much

larger and richer institution, one that could presumably take

much more financial risk than Acumen.

“We can be generous, yes,” I said, “but equally, we

focus on accountability. If you are interested in the future of

the company, we’ll work through how best to do it together

—and take equal risk in doing so.”

My response triggered a powerful reaction. “You get on

stages and talk about love,” this investor said, “but when it

comes down to it, you’re just like everyone else.”

I was taken aback. “I’m sorry, but our focus is patient

capital. It is not stupid capital,” I said, deliberately using

language that I thought would resonate with him. I believe

in love, to be sure. But real love requires setting

expectations and helping people gain the capacities to meet

those expectations. That entails being willing to have

uncomfortable conversations, to know when and how to

step in financially, and to understand when a bailout creates

dependency. Real love is not a soft skill. In this particular

case, we needed to send a message to the ailing company,

and the market, that all investors believed in the company

and were working together to turn around its operations—

head and heart.

Those who see the role of business as solely to make a

profit often employ either-or thinking. But presupposing that

profits alone signal the existence of social good limits our

ability to think creatively, collaboratively, and

constructively, not to mention realistically. The mirror

image, relying solely on charity or government, is limiting as

well. In a world of interdependence, we will flourish only if

we move to “both-and” thinking, integrating purpose and

profit, generosity and accountability, the community and the

individual.

Holding on to both-and thinking requires sustained

effort. It is much easier to focus on profit alone or to ignore

financial discipline and throw money where your

heartstrings tug you. But if you are looking for easy

solutions, you probably will not realize substantive change.

In 1527, the Italian philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli

wrote about the tensions between leading with love or fear,

two proxies for generosity and accountability. While

Machiavelli’s Prince preferred fear, young leaders often tell

me that they would rather lead with love. But if fear or

accountability on its own can be punitive and diminishing,

love or generosity alone can create dependency and

entitlement. With both, progress hangs in the balance.

As the world becomes more entangled and institutions

more diverse, the capacity to hold opposing values without

rejecting either has emerged as a critical skill for solution

building. Consider a simple mantra: “Use feelings of

discomfort as a proxy for progress.” The disquiet may not

make decisions easier, but it will help you identify the forces

you are dealing with, buttressed by both conscience and

reason.

Jawad Aslam, the young man who created the five-

hundred-unit housing development I describe at the

beginning of this chapter, perfected the art of holding

opposing values. It took him many years, but learning to

allow for and acknowledge dual perspectives, he was able to

build homes, not just houses, for a community that had

always scraped by on the margins.

I met Jawad in Lahore in 2006, about a year after he’d

arrived. A Pakistani American from Baltimore, he’d had a

solid career in commercial real estate until the events of

9/11 roused in him a yearning for more. He experienced

firsthand the mistrust that many Americans began to harbor

about Muslims and felt his own religious identity deepen.

The time seemed right to travel to his parents’ homeland to

try to be of use.

Once in Pakistan, Jawad apprenticed with Tasneem

Siddiqui, one of the nation’s gurus of affordable housing,

who offered him the chance to lead a project called Saiban.

In order to sustain itself, the Saiban housing development

needed to be profitable. From the beginning, Jawad was

more interested in building community than merely

constructing physical pieces of property. All people would be

welcome as potential homeowners, provided they were

there to live and actively participate in the community.

Unlike many developers of affordable housing, he felt

responsible for basic services, a sense of security, and an

enabling of social cohesion. In turn, he asked residents to

help tend the parks and common spaces, thus forging a

sense of community while also empowering individual

households to gain choice and freedom.

The nexus of these contradictory forces was the

community mosque. People of all faiths were welcome to

live in Saiban—and they came, not only from the slums of

Lahore, but some from as far away as Karachi, a fifteen-hour

drive. The home buyers represented most sects of Islam,

with a small number of Hindu and Christian families (in

Pakistan, Hindus and Christians each represent about 2

percent of the population). Each sect wanted to use the

mosque for prayers on a daily basis.

But as there was only one mosque, giving every sect

exactly what it wanted was infeasible. In Jawad’s mind,

there was no better way to reinforce the idea of a shared

community than to ask all Muslims to pray together—and

that would require some loss of individual autonomy, an

independence each sect had enjoyed prior to moving into

this new place.

At first, Jawad’s view that the mosque could and should

be shared isolated him: few agreed with him. In modern

Pakistan, it is unusual to see mosques filled with Muslim

worshippers of different sects; a Christian corollary would be

Catholics and various branches of Protestants attending the

same Sunday service. But Jawad conceived his seemingly

radical idea as a chance to renew values of community

within the context of modern diversity.

Moreover, there was precedent in Pakistan for sharing a

mosque. Until the early 1970s, diverse members of a

community would gather together in the local mosque each

week to pray, whether they were Deobandi or Barelvi, both

Sunni sects, or even members of a Shi’a sect.

Rather than capitulate to the modern tendency to want

only what is good for ourselves, Jawad insistently argued for

what was best for everyone. He carried this idea of the

commons in tension with his commitment to encouraging

each family to build their own house in whatever style

suited them. While the residents appreciated the freedom to

reflect their individuality in the homes they built, many

residents disliked the idea that they would have to share the

most sacred time of each day with people whose traditions

diverged, however slightly, from their own.

Month after month, Jawad negotiated, cajoled, and

arbitrated among the competing sects. “There were times

when we had to stop meetings altogether because people

became physical,” he remembers. Residents wanted to feel

comfortable and safe “with their own.” Still, he never lost

sight of his fundamental objective: a peaceful, diverse

community that would ultimately reinforce a sense of

belonging.

Finally, after more than a year, Jawad and the elders

came to an agreement. The community elected a highly

respected imam, who led daily prayers as all sects sat and

prayed together.

My husband, Chris, and I were planning to visit Jawad at

the housing development in May 2010 on what turned out to

be the day after terrorists attacked two mosques in Lahore,

murdering nearly one hundred people during Friday prayer.

The tragedy was a cruel reminder of how hatred and fear of

the other can lead humans to engage in abhorrent,

murderous acts. Stunned and saddened, we decided to stick

with our plan, almost as an antidote to the shocking

violence the city had just witnessed.

As we made the twenty-five-minute drive from

downtown Lahore to Saiban, Chris and I sat in tense silence.

Any unspoken anxiety vanished, however, as we arrived and

walked across familiar parks filled with laughing children,

their parents relaxing beneath tall trees I’d seen planted

years before as tiny saplings. A big-armed woman sold

candy and trinkets out of her tiny shop to chattering

neighbors. For a moment, we forgot the violence just a few

miles away; this tiny pocket of the world was tranquil,

comforting.

Chris remarked that the community also was more

vibrant than some suburban neighborhoods he knew in the

United States, where households appeared distant and

isolated from one another. I recalled the hardships Jawad

endured in the beginning of Saiban’s existence, as he tried

to convince residents to take responsibility for maintaining

their collective green spaces. He had planted those trees,

hoping neighbors would join him; at the time, they merely

thanked him for his efforts but offered no support

themselves. He tried shaming people. That didn’t work,

either. But as more houses were built, a friendly competition

naturally arose among various blocks as each tried to make

their park the best. The result, finally, was a beautiful semi-

urban oasis.

We approached a group of elders, all men, sitting

outside the mosque conversing with one another. They told

us of their pride in the community, how it had become a

place of hope for residents. Their children attend good

schools, they said. Jobs had come, too, and buses regularly

transported workers to town. As for the mosque, all was

good, the elders said. One of the men mentioned that

during the recent spate of sectarian violence across Lahore,

their community was one where the peace was never

broken.

I reminded Jawad of the extraordinary number of

grueling, uncomfortable hours he personally had invested in

listening to individual needs and balancing them with his

vision for a robust community.

He smiled. “Everyone here is a migrant from the city,”

he said. “Some come from as far away as Karachi because

they’ve heard this is a welcoming place.” He continued:

“Nobody migrates by choice. There’s always some hardship

or reason why people have to leave the place they originally

called home. Our job is to try to facilitate that process for

them. And they in return have to learn to live with others

who are different, which leads to some kind of loss for them,

too.” In short, Jawad had deliberately built a community, not

just a development of individual houses.

Finding and maintaining the right balance between the

individual and the community, freedom and belonging,

competition and collaboration, requires moral leadership

precisely because that balance can be discovered only by

inviting constructive conflict for the betterment of the

whole. Done correctly, efforts like Jawad’s can serve as a

model for new social infrastructure with the potential to

bring out the best in people, asking each of us to manage

the inevitable inherent tensions required to live in a

community where all are valued.

If we ignore the tensions within ourselves, our

organizations, and our societies—if we keep the conflicts

internalized and unmentioned—they don’t disappear.

Instead, as soon as we begin navigating complex issues and

decisions across lines of difference, those conflicts become

exacerbated. The key is to recognize and give voice to the

tensions in ways that both sides of a debate can hear, a

sometimes thankless task, to be sure, yet fundamental to

the practice of moral leadership.

In the winter of 2017, a group of about twenty Acumen

fellows from India and Pakistan organized a series of video

discussions among themselves. Most of these fellows hadn’t

previously met; and indeed, some had never had a direct

conversation with any person on “the other side” of the

national lines dividing India from Pakistan. But tensions

between the two countries had been rising, and the two

groups were eager to practice transcending the boundaries

that separated them.

The groups of fellows from both countries created

ground rules and reminded themselves to seek some truth

in what the others were saying. They dared to utter the

prejudices they held about one another. Mostly, they

listened. The conversations were brave and tender; and

sometimes, excruciatingly stressful.

I had the privilege of checking in with each group

afterward, and I remember a Pakistani woman sharing

almost apologetically how nationalistic she felt at times

during the video encounters. “Suddenly, I became purely

Pakistani and experienced moments of mistrust that gave

me shame afterward,” she confessed. This led to an

important conversation about identity, and the ways in

which it can impede our abilities to reach out to understand

another’s perspective.

While visiting Mumbai a few months after the video

sessions, I spoke to a group of Indian Acumen fellows. The

conversation was again grounded in identity, but what

happened next was a powerful example of the challenges of

holding tensions when belief systems push us to retreat to

comfortable corners. One young man said he’d felt proud of

participating in the conversations, reaching across cultural

and political differences in troubled times, so he posted a

screenshot of the video call on Facebook.

“Almost immediately,” he said, “I was deluged with

hatred. What hurt most was that some of the most outraged

responses came from childhood friends.”

At home that evening, he shared his experiences with

his parents, hoping for empathy. Instead, he met a dark wall

of rage.

“It was bad enough that you decided to become a social

entrepreneur,” his father scolded. “Now you are consorting

with the enemy. Your uncle died in the Partition. We have

family in the Indian Army.

“You must decide whether you are with your family or

with the enemy,” his father continued. “You must decide if

you are a true Indian.”

The young man looked at me ruefully, and asked, “Is it

possible to be both an Indian patriot and a global citizen?”

Hearing those words was heartbreaking, though I

shouldn’t have been surprised. The early twenty-first

century has witnessed growing strains that reinforce in-

groups that find strength in creating mistrusted out-groups.

I said to him, “If you define patriotism as being the best

at the expense of other peoples and nations, and if you

blame others for your own problems or refuse to engage,

then you cannot be a patriot and a global citizen.”

He stared as I spoke.

“But,” I continued, “if you are willing to model a sense of

belonging that translates into responsibility for the national

good, and if you believe in celebrating the remarkable parts

of your nation with the rest of the world, while recognizing

exceptional aspects of other nations, then you are indeed a

patriot. And the world needs more of such patriots.”

Just as any solid relationship or familial unit needs to

include strong individuals to thrive, so a family of nations

requires healthy countries to work toward their own

wholeness and contribute to the global community. Today’s

problems (climate change, inequality, refugees, outbreaks

of disease and terrorism) know no national boundaries. We

will solve them only if we can hold the uncomfortable

tension of national priorities on the one hand and the

urgency of our global challenges on the other. We must

commit to building sustainable neighborhoods, companies,

and nations, each of them locally rooted and globally

connected, each giving more to the world than it takes.

Can I be a patriot and a global citizen?

Absolutely. Proudly. Even if sometimes uncomfortably.

In every country, we hear similar conversations. Our

fears can propel us into corners where we hold ourselves

hostage to ideologies that reinforce differences. We stop

listening to the other side, fearing loss to ourselves, even if

we don’t fully understand what that loss might be.

In the United States, for instance, fear of immigrants

and refugees has driven neighbors into two angry camps.

“Build a wall!” one side screams. “Open borders,” the other

side retorts with equal rage. The actual details of either

position don’t seem to matter as long as each side feels

satisfied with its own righteousness.

By allowing polarities to dominate a debate, we free

ourselves from facing the painful trade-offs and costs that

every choice entails. And we deny ourselves the opportunity

to rediscover that we are better than we think we are.

We will not have any hope of finding humane, effective

solutions until we quiet ourselves enough to hold the truths

that, though seemingly opposite, do exist on either side.

What if we slowed down enough to reach out and identify a

truth or even a half-truth in what the other was saying? Both

sides, one hopes, would acknowledge that there are no easy

solutions to immigration in a world besieged by poverty,

inequality, and climate change; a world in which the

populations in rich countries are shrinking while the number

of people in poor countries is growing. The population of the

African continent alone is expected to double by 2050 and

nearly quadruple by 2100. Only by daring to recognize the

uneasy truths that lie far, far apart will we gain the chance

to solve our common problems.

Rumi wrote, “Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and

rightdoing there is a field. I’ll meet you there.” Eight

hundred years later, we have a chance to breathe new

meaning into this ancient wisdom. A modern moral

revolution demands that all of us hold contradictions, even

stark ones, within ourselves as well as between ourselves

and others. For each of us, the first step is to reach across

the wall of either-or and acknowledge the truths that exist in

opposing perspectives.

When engaging someone whose views are opposed to

your own, consider taking these three steps. First, seek, with

eager curiosity, the truths in the other side’s argument.

Second, take a figurative stride, even a small one, toward

the other, acknowledging where there might be common

ground. And third, hold tightly to the essence of your whole

self, while embracing other aspects of your identity lightly.

You must be open to change and learning if you expect the

other side to be the same. Whether we’re talking to an

impatient venture capitalist or tiptoeing through a political

minefield, these skills can help us find better ways forward

that may not please everyone but will bring more of us

along.

After repaying Acumen for the loan to Saiban, Jawad

Aslam went on to create a for-profit housing development

based on a similar model. Nearly a decade after he first

arrived in Pakistan, he successfully sold half that housing

company, providing Acumen and other investors with

double-digit returns. He also raised twenty-five million

dollars from a strategic partner who had deeper experience

in housing than we did to build sustainable communities

across all of Pakistan.

And still, Jawad balanced opposing values in the way he

shared success. Rather than keep the 50 percent of shares

from the sale of the company for himself, he split them up

among its employees, including the young man who serves

the tea. Jawad has proven that mortgages can be made

affordable to the poor—and sustainable to lenders.

As I write this, I cannot help but think of that long-ago

conversation with the Silicon Valley VC. I wonder what that

venture capitalist would have made of Jawad’s

accomplishments today. In addition to building eight

hundred homes, he has built a model for affordable,

sustainable community development from which countless

others can learn. He helped housing policy in Pakistan

become more transparent and accessible. In short, he lives

a life capable of inspiring other change-makers across the

world.

Though Jawad repaid our investment in his company

with a healthy financial return, our partnership with him is

forever: he is now on Acumen’s Global Advisory, helping us

navigate new challenges. Even if things had turned out

differently and his entire housing development had failed,

by holding firmly to his mission, embracing the tensions,

and finding the courage to stand apart and do what was

right, Jawad would have built something valuable: his

character.

When we dare to understand the other, we find the

seeds of our best selves.

I can’t help but think of the housing crisis facing San

Francisco. In that city, so close to where the VC and I had

our long-ago conversation, some of the most successful

companies in the world must confront the unintended

consequences of the economic boom they’ve created:

widespread homelessness, a by-product of inequality. How

valuable would Jawad’s learning, experience, and character

be to that city today? Here, again, solutions will require both

audacity and humility.

In every family, organization, community, and nation,

there are fields in which we all must dare to meet. A moral

revolution demands that all of us do more to reach across

the wall of either-or and to acknowledge the truths that

exist at the opposite poles. Most of our solutions lie in the

truths or partial truths on each side, “out beyond ideas of

wrongdoing and rightdoing.”

Chapter 8

AVOID THE

CONFORMI

TY TRAP

A few months before the financial crisis of 2008, a

prominent Swiss banker invited me to serve on an advisory

council for a new fund he was developing. The fund would

invest in microfinance institutions that, in turn, would make

small loans (from thirty to a few thousand dollars) to poor

women in the developing world. “This fund is going to

generate the highest financial returns in our portfolio,” the

eager professional said, “and there is little risk associated

with it.”

I felt a knot in the pit of my stomach. “So, you’re asking

me to join an advisory in which a Swiss bank plans to earn

their highest returns from the poorest women in the world,

at little risk to the rich? Doesn’t that sound odd to you?”

The banker quickly responded, “Don’t think of it as

making money off the poor.”

“How should I think of it, then?” I asked, “especially

given your pitch that this fund will generate the highest

financial returns of all the funds you manage.”

The banker became a bit sheepish. “Fair enough,” he

said. “But don’t you agree that a fund investing in

microfinance banks is a step in the right direction? This will

bring more money into a sector that needs to grow. This is a

chance to do well by doing good.” He added, “It would be

great to have a voice like yours interacting with a bank like

ours.”

His flattery pricked a slight feeling of mistrust.

“Traditional investors with no background in low-income

markets looking for high returns make me nervous,” I said.

“But you will meet wealthy investors on the advisory

and build a relationship with our bank, which could help

your own fund-raising,” the banker responded.

I paused to work out what was bothering me. The Swiss

banker seemed genuinely thrilled that his fund was creating

a positive impact. But at the same time, he’d structured a

conventional financial vehicle in a system that rewards

greed without considering whether or how that system

would deliver on its promises to “do good” for the poor. My

feelings were complex. I was, and am, a believer in the

strategic imperative of providing low-income people access

to affordable credit to enable them to enhance their

capabilities and choices. And we at Acumen had invested

our own patient capital to help build several microfinance

institutions when we believed our investment would be most

catalytic.

Then it dawned on me. The key difference between the

Swiss banker’s approach and that of Acumen lay in how we

each perceived means and ends. The banker saw financial

returns as his end. If the poor were served—well, that was

an ancillary benefit. He had never visited the microfinance

banks in which his funds had invested; he’d never met any

of their low-income borrowers. My mistrust was not of him

as a person but of a system that would make decisions

based on short-term profitability, not on whether those he

professed to serve were seeing positive changes in their

lives.

Distance easily dulls our moral imagination. In the

banker’s case, just believing that he could sell a product

that allowed investors to “do well by doing good” was

enough. He had geographical distance from those who

would be making and taking out the loans, and that afforded

him emotional distance, too. What mattered to the banker

was generating high returns for his shareholders. What

mattered to me was something else. I wanted to use the

tools of the market as a means to solve poverty, not as an

end. We were playing in different arenas, with different

intentions. I thanked the man for his kind offer, but passed

on the opportunity to join his board.

When a product for the very poor is marketed as doing

good while generating outsized profits at zero risk for the

very rich, a moral question is born. In a world of extreme

inequality, what kind of economic system is just? By

conforming to a system structured solely to maximize

shareholder returns, we avoid taking personal responsibility

for the answer to that moral question.

Conformity to traditional market priorities is a trap that

can make it exceedingly difficult to do what is right.

Decisions that depend on moral choice, not transactional

effectiveness, are rarely straightforward once you are clear

about what’s at stake. If I had decided to join the banker’s

board in order to influence the fund’s ongoing activities,

yes, I probably would have met influential people who could

have helped Acumen. But I ultimately needed to know that I

would be partnering with someone who was at least open to

going against the grain of shareholder capitalism.

A few months later, when the financial crash occurred,

the economic system got a reckoning—and most everyone

was touched by it. In the United States, many on Wall Street

and on Main Street alike lost fortunes. Millions lost their

homes. Most traders agreed that the financial system had

gotten out of control. Still, they defended their actions,

arguing that they never did anything illegal, unable or

unwilling to wrestle publicly with whether what they did was

right. Meanwhile, millions of people with no financial

cushion, caught up in the promises of “easy money,” had

risked their futures and paid a dreadful price. In the end,

everyone lost. As for that Swiss banker, he never got his

microfinance investment fund off the ground.

No matter how determined we are to do the right thing,

we all fall prey to conformity traps within the system we’ve

chosen. We want to “win,” to appear successful, respected,

or powerful, so we cut corners and tell little white lies. We

hold our itching tongues when people around us demean

those from another group—not because we are bad people

but because we don’t want colleagues or friends, religious

leaders or classmates, parents or siblings, to think we are

weak, disloyal, naïve, unsophisticated, or foolish. And

sometimes, in the longer term, we end up causing harm; we

end up becoming the person we said we’d never be.

Our anxieties germinate in the systems we inhabit. Who

are we measuring ourselves against? Whose opinions

matter to us? What does winning even look like?

Mustering the moral courage needed to do what’s right,

not what’s easy, requires knowing when conformity is a

force for good and when it instead muffles our conscience.

The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr wrote that “groups are

more immoral than individuals.” By shifting the blame to

systems bigger than us, we tend to convince ourselves that

we have no choice but to “go along to get along.” But if you

dare to act on dreams of change, you must find the guts to

stand apart while also building the relationships needed to

design better systems.

The warning signs of traps nearby read almost like a bad

poem:

It’s just business as usual.

Everybody’s doing it.

And I don’t want to look stupid.

If I don’t do it, someone else will.

No one else is saying anything.

Don’t the ends justify the means?

I really don’t have another choice.

I wouldn’t do this just for myself.

People are counting on me.

Besides, I’ll do it just this once …

Self-justifying phrases, uttered by you or those around

you, separate you from accountability. Like the banker who

was emotionally removed from the people his fund would

have impacted, it’s easy to insulate ourselves from our

actions. But we can make the choice to be guided by our

own moral compass and play for the long term. Stay close

to people who keep you honest and who will stand by when

you feel isolated, or worse. Keep in mind that business as

usual remains that way until we change our definition of

what is “normal.”

It’s also easy to be a critic who regularly finds fault

rather than proposes solutions or, better yet, risks her

reputation attempting them. So, avoid the trap of

perfection, not just the trap of conformity. If you are a

builder, there will undoubtedly be times when you have no

choice but to compromise in service of a greater goal. Think

of the gray areas Andrew Otieno had to navigate to

reconstruct the market in Kibera. Moral leadership requires

the judgment to make the right short-term compromises so

as to realize the long-term change we seek.

Rejecting conformity outright is required for change.

Until 1865, slavery was business as usual in the United

States. The abolition of legal slavery began with those few

courageous individuals who dared to go against the moral

conventions of the time, conventions endorsed, in many

cases, by teachers, parents, religious leaders, and, again,

the law itself. Many who protested paid the ultimate price

for their actions, and the abolition movement required

strong allies to stand with them before the tide turned.

If you are a change agent, then you are by definition a

nonconformist. You stand for something. Get used to the

awkwardness of turning right when everyone else turns left,

and pursue what you know to be true. And before you

partner or invest, do your homework to understand a

person’s character rather than be swayed solely by

charisma or connections. I have been burned more than

once by trusting someone because they had received

ringing endorsements from people I admired.

In the same year as the financial crisis, Acumen

invested in a company led by a magnetic, capable

entrepreneur. (I’ve withheld the name of the company and

country to protect innocent people.) At first, the

entrepreneur gained significant momentum, and local

recognition, for his highly efficient and profitable company.

Our team was swayed to invest partially due to the

entrepreneur’s commitment to allocating a percentage of

the start-up’s services to the poor. But the first time I met

with him, after we’d invested, I was left with a nagging

feeling that something was wrong.

Sometimes your gut recognizes what your brain initially

misses. Within eighteen months of our investing, the

company was thriving financially and creating significant

impact. At the same time, our local team discovered that

the entrepreneur was keeping two separate sets of financial

books—one for us and a much-less-profitable one for the tax

collector. When we brought this to the entrepreneur’s

attention, he explained matter-of-factly that “everyone does

it.”

Acumen has a strict ethics statement that every

investor signs. The practice of keeping two sets of books is

illegal and unethical. What, we asked ourselves, should our

next move be? Here, too, we risked falling into the

conformity trap. We assumed that if we took the case to

court, we would fail. And when we reached out to a few

investors to ask how they handled such issues, more than a

few suggested that the practice of using two sets of books

was, indeed, “business as usual.”

We knew what we had to do, but it is not easy to write

down profitable investments, especially ones demonstrating

social impact. Writing off our investment would result in a

hefty financial loss to Acumen. Yet, if we did nothing, we’d

reinforce unethical behavior, reduce our legitimacy as

champions for impact (even if only in our eyes), and take a

painful hit to our own integrity. “Everyone does it” cannot be

society’s or any organization’s standard for decision making.

But doing the right thing can be soul crushing and

frustratingly lonely when peers or colleagues would rather

you “won” according to the rules of the status quo.

Our team at Acumen conferred: Were we willing to write

off our investment completely if we couldn’t find someone

to buy our stake? Were we willing to go to court, given an

unreliable justice system? And what if we could convince the

entrepreneur to change his ways? Were we willing to extend

our trust to him again?

We reached out to the entrepreneur to give him a

second chance. He refused, reiterating that keeping two

sets of books was accepted business practice in his country.

I realized that our real failure had been in doing too little to

understand this misalignment of values before we invested.

Corruption is a disease with epidemiological patterns

that spread and fester. The poor suffer costly and

sometimes harrowing permanent consequences: health

services and police protection are sometimes denied unless

bribes are paid, and those unable to pay, often innocent

people, lose their health, their freedom, their livelihoods,

and even their lives. Systems grow so corrupt that people

feel incapacitated unless they participate in the brokenness

of it all, and the potential of everyone to live with dignity is

diminished.

The Acumen team decided to exit the company. We sold

our shares at a relatively small loss to another impact

investor that didn’t mind investing in a company that was

compromised and preferred to focus on its potential impact.

For a year after the sale, we watched the company grow in

its reach and prosper financially, gaining media coverage for

its impact. Some, I’m sure, wondered whether, in this case,

the ends did justify the means.

Some months later, I picked up a local newspaper and

saw the face of the entrepreneur looking straight out at me.

He’d been arrested for corruption. I hated to think of the

people who’d lose basic services, yet I was relieved that we

at Acumen had found a way to extract ourselves before the

investment devolved into crisis. I was reminded again of

why we invest in character, in those people willing to stand

apart from the crowd, sometimes opening themselves up to

looking foolish but always willing to grapple with doing the

right thing for their customers, employees, and society, not

just for the sake of profits.

Would the story still be persuasive if the entrepreneur

had been wildly successful? I think it would. Acumen had to

establish a norm, a code that our team and our companies

would live by. In creating more just, inclusive, and

sustainable systems, the means, not solely the ends,

matter. You make change when you model change.

Even when you are proven “right,” it is

counterproductive to revel in righteousness. Even as we at

Acumen breathed a sigh of relief that we’d exited the deal, I

knew that luck had also played a role. I’m certain that we’ve

made other mistakes in assessing character, and I have

never met a single person without flaws, starting with

myself. The best we can do is aspire to live with integrity, to

tell the truth and expect the truth from those with whom we

partner. Flaunting the moral high ground when others fall

does little to compel them or us to do the hard work of self-

assessment with honesty and humility. Your greatest calling

card is your reputation for integrity. Treat it like gold, though

it is worth even more.

A few years ago, one of the Acumen fellows cheated on

his expenses. Like Acumen’s entrepreneurs, our fellows sign

statements of ethics, which make clear our expectations for

their conduct when they join the Acumen community. Those

statements reinforce an ethos that we are striving to uphold

qualities of moral leadership. The community creates a

support system for mutual accountability.

My senior team at Acumen was split on what to do.

Some believed the fellow should be expelled from the

program immediately. Yet he was deeply remorseful and

asked for the opportunity to redeem himself. His boss

reinforced his otherwise stellar performance and character.

After thinking long and hard about the situation,

consulting both the fellow and two people close to the

situation, my senior team agreed on giving him a second

chance. We asked the fellow to write a letter to his boss and

to me, sharing lessons learned. He also wrote a letter to his

cohort of fellows, and a few weeks later, his in-person

apology led to a powerful conversation about the

community’s norms and expectations. Everyone grew from

the experience, and to this day, the young man has

continued to excel not just in what he does but in who he is.

While every situation is different, one thing remains

clear. As the American civil rights advocate Bryan Stevenson

has said, “Each of us is more than the worst thing we’ve

ever done.” Stevenson explained this idea: “I think if

somebody tells a lie, they’re not just a liar. I think if

somebody takes something that doesn’t belong to them,

they’re not just a thief.” If we banish someone from the

community before considering all the circumstances, if we

let go of a basically good person who has a fierce desire to

grow and contribute, look how much we miss.

Our modern instant-feedback society offers ample

opportunities to shame and blame, sometimes with

destructive and even deadly consequences. Say a young

person is caught cheating on an exam or stealing from her

organization’s petty cash. Perhaps, she felt great pressure to

send money home to her parents. Maybe she was testing

the system, or just being thoughtless. Although this is the

first time she’s violated the group’s ethical contract, when a

peer discovers what she has done, he posts a statement of

outrage, publicly shaming the young woman in question.

Within an hour, a barrage of angry voices rises in a pile-on

of shock and humiliation. Notions of restoration or

redemption, essential aspects of healthy communities, may

quickly feel futile.

The scene is uncomfortable and all too familiar. Can we

instead pause, try to understand, and focus on solutions?

Might we all take a few moments of reflection before we

comment on social media, thinking about what our words

will mean to the person in question and the whole

community?

In the early years after the Rwandan genocide, everyone in

the country possessed the powerful and necessary right to

accuse others of war crimes. That freedom also empowered

some to use “I accuse you” for nefarious purposes, charging

innocent neighbors because of past grievances having

nothing to do with genocidal actions. Others made

accusations purely out of greed. On a visit to the country in

1997, three years after the genocide, I remember the

almost unimaginable anxiety and despair expressed

privately by people who had been unjustly accused of

horrible acts. Even a baseless accusation could tarnish a

reputation by planting seeds of doubt in a society already

plagued by mistrust.

While the circumstances are usually less dramatic, the

internet enables all of us to be instant judges, which in

some cases unleashes roaring mobs. Our online lives bring

us close to those who think and feel like us. This is

wonderful in many ways, but it also creates conformity

traps. If we’re not careful, we can get swept along in toxic

forms of groupthink and mob behavior. We thus have a

corollary responsibility to balance judgment with

judiciousness, a responsibility requiring self-imposed

discipline. Thankfully, the world is full of role models carving

paths to what is right for all of us.

On March 15, 2019, a white supremacist attacked two

mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, killing fifty people in

the middle of their Friday prayers. Refusing to conform to

tired conventions such as speaking compassionately to the

victims, sending thoughts and prayers, and blasting the

murderer’s name across global media platforms, New

Zealand’s thirty-eight-year-old prime minister, Jacinda

Ardern, quickly called for changes to the system. She

refused to use the name of the terrorist and moved within

days to change outdated gun laws. With compassion and

toughness, heart and head, the prime minister led with all

her humanity, bringing out the best not only in her own

citizens but in people across the world.

Constrained by neither female nor male stereotypes,

Jacinda Arden acted swiftly to protect her nation’s people

and stood with moral courage for those who had suffered

most. Her nonconformity set her apart in ways that invited

others to participate. Taking the prime minister’s lead, tens

of thousands of New Zealanders gathered to honor their

Muslim neighbors. Women of all ethnicities turned up

wearing headscarves, as their prime minister did. Even the

global media respected Ardern’s leadership, refusing to

splash the name of the terrorist across the world, thus

denying him his twisted lust for infamy. Rather than simply

mirroring those who had gone before her, the prime minister

set a new standard for a powerful moral response to hatred.

Each of us has opportunities to avoid conformity traps

and offer the world the best version of ourselves, whether

we are a prime minister, a teenager, or a corporate leader.

Fifteen-year-old Greta Thunberg of Sweden started a youth

movement in 2018, waging a one-girl protest to fight

climate change that eventually gained the attention of the

entire world. America’s most effective advocates for gun

reform include teenage survivors of a mass shooting in 2018

that killed seventeen students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas

High School, in Parkland, Florida. Young people are raising

their voices and calling for change, and the world is taking

note.

Brave CEOs, too, are standing apart. Bob Collymore, the

beloved Kenyan CEO of Safaricom, made public his net

worth and challenged his peers to do the same, though few

followed his lead. He fought corruption relentlessly and

modeled an ethos of service continuously. What made him a

true nonconformist, however, was the way he lived the

minutes of his life. Some of his closest friends grew up and

worked in Nairobi’s slums. During a time of heightened

terrorism, Collymore fasted for Ramadan to demonstrate

solidarity with Muslims.

“Never be ashamed of who you are,” he would tell

young people. “Never let people decide how you should feel

about yourself. A person’s a person no matter how small.”

Bob died too young, at sixty-three, but because he

dared to be his own man, his influence will last for

generations.

We often start out wanting to be like others until an

external event or situation forces us to confront the toll

society’s strictures impose on those who are different.

Gayatri Jolly, a privileged young Indian woman, grew up

assuming she would join her family’s successful home care

business as one of its first women directors. She attended

the “right” schools in the United States and studied business

to prepare herself. But back home in New Delhi, Gayatri

found herself spending two years sitting in her family office

feeling ineffective and, too often, ignored. Everyone,

including employees, assumed she would work for her

family only until she found a suitable husband. Instead,

Gayatri told her father that the arrangement wasn’t

working. And then, with his support, she moved to New York

City to study at the influential Parsons School of Design.

While at Parsons, Gayatri decided to build a company

that designed and manufactured beautiful clothing, a

company led, run, and aimed at women. Her social

enterprise, which she called MasterG, would also train

women to become masterjis, or expert pattern makers, a

profession that in South Asia was held only by men at the

time. Well-intentioned friends and relatives urged her to

aspire to be a designer with her own collection, a much

more conventional, status-oriented route. For Gayatri, the

price of nonconformity was hearing others make light of her

desire to “help the poor” as if she were simply a “failed

designer” on a mission.

Though aware of her privileged position in society,

Gayatri knew what it felt like to be invisible in her own

family’s business, and thus a sort of outsider. Time would

teach her to use her sense of invisibility as a gift. Coupling

that with her empathy for underprivileged and underserved

women who had none of her access, she was able to

imagine using her privilege as a bridge to them. She

followed a thread, an instinct—that she had the skills and

knowledge to offer the garment industry—and in doing so,

served a group that had for too long been invisible.

In early 2017, I visited Gayatri’s training center on the

edge of a semi-urban hamlet called Gwal Pahari, on the

outskirts of New Delhi. The village, home to the traditional

Gujjar community, is a place with high reported levels of

child marriage and domestic abuse. Female feticide is also

common. Indeed, some of the young women in Gayatri’s

program suffer chronic illness from repeated illegal

abortions, forced on them by families who did not want to

welcome additional daughters. Yet a growing number of

young women either escaped their families or found ways to

secure their blessing to join Gayatri’s MasterG training

program.

The tailoring room, a place usually associated with poor

working conditions, was bright and filled with young women

in their late teens and twenties, all of them moving through

different stages of pattern making and stitching classes.

Some sat at sewing machines; others learned to make

patterns. Gayatri had taken her lessons from Parsons and

extended them to these women.

Beyond practical skills, the program teaches the women

to think more freely, to create and give voice to their

knowledge. Asked regularly for their opinions and their

decisions, often for the first time in their lives, these women

necessarily confront the socialization that required them to

be seen but not heard, to be nice and know nothing, and to

believe that they were worth less than a man.

“Our community must break the pattern of prejudice

against women,” Gayatri says frequently, her pun intended

to communicate action both to the women she serves and

to the industry she hopes to reform. “To change the system,

our women must begin by changing themselves.” Gayatri

dreams that some of the trainees will become celebrated

outside the studio and serve as role models for young

women across India and the world.

One of the masterjis, a petite young woman named

Rajni Mourya, was slight of build with long hair and wide

brown eyes and was attired in a bright pink-and-white dress

with flouncy sleeves. Rajni’s father, an informal laborer, had

died when she was a teen, leaving her with a sick and

debilitated mother and younger siblings to support. Upon

her father’s death, she dropped out of university to scratch

out a meager income by providing tailoring services in her

local area.

“Girls like Rajni weren’t meant to succeed,” Gayatri told

me.

Life changed radically once Rajni joined the MasterG

Fashion Design and Skill Development Program. Seeing how

Rajni cut patterns and tailored garments for her class

assignments, Gayatri perceived a rare talent, and I soon saw

what she meant. Rajni is now working full-time with Gayatri,

pattern making and stitching for the company’s upscale

clients across the world. She is also pursuing a degree via

distance learning.

Rajni stood at Gayatri’s side to welcome me to MasterG.

Rajni was learning English, so Gayatri did most of the

talking. “We’re going to make a jacket as our gift for you,”

she said, beaming, adding that Rajni would be the one to

take my measurements and do all the tailoring and

finishing. Gayatri pointed to a small room where Rajni and I

and a couple of the young women who could help translate

would gather. While Rajni was expertly taking my

measurements, I asked her what her dreams were.

“I want to be a Somebody,” she said, adopting language

commonly used at Acumen. I smiled.

As she was taking the last measurement, it was Rajni’s

turn to smile. When I asked her the reason behind her ear-

to-ear grin, she blushed. “I got your measurements

perfectly,” she said. “I don’t need to change anything.”

“Anything of what?” I asked, not fully understanding

what she was talking about. Her friend explained that she

and Gayatri had already blocked out the pattern earlier, and

Rajni was fairly certain of my measurements.

“But we’ve never met,” I said, stating the obvious. “How

were you able to guess my measurements with such

precision?”

She seemed puzzled by my surprise. “Oh, madam, I

watched you on YouTube,” she said matter-of-factly. “That’s

how I could guess. I know your colors, too,” she added. A

few minutes later, she showed me an array of silks, each

dyed a different jewel tone, all perfectly curated for me.

A generation ago, Rajni would likely have lived a life

trapped by tradition and poverty, with limited freedom and

little ability to support her family financially. Now she has

access to a world-class education, a support system, and a

steady income. She has a chance to dream in ways not

afforded to most young women in her community, nor in

any previous generation. Like Gayatri, she dared to be a

nonconformist and, as Gayatri regularly says, “break the

pattern.”

Of course, Rajni and the other young women sometimes

have to switch their mannerisms, behaviors, and even the

way they speak when they are at home in order to survive

in their communities. They still regularly face situations in

which they pretend to know less than they do as a survival

mechanism. Some hide their work and, most definitely, their

dreams from family members. But more of them are moving

out of bad marriages, setting up shops of their own, finding

their voices, and building strength in the unity they offer

one another. Already, the MasterG women are becoming

role models for a new generation: Gayatri has trained more

than a thousand of them, all of whom were tired of waiting

for someone else to give them freedom.

Gayatri sees technology purely as a tool. She attracts

customers based on her unique talents and then uses online

communications to connect customers across the world to

expert pattern makers like Rajni. In this way, she extends

her privilege, her social capital, to bridge two worlds. Her

pattern makers gain skills, self-confidence, and increased

income. Customers are able to see the direct impact of their

choices. If we learn to control it and not be controlled by it,

technology does not have to divide us. It can be used to

feed and strengthen relationships.

As for Gayatri, I have no doubt that she will be a famous

designer. But her success will be a shared success. As Rajni

and the other young women learn to trust themselves and

fly, they will buoy Gayatri as well, enabling her to break

ever more patterns. Instead of striving to gain a seat at the

proverbial “table,” she is building a table of her own.

The difference between Gayatri and that Swiss banker is

that Gayatri avoided conformity traps. They both wanted to

do good for the world. The banker, however, believed his job

was to protect the short-term interests of his shareholders

by valuing profit above all else, even though when markets

turned, the most vulnerable stakeholders lost most. In

contrast, Gayatri devised in MasterG an inclusive business

model that refuses to see the world as separated by us and

them, profit and purpose. Indeed, the urgent challenge for

our times is to reimagine capitalism as a tool to enable our

wholeness rather than to reinforce our separation. There

could be no better blueprint for those of us who believe in

the need for a moral revolution, and only those who are able

to sidestep conformity traps can meet this challenge.

Chapter 9

USE THE

POWER OF

MARKETS,

DON’T BE

SEDUCED

BY THEM

When I started Acumen in 2001, many prospective donors

insisted we should be a for-profit fund. We were investing

patient capital in mostly for-profit companies, they

reasoned. If we used philanthropy to support for-profit

investments, we would muddy the waters. At the same

time, some nonprofit leaders flatly rejected out of hand the

idea that we would use business as a tool for change. After

a talk I gave in Bangladesh during Acumen’s early days, an

earnest young person accused me of being a “rapacious

venture capitalist, earning money off the backs of the poor.”

That hurt. But, as I have learned, making all sides

uncomfortable can be a signal that you are on to something.

I hear echoes of a similar conversation between

generations. The older generation, especially those who

lived in state-dominated economies like those in Eastern

Europe, China, Russia, India, and large parts of Africa,

remember lives of limited choices and opportunities and

tend to favor free markets. The younger generation, who

experienced the financial crisis of 2008, a calamity fueled

by unbridled greed, convincingly points to the ravages of

capitalism: inequality, divisiveness, climate change. Each

group clings to its own version of reality.

Let me make a plea for nuance.

On the one hand, markets, the part of the economy that

fulfills the needs of customers with products and services

provided by businesses, have a fundamental role to play in

healthy societies. At their best, markets efficiently allocate

resources to meet the greatest demand. As long as

individuals have access to them, markets give people

control over their own lives rather than leaving them to the

whims of government or charitable benefactors. Think of the

massive emergence from poverty over the past thirty years,

a billion people around the world supported by the opening

of markets (along with interventions such as better health

care and education).

On the other hand, if markets enable individual

freedom, they also create inequality. Unchecked, capitalism

overlooks or exploits those who cannot afford to pay;

insufficiently considers the well-being of employees; and

does not integrate onto balance sheets the cost of poorly

utilizing earth’s precious resources. The result is a

profoundly unequal society in which the wealthiest feel

above the system and the poorest feel left out altogether. In

other words, capitalism without restraint is not good for any

of us.

Moreover, when certain groups are barred from markets

because of politics or prejudice, they can’t participate fully

in society. Remember Vimal, whose community was denied

the opportunity to purchase a satellite dish for their

televisions until he and his friends fought to be served?

They weren’t asking for favors, only access to markets as a

form of freedom.1

Knowing how to use and build markets is one of the

most powerful tools we have for solving our problems. If you

want to change even a small part of the world, learn to use

the best of what markets can do while keeping them in their

place. Resist the allure of short-term profit making, but don’t

reject the market entirely. Hold the tension. Use the market

as a listening device (I explain this in chapter 4) and let it

teach you what people value alongside what they can

afford.

Indeed, the notion of the market as a listening device

can be a powerful starting point for understanding both

private and public problems. When Acumen first explored

the issue of safe drinking water, a basic human need, we

saw countless water filters designed to change the lives of

the poor. But the inventors of those technologies often failed

to let prospective clients’ needs and tastes inform their

designs.

Consequently, they learned far too late that people care

a lot about their water’s clarity, taste, and convenience, not

to mention its price—in many urban and, increasingly, rural

areas, the poor pay much more for water than their wealthy

counterparts. Even if water is provided by the government,

listening to poor “customers” is critical to any program’s

success. By failing to listen to the market, hundreds of

billions of well-intentioned funding has gone down the drain.

In sectors such as energy, people with low incomes will

pay for products and services when they see tangible gains

on their investment. If I sell you an affordable solar light

and, over time, save the money you would normally have

doled out for kerosene, you are likely to tell your neighbors

about it. That the solar light is cleaner, healthier, and

significantly improves your lifestyle doesn’t hurt, either.

But in other sectors, such as education, lower-income

earners may not be able to afford what they need. If I offer

early-childhood education facilities but charge enough

tuition that the school at least breaks even, that leaves out

the poor. I believe that every child in the world deserves an

education that will allow them to contribute to the best of

their abilities. So, does that mean public education is

government’s responsibility alone?

I used to confidently assert that the only way to enable

fair opportunity to all children was to insist on public

education for all—until I visited scores of schools in India

and Pakistan. There, government-financed public schools

are riddled with bureaucracy and corruption. Classrooms

tend to be run-down and equipped with broken furniture or

no furniture at all; and for the most part, neither teachers

nor students show up for class. As a result, in Pakistan, 40

percent of low-income parents send their children to private

schools. Low-income parents hungering to educate their

children are willing to struggle and pay mightily for a better

chance.

While we might demand that governments improve the

quality of education for all children, how do we again hold

the tension and use markets to build alternative models that

serve the poor a high-quality product? By listening to the

market, social entrepreneurs can identity what parents can

afford to pay and then define the gap between that amount

and the actual cost of delivering quality services. In the

short term, philanthropy might fill that gap. But in the

longer term, the only way to rectify the situation will be for

government to step in.

Let’s stand back from economic ideologies and start

with the human problem we want to solve. We need a full

understanding of the problem from the perspective of all

stakeholders; only then can we determine the right kinds of

capital (as well as the partnerships) needed to make the

solution work. If you believe, as I do, that all human beings

deserve access to affordable, quality education, to

electricity, to primary health care, to a minimum level of

clean drinking water and the like, then we need financial

models that ensure universal access.

As I discussed earlier, Acumen has always seen its

patient capital investments as a means to solving problems,

not an end. In other words, the end or purpose of money is

not simply to make more money, but to create something of

value.

To place that in a moral framework: the more value our

investments create, especially for the poor and vulnerable,

the more we value our investments. Philanthropy enables us

to take outsized risk—and time—investing in companies

disrupting systems to serve the poor. Profits are a means to

the sustainability of the innovations we support and,

eventually, to ensuring that we also can cover our costs in

the long term. Acumen’s success hangs in the balance of

two points on our moral compass, impact on one side and

financial sustainability on the other.

Consider a complex issue like sanitation. People in the

developed world take for granted having toilets that flush

waste into enormous sewage treatment networks. In the

developing world, however, 2.3 billion people rely on an

outhouse or latrine, or else they defecate in the open air,

which can lead to disease and often a loss of dignity.2

Indirectly, poor sanitation imposes a higher cost on

women than on men. Schools that lack safe toilets typically

see significant drop-out rates for girls once they begin

menstruating, as they have no place to tend to their

personal hygiene needs. And rural areas lacking any toilets

whatsoever force women to relieve themselves in fields,

where they are vulnerable to violence from passersby.

Local governments, international aid agencies, and

charities have all attempted unsuccessfully for decades to

build latrines in slum areas. But without a plan to remove

the waste and sustain the management of those toilets, the

latrines quickly overflowed, creating stench and toxicity. No

wonder traditional investors have stayed away from the

business of providing toilets for the poor.

Solving such a complicated problem for one-third of the

world’s population could seem overwhelming—but not to

David Auerbach, Lindsay Stradley, and Ani Vallabhaneni,

who met at MIT’s Sloan School of Management as graduate

students and went on to found Sanergy. The three had each

lived and worked in low-income communities, and they

understood the connections between poor sanitation and

diarrhea, cholera, and other water-borne diseases in slum

areas especially.

The Sanergy founders were agnostic as to whether to

take a for-profit or nonprofit approach to the problem; what

mattered was solving it. In 2010, they traveled to Nairobi,

Kenya, and found a smallish slum community of about forty

thousand people where they could immerse themselves in

learning and experimentation until they found a solution

that worked. They used the market as a listening device,

and considered every stakeholder group.

Mukuru, like the rest of Nairobi’s slums, was known for

“flying toilets,” the practice of defecating on paper inside

one’s home and then tossing the bundle onto rooftops

outside. The Sanergy founders met with many residents

there who were willing to pay for a better, cleaner solution,

especially as they were already in the habit of paying to use

filthy toilets as a last resort. Individual entrepreneurs saw

business opportunities in the owning and operating of

toilets, and Mukuru, like all of Kenya, needed good jobs to

employ its youth. Building a network of clean and

sustainable toilets there made sense.

But before Sanergy could begin operating, the team

needed to find local entrepreneurs willing to extend trust to

three foreigners who had not yet proven their business

model. “We just kept showing up,” cofounder Lindsay

Stradley explained. “For weeks, we would go into the slums

and talk to people, until we made it clear we weren’t going

anywhere. The problem of waste had gotten out of control in

Mukuru, so people were desperate to try a new solution.

Plus, the entrepreneurs we connected with saw a business

opportunity for themselves that also would do good for the

community.”

Sanergy’s business model seeks to create value out of

waste. The company manufactures toilets and sells them to

the entrepreneurs, or “franchisees,” for about five hundred

dollars per toilet (a cost financed mostly via microloans).

Sanergy employees then collect the waste from the

entrepreneurs on a daily basis and compost it. In the early

years, the founders lacked an answer to one of their biggest

questions: what to do with the waste once it was collected.

Might the government and others eventually come to see it

as a resource rather than simply a cost? That would depend

on whether the company was able to turn the waste into

fertilizer that met health standards and that local farmers

would purchase. The team would gain insights only by

starting.

The founders correctly assumed the franchisees would

repay their loans on the toilets with proceeds from their

customers. Still, as it turned out, Sanergy needed both

grants and loans before they could build a whole system to

move waste effectively. They used grants to advertise their

new service to local residents and for research into how best

to compost and convert the waste into useful, salable

products.

I visited Sanergy’s office in Mukuru on a Sunday

afternoon in October 2015. The slum’s narrow entry road

was lined with tarpaulin-covered kiosks crammed willy-nilly.

Alleyways snaked between ricky-ticky houses made of mud,

with open sewers running alongside. Lines of colorful

laundry hung among the houses like prayer flags, and

children were dressed in their finest clothing from a morning

spent at church. A little girl reminded me of a princess from

a Velázquez painting, her delicate hand daintily holding up

her long, silky, scalloped blue skirt to avoid its becoming

soiled.

Lindsay Stradley met me at Sanergy’s small but lively

office, which was filled with young people from around the

world. She had just had her first child, but still came daily to

the office to meet with local toilet entrepreneurs, solve

problems with them, and grow the business. To show me

Sanergy’s business in action, she led me out of the office,

striding in front of me through the muddy streets wearing

jeans and bright yellow rubber boots, a huge smile on her

face, clearly in her element.

We stopped in front of one of the toilet kiosks to meet

Leah Gachanga, a square-jawed businesswoman with soft

brown eyes. A colorful scarf was wrapped around her head.

Leah proudly told me that she’d already grown her

enterprise from one to three toilets, netting about five

dollars per day on top of what she and her husband earned

running a clothing store. Lindsay and I stood outside the

bright blue toilet units with “Fresh Life” (Sanergy’s local

brand) painted in yellow on the sides. Just outside the units,

Leah had set up a vanity station, complete with a mirror and

washing stand. Like all Fresh Life agents, she charged about

five cents per use for adults, two cents for children. She

took care to clean the toilet after each customer left, and

each day, young men in Fresh Life uniforms arrived to

collect the waste in sealed containers, leaving the toilets

fresh and odorless.

Leah relayed how much she loved contributing to her

community. “Before Sanergy,” she told me, “there was so

much human waste right outside our houses. We would walk

home, especially in the rainy season, and mud would rise so

high that your boots became covered in an awful mix. Now

the pathways are clean. Disease has fallen. I’m helping to

make my community cleaner, and that makes me proud.”

Moreover, her efforts have changed the prospects for her

family. “My customers have provided me with enough

income to buy a home and educate my children in good

schools,” she said. “Fresh Life is good for all of us.”

Lindsay and I continued walking along alleyways to the

composting unit. Though Sanergy had been operating for

several years by then and had seen significant interest from

local farmers in its fertilizer, the company still lacked the

European equivalent of FDA approval verifying that the

product met health standards. When approved, the fertilizer

delivery service would create good jobs and play a vital role

in the community’s health, culture, and business

environment.

Lindsay, David, and Ani had focused maniacally on

building a sustainable company that could solve a critical

problem and, over the long term, provide a positive return

to shareholders. But what they needed at that moment were

patient investors who shared their values and aspirations.

Though many loved the vision, most investors still wanted

proof of the company’s profitability before they would

consider making a bet on Sanergy. The proof would only

come later, making it all the more critical for the Sanergy

founders to find investors who understood markets, yet also

were willing to experiment and learn what it would take to

build a sustainable, impactful model for change.

For patient investors, Sanergy’s impact is significant. By

March 2019, Sanergy had sold more than 2,500 toilets to

local entrepreneurs, created more than 2,750 jobs, and

provided affordable, hygienic sanitation services to more

than 100,000 people, removing in excess of 6,000 tons of

waste each year. That’s about 600 big dump trucks full of

human waste, which is composted and converted into

organic fertilizer before being sold to commercial and

smallholder farms. Major corporations interested in selling

organic food products recently expressed interest in the

fertilizer, which would bring the company’s supply chain full

circle.

Mukuru has been the main beneficiary of Sanergy’s

work. Disease rates have fallen, and education rates for

adolescent girls have risen, as young women now have safe,

private toilets to use at school. Community members feel a

deep sense of pride in their homes, a benefit that matters,

even if it is not always easy to measure.

The Sanergy founders have built a model that works,

and are now looking to partner and grow the business

significantly. Thrillingly, the city of Nairobi is interested in

joining with the company to bring sanitation to all people.

And the company continues to raise both grant money for

research and development and investor capital.

Within eight years, Sanergy has become an example for

patient investors, smart philanthropists, and city

governments that are serious about solving a significant

public health issue. The company’s founders dreamed of

providing a blueprint that governments could use to deliver

“off-grid waste management,” enabling the world’s urban

poor to improve their health, comfort, and dignity. Using

moral imagination, the right kind of capital, and a circular

business model that seriously considered all stakeholders,

Sanergy’s intrepid founders have succeded in turning waste

into gold.

The more you understand how markets work, the better

you’ll be able to put markets in their place. The more you

gain the tools needed to build financial viability into any

endeavor you pursue, the more effectively you can solve

intractable problems. Understanding markets is also critical

to seeing and correcting some of the intrinsic flaws in our

global economic system, blind spots that rely

disproportionately on the toil and sweat of the working poor,

holding them in a perennial cycle of indebtedness and

impoverishment.

For example, agricultural markets have flourished for

hundreds of years at the expense of the poorest farmers,

the people who actually grow the food and drinks that

nourish us. In Colombia, more than a half million smallholder

farming families grow, pick, and export some of the finest

coffee on earth. Yet the vast majority of these farmers live in

poverty, often unable to cover the costs of production.

In 2009, Tyler Youngblood, a freelance writer and coffee

enthusiast, found his imagination ignited by the rich, wet,

emerald hills of Colombia’s coffee-growing region. His

curiosity drove him to meet everyone he could in the coffee

industry and learn as much as possible about Colombian

coffee production and its markets. His empathy for the

coffee farmers urged him to ask: why was it so hard for

them to make a living?

Almost everyone Tyler met pointed to the complicated

global supply chain for coffee, which has been in place for at

least a century. Millions of farmers grow coffee beans of

varying qualities, then handpick the coffee cherries and sell

them to domestic buyers and exporters at prices

determined by global coffee futures. The exporters sell the

coffee to roasters abroad, who in turn sell bags of high-

priced coffee beans and lattes to the end consumer.

Why, Tyler wondered, were farmers beholden to a daily

global commodities price, which was known for wild swings

(from under a dollar to three dollars per pound) and had

little to do with the realities of their production costs, when

consumers paid the same amount for lattes regardless of

commodity prices? Why, in an age of transparency, given

that 25 million of the world’s poorest citizens grew 80

percent of coffee produced, wasn’t there a more ethical way

to organize the industry?

Imagine being a farmer who drudges for months each

season, investing your savings and time and not knowing

what you will be paid until the day you deliver your harvest.

You want to be able to sell your produce at fair prices.

Ideally, you’d like “fair” to be a price that not only covers

your costs but rewards your hard work with a

commensurate financial return or profit. This is not what

most coffee farmers experience. The majority of Colombian

coffee farmers operate at a net financial loss. No wonder the

average smallholder farmer is fifty-seven years old—most

farmers’ children decidedly do not want to become farmers.

Tyler dreamed of designing a system that started from

the farmers’ perspective. He knew this would entail

ensuring a supply chain that compensated farmers fairly

while also delivering a premium product to consumers. Isn’t

that the real point of markets, anyway, to ensure a fair and

reasonable exchange of goods in ways that create value for

all parties involved?

The result of Tyler’s inquiry is Azahar, a coffee company

that makes the markets work for farmers as well as

everyone else along the supply chain. The company buys

coffee directly from smallholder farmers because single-

origin beans yield higher prices from international buyers. To

ensure just pricing, Azahar works to understand farmers’

costs of production and negotiates a long-term, fixed-price

contract with roasters. These contracts between farmers

and Azahar can yield prices two times higher than the global

commodities price.

In return for their partnership, Azahar insists on the

highest level of integrity from the farmers—timely delivery

and no mixing of different qualities of beans. The company

is able to pay so much more for the beans because it has

developed a network of sustainable coffee consumers who

want to know who is growing their coffee and how those

people are treated. When I was in Colombia in November

2018, the world price was just about one dollar per pound;

Azahar was paying the farmers, on average, two dollars per

pound. The well-paid farmers are loyal to the company and

consistently deliver the highest-quality beans.

I witnessed this sense of shared prosperity in 2017,

when Acumen’s Latin America director, Virgilio Barco, and I

traveled to Nariño, in the southwest part of Colombia,

bordering Ecuador and the Pacific Ocean. The land around

Nariño is rich, verdant, and productive, perfect for growing

coffee. Yet, like the Arhuacos who cultivate cacao in the

north, the farmers who grow coffee in the southern region

suffered greatly during the fifty-year civil war. Azahar was

changing not only daily realities but future possibilities.

In Nariño, we met with a group of men and women

farmers who had participated in an early revenue-sharing

experiment with Azahar. Long, lonely hours toiling in the sun

had carved creases of austerity and weariness into their

faces. Most of the farmers stood quietly in a circle wearing

jeans and cowboy hats, their eyes cast downward. Tyler,

dressed in a white button-down shirt and jeans, his longish

brown hair behind his ears and scholarly glasses perched

above a mischievous smile, broke their silence with a simple

hello. Then all eyes turned to him as he explained that

thanks to an American buyer, each farmer would receive a

bonus for the harvest based on additional premiums to be

paid by the company.

One by one, the farmers approached the group’s

accountant, who sat on a simple stool in front of a small

wooden table, checking handwritten ledger paper for the

amount of beans each farmer had delivered. The farmers

accepted the bonus in cash, usually with a wide grin, as the

group applauded proudly.

I asked one of the men what he would do with his new

income. “I’m saving to buy more land,” he said. Tyler

explained that for the first time, Colombian smallholders see

the potential to earn a good living in coffee, but only if they

own more than two hectares—and most farmers in Colombia

own less.

“You seem happy today,” I said to a cluster of farmers.

“But is this company really different from the other coffee

buyers?”

“Azahar cares about us,” one farmer responded. He had

jet-black eyes and a thick fringe of hair to match. “They

aren’t here just to make money from us, but to help us earn

money, too. We trust them.”

“Our job is to build a community of trust,” Tyler

explained to Virgilio and me over dinner that evening.

“Specialty coffee depends on a supply chain with trust at

every link. Our buyers depend on us to sell them single-

origin beans with no mistakes; they need to trust that we

will deliver the highest-quality coffee. Our customers need

to trust that our farmers are paid sustainably. And our

farmers need to trust that we will adhere to our fixed

agreement, paying the best prices in a timely manner. They

need to know that we will show up. We have to do this

outside a traditional commercial or legal framework. We

have to do it because it is the right thing to do.”

The phrase a “community of trust” resonates; it unites

the many stakeholders of social enterprise, linking the

hands and minds of those who produce and deliver our daily

bread and everything else we use. The reality of creating

such a community is another story. Many peers and

investors think Tyler and others like him are insane to pay

double the world coffee price.

Tyler took a conventional economic model and turned it

upside down, understanding that farmers needed to be fully

included in the supply chain, not as inputs but as dignified

human beings whose long months of work produced daily

cups of joy for the world. It took the courage and creativity

of nonconformity to build a business based on the

production costs of the farmers, not on maximizing sales to

the buyers. It took persistence fueled by a belief that trust,

empathy, and mutual accountability are the bedrock of

healthy societies.

In November 2018 we met Tyler again, this time at a hip

yet elegant retail Azahar store in a popular section of

Bogotá. Every table was filled with residents talking,

working, and drinking Azahar’s fine coffee. “When I got here

in 2010,” Tyler said, “Colombians couldn’t find much high-

quality coffee from their own country to drink. All the good

stuff was exported. It feels good to be part of changing

that.”

Market fundamentalists may ask how entrepreneurs

such as the founders of Sanergy and Azahar make good

decisions while balancing multiple bottom lines. With the

single metric of profit, the results are binary: you are either

profitable or not. But profit doesn’t take into account the

natural resources we consume, the pollution we create, and

the employees we empower. Nor does it grapple with issues

of fairness that operate in systems with wildly unbalanced

power dynamics. The shareholder capitalist system also

does not value the social and environmental capital some

businesses are creating (which, in some cases, is

enormous), focusing only on short-term profitability. But

human beings created the current systems that govern our

lives. It is up to human beings to change and evolve those

systems.

The current economic system keeps the attention on

what we can count (profits) rather than on what we most

value (our children’s health and education, the quality of the

air we breathe, just compensation to the poorest, etc.).

Companies and investors tend to allocate financial and

human resources to achieve the highest possible financial

returns, and even some impact investors count it as a bonus

rather than a requirement when social impact is also

achieved. The expense of corporate resources on fairly

integrating smallholder farmers into the supply chain,

training women and minorities, and protecting and

strengthening the environment tends to be relegated to

Corporate Social Responsibility or philanthropy. Yet, only

when companies regularly quantify and value nonpecuniary

but fundamental human and environmental benefits will we

see a more inclusive, sustainable market system.

Like many of our peers, the team at Acumen and I have

been working for many years to develop new approaches to

measuring social impact as a complement to quantitative

financial analysis. In Acumen’s early years, like most socially

oriented organizations, we counted “outputs” (the number

of toilets produced, the number of people trained or jobs

created). That approach gave us a sense of scale, but it fell

short of showing whether our companies were effective at

helping people lift themselves from poverty. And we wanted

to hold ourselves, and our companies, accountable for doing

just that.

The cell phone revolution led to the ability to

communicate with thousands of low-income customers

simultaneously. In 2015, building on the work of others,

Acumen developed Lean Data, an approach to measuring

impact using cell phones. Using this approach, Acumen can

simultaneously text thousands of customers of a given

project or company, asking a series of questions from which

we then deduce invaluable information such as income level

and whether using a certain product has had a positive or

negative impact on its user. We learn what people value, or

don’t, about a specific project. Low-income customers

answer these questions very seriously, so that companies

know how to serve them based on what they actually need,

not what we think they need. Lean Data is a step forward in

treating the poor as customers, not victims.

For example, remember the solar lighting company

d.light from chapter 4? Acumen has invested more than

thirty million dollars in companies like d.light that are

bringing off-grid solar electricity to low-income people

around the world. We hope to realize financial returns yet do

not expect to compete with traditional venture capitalists on

a returns basis alone. Instead, we are counting on our

portfolio of companies to bring measurable change to the

lives of many. Our energy companies, reaching well over

110 million and counting—does not disappoint.

Consider these results. Lean Data surveys have

demonstrated that solar light results in low-income people

staying active an extra hour each night. Children study

about an hour more as well. Customers tend to place high

value on the security and peace of mind that electricity

brings—harder to quantify but important. Our investments

also have kept more than seven million tons of carbon

dioxide and black carbon from being released into the

atmosphere. Over one hundred million lives are better. And

most important, we know in what ways those lives have

improved because the people living with the solar products

have told us so.

Imagine if more of us allocated our resources, placing

social and environmental impact on an equal footing with

(or higher than) financial returns. Everything would change.

Using markets without being seduced by them does not

require a degree in rocket science, but it does require

fortitude to move beyond a profit-alone mentality. The

process starts with focusing first on purpose; considering all

stakeholders; using the right kind of capital; hiring

competent, values-aligned talent; and measuring what

matters, not just what you can count. We are the ones who

choose the kind of economy and society we inhabit. We can

continue to play by tired rules that work only for the few, at

the expense of the many, or we can imagine and build new

rules that work for everyone. It is all within our individual

and collective grasp.

Chapter 10

PARTNER

WITH

HUMILITY

AND

AUDACITY

If you want to create or renew systems, small is beautiful

but scale is critical. Changing systems for the poor, not just

the rich, requires understanding how to use markets and

how to partner with government, which means moving from

small-scale purity to the messy and complex thickness of

scale. I’m not talking about growth for growth’s sake

though. Rather, I’m underscoring the need to recognize the

problem you are solving and then executing a strategy to

either replicate your business model or partner to expand

your model’s reach. Neither path is easy. But if you are up to

the challenge, you could enable widespread transformation.

In the summer of 2007, I was speaking at the Aspen

Ideas Festival to a crowd of a couple hundred wealthy

people, mostly Americans, about Acumen’s latest

investment, an ambulance company in India. The Indian

government was spending more than a billion dollars

annually on emergency services, yet in Mumbai (the

country’s financial center and largest city), only a few

emergency service units actually functioned. At that time,

the emergency medical sector across India was notoriously

bloated and corrupt; 90 percent of people traveling in

ambulances were already dead and en route to the morgue.

It was common knowledge that if you wanted to get to the

hospital quickly, you were much better off calling a taxi.

Earlier that year, Acumen’s India team had invested in

Ziqitza, a social enterprise with the singular mission of

disrupting the emergency services industry in India. The

company had begun operating with nine ambulances as a

purely private business: 80 percent of clients paid market

prices to be transported to private hospitals. The company

made a deliberate commitment to ensure that the other 20

percent of its clients were low-income people who paid only

what they could afford.

Ziqitza was committed to an anticorruption policy,

sharing Acumen’s belief that strong action was required to

break the inevitable correlation between corruption and

poverty. We knew that the risks of disrupting such a massive

industry were enormous, but the combination of the

inclusive business model and the character and

commitment of the founders reinforced our conviction in

making the investment.

Under that white tent in Aspen, one of India’s most

eminent businessmen raised his hand to ask a question.

“I applaud your ambition,” the great man said. “But did I

hear you correctly? Nine ambulances? Mumbai is a city of

seventeen million people [by 2019, more than twenty-two

million]. Are you seriously backing a group with only nine

ambulances?” The businessman continued, his doleful

lament by then so familiar that I could have filled in the

words myself. “This is the problem with social enterprises.

They are mediocre businesses run by smart, idealistic

people and have no hope of changing anything except at a

small-scale level. This sideline approach distracts from the

real issues and takes pressure off government from doing

their job.”

My face flushed. The businessman’s statement felt like

censure, a personal rebuke made public in front of my peers

at an esteemed institution where I served as a trustee. I

sensed a wave of doubt about our model sweeping the

audience. Heads nodded in unison.

A snippet from a Mary Oliver poem arose inside me like

a good friend: “Let me keep my distance, always, from

those / who think they have the answers.” Bring on the

skeptics—we need them—but those of us who want a better

world have little use for critics who armor themselves with

rigid certainty, especially if they propose neither assistance

nor solutions.

“At least we’re trying,” I said, “and nothing else seems

to be working. Why would we not try?” I was a believer in

social enterprise precisely because the big players who

dominated systems rarely had the creativity, daring, or

nimbleness needed to disrupt the status quo. Yet I wasn’t

certain that we would succeed. Indeed, the odds were

against this company. But Ziqitza would learn only by trying.

And so would we.

That day in Aspen, I wish I’d known then what I

understand now: that visionary builders who reshape entire

industries perceive the big picture while working to get their

initial operating model right, even if that model starts out

small. These audacious individuals must possess the

character to withstand naysayers and bullies.

Of course the founders of Ziqitza started small. As with

Jawad in his dream of affordable housing in Pakistan, they

were out to build something that had not succeeded in India

prior to their efforts. The group required time to experiment

and fail until they discovered how to run a high-quality

ambulance service with a decidedly social objective. Once

the model was in place, the company could then more easily

partner with government to reach a scale that served

millions.

While I was less articulate in that Aspen tent than I

would have liked, a number of factors persuaded me that

my team at Acumen had made the right bet on Ziqitza.

First, the founders had started their business to solve a

problem with which they had a deep sense of personal

connection. Years earlier, in the southern Indian state of

Kerala, Shaffi Mather, one of Ziqitza’s five founders and its

team leader, had nearly lost his mother when she woke up

choking and couldn’t find anything but a taxi to take her to

the hospital. Around that same time, the mother of Shaffi’s

cofounder Ravi Krishna was traveling in New York City when

she collapsed on the sidewalk. Ravi’s mother’s companion

called 911, and within minutes they were met by trained

medical personnel who provided effective assistance on the

spot, saving Ravi’s mother’s life. Why, the founders

reasoned, shouldn’t India’s people expect a similar

response?

Second, when the time came to scale up the business,

the Ziqitza cofounders would be ready. Like Shaffi and Ravi,

the other cofounders, Sweta Mangal, Naresh Jain, and

Manish Sacheti, had experience working in different

divisions of large corporations, learning to manage talent,

build effective supply chains, and grow technology

businesses. They knew how to lay the groundwork for scale.

And, last, we at Acumen believed in the character of the

founders. Shaffi Mather reminded me of a bull in a china

shop, filled with the right kind of ambition, enthusiasm, and

energy, if not always with grace and mindfulness.

If anyone could pull off a major disruption in a broken

and corrupt industry, this guy and his partners could, even if

they did not yet fully understand their project’s exact path

to growth.

When I told Shaffi about the Indian businessman’s

disparaging remarks, he simply shrugged. “You know what

Gandhi said about society-changing innovations?” he asked.

“First, they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they

fight you. Then you win.”

But if vision, the right skills, and character got Ziqitza to

the starting block, the Indian businessman’s question

nonetheless dogged me. I wondered how the company

would raise additional investment capital, given its

commitment to providing 20 percent of its customers with a

significant subsidy. We had invested because Ziqitza was

dedicated to an inclusive business model. Yet how, I

wondered, could we protect our investment to serve the

poor while supporting the company’s clear need to grow

financially?

In the early years, the company grew organically,

serving thousands of low-income people who’d never before

had access to ambulance services. That was a good start,

but given our focus on the poor, the company wasn’t

reaching enough low-income people to justify our large

stake. A few well-intentioned potential investors suggested

that it would do better financially and reach more people

overall if it targeted a higher income bracket and removed

the requirement to serve low-income people.

“You can always go down-market once you’ve built a

viable model,” one American investor told me.

True, I thought, but how many years would that take?

The idea sounded too much like business as usual: serve the

wealthy and give back through the side door only once

you’re flush with profits. Ziqitza had at the core of its

business a vision to serve all people, and we needed to do

what we could do to protect that vision while also helping

the company expand.

In 2008, a year after I spoke at Aspen, an established

U.S.-based emergency services company explored

purchasing a significant share of Ziqitza, sensing its long-

term financial potential. Though thrilled to see such interest,

I worried about whether this more profit-oriented entity

would agree to devoting 20 percent of its services to the

poor. The next morning, I called Shaffi, and he agreed that

Ziqitza would change its bylaws to make explicit the

company’s commitment to serving the poor before any

shares were sold. That bylaw change strengthened trust

between Acumen and Ziqitza. We were both learning to

build for purpose and profitability.

Then, tragedy. On November 26, 2008, I was celebrating

Thanksgiving, my favorite holiday, with my family in New

York when a teammate called and told me to turn on CNN:

Mumbai was under siege from terrorists. The Taj and Oberoi

hotels, two of the city’s finest, were burning; people were

trapped inside and many were believed dead (in total, 174

were killed and more than 300 wounded). I couldn’t believe

this was happening in my beloved Mumbai. Tears streamed

as I watched footage of desperate, terrified people running

through smoky streets.

Next, to my amazement, there appeared in front of

every burning building, bright yellow ambulances—our

ambulances—each equipped with capable medical

personnel and all the up-to-date technology required to

respond to the acute needs of disaster victims.

The ambulance drivers, I later learned, ran headlong

into the burning buildings, despite the presence of terrorists

killing anyone in their path. Somehow, every driver survived

while rescuing more than a hundred of the terrorists’

intended victims. Lives were saved because of this little

company—and everyone in our global community felt part

of it. For all of this, thanksgiving.

A few months after the tragedy, I shared a simple lunch

with the ambulance drivers on the rooftop of the company’s

office at the edge of Mumbai. I asked a driver who was

relatively short in stature but of sturdy build what had made

him act so courageously on the day of the attacks.

“There was too much need,” he said. “When the

commandos came, I followed them into the hotel. We saw

the attackers with their guns firing. A commando pushed me

to a corner where I would not be seen by the terrorists. We

waited for the terrorists to move to another room and then

we pulled wounded people out of the hotel. There were so

many people in pain. So, we went back in. We came back

the next day and the next day, too.”

I praised the driver’s humility, and asked again how he

had stared down the threat of death and acted anyway.

He answered, “I’m a driver who can help save lives. It is

my duty to do so, madam.”

Here was a man who earned just a few dollars a day. His

character was a reflection of the company that valued and

nurtured character in every employee. To me, his courage

made him a giant.

I wasn’t alone in being moved by the effectiveness of

the company. Though still relatively small, it managed a

swift, competent response, earning the respect of Indian

bureaucrats charged with bringing public emergency health

services to their states. Soon, Ziqitza was invited to

compete for state government contracts to provide free

ambulance services. In pursuing these tenders, it could now

point to its track record as well as its ethics.

Thus began the company’s transformation into a

private-public partnership, and to a level of growth that

would eventually make it one of the largest emergency

service companies in the world. As of 2019, Ziqitza operates

more than 3,600 ambulances, employs 12,000 people, and

has delivered more than 4 million patients to hospitals.

Moreover, by moving from a private-sector company to

partnering with the government, it was able to extend its

services to those who previously were excluded from the

emergency health care system altogether. In 2014, Acumen

did a Lean Data study of two of the states where Ziqitza was

operating and found that more than 75 percent of those

served were poor, an almost complete flip of the client ratio

when the company was private.

But that impressive scale and the company’s increasing

inclusiveness came neither easily nor without a cost. To

make such growth possible, Ziqitza’s leaders needed the

humility to stare down the realities of their business. That

may seem oxymoronic, but the opposite approach would be

to assume that you can simply build a better service or

product and watch the world beat a path to your door.

Humility is needed to recognize the barriers in your way.

Audacity is key to imagining a different future regardless,

firing up the resolve to overcome impediments to your goal.

For Ziqitza, those realities included the complacency,

bureaucracy, and corruption that often go hand in hand with

doing business, as many Indian government officials in the

ambulance industry demanded petty (and not so petty)

bribes both to win and maintain contracts. In March 2019 in

Acumen’s Mumbai office, Shaffi and I had a long talk about

government. He said there are “good officials, bad officials,

and indifferent ones.”

Ziqitza cofounder Sweta Mangal tells the story of

dealing with one particularly vexing official who demanded

a 5 percent “fee” each month before he would process the

government payment, which the company needed to pay its

employees. The company refused.

“Each month, he would delay,” Sweta said. “That delay

would result in us being slower to pay our drivers and other

workers, who lacked any financial cushion to absorb even

minor shocks. We would explain to our team that the late

payments were due not to a lack of competence on our part,

but because we stood by our values. The employees were

proud to work for us, but some also reminded us that you

can’t eat values.” Sweta added that those conversations

humbled and hurt; and reinforced the founders’ resolution to

stay the course.

As the company continued to refuse to pay the bribes,

the government official grew more aggressive, at one point

calling Sweta to demand payment. He had apparently

forgotten that ambulance companies record all phone calls.

You might think the shame of being recorded in the act

of extortion would be enough to quell someone’s appetite

for corruption, and for a few months, demands for bribes

ceased, at least from that one official. Then, at one point,

the local government represented by that official accused

Ziqitza of corruption, which we took very seriously at

Acumen. There were times, in truth, when it would have

been easier for Acumen to walk away, but we had signed up

to be patient investors, partners in disruption. Moreover, we

believed in government and the potential of the right

private service providers such as Ziqitza to partner and

make good on government’s obligations to its citizens.

Some might ask, why even bother partnering with

government when there are so many challenges and

seductions?

First, government itself is not corrupt. Individuals may

take advantage of systems that need improvement, but that

doesn’t mean that all people working in government are

corrupt. As Shaffi would say, you have to find “the good

ones.” And there are plenty of thoughtful, principled,

courageous individuals in government doing what they can

to change broken, corroded systems. They can be powerful

change-makers and allies, so keep an eye out for them. You

might also consider working in the public sector yourself.

Second, partnering with government is essential for

getting quality health care to the rural poor. Markets alone

will never succeed in protecting our most vulnerable from

disease or misfortune, but companies such as Ziqitza can

help government achieve its goals of serving its citizens and

protecting its most vulnerable.

Eventually, Ziqitza gained a reputation for transparency.

The company came to know which government officials

shared their values and which did not. The best local

government agencies discussed their own challenges and

problem-solved directly with the company. Over time, these

various “good” partners and Ziqitza wove a web of trust

that only intensified.

Our most disadvantaged communities could avoid many

every day tragedies if our public systems were built on twin

pillars of character and competence. I saw this in 2014,

when visiting Ziqitza’s branch office in Bhubaneswar, the

capital of Odisha, one of India’s three poorest states. Before

Ziqitza’s partnership with the local government, an older

fisherman said to me as tears ran down his face, “I saw too

many family members die when we had to use a bullock

cart to get them from my village to the hospital. Now, the

gods have come, madam. We can save ourselves.”

I got the sense of a “before Ziqitza” and an “after

Ziqitza” way of thinking and behaving.

Sumit Basu, the thirtysomething regional manager of

Ziqitza Odisha, recounted stories of a terrible cyclone that

ripped through the state a year prior. “We had every

ambulance at the ready,” Sumit said. “Over two nights with

the cyclone, the company’s vehicles drove thirty-seven

pregnant women to safety and delivered at least one

healthy baby inside an ambulance. Not a single life was lost.

Our region has seen great tragedies, and lost thousands due

to cyclones in the past. But Ziqitza and the government

were fully prepared this time. We worked together.”

Solving humanity’s toughest problems requires no single

hero, but a system of people, companies, organizations, and

government that rally around a common enterprise. Ziqitza

could offer operational efficiencies and nimble decision

making, but the company had to partner with government

to reach millions of low-income people in need of their

services. Government required the high standards, quality

of service, and efficiencies delivered by the private

company. Workers, whether manning call centers, driving

ambulances, or serving as medical technicians, had to look

beyond their own needs and operate from a sense of duty

and service to the greater good. Ziqitza’s rules and

practices have now become the standard benchmarks for

ambulance services across India.

The road to trust and effectiveness for Ziqitza was long

and, at times, arduous. The company’s story of creating and

maintaining reliable, productive partnerships carries

important lessons for every organization that wants to

extend beyond what it does well on its own.

First and foremost, be clear about your purpose and

honest about what you bring to the table, as well as what

you hope to take away. Are you and your partner values-

aligned and committed to learning together? Are you willing

to compromise and be clear on those compromises, not in

an easy “the ends justify the means” way, but in that gray

area that recognizes the imperfection of the world—and of

every human being? To create change, we have to be willing

to be uncomfortable without losing sight of what is most

important.

Partnering effectively takes time and commitment. If we

believe that a moral revolution requires everyone, we must

become skilled at building trusting partnerships across

sectors. Honing this skill almost always requires a shift in

both assumptions and behaviors. Nonprofits need to let go

of suspicions that all corporations are greedy, exploitative,

and unconcerned with the earth, while still holding to

account those who are greedy and exploitative. For-profit

companies must drop the assumption that all nonprofits are

full of woolly headed, morally righteous do-gooders who get

nothing done, while still calling on the carpet those who are

ineffectual. And many of us must shift our lazy assumptions

about other sectors, giving up presumptions about

government (“corrupt and ineffective”), media (“liars”),

philanthropy (“entitled and disconnected”), and technology

(“monstrous and self-serving”). Of course, some people and

organizations fit these assumptions, but when we refuse to

see the humanity in those who share a desire to create

change, we miss the chance to amplify our work and realize

our mission. And we are all needed to build more just and

inclusive societies in which each individual counts.

Yasmina Zaidman, Acumen’s chief of strategic

partnerships, wisely counsels, “If I could have one wish—

and this is something I try to practice myself—it would be to

enter a new partnership with greater openness to what the

other side can offer and a courageous vulnerability to

sharing fears—and with the patience to take the time it

needs to build trust.”

In other words, commit to the commitment itself.

Sometimes, what looks like a great partnership at first

might ultimately let you down. My heart has been broken by

corporations that told a good story of purpose, but in the

end were focused on business as usual. One phrase I dread

is “We want to be part of radical change as long as it

doesn’t impact shareholder value.” That is a clear moment

for pushback, or for a difficult conversation, at the very

least. It is a chance to try to bring your would-be partner’s

focus back to the problem you’re trying to solve together. If

you cannot do that, you may need another partner.

If, however, you find a corporate partner that recognizes

that its global supply chain is broken and wants to explore

models to make it more inclusive and sustainable, try to

support that partner as it fights its internal battles. As with

government, some of the most courageous change agents I

have met work in large corporations. They are aware of the

risks involved in rejecting the status quo, but they do so

anyway. For them, partnering with external allies staves off

the solitude that comes from being a lone questioning voice

and also helps them bolster the firm’s legitimacy in

delivering on its promises to stakeholders.

Some partnerships fail; it’s part of life. If a partnership

sounds too good to be true, it usually is. If donors insist that

you “collaborate” with another organization whose mission

or values do not seem aligned, spend time making sure that

the misalignment truly exists, and then say no gracefully.

Be wildly cautious when an organization calls and says,

“We love what you do. We should find ways to partner.” If

they cannot articulate why to partner, how to partner, or,

most important, to what end, you won’t have a partnership;

you’ll have a mess. Ironically, sometimes those you see as

least like you may be exactly who you need for what you

want to accomplish. So, start again with your mission and

an understanding of which skills, markets, and

communication outlets enable you to realize the good you

are creating for those in need.

What if you are starting out with just a giant, uplifting and

daring idea and no resources, networks, or money? How do

you even begin to find the partners who can help you realize

your goal? There are few better stories in my experience of

impact investing than the one about a chicken company in

Ethiopia that started out as a ragtag operation with

founders who’d never before seen live chickens yet went on

to change the fortunes of millions of poor farmers. Today,

they are providing financial opportunities, improving health

outcomes, transforming an industry, and in so doing,

helping to strengthen a nation.

That story begins in 2009, when an American named

Dave Ellis spent a year in Uganda working for a well-

intentioned start-up NGO that never got off the ground.

Most of the Ugandans he met wanted jobs, which convinced

him that poverty would not be solved by an act of charity.

The next year, encouraged to try something different, Dave

and his partner, Joe Shields, traveled to Ethiopia, a country

of one hundred million people, with a small amount of

investment capital in search of a business that would enable

them to make a greater difference.

Soon after arriving in Tigray, a region in northern

Ethiopia near the border of Eritrea, Dave chanced upon the

right opportunity: The government owned a six-hundred-

thousand-square-foot defunct chicken operation and was

looking for a partner to make it productive. The only

problem was that it contained not a single healthy flock of

chickens. Under past management, most of the chickens

had died.

Though Dave had grown up in Chicago and had never

encountered a live chicken, he was undaunted. The lease for

the factory was within his financial reach, and the

opportunity he saw was enormous. In the region of Tigray,

an estimated 58 percent of children were malnourished.

Eggs are an inexpensive form of protein, and chickens

generate income. Moreover, a new generation of Ethiopian

leaders was looking to partner with private-sector players to

jump-start a flagging economy.

Unlike the cofounders of Ziqitza, the ambulance

company that initially was private, Dave, Joe, and a third

cofounder, Trent Koutsoubos, put their company into

partnership with government from the start; they assumed

that “all they had to do” was raise baby chicks to egg-laying

age (forty-five to sixty days) and then sell them to

government extension agents, who would be responsible for

selling the chicks to smallholder farmers across the country.

To fledgling entrepreneurs Dave and Joe, this plan sounded

straightforward and easy.

The first night the entrepreneurs were on the farm with

newly purchased chickens, two of the chicken houses

caught on fire from an electrical malfunction, and the

founders had to carry the frightened birds outside in their

arms. Once things settled down, the company restarted

operations and set a date with government extension

workers to pick up a major order of baby chicks exactly

thirty-five days after they were born.

The workers showed up with fifteen trucks—a month

late. By then, the company founders had already scrabbled

to sell the baby chicks to whomever they could find; this

was another setback to operations, resulting in more lost

money that the founders didn’t have. As for the extension

workers, they had no choice but to return to their posts with

empty trucks. Trust on both sides plummeted.

Dented but undaunted, Dave and Joe went back to the

drawing board. The cofounders reviewed what had

happened and reminded themselves of their purpose. They

were in Ethiopia to build a successful chicken operation that

would feed the poor and change the lives of farmers. They

reconsidered their own strengths and weaknesses as well as

those of their various partners.

Try. Fail. Learn. Start again.

This time, Dave and Joe tried selling one-day-old chicks

directly to the farmers, but the farmers were both poor and

overworked, earning on average $350 a year. Smallholders

can afford to buy just a few chickens at a time, and they

have multiple constraints that prevent them from finding

the right vaccines, the most effective feed, and the means

to keep the chickens safe at night, when predators such as

foxes and dogs roam about looking for vulnerable, fluffy,

chirping yellow snacks. In short, raising baby chicks from

birth to forty-five days (after which they could thrive in a

village environment) took time, money, and expertise, none

of which the smallholders had.

Though operations faltered again, Dave and Joe were

gaining a better sense of the farmers’ and the government’s

potential as partners. While Ethiopia’s state-run enterprises

may have lacked some efficiencies, the government’s

agricultural extension workers, who knew and lived among

smallholder farmers, were highly trusted. The government

workers thus represented an enormous asset to the

company—if Dave and Joe were willing to discern those

functions where government workers were most capable of

delivering. Dave explained: “We saw that we could work

with local government offices to mobilize demand for the

chickens and educate the farmers. The government also

helped us reach last-mile areas we could never reach

ourselves.”

So, the cofounders changed the model again. The

company, which Dave and Joe named EthioChicken, now

breeds chickens and incubates eggs, selling them a day

after they’re born in batches of one thousand to “agents,”

individual entrepreneurs who raise the chicks for the next

forty-five to sixty days. EthioChicken provides the agents

with the vaccines, feed, and other supplies along with the

inputs and advice they require to succeed. Then the agents

help the farmers by selling three to four chickens at a time

in collaboration with government extension workers. Once

the chickens are at egg-laying age, they stay close to home

and eat most anything, making them the perfect investment

for a poor farmer.

In August 2017, Dave and I met Yohannes, a nineteen-

year-old who had signed up to serve as an agent, raising the

tiny chicks until they’d grown old enough to sell to individual

farmers. We stood together in the corrugated tin shed

Johannes had constructed to house two thousand chicks.

Wearing wraparound sunglasses, a black watch, a white lab

coat, and an amulet around his neck, Yohannes waved his

delicate, long-fingered hands enthusiastically as he shared

with me his success. A couple of years prior, he’d taken a

loan from a local microfinance organization to purchase his

first batch of a thousand chicks. “I knew that I had to keep

those chicks healthy and alive,” he told us. “I slept in the

room with them every night. EthioChicken gave me advice,

and the government helped me until I could sell all the

chickens. Now I am a happy man. All my brothers and

sisters go to school and are happy, too.”

We’d been speaking for a good half hour before

Yohannes shared that he’d taken a risk with the company

because his life depended on it. He and his five younger

siblings had been orphaned, and the teenage Yohannes was

responsible for their collective welfare. His risk and diligence

paid off: by the end of 2017, he had sold fifteen thousand

chickens, all to smallholder farmers. That year, his earnings

exceeded ten thousand dollars, an astronomical sum in a

country where most people earn a dollar a day.

In 2019, EthioChicken sold over 1.5 million one-day-old

chicks every month to 5,500 agents who earned anywhere

from $1,000 to $10,000 a year. The agents sell to about 4

million farmers, who represent nearly 25 million family

members. By our estimates, EthioChicken is annually

injecting more than $200 million into Ethiopia’s economy.

The company has grown to 1,200 employees, all but 4 of

them Ethiopian. In the five-million-person region of Tigray,

where EthioChicken started, malnutrition rates have fallen

more than 11 percent. The government credits EthioChicken

with much of that gain in nutrition, and it has integrated

chicken rearing into its overall agricultural strategy.

EthioChicken learned to partner—with the government,

with agents, with Acumen as an investor, and with charities

such as the Gates Foundation. Each of these partners

brought something different to this enterprise, while

remaining committed to the same goal. Getting

EthioChicken on its feet may have taken longer than either

Dave or Joe thought it would when they started, but by

partnering with government, the company helped make

Ethiopia a model for empowering smallholder farmers with

chickens and their eggs as a source of both income and

protein.

What struck me most about Dave’s and EthioChicken’s

approach to partnering was, again, not only the audacity of

their vision, but the quality of their humility and, therefore,

their ability to build trust. Dave speaks openly about the

mistakes the company made when he and Joe first arrived in

Ethiopia. He recognizes that they initially assumed they had

the answers, rushing to share what they themselves were

bringing to the table. They first had to listen more closely to

what the government needed in order to help its people—

and only then act.

Dave and Joe also realized that they could not partner

alone effectively. They needed the assistance of people such

as Dr. Fseha Tesfu, their soft-spoken but resilient Ethiopian

national sales manager, who manages EthioChicken’s

relationship with government. On the government side, the

state minister for livestock, Dr. Gebregziabher

Gebreyohannes, was a believer in the company’s potential

from its early days, backing them up as they hit inevitable

speed bumps along the path to success. After all,

individuals, not institutions, create the relationships that

lead to change.

Dave models building trust with those at all levels of an

institution, and all kinds of stakeholders. I have watched him

interact with agents, farmers, and extension workers with

enormous humility, shaking everyone’s hand; speaking in

Ethiopia’s official tongue, Amharic; eating the local food

with the exuberance he brings to everything; and praising

the goodness he has discovered in his adopted country. In

never forgetting that you are a guest, you are more likely to

be accepted as a local.

In 2014, recognizing the company’s ability to deliver,

Ethiopia’s Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’

Region offered EthioChicken a contract to take over two

more failing farms, this time on a fixed-payment

arrangement. “I don’t think we would have been as

successful without working with the Ethiopian government,”

Dave told me. “The government allowed us to build trust

very quickly with smallholder farmers. And to build a market

that has changed the game.”

I was recently asked if it was possible to teach people to

build trust. Yes, I believe so. Given that trust is our rarest

currency, we have no choice but to teach our children, and

one another, to be trusting and worthy of trust. You build

trust by showing up, by listening to what someone else has

to say, by keeping promises. You build trust through shared

endeavor and by the consistency of your words and actions.

You build it by admitting mistakes and by communicating

both when things go well and when they fail. You build trust

by knowing your values, living them, and being clear with

others that you will not violate those values.

Most of our grandmothers could have given us this

same advice.

Chapter 11

ACCOMPAN

Y EACH

OTHER

In 1987, while I was building Duterimbere, I also helped a

group of unwed mothers transform a charity project into a

bakery business. I’d recognized that too few

microentrepreneurs in Rwanda employed people beyond a

couple of family members, so I decided to try my hand at

building a business, foolishly assuming the endeavor would

be easy. The women already knew how to bake, and there

was a ready market in the fancier offices in town. Moreover,

there was no real competition at the time.

But in the beginning, no matter how hard I tried to make

things work, we failed. The women didn’t show up on time.

They stole from the bakery. They were too fearful to knock

on office doors and introduce themselves, looking at the

floor when anyone spoke to them. The women had few

marketable skills, no trust, and little entrepreneurial drive. It

took me a while to identify the entanglement of forces that

kept these women from taking advantage of this “market

opportunity.” They were from poor families, and most were

illiterate and unskilled, divided from mainstream society and

divorced from their own sense of worth.

So-called “respectable people” kept their distance from

such poverty, referring to the poor women as “prostitutes”

and seeing them as second-class citizens, at best. The poor

and vulnerable continually suffer from poverty’s many forms

of violence: dangerous physical environments, miserable

schools, inadequate health care, and untrustworthy courts.

In turn, many poor and vulnerable people inflict a further

sense of unworthiness on themselves. I began to

understand what Rousseau meant when he wrote in The

Social Contract that “man is born free, yet everywhere he is

in chains.”

Intuitively, I adjusted the role I played, no longer simply

a manager, but a coach, a cheerleader, a friend. Each

Friday, I’d hold sessions to teach the women how business

worked in ways that connected to their realities, not mine.

We practiced saying hello to strangers. I joined them to try

to convince shopkeepers to stock our baked goods. I was at

the bakery most mornings when they arrived, and we

celebrated small victories together. And sometimes we

laughed, joyfully and boisterously. Their challenges in the

bakery became mine to solve not for them but with them.

Though frustrated daily, I found that I liked the person I

was when I was around these women. I discovered ways to

hold a mirror to their inner beauty and potential, and they

reflected back to me the best parts of myself. Appreciation

revealed itself in an unexpected smile, a hug, or a collective

cheer when our sales finally began to creep upward and the

number of stolen goods declined to zero. Yet our shared

journey was more than one of mutual gratitude. In time, the

women began to earn more than most of their peers while

building a business, seeing a steady income, and

establishing self-esteem. Finally, they had unearthed a

sense of dignity inside themselves that no one could take

away from them.

Without knowing it, I was learning to practice the

principle of accompaniment.

Accompaniment is a Jesuit idea, meaning to “live and

walk” alongside those you serve. It is the willingness to

encounter another, to make someone feel valued and seen,

bettered for knowing you, never belittled. Guiding another

person, organization, or community to build confidence and

capabilities requires tenacity, a disciplined resolve to show

up repeatedly with no expectation of thanks in return. This

kind of accompaniment requires the patience to listen to

others’ stories without judgment, to offer skills and solutions

without imposition. It is to be a follower as well as a guide, a

humble yet aspirational teacher-student focused on

coaching another with firm kindness and a steady presence.

With those you aim to serve or lead, your job is to be

interested, to help make another person shine, not

demonstrate how smart or good or capable you yourself are.

Accompaniment is especially important when partnering

with those who are from places or families that have been

traumatized or marginalized by war, violence, isolation,

aggression, or by drugs or generational poverty.

Accompaniment recognizes that for many individuals and

communities, spiritual poverty is as devastating as material

poverty. The simple act of showing up and connecting with

another’s humanity can help a person rekindle hope in ways

they might not otherwise have dreamed of doing.

Think of someone in your own life who saw the best

version of who you could be, even when you couldn’t see

that version yourself. That person could be a parent, sibling,

mentor, teacher, coach, or boss who dared you, pushed you,

equipped you with the skills to succeed; a friend who told

you hard truths constructively, perhaps with toughness but

bolstered by determined love, all with the end result of

making you feel bigger, more awake, more here. If you can

think of just one person who accompanied you like that, you

should count yourself lucky.

Now think of the people who feel left out—those living in

poverty, in conflict areas, sitting in prison, or struggling in

refugee camps. Many in those communities are exposed to

endless callousness and constant criticism. Often, they

internalize the perceptions that others impose on them—

that they are predatory, parasitic, unfit, unworthy, or

invisible.

Despair is not the singular domain of the poor. For all of

us who have suffered unimaginable loss or who are in crisis

or physical pain, just getting out of bed can sometimes be

an act of courage. For anyone experiencing loneliness or

despondency, there is great power in knowing that while

you have to do the hard work of change on your own,

someone out there has your back.

I’ve always been drawn to businesses that integrate the

spirit of accompaniment into their operations. I moved to

Africa in 1986 because I’d seen how banking had overlooked

the poor and was inspired by the earliest microfinance

models, which lent money to low-income women and

imparted them with skills, confidence, and community. One

of the most inspiring of these was the Self-Employed

Women’s Association (SEWA) in India, a trade union for

ragpickers, brick crushers, women who carry huge loads on

their heads, and the like. Based on an ethos of strength in

unity and a pro-poor philosophy, SEWA has grown to more

than two million members. Though the women of SEWA may

have limited material assets to claim for themselves, their

union membership is their bond to one another, and it is

upon this bond that SEWA extends microloans to them.

In 2015, on a cold and bitter January day in New Delhi, I

met Deepa Roy and Shruti Gonsalves, two of SEWA’s

directors, to travel with them on a visit to Acumen’s new

investee, SEWA Grih Rin, a housing finance subsidiary that

provides loans to women who lack legal title to their land

and thus are unable to obtain mortgages to improve their

homes.

Together, we drove more than two hours on

crisscrossing highways whose twists and turns made me

nauseated at times. As we traveled farther from the city, the

spaghetti roads relaxed and narrowed, carrying us past farm

fields and barren industrial areas, until we reached Savda

Ghevra, a massive resettlement project for people rendered

homeless by slum clearances undertaken mainly by the

Indian government to remake parts of Delhi for major

events such as the Commonwealth Games. Even before we

reached our destination, I couldn’t help but imagine the

four- to five-hour round-trip bus commute people living in

the area endured daily to look for work in the city.

The unpaved settlement lanes were lined with a mix of

brick and poured-concrete houses painted Candy Land

colors, as well as temporary shacks patched with bamboo

poles, sheets of plastic, cardboard boxes, and random

pieces of fabric. Soon we arrived at a two-story structure

painted a startling aqua green with a narrow, banister-free

exterior staircase zigzagging sideways along the wall from

ground level to a door on the second floor. A diminutive

woman with salt-and-pepper hair fastened in a neat bun

waited for us in the second-floor doorway wearing socks and

sandals and a mauve kurta layered over a burgundy

sweater and loose homespun shawl. A cataract clouded one

of her bright eyes.

“My name is Dhanpati,” the woman said, inviting us into

her small, clean, unheated home with pink interior walls. We

settled into white plastic chairs for what would be a three-

hour conversation. Dhanpati began by telling us about her

“happy life” in the slums near Connaught Place, in Central

Delhi, where she’d grown up knowing everyone and was

confident she belonged. Describing the slum clearance that

changed her life in 2008, she began to weep. “It was raining

the day they came to evict us,” she said.

The bulldozers knocked over her house and the

dwellings of her longtime neighbors as if the structures were

made of cardboard. The destruction became a harrowing

storm of concrete and dirt, a lamentation of photographs,

papers, and other mementos that churned and settled in the

dust, all that remained of a once-vibrant community where

she and her family lived and worked and dreamed.

Dhanpati’s voice dropped to a whisper. “We were

promised an allotment for land, but you had to pay seven

thousand rupees [about a hundred dollars] to process the

allotment, and most of us didn’t have that kind of money.

So, we lost everything.”

For six years, Dhanpati’s family of ten lived in a tent in a

mustard field. “At least,” she said, “we were close to the

resettlement area and did our best to navigate the system,

even if so little of the system actually worked.” In the

meantime, while her family was seeking some sort of

assistance, Dhanpati began working at the supposedly free

public toilet in the area. “Since government does not show

up,” she said, “I clean the toilet and charge people per use.

They are happy I am there. Otherwise, it would be too

filthy.”

The opposite of accompaniment is separation. To enable

the violence of slum clearances and other systems that strip

people of life’s possibilities requires a separation among and

within ourselves. We reduce people to statistics in ways that

dehumanizes them, keeping ourselves at a distance from

the ugly realities of our decisions—or our inaction. We tell

ourselves there is nothing else to be done. We blame

victims’ hardships on “the system” or characterize the poor

as being unwilling or unworthy. We prefer not to know.

Thus does separation lie at the core of poverty. When

policy makers decided to build a stadium in that Delhi slum,

Dhanpati lost the only home she’d ever known. She felt

humiliation in her homelessness, and shame in her inability

to afford school for her children or find adequate health

care. She bore the cost of too many cold and sleepless

nights, accustomed to the loneliness that comes from

feeling forever on the outside looking in, far away from her

community. As Dhanpati told her story, her eyes flickered

with both fight and desolation.

The separation that divides human beings also creates

divisions within people, making them feel that they are less

than others, that they are not worthy, that they are not

enough. In reconnecting and reconstituting our common

bonds, in accompanying one another, we have the greatest

chance for renewal in our work, in our communities, and

also within ourselves.

I asked Dhanpati if she trusted anyone.

“I trust only myself.”

“What about SEWA?” I asked.

She smiled and said, “Yes. I trust them.”

I asked why.

She looked around the room. “The people from SEWA

visit,” she said. “They fulfill promises. They lent me the

money to build my home. They call me by my name. It is

the only place in my life where I hear my name aloud. I am

Dhanpati when they come.”

I asked her to say more.

“Women like me lose our identity as soon as we marry.

We are called wife or daughter-in-law or mother, but never

our real names. SEWA makes me feel more important, as if I

am somebody. I am Dhanpati. My name means ‘Lord of

Wealth.’ I am somebody.” Then she added proudly that she

was current on her loan payments.

SEWA accompanies its female members, trains them

with skills, and holds their hands when needed. At the same

time, SEWA Grih Rin understands that it cannot and must

not simply solve their members’ problems, but must enable

the women to solve problems for themselves. In turn, the

women show up for one another.

SEWA Grih Rin’s accompaniment of these women

signals the union’s fight for the rights of the self-employed,

the landless, and those who would change their own lives if

given the chance and skills. The female members know that

the institution is there to support them.

Accompaniment is a way of upholding your commitment

to another’s success. After her year as an Acumen fellow

with a Rwandan coffee company that purchased beans from

some of the poorest farmers on the planet, Australian-born

Ramya Waran accepted a full-time job with the company,

running operations while the CEO negotiated contracts with

specialty buyers and maintained a more external presence.

Ramya loved working with the farmers, and took great pride

in being a female leader who supported women to lead

themselves.

Sadly, that coffee company ultimately failed. While

investors, including Acumen, focused on what it would mean

to shut it down and do what was necessary to repay its

creditors, Ramya turned her attention to the three hundred

smallholder farmers who had lost their livelihoods. Despite

her own exhaustion and working without a paycheck for

months, Ramya stayed on the job until every farmer felt

secure and connected to a new company.

I will never forget my phone conversation with her. I was

walking down a blustery New York City street while Ramya

was up late in Kigali. “While the company is operational,”

she told me, “the best thing I can do for investors is to

ensure a fair and profitable company. But with investors out

and the company shutting down,” she continued, “I have to

focus on the farmers. Isn’t that what we mean when we

commit to standing with the poor? The bankruptcy wasn’t

their fault. They are the most vulnerable stakeholders of all

here.”

When faced with excruciating decisions involving

divergent stakeholders, I call to mind and am inspired by

Ramya’s fierce determination to accompany the farmers.

She had no financial cushion, and she was living in a foreign

country, yet not for a minute did she allow the situation to

be about her. Ramya was there to accompany the farmers,

to stand with the poor so they could carry on with their

prospects intact after the company that had trained and

supported them collapsed.

In times of both success and failure, we can choose with

whom we stand. Going beyond yourself to enable others not

just to persevere but to thrive lies at the heart of

accompaniment. Twenty-first-century capitalism rewards

money, power, and fame, not the immeasurable impact we

have on a person’s confidence, their courage, or their ability

to, say, remain in school or even to make it through another

day. This failure to recognize important work imperils us all.

By rewarding only what we can measure, we perpetuate

systems that fail to honor that which we value most—and

the price we pay is nothing less than our collective soul. But

we can choose to build new systems grounded in a moral

framework premised on the belief that we are here on earth

to serve others and to sustain our planet for the next

generation. That starts with the simple, dedicated act of

accompanying one another.

At a time when elements of the developed and the

developing world exist within every country, the principle of

accompaniment is universally relevant. As countries become

wealthier and more unequal, they inevitably become more

individualistic and fearful, breeding grounds for isolation,

loneliness, and mistrust.

Many models of accompaniment in the developing world

are based on the understanding that people yearn to

belong, to be cared for, and that individual communities

thrive when they are parts of larger communities. In other

words, human beings thrive when we believe someone

cares about us. It isn’t much more complicated than that.

During the HIV/AIDS crisis in Africa, many organizations

employed a community health worker (CHW) model,

enlisting and transforming ordinary community members

into health workers who accompanied their neighbors. The

CHWs would show up at the homes of HIV-infected patients

to make sure they were eating correctly and taking their

medicines. The best of these health workers emotionally

accompanied the ill, making them feel seen and worthy. In

turn, the CHWs become valued members and leaders of

society.

Manmeet Kaur, an American daughter of South Asian

immigrants, worked both in South Africa and India, where

she experienced the CHW model firsthand before returning

to New York to pursue her MBA. In 2013, she founded a

company in Manhattan’s Harlem neighborhood called City

Health Works, which aims to integrate CHWs and coaches

into the U.S. health care system. She’d seen unskilled South

African women receive a few months’ training and then

support patients with HIV, often with remarkable results.

“Why couldn’t residents serve as peer counselors in the

States?” she wondered.

In Harlem, as in much of the United States, significant

numbers of residents suffer from chronic diseases such as

diabetes, asthma, and hypertension. Manmeet reasoned

that partnering directly with these patients could help them

modify their lifestyles and provide companionship while also

saving the government and insurance companies a

considerable amount of money.

On another wintry January day, this time in 2017, I went

to City Health Works to visit a local health coach named

Destini Belton, an African American whose uncluttered attire

(black pants, a red sweater, and stud earrings) and pulled-

back hair were paired with a straightforward personality.

Personable, smart, and matter-of-fact, Destini spoke to me

as if we were old friends while we walked to a colorful

community center in Spanish Harlem. Inside the center, we

passed a gym full of young boys playing basketball, and

then a dance hall where older men and women were

dancing salsa, finally to arrive at a room filled with thirty

women and three or four men playing cards or bingo or

mah-jongg. A petite elderly Chinese woman walked from

table to table offering oranges and powdery cookies.

We joined a group of black and Latina women who were

gladdened to see Destini and who welcomed me warmly. We

talked about their lives and what it felt like to be clients of

City Health Works. Maria, wearing a wool cap and holding a

cane, spoke about how much she loved feeling part of

something. “Destini takes me to the grocery store and

teaches me how to shop for healthy foods,” she said. “I

appreciate that. These people know what they’re doing. We

go on walks, and Destini checks in on me to see that I’m

taking the right meds. Whenever I have a problem, I just call

her.” As Maria spoke, the other women at the table nodded

their heads in agreement.

“But are you healthier?” I asked.

“You bet I’m healthier!” Maria exclaimed. “I’ve lost

weight and I feel good. It’s been a long time since I had to

go to the hospital.”

I turned to Destini and asked for her reaction to so many

compliments.

“It does make me feel valued,” she responded. “I had a

dead-end job before this one, just working in retail. But now

I’m being trained. I’m contributing to the community and

my family.”

I asked Destini what she appreciated most about her job

as a health coach.

“I teach the women how to do better at eating and

shopping,” she said. “And they appreciate it. Some have a

better sense of hope now. They’ve been suffering from the

same diseases for so many years, and now they are seeing

for the first time that they can feel better if they manage

their issues.”

“Has seeing the women changed you?” I asked.

“I feel more important now, and my own eating also has

improved.”

“Why do you think your eating habits have changed?”

“If you’re the coach, you’d better practice what you

preach!” Destini responded. “Being a coach is helping more

than my patients. It’s helping my whole family and some of

my friends, too.” I realized as she spoke that in teaching one

family member how to take better care of their health,

Destini was impacting extended families, including her own.

As Manmeet later explained, “We teach our health

coaches to start by asking three questions of their clients:

What are your fears? What are you struggling with? What

motivates you to live a longer life? After a couple of visits,

clients might disclose more sensitive struggles that are

contributing to their poor health, whether they fear taking

their medicines or are too ashamed to go to local food

pantries. The health coaches learn to listen, and the clients

feel seen, because our coaches have similar life

experiences. People from vulnerable situations are not just

defined by their situations. They have individual and

collective strengths.”

As for the health workers, Manmeet added, some have

told her that they observe themselves “leveling up,”

acquiring new skills and believing more deeply in

themselves because the company assumes they can do

more than they imagined for themselves.

City Health Works now has accompanied more than two

thousand clients in Harlem and is taking the model to other

parts of New York City. Manmeet has proven that the model

lowers overall health costs, securing state contracts that will

allow her to build a profitable company.

People sometimes ask how “accompaniment” scales as

a principle. I would say that how we support one another is

an ethos, a way of seeing others—and ourselves. If we

spread that ethos, and if we celebrate those who do it well,

then accompaniments and the benefits from them will only

increase.

Accompaniment is not only for a business or an

organization. It is a framework for a more inclusive, caring

society. Wherever people feel lonely, isolated, or anxious,

there is an opportunity: to prevent chronic disease, to

support the elderly, to take care of the very young, to help

the sick and suffering, to help prisoners feel less alone, and

to enable the formerly incarcerated and drug users to get

back on their feet. All of us will at some point need to be

accompanied. All of us have the power to accompany

someone else in need.

At the end of my day in Harlem, I reflected on its

connection to that chilly visit to Dhanpati’s pink house on

the other side of the world. I was mesmerized by her story:

Dhanpati’s was a narrative of an entire system that people

like her across the world are expected to navigate though

every card in the deck is stacked against them.

That day, Dhanpati noticed that I’d not stopped

shivering from the freezing air since we’d arrived. She

offered us hot tea and biscuits. We declined, knowing the

family would have to cross the street to buy water and milk

for the tea. But Dhanpati would not accept my refusal.

“If I visit you, you will give me tea. Now you are visiting

my home. I will do the same.”

I accepted the milky sweet tea gratefully, delighting in

the shot of sugar and heat. Dhanpati instantly offered me a

second cup. My desire to take it was slowed only by my

sense of shame. By now, the entire family had joined our

conversation and was waiting patiently for us to be sated

before they served themselves.

The irony of Dhanpati’s attentiveness and her focus on

service—her accompaniment—was not lost on me. Who was

the real giver here? In that tiny teacup was an ocean of

grace provoking me to examine how often I failed to pause

and notice the needs of those right in front of me. I had

much to learn from Dhanpati, and from the way SEWA Grih

Rin accompanied her so that she could accompany others.

This is the secret of accompaniment: I will hold a mirror

to you and show you your value, bear witness to your

suffering and to your light. And over time, you will do the

same for me, for within the relationship lies the promise of

our shared dignity and the mutual encouragement needed

to do the hard things.

Whatever you aim to do, whatever problem you hope to

address, remember to accompany those who are struggling,

who are left out, who lack the capabilities needed to solve

their own problems. We are each other’s destiny. Beneath

the hard skills and firm strategic priorities needed to resolve

our greatest challenges lies the soft, fertile ground of our

shared humanity. In that place of hard and soft is

sustenance enough to nourish the entire human family.

Chapter 12

TELL

STORIES

THAT

MATTER

“Aren’t you too old to be so idealistic about Africa?” a

prominent Nigerian businessman taunted me with a smile

during a 2009 dinner party in a posh home in Accra, Ghana.

Around the long rectangular table with me were eighteen

West African businessmen and my colleague Catherine

Casey Nanda. The air held the scent of frangipani and

formality.

Catherine and I were at that table to introduce Acumen

to potential philanthropic supporters in West Africa, to paint

a picture of what Acumen was capable of igniting in the

region, and to set the stage for raising local funds.

Catherine had already shared anecdotes of potential

investments we would make in Nigeria and Ghana, stories

that offered strong testimony to the potential of our work.

The night had been progressing swimmingly.

Then I launched into a perhaps too-rhapsodic address

about Acumen’s work from a more global perspective. The

man’s question about my idealism took me by surprise. His

words were skeptical; his tone, cynical. I was conscious of

my race, my outsider status, and the larger stakes of this

first meeting to introduce Acumen to West Africa. At the

same time, I experienced the man’s provocation as an

affront to what my team and our collective work

represented. Into the center of that table, with its starched

and pressed linen and its sterling silver, attended by

uniformed men wearing pristine white gloves, the

charismatic questioner had thrown down a gauntlet.

I reached across the finery to accept the challenge,

asking the man what he meant by his question.

“Just what I said,” he responded flatly. “Aren’t you too

old to be so idealistic about Africa?”

Now all eyes were on me.

“I choose idealism as an antidote to cynicism,” I said,

locking the man’s eyes with my own. “That doesn’t mean I

don’t see the ugly or the challenges. I’m trying to picture

how I would inspire an audience by describing only the

continent’s underbelly. Isn’t West Africa much more than

that?”

Internally, I could feel the presence of two voices, one

telling me to put a muzzle on my mouth; the other one

urging me forward. “Would you rather I spoke about some of

my experiences with incompetence or corruption or abject

indifference?” I asked, as the timbre of my voice gradually

crescendoed. “For I could give a lecture on any of those

topics. I could also share anecdotes of elites who talk a big

game of love and peace only to let down their countrymen

and women, knowing that as long as they are in the ‘right

clubs,’ the world will applaud their riches and ignore their

misdeeds. Or I could recount times I’ve been held up,

mugged, assaulted, robbed, and threatened. I could speak

about colleagues of mine who fought for justice, for years,

only to be murdered during the Rwandan genocide; or

describe others who capitulated finally to their insecurities

and their thirst for power, ultimately joining the perpetrators

of that bloodbath.”

I took a breath, if only to stem my swelling emotions.

“Sometimes,” I concluded, “there are days when I have to

fight a hardening of my own soul from seeing too many

people treated like throwaways. So, yes, I can paint the

opposite of idealistic for you. But as the Nigerian author

Chimamanda Adichie says, there is more than a single

story.”

Of course, I can tell stories of lightness and darkness

about every country I know, especially about my own

nation. But we were talking about a continent that had

shaped my identity and, in many ways, had taught me what

real love is. Anger rose inside my chest like a clenched fist

as that part of me that had committed to showing up with

real love, not easy love, felt threatened.

And the man had questioned me on the wrong night.

Or maybe it was the right one.

I was in the middle of a family crisis that seemed to

parallel our dinner discussion. A month earlier, my thirty-

five-year-old sister, Amy, had undergone brain surgery that

had left her entire left side paralyzed. The surgeons had told

her she might never walk again. She was in rehab in New

York City, and we knew, regardless of the outcome, that the

road ahead would be a long one.

But you don’t want to mess with my sister. Amy

understood the prognosis; we all did. She knew that parts of

her body would be slower to return to mobility, if they ever

did, and that other parts held more potential. She was

studying every kind of therapy imaginable, supported by a

tight community of family and friends who accompanied

her, aware that in the end, she was the one who would have

to do the excruciating work of recovery. And my sister kept

to a single narrative: You don’t get to choose what happens

to you. But you do get to choose how you respond.

“When I’m in the room with my sister,” I said to those at

the table, “we listen carefully to the surgeon’s dreary words,

but we don’t dwell on them; instead, we talk about the

wedding my sister Amy is planning with her prince of a

fiancé. I tell her how much I’m looking forward to dancing

with her.”

I continued: “Some might say that is foolish optimism—

or too idealistic, but I believe you become the story you

choose to tell. While my family can accompany my sister,

that’s all we can do. Amy has to do the heroic work of

fighting every day. She is focused and tough. And she

refuses to acquiesce to narratives that would have her

accept what many see as inevitable.

“And you know what?” I continued. “Mark my words: I

will dance with my sister at her wedding.”

I paused long enough to notice that everyone had

stopped eating.

“Make of it what you’d like, but I am dedicated to

contributing to the growing movement of enterprising,

committed, capable, ethical, and public-spirited African

social entrepreneurs who are serving their communities,

nations, and this very continent. I am betting on individuals

who will not be hemmed in by other people’s narratives.

“Look, the negatives I described about Africa are truths,

just like those that my sister’s surgeons hold about

probabilities of recovery. Equally as real, however, are the

stories of astonishing creativity and hard work on this

continent. Kenya’s mobile banking technologies have

leapfrogged services in the West. Nigeria’s Nollywood is the

third-largest film industry in the world. I’ve met brilliant

scientists, technologists, doctors, musicians, poets, writers,

philanthropists, activists, teachers, and, yes, even

politicians here, all of whom are focused on serving the

greater good. I have been humbled by the wisdom of people

in this region who’ve known great suffering yet still are

determined to try to give and to forgive.

“It is all here. All of it. The question is which stories will

we tell, those reeking of despair or those imbued with a

hard-edged hope.”

The man’s mouth broke into a toothy smile. “Hey,” he

said, “I’m a journalist. I’m paid to be skeptical.”

“I get that,” I replied. “I just have to beat the drum for

hope, you know, as a radical response to cynicism.”

He insisted he wasn’t cynical, just skeptical, and

everyone laughed. Maybe because the discussion was so

real and so raw, Catherine and I found ardent supporters

that night, people whose efforts helped us build a program,

now based in Lagos, Nigeria, whose stories of possibility

Acumen and scores of fellows and entrepreneurs can now

tell.

The job of the moral leader—which is the job of all of us

—is to learn to tell the stories that matter, stories that unite

and inspire, reinforcing our individual and collective

potential, and paint a picture of the future that we can build

and inhabit together. Stories that matter are not stories that

demean, deride, divide, ridicule, belittle, blame, or shame.

We must take the harder path of telling stories that hold our

truths, both the ugly and the beautiful, while remaining

laser-focused on the possible.

Stories matter, for they have consequences. The stories

we choose to tell often define who we become. Indeed,

recent advances in science are proving that the narratives

we tell about ourselves and others influence even our health

and longevity. Show me a happy person, and I will show you

someone who owns her own narrative, who shares most

happenings in positive ways and tragic events as turning

points rather than end points.

In consciously shaping our personal narratives, we find

the freedom to become our best selves, and can do more to

accompany and inspire others. Take the case of Teresa

Njoroge. An elegant young Kenyan woman with a successful

career in banking, in January 2011 she was jailed, along with

her three-month-old daughter, in the Langata Women

Maximum Security Prison in Nairobi, Kenya, for a crime she

didn’t commit—for a year. Teresa could have told a story of

being a victim, a story of bitterness, rage, or revenge.

Instead, she claimed a more positive narrative for herself,

turning a tragic and costly miscarriage of justice into a

springboard for service and possibility—and without letting

the broken criminal justice system off the hook.

Teresa shared the story of her arrest during one of my

Nairobi visits in 2017. “I loved my career and everything

that went with it, especially the status and prestige,” she

said. “But then I handled a fraudulent transaction

unknowingly. The police arrested and charged me with

fraud, and that same arresting officer told me that if I paid

him ten thousand dollars, the case would disappear.

“Even if I had the money,” Teresa continued, “why

would I pay a bribe when I had done nothing wrong? I spent

the next two and a half years in and out of courts, fighting

to prove my innocence. It was humiliating to see my face

and name in newspapers and on television. And then, just

before the court date, the court offered me the chance for

freedom—if I paid fifty thousand dollars. But the

investigation had produced no evidence whatsoever of any

crime, so I had no fear of conviction. I refused to pay, and I

found myself locked behind a prison gate.”

The prison guard in Langata issued Teresa a number as

a proxy for her name. As a prisoner, she was given a loose-

fitting black-and-white-striped cotton uniform to wear just

like everyone else. Though her first days in the prison were

full of trepidation, Teresa quickly came to understand how

many of her fellow inmates had simply fallen through the

cracks of society, ending up in jail after having been falsely

convicted, or used as a scapegoat in corrupt systems where

the poor and most vulnerable bear the brunt of society’s

failures.

Living as a prisoner, among prisoners, Teresa came to

reinterpret the misguided stories we tell ourselves about

those who are incarcerated. “Too often, we criminalize

poverty,” she said. “Poor women are arrested for lacking

licenses to hawk their wares on the streets. Technically, they

are breaking the law, but they are trying to sell what little

they have so that they can survive. The same applies when

mothers sometimes steal tiny portions of food to feed their

children or find medicines to keep a sick relative alive.

Again, they might be guilty, but aren’t their stories more

about broken health systems, broken education systems,

broken economic systems? Don’t those stories matter more

than the individual infringements of women and men cast

aside by society before they even had a real chance to

participate?”

Teresa resolved to work on the challenges of the

criminal justice system. “My time in prison was a blessing in

disguise,” she reflected.

Upon her release, she founded an NGO called Clean

Start, to help female prisoners gain the skills and confidence

to participate as full citizens of society. This mission has

become part of who she is: “Daily, I think about the women

in prison and those who have left but are kept out of

society’s opportunities. Daily, I wonder how their children

are faring.”

Teresa’s story begins with the narrative that matters

most to her—her own. The truer we are to the details of our

inner and outer lives, the more universal those details

become. In time, Teresa’s story has become the story of all

imprisoned people. By hewing to her own deepest realities,

she has been able to extend empathy toward prisoners as a

collective group and acknowledge that she is in them, and

they, in her.

The moral leader elevates, providing pathways to

redemption and meaning. Teresa’s narrative is not just

about enduring hardship. It is also about second chances,

and taking charge of your own life. She now enters jails

willingly, lovingly, and finds in the female inmates a life

force that enlivens her spirit and fortifies her will.

The psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl

wrote, “Between stimulus and response there is a space. In

that space is our power to choose our response. In our

response lies our growth and our freedom.” The narratives

we choose to tell ourselves and others can be extremely

consequential, steering us toward roads of despair or

pathways to freedom. The choice is ours to make.

Of course, the space “between stimulus and response”

is no space at all for those who respond emotionally or

defensively to every Facebook post or tweet. Social media

encourages us to post fabulous stories and images, to

curate our personal “brands” based on “best of” lives lived

externally. Meanwhile, our internal realities may painfully

diverge in comparison, making it even more challenging

than in previous generations to be honest with ourselves

about who we are and who we want to be. But the ability to

tell stories that matter starts with the story of self. Those

narratives must be truthful and vulnerable, and grounded in

self-awareness, if we hope to engender trust and enable

self-discovery in those around us.

We fail in this accounting if we reduce our own narrative

to a single defining story. I’ve known too many people who

cling to a narrow definition of themselves, repeating the

same story so many times that they divorce themselves

from their own words, thereby limiting their potential for

growth. I once knew a man who started every introduction

recounting his youth, how he would lie on a mat beneath a

yellow moon, his belly empty and aching as his mother

pretended to cook over an open fire while, in reality, stirring

nothing but water. He shared this narrative in ways that

captivated every audience—at least, the first few times they

heard it.

Over time, I realized that my friend used his childhood

story less to teach or illuminate than to protect from

rejection of the man he had become. While that

impoverished boy would always be a part of him, he had

since become a privileged adult with significant

opportunities and responsibilities. By failing to integrate his

new story into the old, he neither made peace with that

frightened, hungry little boy nor fully acknowledged his

older, successful, complicated self. Consequently, everyone

was cheated from knowing the fullness of him in the

present; and he lost most of all.

In that same vein, diminishing ourselves to elicit

sympathy or pity from those more powerful than ourselves

might result in short-term material payoffs; but those

narratives risk reinforcing negative biases and spiritual

depletion. I once visited a private school for underprivileged

but talented youth in East Africa, and I was overjoyed by the

quality of the young people I met there. At the same time, I

became increasingly dismayed at the way each of them

introduced him- or herself. A beautiful fourteen-year-old girl

with a veil draped softly over her head shared her name and

then immediately launched into her story as a poor village

girl who was beaten by her recently deceased father. A few

minutes later, I met a fifteen-year-old boy dressed in a

perfectly pressed school uniform, his hair neatly combed. He

shook my hand professionally. Before I could ask a question,

he told me that his parents were poor and had no means to

educate him. A third and then a fourth youngster handed

me similar stories of suffering.

My head in a whirl, I thanked the young people for their

time, then excused myself to seek out the headmaster. I

found him outside the school’s well-stocked music room—a

tall, balding man in a blue suit. “Your students are

remarkable,” I began. “I could imagine each of them

running a company, a school system, or even a country in

their lifetimes. But I also feel uncomfortable with the way

they introduce themselves. Rather than painting pictures of

endless, hopeless poverty, why can’t they present

themselves as the highly talented students they are, young

future-oriented people who have earned a right to attend

any school on earth and succeed?”

The headmaster spoke plainly and slowly. “Most visitors,

especially donors, want to know that we use their money for

poor children who would not have the opportunity for

education without them. Philanthropists want to feel good

about their giving; we are simply helping them do that.

Without their funds, there would be no school.”

“But what about the young people themselves?” I

asked. “Doesn’t this beggar approach lock them into

presenting themselves as poor and grateful, rather than

talented and brimming with potential? What message does

this send to the students? And doesn’t it reinforce the savior

complex in wealthy individuals?”

The headmaster’s expression was a mix of

understanding and irritation. “It is hard to raise money,” he

said, and sighed.

I agreed with the hard part, though I deplored his

methods. We will not build strong institutions or confident,

capable people if we don’t tell the whole truth. And we

diminish ourselves when we tell—or heed—stories that

reinforce negative stereotypes.

On the other hand, if we spin yarns from hyperbole and

empty promises, we feel like frauds. I was lucky to be raised

by a mythmaking mother who infused her children with the

belief that we could be anything we wanted to be, provided

we worked hard and didn’t quit. And I was regularly cut

down to size by a rowdy bunch of siblings who, even today,

remind me of the foibles of my youth, making it impossible

for me to take myself too seriously. Stories shape and then

reshape each of us. Stories matter.

Too many children are raised on narratives that reinforce

a sense of inferiority or meekness. Some of those children

grow into adults who never escape society’s low

expectations. Others seem imprisoned in bitter allegories of

their own making. Somewhere along the way, they forgot

that our stories are not set in stone. We might inherit

stories, but it is up to us to craft the narratives of our lives,

just as Teresa, the falsely accused banker, did.

We are raised on stories about characters in bedtime

fables, proverbs, religious texts, and family anecdotes;

these shape our worldviews and color our moral

frameworks. Many of the narratives we inherit also demean

other people. Think of Vimal, the Acumen fellow who, as a

boy, was repeatedly told myths about his caste, deemed the

lowliest of people, humans who deserved no livelihood other

than cleaning toilets or removing human waste. That story

was a “fiction,” if you will, to borrow a meaning for that

word from the Israeli philosopher Yuval Harari. For what is

caste if not a story written by a group of people long ago to

explain the world to themselves (and others) in ways that

protected their privilege by making others inferior and

giving a false sense of order to society?

Our most inspirational leaders share stories of human

possibility in which we can see ourselves; consider the

speeches of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and

Nelson Mandela, for example. Creating counternarratives

that refuse to divide and diminish requires a reclamation of

the parables and histories of people too often unheard,

eliciting from them insightful, true stories that resonate with

everyone’s humanity. Good news lies in spectacular role

models of fortitude and forbearance, decency and dignity,

models who exist in every hamlet and slum, in every city

and on every isolated mountain.

Recounting tales of possibility also impacts the culture

we create. If you want to inspire courageous acts of

integrity, celebrate those who act with courage. As the

philosopher Plato wrote, “What is honored in a country is

cultivated there.”

As the ambulance company Ziqitza began to expand

across India (as told in chapter 10), the founders knew that

the question of culture was paramount to their success. The

company built its reputation on delivering effective services

without bribery or corruption, and that demanded shifting

the expectations not only of the private and public partners,

but of the drivers, emergency medical technicians (EMTs),

and patients as well.

The right stories reinforced those values.

“We are talking about people’s lives,” said Sumit Basu,

the company’s regional manager in Odisha. “What else

matters when you have this responsibility?”

Sumit relayed the story of Pratap Kumar Sethi, an EMT

who noticed an open wallet beside an unconscious man

thrown from his vehicle during an accident. Pratap gathered

up the wallet and found $350 in rupees, more than several

months of his salary. He carried the wallet to the hospital,

holding it tightly until the man involved in the accident was

conscious enough to receive it.

At Ziqitza, Pratap’s story was cause for celebration. The

company made him a hero, elevating him as a role model

and getting local media to spread the news and reinforce

the company’s values. The drivers told me how proud they

felt to be part of a company that was “good,” and stressed

that seeing Pratap celebrated publicly inspired them to do

the right thing as well. Ziqitza cofounder Shaffi Mather later

affirmed that a stronger culture translated into more

effective results.

Our hope for a moral revolution rests on telling stories

that unite, that challenge stereotypes and easy prejudices,

and that ultimately reinforce our dignity. Telling those stories

effectively, however, requires a humility that acknowledges

the light and dark in all of us. When you dare to tell your full

story, you will inevitably touch people who relate to your

most vulnerable elements. And as you dive into the more

painful stories from your past, you may find clues to help

shape the story of who you want to become.

At Acumen, we ask new cohorts of fellows to do an

exercise called River of Life. First, the fellows pair off and

discuss the twists and turns of their lives; then each fellow

shares his or her story with the full group (twenty or so

people). Each narrative contains moments of success and

joy, and inevitably times of sorrow or hurt, tragedy or

shame—and sometimes all of these. They tell of childhoods

trapped in crushing poverty, of tragic losses borne too

young. They have grown up in refugee camps, or they have

lived in terror of the Taliban, Naxalites, paramilitaries, or the

police. They have been betrayed; they have been

abandoned. Some have suffered physical or sexual abuse.

The stories make you weep. Every fellow has a story worth

telling, all of them adding to the story of us, a story still

unfolding.

Listening to people share stories of trauma or loss within

their life trajectories is a profound reminder that our

tragedies neither define nor destroy us. How we respond to

our trauma plays a much greater role; and therein lies the

groundwork for the most important stories we can write, not

with pen and paper but in the way we conduct our lives. The

stories shared during the River of Life exercise are

reminders that some individuals choose service and

kindness or commit to fighting for justice in order to defy

the darkness.

Shameem Akhtar was born to a thirteen-year-old father

and a fifteen-year-old mother in a speck of a village outside

a small city called Mirpur Khas, in the vast desert of Sindh,

Pakistan. Shameem’s father, just a boy himself, was initially

devastated at bringing a girl into the world. The story for

girls in his tribe was that of being unworthy, a burden. He

and his wife wanted more for their child.

Shameem’s father had an elder brother, one of the first

in his family to attend university. The elder suggested that

the young couple raise Shameem as a boy—dress her as a

boy, treat her as a boy, and, most important, educate her as

a boy. No girl of their village had ever attended school, and

this plan would allow her to learn.

Thus began Shameem’s adventures as a little boy,

climbing trees, riding bicycles, and attending school. While

her cousins stayed indoors learning to cook and clean,

Shameem sat at the feet of elder men during jurgas, or

councils, absorbing the rules and practices of political

negotiations. Unlike the village girls, she had the chance to

read newspapers, ask questions of male elders, and dream

of other places.

During a long discussion with Shameem at Acumen’s

Karachi office in July 2018, she shared with me the

contradictions of her childhood: “I felt sorry for the girls in

my village but disliked spending time with them, for they

spoke about clothing and makeup, things that bored me. It

made no sense that the boys had the same hands and feet

as I did, yet were treated so differently. I studied hard to be

the best in my class and prove what girls could do.”

I asked her if she had dreaded finally “becoming” a girl.

“Yes, very much,” she admitted. “By the time I was

sixteen, the villagers could see I was female, and many men

insulted my father. Maybe they didn’t like watching a

daughter do better than their sons.” And though being

treated as a boy gave her physical and mental confidence,

Shameem still feared walking alone in a dress at the

university she was then attending.

And her story was not hers alone. Though her father

was not yet thirty when Shameem left for university, he

accompanied her through every challenge. When she

expressed her apprehension to him, he said simply, “I didn’t

raise you to be afraid.”

Though her father endured misunderstanding and

ridicule for the way he raised Shameem, his determination

that she succeed never wavered. This is a story of a father’s

love as well as of a daughter’s courage and capability.

When we dare to push the edges of comfort, the

narratives we tell ourselves can shape-shift and transform

the world. After university, Shameem learned of a job

opportunity with a regional NGO a five-hour bus ride away

from her village. Again, she asked for her father’s blessing;

and again, he said yes. But she was the one who decided to

live a story that would have no limits, regardless of the

costs. Her education had gifted Shameem with dreams

unavailable to “people like her,” and she was not going to

squander them.

Shameem’s new job exposed her to her country’s

diverse people and places, and also to its poverty. “Now I

could see how much more privileged I was than poor women

who were dying in childbirth because they were too far from

a hospital, or whose poverty forced them to choose which of

their children to feed.” Her perspective broadened further

when, as an Acumen fellow in 2015, she met with leaders

from across her country.

In 2016, inspired by the life choices of others, Shameem

decided to leave her job at the NGO and return to her region

to bring education to other little girls. By then, parents of

children were more amenable to the idea, especially those

who had witnessed Shameem’s family receive the money

she sent back home. But nothing prepared her for the

feeling of “seeing a classroom full of little Shameems”

looking back at her as she told the stories of Nelson

Mandela and other history-making individuals. Those bright,

shining faces were worth the cost of her two-hour bus ride,

twice daily, to reach the schools. In the course of the next

few years, Shameem would also earn her PhD.

Shameem’s narrative is filled with layers and lessons—

about the value of education, the power of courage, and the

strength that comes from having someone in your court. Her

story also reveals the incalculable potential lost when we

deny any human being the freedom to learn and contribute.

And Shameem does not need anyone else to tell her

story. In November 2017, I had the great privilege of

curating a session for the TEDWomen conference in New

Orleans, a session in which Shameem participated. She

arrived from Karachi on Halloween night, and the city

streets were overflowing with residents in outlandish

costumes, portraying every ghoulish, irreverent celebrity

character and personality imaginable. Shameem took it all

in stride, though I assured her that Halloween in New

Orleans was not the only story of that city.

Two days later, she stood proudly onstage. The TED

conference had given this child of the desert, born to

illiterate teenage parents, a platform to speak in her own

words, on her own behalf. In return, Shameem spoke for

every child who has been overlooked because of their

gender, race, ethnicity, class, or disability.

Our collective story is a mosaic of narratives that inspire

our better selves, counter those who would divide us, and

reveal the hidden gifts and capacities that the world would

rather not see. The story of us is ultimately that of love

forever unfolding. And no story matters more than that.

One more thing: one of the most indelible memories of

my life is dancing wildly with my sister, Amy, at her epic,

unforgettable wedding.

Chapter 13

EMBRACE

THE

BEAUTIFUL

STRUGGLE

In November 1992, several friends and I trekked the Borneo

rainforest accompanied by two hardy guides, Mustafa and

Gun. We were there to explore the forest ecosystem, natural

and human. The trip was rough going at times; we trudged

for weeks along narrow pathways through dense,

unforgiving vegetation. We would have been wearied by the

intense humidity that kept our clothing perpetually damp

had a constant flow of leeches not jumped onto our limbs

and distracted us with more pressing concerns. At night,

random bugs and enormous beetles had a way of crawling

into our sleeping bags. Our fresh food ran out after a few

days, leaving us with only heaping piles of rice and canned

sardines for meals. Yet, we daily experienced wonder and

were regularly astonished by the lushness of layered jungle

terrain punctuated by shafts of sunlight peeking through the

filigreed forest canopy overhead.

Our guides were delightful. Though their English was

basic at best, Mustafa and Gun helped us witness firsthand

the cost of human activity wrought by commercial logging,

stopping to point toward groves of tree stumps and wide

roads plunging violently into what used to be fertile forest.

We didn’t spot a single mammal on the journey, and heard

just one gibbon call out to others. As for the local people, an

“Indonesianization” policy had consigned nomadic tribes to

reservation-like villages, uprooting them from their homes

and denying them their culture.

In the course of our journey, I began to see more clearly

the symbiotic relationship between human beings and the

environment. Men hauled teak and other hardwoods from

the rainforest to sell across the world, animals lost their

habitat, and humans lost part of the world’s lungs. Native

peoples could not sustain themselves under the onslaught,

and the entire world paid a price. Here, at the source of our

shared ecosystem, the violence of poverty and greed were

palpable.

Both guides seemed to sense when I was feeling nearly

overwhelmed by the destruction wrought by human beings’

thirst for things. In those moments, the guides would

attempt to distract me from my ruminations, directing my

attention to an exotic orchid or tangled vines or moon

shadows dancing across the trunks of skinny trees

shimmying in the night breeze. I’d find in the astonishing

beauty around me a sign of life urging itself to survive. I’d

also hear an admonition of what we would lose if we didn’t

repair the world.

On one of our final nights in the rainforest, the Borneo

journey gifted the group a moment of transcendence. At the

end of a long, sweltering day, we rested in a small clearing.

We were all bone-tired, unrestored by the sticky sponge

baths we’d taken in a nearby blackwater creek. We ate what

we could of our regular canned dinner and then sat silently

with our guides beneath a veil of mosquito netting. Knowing

we were nearing the end of our adventure, I was desperate

to convey my gratitude and admiration to the guides.

With no knowledge of Bahasa, the guides’ language, I

could express only rudimentary thoughts through my words.

But if we lacked a common language, I reasoned, maybe

there were songs we shared. I started to sing, hoping I’d hit

a tune the guides would recognize. After trying and failing

with at least a dozen songs, I finally chanced upon one of

my favorite Christmas carols: “Silent night, holy night, / All

is calm, all is bright…”

Upon hearing the familiar tune, Mustafa and Gun both

smiled and began to sing. The others joined in, and our little

group became a choir, harmonizing in four languages:

English, Bahasa, German, and French. I felt myself extended

not only to my fellow journeyers but to the forest around us

and all its living things. Long, arduous days immersed in

nature had stripped us of artifice, granting us access to a

deeper level of “knowing” somehow. The night’s flickering

lights and unbidden symphony illuminated the possible,

expanding my soul’s longing to know that all could be

healed.

Silent night, holy night.

When we finally could sing no more, the six of us held

hands for a moment and bowed to the divinity we

experienced in one another.

That night, I went to sleep full of awe and secure in my

belief of an illimitable consciousness that binds us with all

living things. I silently recommitted to work toward human

dignity and a more sustainable earth. And I understood then

that skills and resources are not enough to solve our

problems: we must ground our systems in a spiritual

foundation big enough to sustain our astonishing diversity.

Such a foundation is based on the notion of transcendence,

that all living things are interconnected, that we are

deserving of dignity.

Humans’ growing awareness of our interdependence is

driving people across the planet to reimagine and try to live

by a new set of guiding principles. I see this in the growing

army of social entrepreneurs across the globe, including

those you’ve met in these pages. Some are devoted to

expanding human possibilities. Others are fighting to save

the planet, to reverse the march of so many species toward

extinction, to temper the destructive elements of

technology. No matter your field, there is much to learn from

activists imagining and building new systems together for

our twenty-first-century world.

For example, environmental and animal rights activists

are pressing, sometimes successfully, to enshrine

“nonhuman rights.” In Colombia in April 2018, a group of

twenty-five young people won a court ruling to “recognize

the Colombian Amazon as an entity, subject of rights, and

beneficiary of the protection, conservation, maintenance

and restoration.” New Zealand and several U.S. states have

won similar cases.

This was a game changer based on a moral framework:

if corporations are, for legal purposes, given “personhood,”

and if rivers and forests can have rights, so might animals.

Groups across the globe are beginning to argue that some

mammals like chimpanzees, elephants, and orcas should be

assigned certain rights to protect their survival. These new

frameworks are manifestations of the belief that we can,

and must, transcend our individual needs and desires to

build structures that work for and sustain all of us.

More than a quarter century since that night in the

Borneo rainforest, my youthful aspirations feel affirmed

when I see the progress we are making in reimagining a new

economic system that is both inclusive and sustainable. Yet,

I’m bemused when young people earnestly ask me how I

can be so old and still so passionate about my commitment

to work toward dignity, despite all the inevitable setbacks

and failures. I feel a growing sense of urgency to do more in

the decades that lie in front of me. All of us know that the

work of change is hard, that it is long—sometimes decades

long, sometimes lifetimes long.

So, how do any of us sustain? Every change agent must

find within herself the strength to carry on through the dark

times and the courage to push against a resistant status

quo, not just for a couple of years but, potentially, for

decades. Anger can go a long way, yet it eventually whittles

the soul. External awards may be reinforcing, yet whatever

comfort they provide is fleeting. Any honor bestowed by

others can be taken away. There must be something more,

something that nourishes the spirit and makes slogging for

years through the mud and grime of social change bearable.

I have found sustenance in a part of the journey that

few talked about when I began: beauty. To paraphrase Dr.

King, there is beauty in struggle. There is beauty around us,

beacons of the possible, especially if we still ourselves long

enough to recognize it. Beauty inspires and motivates.

Beauty sustains. The key for each of us is to define what

beauty means for us, to think of it not as superfluous or

indulgent but as an essential part of what it means to be

human.

Life is hard—which may be why humans have insisted

on creating beauty in even the darkest times and in the

meanest places. In every poor community I’ve ever visited,

beauty manifests. Think of tribes the world over that

embellish bowls and farm implements or weave evocative

imagery into everyday fabrics. In the harsh climes of India’s

and Pakistan’s deserts, women collect water wearing the

brightest colors imaginable, multiple clay pots stacked on

their heads and steadied with confident arms encircled with

sparkly bangles. In war zones, I’ve witnessed little girls

walking down dangerous streets in pretty white party

dresses. Even in the grimmest slums of Kampala or Lagos,

women hang beautifully embroidered, diaphanous curtains

to cover walls made of corrugated tin patched with

cardboard and coffee cans: beauty for survival, for bringing

life itself to parched and tired places.

Beauty is an expression of human dignity. It resides in

the work of showing up, of extending ourselves and bringing

kindness when we feel like being anything but kind. Beauty

lives in the narratives of those who are striving to overcome

profound obstacles just to survive. It thrives in the bonds of

human connection and the quiet moments of contemplative

reflection. Let beauty be a powerful touchstone, not only to

reinforce your own resolve, but to rejuvenate those you

serve.

The practice of paying attention is a form of beauty, a

kind of prayer, connecting us in ways that elevate. Hone

that skill so you can encourage it in others. In the 1990s, I

volunteered at Phoenix House, a drug rehabilitation center

on the Upper West Side of New York City. My job was simply

to talk to the female clients. Unsure of how to break the ice

and move to deeper topics, I thought I’d try prompting

conversation with a poem, and chose Maya Angelou’s

“Phenomenal Woman.” I suggested we go around the room,

each of us reading one line, thereby linking ourselves with a

daisy chain of words.

As we started to take turns reading, it became clear that

some of the women were functionally illiterate. As I listened

to one woman stumble over the first word in the poem

—“Pretty women…”—I felt ashamed that I’d set them up for

failure.

Then something magical happened.

The woman sounded out, “Pret-ty” and then reached

toward the group as if to grab the second word.

The other women, in turn, leaned toward her, their

mouths forming the “wo” sound in “women,” lips puckered

as if to blow her a kiss. Soon they were a unified voice,

quietly urging, cheering at the end of each line. By the last

stanza, we were a chorus, a proud group of women singing

from the rooftops: “’Cause I’m a woman / Phenomenally. /

Phenomenal woman, / That’s me.”

Reciting that extraordinary poem created a gentle

opening for us, a way into a deeper conversation about

what it means to be a woman, and that, at least for a

moment, made the future a little less daunting.

The beauty in that room at Phoenix House stemmed

from the collective witnessing of another person visibly

overcoming a challenge. We are most lovable when we are

vulnerable. But the feeling of shared victory was episodic.

Everyone but me had to wake up the next morning and

recommit to the grind of rehabilitation. The work of personal

transformation can be brutal. Daily practices can

supplement small victories at the edges if only to remind

ourselves and each other that we are good, that we are not

alone. Otherwise, the work can feel too hard.

And what of those who are committing to reforming

entire systems, not only their own lives (which can be

difficult enough)? Those people require mastering a sense of

personal grounding, as well as the business practices

needed to make a change process succeed. On both counts,

there are few examples like Dr. Govindappa Venkataswamy,

founder of India’s venerable Aravind Eye Care System. At

age thirty, he was crippled with rheumatoid arthritis, yet he

did not allow the disease or anything else to hold him back.

Instead, he dedicated himself first to overcoming his

physical ailments and then to becoming one of the most

highly skilled surgeons in India.

At fifty-eight, the age when his peers faced mandatory

retirement, Dr. V left the Indian civil service and embarked

on a quest to end treatable blindness. He had seen the toll

of blindness on his fellow citizens, especially the poor, who

could not afford cataract surgery. He also understood the

nourishment that can come from serving others and knew

he had a gift to offer the world. Unfazed by his age,

infirmities, or lack of significant financial resources, he just

started.

In 1976, in a tiny house fitted with merely eleven beds

in the south Indian town of Madurai, Dr. V founded Aravind

Eye Care System, resolving to provide eye care services to

all people regardless of their ability to pay. Then he went in

search of the most elegant and efficient solutions to

bringing cataract surgery, affordably, to millions of India’s

poorest—and to do so with a financially sustaining business

model.

I first met Dr. V in 2002. He had driven himself to meet

me at Madurai’s tiny airport and was standing at the gate

leaning on a wooden walking cane, his hair thick and white,

a mischievous twinkle in his eye. As he drove me into town,

he described his beloved Aravind Eye Care System like a

young man excited by ideas and possibilities and recounted

how he acquired knowledge wherever he could find it.

“We had to build a system that was fast, low-cost, high-

quality, and accessible to the poor,” Dr. V explained.

He told us how in his search for effective business

models, he was taken by the American fast-food company

McDonald’s, which broke down operational processes into

distinct, repeatable practices. The Aravind Eye Hospital

would do the same, he decided. Surgeons stand in the

operating theater and do what they do best: perform

cataract surgeries. Trained health workers prepare patients,

deliver them to the operating theater, and then take them

to the recovery rooms, where other health workers support

the post-op processes.

Had Dr. Venkataswamy integrated only McDonald’s

values of efficiency and accountability, his business model

could have made him a very wealthy man. But Aravind’s

mission was to eradicate blindness among the poor, and Dr.

Venkataswamy believed in the interconnection of all things.

His spiritual philosophy undergirded a business model that

was driven, first and foremost, to provide eye care to all

people, regardless of their ability to pay, and to treat the

poorest with the respect and dignity they deserved.

In other words, Dr. V’s spiritual philosophy, which put

the poor first, required toughness and discipline that far

exceeded the skills and resolve of businesses pursuing

profits alone. That same philosophy sustained his focus on

his mission for forty years. In turn, Dr. Venkataswamy

integrated those values into every operational aspect of this

nonconforming eye hospital system.

Aravind Eye Hospitals remains one of the most powerful

pro-poor business models I have ever encountered. “It is not

enough to provide essential eye care to the blind for free,”

Thulsi Ravilla, the genius businessman who worked closely

with Dr. V, explained to me. “Our starting point was

ensuring that all people could access eye care. If you want

to serve the poorest, you have to consider and integrate

their costs of giving up a day’s earnings and paying bus fare

to and from the hospital.” The result of Aravind’s efforts has

been to deliver world-class health care to more than fifty-

five million low-income patients, half of whom do not pay.

Dr. Venkataswamy’s spiritual grounding kept him

focused on creating an operational model that would

succeed only if it effectively served the poor. Taking time

daily to replenish and renew his commitment to his mission,

he was up well before the sun each day; spent hours in

reflection and meditation, reciting Sri Aurobindo’s epic poem

Savitri; and reminded himself that divinity exists in the

interconnection of all things.

To meet Dr. V was to experience a man who remained

present in the here and now, focused on human potential

with no trace of despondency. It was impossible to refrain

from smiling around him, as his spirit and unbridled laughter

lit up a room. In his own words, “Intelligence and capability

are not enough. There must be the joy of doing something

beautiful.” For more than thirty years, Dr. V sustained his

vision with the wisdom of an elder and the curiosity of a

child. Though he died in 2006, his legacy is alive in the

minds and vision of millions who have been changed for the

better because he existed.

Dr. Venkataswamy confidently wove his understanding

of the material world and its realities with his unabashed

belief in human interconnectedness and dignity. Whether

you are fighting to solve poverty, to heal the earth, to

reform the criminal justice system, or pursuing a host of

other aims, there will inevitably be moments when the more

established world makes you feel like a fool for “not

understanding business” or “being soft” or for trying too

hard. Remember, again, in those times that real love is a

hard skill. I also hope you can find rituals, whether religious

or decidedly nonreligious, to sustain and connect you more

fully to the realization that we are on this fragile planet for a

short time, that we are here together, that all we have is

one another. And that you are enough.

I’ve been moved to see young people breathe new life

into ancient rituals. Fahad Afridi, a Pashtun Acumen fellow in

Pakistan, told me that when he touches his head to the

ground in prayer, he is reminded to pause and feel gratitude

for the earth, for all we are given. In this I heard echoes of

an Acumen India teammate, Karuna Jain, who shared her

family’s tradition of starting each day by feeding seeds to

birds outside their home as a touchstone for our

interdependence. Others pursue yoga or meditation; they

might read or listen music, or dance, or walk or run in

nature. What matters is pausing long enough to pay

attention, to hear yourself, to bring a small respite to the

day.

There are a thousand ways to reconnect to the here and

now. The Jesuits practice a daily examen, a quick check-in

with themselves, once at noon and again at the end of the

day. I have adapted a shortened four-step version. In the

morning, set your intention for what you hope to do or how

you hope to be during the day. At noon and/or in the

evening, step back and assess how you are doing and what

you’re learning from both success and failure. Third, forgive

yourself for where you failed. And fourth, express gratitude.

When I remember to incorporate this short practice into my

day, I feel calmer, more focused, more grounded.

There is wisdom in practices that entreat us to pause, to

breathe, to contemplate what we are here to do. It takes

only a moment to remind myself that my very life depends

on the millions who toil planting the food we eat, making the

clothes we wear—and that our interconnection demands

some sort of reciprocity. I try to start most days reading a

poem—Rumi, Hafiz, Mary Oliver, Rainer Maria Rilke, Seamus

Heaney, Maya Angelou, and Marie Howe are among my

favorites. Poets trade in the universal, the transcendent, the

awe-inspiring simplicity of the world. The silence between

their words is almost a meditation itself.

My most consistent and timeworn ritual is to go for a

morning run. I love to feel my body come alive as the world

wakes up, to breathe in the colors of the sky, to mark the

changes in seasons, to explore new places and rekindle

delight in being alive. No matter how bad things get—and

thirty-plus years of working on poverty is a long time—a run

restores my spirit and readies me for the day. Of course,

these are simply my practices employed to help sustain my

life’s work and hopefully make me a better leader. Whoever

you are and whatever you do, I hope you can find your own

ways to make time to nourish your spirit and find a sense of

wholeness even when the world is trying to break you. I

hope you balance action with time for reflection.

A decade ago, when I published The Blue Sweater, I was

surprised to receive so many letters from readers who

voiced their desire to be of use. None moved me, though,

like the long text message I received from a man named

Kevin George Otieno, a resident of the Kibera slum in

Nairobi. Kevin had found the book through an Acumen

fellow, Suraj Sudhakar, who was working at a company that

operated pay-per-use city toilets according to a different

model from that of Sanergy. Kevin was hanging around the

toilet operation, asking about Suraj’s work. Eventually, Suraj

offered him a copy of my book—on the condition that Kevin

write and send me a review.

A few weeks later, I received a long text from Kevin:

“I’m just like you,” he wrote. “Like you, I have failed many

times. I was only able to complete third grade. I am HIV-

positive and out of work. But if you have failed in your life

and still made so many changes, then it gives me hope that

I can, too. And just like you, I also want to help bridge the

gap between rich and poor.”

I was speechless, glad that documenting my own

failures could help someone so different from me overcome

some of his fears. After reflecting for a day or so, I wrote

Kevin back. “If you’d like to give my book to other friends

who might enjoy reading it, I’m happy to send copies to

you,” I wrote. “But I’d like to hold a book club to hear from

your friends.”

“Deal,” Kevin replied. “I’ll take a hundred.”

So began the Blue Sweater Book Club, organized by

Kevin, his friend Alex Sanguti, and five others. Despite their

hardscrabble lives (selling eggs on the street, working as

laborers, sometimes earning the equivalent of about thirty

cents for a day’s work), they each found time to distribute

the one hundred books to fellow slum residents.

Driving through Kibera’s muddy alleyways the day of

the book club meeting, I was unprepared for what I saw.

More than a hundred people were crammed into Mama

Hamza’s community center, a corrugated-tin box of a room

outfitted with white plastic chairs. I felt overcome with

shyness, acutely aware of my privilege while writing about

poor people living in slums like this one. I desperately did

not want to let this group down.

The self-proclaimed “controller,” Kevin kicked off the

event, cheekily warning the other club members that he

would cut off anyone who was long-winded. “This is about

the future,” he proclaimed.

Alex went next, speaking about experiences that had

taught him that tribalism and nepotism were barriers to

one’s goals in life.

“If you ate a meal or slept with a roof over your head

last night,” he said, “remember that many have it much

worse than you do.”

The two were a hard act to follow. The slum dwellers

asked many questions—how to start a business, how to find

funding for a local project—and I did my best to respond.

Then a young woman, slender, short, and muscular, wearing

jeans and a dark cotton blouse, piped up from the back:

“I’m a teenager and a single mother. I have no money,

and I’m HIV-positive. How can I be a leader? Who will follow

me?”

I stammered through a nonresponse, citing Jesus and

Muhammad, and then some people whose names no one

there recognized. I was embarrassed to have drawn a blank,

as I knew so many audacious, competent leaders of humble

backgrounds from this young woman’s city. But at just that

moment, out of the crowd, a beautiful woman in a flaming

red dress stepped forward. I recognized her at once: Jane.

We’d met through Jamii Bora, the Nairobi-based

microfinance organization. Her story was full of

backbreaking challenges, yet she was a survivor.

Jane spoke directly to the skeptical young woman, from

her own experiences. “If you had known me ten years ago,

you would not believe I am here today,” she said. “I was a

prostitute for seven years before I came to Jamii Bora. By

then, I was also a single mother with HIV. Jamii Bora taught

me to sew, and now I am a tailor. My children are happy.

And I feel so lucky that I volunteer at the health clinic to

counsel people who have just discovered they are HIV-

positive.

“I grew up very poor. I could not follow my dreams to be

a doctor because of what life gave me. But now, in some

ways, I’m better. You see, doctors, they give out pills. But

me, I give out hope.”

Jane began to turn around and then stopped, looking

again at the agitated teen mom. “Everyone can be a

leader,” she said. “Don’t make excuses.”

The larger conversation continued, and I tried to direct

more of the queries toward the other people standing in the

room, but the questions to me continued. And just like Kevin

in his original text to me, many people started their queries

with the phrase “I’m just like you, but…”

I started to feel like a fraud.

“I appreciate your generosity and your humility,” I

finally said, “but the truth is, you are not just like me. I live

in a good neighborhood in New York City and attended some

of the country’s best schools. I hold an American passport

and my skin is white. I travel around the world and know the

freedom in my privilege. I hope I never take it for granted,

but my life is very different.”

Mama Hamza, the irrepressible entrepreneur in charge

of the community center, broke into a huge grin. “We know

that,” she said. “Yes, you are privileged. But still, you fight

for issues we fight. You care about the changes we want to

make. You fail and sometimes succeed—like we do. You see

yourself as part of us. This is what makes us like you—and

you like us.”

On the way back to my hotel, I shared a van with

Catherine Casey Nanda and Jocelyn Wyatt, two younger

colleagues who have since become close friends. We drove

in silence through Kibera’s still-muddy streets, each of us

lost in thought, my heart lodged in my throat. Something

had happened in Mama Hamza’s center. We had all shown

up simply as ourselves, to learn and gather in communion.

I was no longer that young woman trying and failing to

lead a diverse group of young Americans when I could not

fully acknowledge my own identity. I wondered what had

taken me so long to remove every mask I’d ever worn and

finally show up as no one else but my truest self.

The transcendence of that experience at Mama Hamza’s

was another reminder that we are part of something bigger

than ourselves. Instead of kneeling in a grandly lit cathedral

or a mosque with soaring ceilings, we stood together in a

dark, makeshift community center in an impoverished slum,

yet the ground in Kibera on that night felt no less sacred.

That precious moment continues to feed my commitment all

these years later. That evening, I was able to acknowledge

the beauty inside myself and, in so doing, make it easier for

others to acknowledge what was good and beautiful inside

them. The theologian Howard Thurman has called that quiet

recognition “the sound of the genuine.” When we reveal our

most genuine selves, not only do we invite the same from

others, but the choice to work toward something beyond

ourselves becomes inevitable.

Finally, when times are terrible—and few of us escape

living without experiencing tragedies and sorrows—there is

sustenance in beauty manifested in service, in the arts, in

rebuilding what has been destroyed. In 1994, I had the

immense privilege of sitting alone with fabled dancers of

Cambodia’s Royal Ballet at their modest studio in Phnom

Penh. During the mid- to late 1970s, under the Pol Pot

regime, the Khmer Rouge army murdered over a million

Cambodians, targeting intellectuals and artists. Just thirty

classical dancers survived the war, and only three remained

living when I visited to learn about their work as part of the

Philanthropy Workshop, a program I had created at the

Rockefeller Foundation.

A petite gray-haired woman dressed in wide-legged

yellow trousers and a deep red jacket imparted her

recollections of the refugee camps after the war. She was

elegant and graceful, with a perfect carriage. “I would lie in

my cot,” she said softly, “and try to piece together the

dances but could only hold on to fragments,” she recalled.

“You see, our dances have been passed down through each

generation orally, for more than a thousand years. Only we,

the dancers, held the keys to reviving this part of our

nation’s heritage. I desperately hoped that other dancers

might still be alive, trying to remember, as I was.” These

women’s recollections were links to the dances’ revival—and

their immortality.

Once the surviving dancers had found one another, they

pledged to train their grandchildren’s generation—their

daughters’ generation had already grown too old—in the

ancient techniques of the Royal Ballet. She spoke calmly,

slowly, her gaze straight at me while tears trickled down her

face, not once lifting her hand to dry her cheeks.

Suddenly, little girls pranced into the studio for practice.

Watching the class, I was mesmerized as the elderly women

stood at the center of the room clapping to beguiling

rhythms of age-old music played by old men with slender,

creative hands sitting at the edge of the dance floor. Little

fairy pixies pirouetted around the women, a circular rainbow

of fluttering iridescent silks surrounding slender, wise old

trees. The bland room metamorphosed into an enchanted

garden.

After unimaginable bloodshed and loss, I thought to

myself, there is dance. There is a new generation to teach.

And in that new generation is a chance for rebirth. The

elderly dancers, nearly annihilated, were honoring what was

most beautiful about the nation’s past and building it into

the future, forging a hard-edged hope out of suffering,

beauty, and faith.

Faith does not have to be religious, and prayer can take

a thousand forms. We are on dangerous ground when “faith”

becomes associated with political parties, or when

nonbelievers are seen as heretics rather than seekers. A

moral framework for an interdependent world has no place

for religious practices that divide. What matters instead is

that we agree to at least some shared moral principles that

enable our collective human flourishing. In whatever form

faith takes for you, I wish you a reservoir from which you

can draw sustenance. May you find ways and rituals to

remind you to be present in the world, to be grateful.

When you are broken or exhausted—and you will be—

remember beauty, gratitude, faith, and love. Remember

that in the struggle, there is a beauty that endures.

Remember that there will be beauty in moments of tragedy

as well as in times of shared celebration. But most

important, remember that beauty is inside you, if you let it

be.

Chapter 14

MANIFESTO

A few times a year, I run or walk uptown along New York

City’s Hudson River to pay homage to a hero from my

childhood whose example has accompanied me throughout

my life. At the entry to Riverside Park, under soaring oak

trees, stands a giant-size bronze statue of Eleanor

Roosevelt, human rights activist and one of America’s most

venerable First Ladies. Mrs. Roosevelt’s figure, attired in a

simple dress and a spring coat, leans casually against a

boulder, her hand at her chin, her distinctive face in restive

contemplation. Silently, I thank her for her service to her

country and the world.

Because she dared, the world is a different place.

Because she had the courage to stand for those who were

excluded, my life as a woman is radically better than it

would have been had I been born in her era. Because she

maintained her faith in the goodness of people while having

a front seat to one of the darkest times in human history, I

try to assume that same goodness in others.

Mrs. Roosevelt embodied principles of moral leadership,

renewing her commitment time and again to remake an

imperfect world. If she harbored inner doubts, she

nonetheless displayed a willingness to confront her fears

and undertake exceedingly demanding and sometimes

delicate tasks in service of her commitment to others. I can

only imagine the tensions Mrs. Roosevelt had to balance—

first, as a wife and First Lady who sometimes openly

disagreed with her husband’s policies; and second, as a

leader who believed in and fought for the rights of African

Americans, low-wage workers, and women in her country

while also embracing the duties of America’s responsibility

to fight a world war. Hers was a public life with its own share

of private pain, in which she grew in wisdom and

effectiveness until the end of her days—because she tried.

As a young woman, Mrs. Roosevelt was not particularly

aware of race issues in America. But as the wife of a

president fighting a war over human rights in Europe, and

with the encouragement of resolute African Americans

willing to speak their own truths to power, she expanded her

understanding. She listened. She took valiant, unpopular

stands to push for expanded rights for African Americans. In

return, she was called a Communist, a traitor, and, I’m sure,

much worse. But as she practiced acts of moral courage,

she became more courageous. And through it all, she lost

neither her humility nor her audacity.

In 1946, the world was only beginning to recover from a

war of murderous destruction: thirty million lives lost, many

because they were deemed by some to be less valuable

than others. A manifesto was called for to renew the world’s

most urgently needed values. Mrs. Roosevelt’s crowning

achievement was chairing the United Nations Commission

on Human Rights. She played an influential role in drafting

the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which in

December 1948 the UN General Assembly proclaimed as the

international standard for human rights. In it, Mrs. Roosevelt

and her coauthors set forth a rights-based framework with

the hope of protecting future generations from the horrors

the world had just endured.

That Declaration, one of history’s most aspirational

expressions of what we owe one another as human beings,

established human rights as a moral principle to be

nourished and protected. The Declaration is based firmly on

the equality of all human beings. By virtue of being born

human, the document argues, every person should be

guaranteed the right to be treated as nothing less than

human. Consider the opening lines of its preamble:

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the

equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human

family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the

world.” In this single principle, the immutable value of

human dignity stands front and center.

Without doubt, seventy years later, most countries still

fall short of meeting some of the most basic rights, whether

it be the right to equal protection of the law or the right to

education and a “fair and adequate living standard.” Read

the Declaration’s principles and it becomes impossible to

resist shaking your head at how far the world remains from

the aspirations inscribed in it many decades ago. Reread it

and you might discover gaps where more aspiration is in

order.

Some disagree with the Declaration’s core premise.

Cynics and strongmen may scoff that the Declaration of

Human Rights is hopelessly idealistic or unrealistic. Others

would willingly trade off political freedoms (of free speech or

the protection of minorities, for instance) to know their

economic rights are protected above all. In unstable times,

humans’ fear of scarcity, hurt, and loss causes too many of

us to lean on the false security of privilege by excluding or

blaming others.

While imperfect, the Declaration has endured as one of

the most important documents of all time. It has been

translated into more than 330 languages, and while not

legally enforceable, it has assumed a moral and political

significance, inspiring generations to protect the oppressed

and those who speak out on their behalf. It has served as

the basis for constitutions and treaties, setting forth

standards for expanding what is owed every human being if

we hope to live with true dignity.

I am far from being an expert on Eleanor Roosevelt, yet I

wonder what she would have thought of the early decades

of the twenty-first century. I imagine she’d have been

pleased by the continued expansion of individual rights and

freedoms, and astonished by how individualistic yet

interdependent we have become. I’d guess she’d have been

curious about the juxtaposition of the possibilities and perils

of a technologically connected world. She would almost

certainly have recognized the continued relevance of her

belief that human rights begin “in small places, close to

home—so close and so small that they cannot be seen on

any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the

individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school

or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he

works.”

Though our greatest threats are divergent from those

Eleanor Roosevelt’s generation faced, in many countries

around the world there is a chilling symmetry in the

spreading fear of the “other.” The burgeoning refugee crisis

prompts one to ask: who is responsible for masses of people

who, no longer able to survive on their lands, have no

choice but to leave behind everything and everyone dear to

them? Climate change, the phenomenon most critical to

humanity’s shared future, was not even contemplated in the

mid-twentieth century. The earth is witnessing the

extermination of species at a shocking rate, imperiling our

food supplies, our oceans, and the equilibrium and beauty of

nature. A new declaration infused with the moral

imagination of a new generation might consider not only our

rights, then, but our responsibilities, recognizing that if we

do not sustain the earth, human rights will die along with

our species.

In a time of low trust, such a manifesto will not come

from on high—certainly not one that will guide our daily

actions. Yet we face threats that carry within them perilous

consequences and untold opportunities—not for some, but

for the human race as a whole—challenges requiring each of

us to renew the values of human dignity, basic rights, and

decency. When we finally muster the courage to change

ourselves, only then can we change the world.

Freedom does not exist without constraint. Saying aloud

those values that bind us, whether we start with our

families, our organizations, our communities, or our nations,

is a start. Aspiring to live those values is the next step.

Within each of us lies the basis for the only revolution that

will save us: a moral revolution.

In 2011, we at Acumen put into writing our deepest

beliefs about the work we do to use investment as a tool for

social change and to build a community of remarkable

people—social entrepreneurs, fellows, philanthropists,

impact investors, committed students, and agents of

change. I offer you Acumen’s manifesto here simply as one

example of a declaration of principles that guide a

community dedicated to being part of the moral revolution

called for by our divided world. This declaration of principles

is aspirational, but it has become a moral compass, a daily

reminder of who we aim to be and who we practice being:

It starts by standing with the poor. Listening to

voices unheard, and recognizing potential where

others see despair.

It demands investing as a means, not an end,

daring to go where markets have failed and aid

has fallen short. It makes capital work for us, not

control us.

It thrives on moral imagination: the humility to

see the world as it is, and the audacity to

imagine the world as it could be. It’s having the

ambition to learn at the edge, the wisdom to

admit failure, and the courage to start again.

It requires patience and kindness, resilience and

grit: a hard-edged hope. It’s leadership that

rejects complacency, breaks through

bureaucracy, and challenges corruption. Doing

what’s right, not what’s easy.

It’s the radical idea of creating hope in a cynical

world. Changing the way the world tackles

poverty and building a world based on dignity.

Acumen’s manifesto has served our global community

well. The phrase “It starts by standing with the poor”

confronts us in every investment meeting and at every

management session as we grapple with how to ensure that

our work favorably impacts low-income populations. The

idea of “investing as a means, not an end” requires that we

balance financial returns with the goals we seek. Balancing

patience with urgency, calling out our own failures,

committing to resilience, yet knowing when to call it quits—

our commitment to these values sets standards that better

us.

And we’re far from perfect: though a sense of humor, of

joy, and a willingness to forgive ourselves and others are

not included in the manifesto, they nourish and sustain us.

My team and board have had many discussions about

the word poor, and how language can be limiting.

Ultimately, Acumen has maintained the word poor because

we see poverty simply as a lack of choice and opportunity;

the word says nothing about a person’s character. Indeed,

some of the richest lives I have ever encountered have been

lives of scarce means, while others with the financial

advantages of kings have been desperately lacking in spirit.

Although we don’t mention the earth in our manifesto,

Acumen’s community assumes that if you care about

poverty, you will also focus on climate change, which

continues to harm the vulnerable disproportionately more

than the wealthy. This set of guiding principles has provided

steady grounding, especially in those times when solid land

is unavailable.

I have also observed with awe how embodying values

can ripple across lands and oceans to unexpected places.

Don’t underestimate the impact you can have as a parent, a

teacher, a colleague, an organization builder. When I started

Acumen, I dreamed of touching the lives of millions, though

the actual community we directly worked with was relatively

small.

If you include only the philanthropists, entrepreneurs,

and fellows with whom Acumen interacts directly, then two

decades after its founding our work reaches thousands. If

you include the participants who have taken our online

courses for social change, Acumen’s principles have

affected hundreds of thousands. But if you count the low-

income people whose lives are tangibly different because a

community of individuals decided they could do more for

the world together than any one of them could accomplish

alone, our efforts have impacted hundreds of millions.

To be of use, a manifesto based in a moral framework fit

for the twenty-first century must connect with values that

transcend nation, culture, religion, race, and class.

Identifying a minimum set of values, though essential, is not

always straightforward. Sometimes, in quiet moments, I’ve

reflected on how many people in Acumen’s community were

raised to hate other members within our global circle.

Whether with fellows, entrepreneurs, or the customers our

companies serve, I’m regularly in conversation with people

whose parents taught them that certain neighbors were

“bad” or “evil.” The global community comprises groups of

deeply wounded people from places or of ethnicities,

genders, or sexual identities under grave threat of

persecution.

Yet cutting across every line that attempts to divide us

is the growing recognition that we are bound to one another

by virtue of our shared humanity and quest for dignity. I’ve

been inspired by many people who grew up in communities

that rejected other traditions but are now choosing to

embrace a universal truth: there is divinity in each of us,

and we are connected to something greater than ourselves.

And whether you believe that dignity comes from God or

is inherent simply in our having been born human, the end

result is the same. Every one of us deserves to be seen, to

be respected, to determine his or her own life. Every one of

us is owed a fighting chance to flourish.

From the beginning, my partners and I built Acumen as

a deliberately diverse community, not for its own sake but

so that we could use that diversity to know and to learn

from one another how to navigate the growing tensions in

our world. We wanted to affirm our differences without

erasing them, arriving at a sense of wholeness based on

commonly shared values.

That commitment to one another and to shared values

requires a willingness to confront obstacles to listening, to

seeing, to making true human connection. The work of

building our community requires being open to other faiths,

cultures, and traditions, to celebrating what is most

essential in each of them while building the courage to

speak up about that which no longer serves. We commit

ourselves to being members of a single human family,

beyond any nation or religion, caste or tribe. This work is

difficult and it is long, but it is the work of the moral

revolution, the only way to build a future that will sustain us.

Your organization or business might work from different

foundational principles than Acumen. The point is to reflect

and put your purpose and values into words to serve as your

own compass for decisions and actions, not only as an

organization but as individuals.

Statements of values can guide actions and reinforce

bonds of community—if they are lived. I’ve seen religious

communities mask terrible acts with beautiful words from

sacred texts, and I’ve witnessed philanthropists make

change in one area of their lives while engaging in unethical

practices elsewhere. To unite any group, let alone the world,

in common purpose requires role models and business

models that demonstrate values made manifest.

Muhammad Ali, an Acumen Pakistan fellow, is one such

role model who relentlessly lives his values. I first met him

in 2014, while leading a two-day seminar with his cohort of

twenty fellows. This group of fellows and I again used

literature as a springboard to conversation aimed at

clarifying each individual’s values, as well as identifying

common beliefs held by this very diverse group of human

beings.

When we first introduced ourselves, I was struck by

Muhammad Ali’s unassuming manner. He wore simple wire-

frame glasses, his dark hair combed to the side, his

mustache neatly trimmed, his button-down shirt and khaki

trousers perfectly pressed. He spoke broken English in a soft

voice that made him appear a bit shy at first. I imagined him

working in an accountant’s office. This could not have been

further from the truth.

Once he opened his mouth, Muhammad Ali quickly

impressed me with the quality of his ideas, grounded in

ancient texts, and his commitment to putting his ideals into

action. His values were based unyieldingly in the inherent

worth of every child and an insistence that it was society’s

duty to protect all children.

By the time I met him, Muhammad Ali had spent twenty

years rescuing children caught in the dark world of human

trafficking. In 2004, he’d founded Roshni Helpline, to identify

and rescue the missing children of the dispossessed.

Muhammad Ali spoke with understandable anger about

sexual assault, false adoption, prostitution, child labor—just

a few of the myriad reasons a child goes missing in Karachi

every day.

Muhammad Ali railed against the inequitable system

that rallied the police, media, and community members to

search for a single missing child of privilege while thousands

of poor children who disappeared each year across the

country drew little to no notice; they were left to experience

their terror alone. Few resources, either philanthropic or

governmental, focused on the children who lived at society’s

furthest edges.

Fighting human trafficking requires confronting the

ugliest parts of ourselves, sides that many would rather not

see. To better understand how Muhammad Ali’s values

translated into results, in 2017 I drove with Acumen’s

Pakistan director, Ayesha Khan, to a Karachi slum area

known for high levels of insecurity and violence and climbed

a pale-blue staircase to the small second-story office of

Roshni Helpline.

There, Muhammad Ali recounted how his mission to

protect vulnerable children had led him to discover one of

his most deeply held values: the power of a diverse

community. “In the beginning, our organization had little

money or staff,” he explained, “and I soon recognized that if

we were going to find a lost child, we could only do it with

the full support of the community we were trying to serve.”

He ultimately called upon the police and relied on a complex

informant system of thousands of local volunteers, including

shopkeepers, street children, and Karachi’s transgender

community.

Transgender community members, a highly visible but

discriminated group, have been fundamental to Roshni’s

success. Though they can be seen begging on streets and

dancing at weddings in Karachi, transgender folks typically

exist at the margins, with little access to jobs or income,

living in informal housing with “chosen families” of people

like them. Where others regarded transgender people as

outsiders, Muhammad Ali recognized them as potential

partners. “Traffickers often move children through

underground routes that include bus stations, where

transgender people can often be found. They were willing to

help and have been our best volunteers.”

During our visit, I had the privilege of sitting with

several of Roshni’s transgender volunteers. The group

leader, Hina Pathani, wore a flowered shalwar kameez, her

dark hair pulled back into a bun, tendrils framing her face.

She explained that while she and other transgender

volunteers had little money, they took great pride in their

work. “I love my country,” Hina said. “I want to be known for

contributing, for doing something that makes me proud, and

not to be seen as less than others.”

Muhammad Ali set free the potential of community

members who collectively became the superpower enabling

Roshni’s success. To date, the organization has saved nearly

four thousand people, most of whom are children. Only

through enlisting the help of the marginal and vulnerable

could Muhammad Ali succeed, finding the strength to do

what traditional child protection systems could not.

Muhammad Ali knows that four thousand people may

not sound like a lot to outsiders, but each of those children

represents a family. Each of those children represents a life

to be lived. Muhammad Ali’s work, which reveals the best of

human conscientiousness countering the worst of human

depravity, reminds me of lines from the poem “The

Pedagogy of Conflict,” by the human rights activist and Irish

theologian Pádraig Ó Tuama:

When I was a child,

I learnt to count to five:

One, two, three, four, five.

But these days, I’ve been counting lives, so I

count

One life.

One life.

One life.

One life.

One life.

In a world that too often views our most indigent

children as throwaways, Muhammad Ali is a candle burning

to ensure that we behold the unseen.

Despite his local effectiveness, Muhammad Ali lacked

access to financial and human resources to expand his

reach. This is where our responsibility for extending social

capital to voices unheard cannot be overestimated. Since

becoming associated with Acumen, Roshni Helpline has

worked with no fewer than ten fellows who’ve volunteered

services in marketing, communications, technology, and

government affairs. A few months after I visited, the

Acumen team took a small delegation of our philanthropic

partners from Pakistan and the United States to see

Muhammad Ali’s work firsthand. A few of the locals had

never been to the part of town where Roshni worked; nor

had they ever had a real conversation with transgender

folks.

By the end of the day’s visit, the philanthropists had

agreed to fund Roshni’s entire budget for the following three

years. Wealthy individuals signed on as ambassadors,

spreading the word about Roshni’s work and raising enough

money to build a safe house for traumatized children.

Putting the Acumen manifesto’s values into action, the

philanthropists encouraged Muhammad Ali to be audacious

in his plans, yet they maintained the humility to listen to

what the founder of Roshni most needed rather than

imposing their own desires.

Momentum built. The Karachi police requested that

Roshni Helpline train its officers to be of better support. A

local paint company sponsored artists to paint portraits of

the missing children on the elaborately decorated trucks

that drive across the country—and within months, a child

who’d been missing for seven years was rescued. Fifteen

years after Muhammad Ali founded Roshni Helpline,

Pakistan’s Supreme Court is making the kidnapping of

children under age eighteen a cognizable crime, which

means the police now will have the authority to investigate.

By valuing not only the individual but the communities

that support that person, Muhammad Ali has tapped into

many people’s urge to be of use. The transgender

volunteers along with philanthropists, designers, marketers,

artists, a public relations company, and others are

demonstrating what is possible when a diverse group of

individuals unites to reweave the torn fabric of society.

When we do this, we recognize not only our powers to heal,

but our entanglement with one another. We gain the chance

to remind ourselves that we are in this world together, that

all we have is each other, that, to use words of the poet

Gwendolyn Brooks, “We are each other’s harvest.”

James Kassaga Arainaitwe is an Acumen fellow from

Western Uganda who lost both parents and all four of his

siblings to disease, including AIDS, before he was ten years

old. Kassaga (his preferred name) was raised by his

grandmother, a gentle battle-ax of a woman fiercely focused

on giving her grandchild two treasures no one could take

from him: self-discipline and an education. When local

schooling options ran out at age eleven, she put Kassaga on

a bus alone for the three-hundred-kilometer journey to the

childhood village in southwestern Uganda where the

nation’s President Museveni maintained his personal home.

Kassaga’s grandmother figured the small boy would

somehow find a champion to help him meet the president’s

family and secure a scholarship to school.

His grandmother’s risk paid off. Because of his tenacity,

Kassaga met the country’s First Lady, and not only found a

place to learn in Uganda, but went on to attend Florida State

University on a full scholarship.

As an Acumen fellow, Kassaga worked in Bangalore,

India, at Gayathri Vasudevan’s LabourNet, the company

described in chapter 3 that provides effective vocational

and entrepreneurial training for low-income workers. On

weekends, Kassaga would volunteer at a school for low-

income students. That experience reconnected him with

what had initially saved him: education.

Dots connected: During his time in India, Kassaga met

Acumen fellows who’d worked with Teach for India, a part of

the powerful Teach for All network founded by Wendy Kopp.

They began a brainstorm that would expand to include other

fellows who were designers and strategists. Soon, Kassaga,

aided by an Indian community of trusted partners,

conceptualized and created Teach for Uganda.

In times of growing fears and divides, citizens are the

future of a new global diplomacy. Values-driven communities

can expedite making global ambassadors of all of us. The

India fellows had forged a bond with Kassaga over their

shared experiences with Acumen and their belief that every

child deserves a basic quality education. As Kassaga later

wrote me, “Their tireless sacrifice for an organization in a

country they’ve never stepped foot in reveals more than

just their love for me. It shows the interconnectedness of

humanity. To them, I was not seen as the ‘other.’ I became

their brother, and they became my sisters and brothers. It is

the African spiritual ideal of ubuntu, or ‘human kindness,’

that forever unites me with them.”

Kassaga is supported in myriad ways by Acumen’s

Ugandan fellows, who provide him with training,

connections, a needed ear, and what we at Acumen

affectionately call a “one-armed hug”—enough support to

stand with someone, but not so much that you disable

them. With the support of a local and global community

behind him, Kassaga is primed to make Teach for Uganda a

success, unleashing the energies of a new generation and

bringing back the best of what other regions have to offer to

the country he calls home.

A revolution of values is one that necessarily relies on

countless, immeasurable daily heroic acts. Unified in the

pursuit of dignity, we can serve in a thousand ways.

Fortified by one another, we can choose to celebrate role

models who help others succeed. Strengthened by a

commitment to shared values, we can build meaningful,

productive relationships across lines of difference.

Consider writing your own manifesto. It should start with

what is most important to you, the world you want to create

—in your school, local community, or company. Next,

consider the means you will need to achieve those ends.

What are the obstacles you face? The tensions you must

hold? What kind of person do you want to be as you live

your purpose? If you can envision your horizon, you can

build a pathway there. It will inevitably be a long, twisting

one, sometimes turning back on itself entirely. But I hope

your path will be joined by many others, drawn to that

mission, purpose, and values to which you subscribe.

All of us are needed for a moral revolution. It doesn’t

matter where you live, the size of your bank account, or

what you do for a living. The world needs you to flex, to

stretch to uncomfortable levels, to build your moral

imagination, to listen more deeply, to reckon with your

sense of identity, and to open yourself up to understanding

the layered inconsistencies and differing perspectives of

others. It requires each of us to partner better, to tell stories

that matter, and to embrace the beautiful struggle.

Critically, a revolution of morals requires each of us to

rethink success, asking ourselves whether we are doing

enough to serve others, whether we are enabling others to

help themselves, whether we are kind. We must find the

courage to recognize, integrate, and accept the light and

dark sides of ourselves so that we can bolster and integrate

our larger communities. Finally, we must have faith that we

can solve our biggest problems, trusting that we can bridge

our divides because we are connected, because we can see

one another, because our shared destiny is dependent on

the dignity of every one of us.

Whoever you are and whatever you do, the world needs

you to lead. There will be times when happiness may feel

elusive and the horizon impossible to reach. But remember

that each day, we wake up to another chance to renew the

world. Daily, we have a choice to recommit to the work we

came to do. Daily, we can reconstitute the promise of hard-

edged hope.

After the horrendous terrorist attacks in the fall of 2015

in Paris and California, Baheira Khusheim, an Acumen fellow

from Saudi Arabia, wrote me an email from a hospital in

Houston, Texas, where she was accompanying her father as

he underwent treatment for cancer. The Saudi consulate

had called her, she wrote, to ask her to be cautious when

moving about. Friends suggested she remove her headscarf

so as to avoid facing discrimination. Muslims, they said,

were at risk of counterattacks.

After some consideration, Baheira decided, “If I do not

stand up to show the world a different face of my religion,

who will?” The irony of sitting in a cancer ward where so

many women covered their heads with scarves was not lost

on Baheira. She could wear a scarf in solidarity with the

cancer patients, she reasoned. Why couldn’t she wear one

out of respect for her religion?

The following day, Baheira, her head covered, made a

trip to a nearby grocery store. The young Saudi woman self-

consciously was walking down the vegetable aisle when a

stranger rushed up to her. His intense expression sent her

into a mild panic. Then Baheira noticed the bouquet of

flowers in the stranger’s hand. “I bought them to bring to

my house,” he explained. “But when I saw you here in my

hometown, I thought I’d give these flowers to you instead.

Thank you for your courage in showing your Muslim identity

during this difficult time.”

About a year later, I was invited to Saudi Arabia to

launch the Arabic translation of my first book, a gift made

possible by our four Saudi fellows and scores of young

people who felt close to Acumen’s mission. Many people,

including some from Acumen’s own community, expressed

disapproval that I would travel to the country given its poor

human rights record. But I was there to engage with young

people who hungered to be part of the world.

Three of the Acumen fellows there, Yousuf Alguwaifli,

Shahd Al Shehail, and Lujain Al Ubaid, hosted me in Riyadh,

introducing me to many young people who impressed me

with their knowledge of other cultures. Many expressed a

deep desire to help change their country while also keeping

and sharing the traditions that made them proud, such as a

shared commitment to family and the region’s unmatched

hospitality to guests.

On my final morning in Riyadh, I took a taxi to the

airport. Though I’d previously been welcomed graciously by

everyone I’d encountered, the driver treated me

disdainfully, almost shouting at me to adjust my hijab and

abaya, the black headscarf and gown worn there to cover a

woman’s head and body. Sitting silently, I felt humiliated,

reminded for a brief moment what the powerless experience

a hundred times a day. Then, as I was putting my bags

through security, a surly worker harassed me. I focused

again on holding my composure, reminding myself not to

allow his disrespect to inform my actions.

Nonetheless, I was shaken up by both incidents. I

spotted a coffee shop in the terminal and made a beeline for

the comfort of a latte. As I was standing in that line, a Saudi

man approached me. He was carrying several boxes of fresh

dates in his arms. I wondered what was coming next.

“Excuse me,” he said, “but I watched that man attempt

to humiliate you in the security line. You kept your grace

through it, and I want to thank you for that. But watching

the interaction made me feel ashamed. I don’t want you to

leave my country thinking you are not welcome. I don’t

want you to think that kind of behavior is acceptable to us.”

I smiled and said thank you.

“Please,” he continued, “take these dates home. They

are full of sweetness. Take them as a gift from myself and

my fellow Saudis. Enjoy them with your friends and family.”

I thanked him profusely but tried to refuse. Laughing, I

added, “Plus, there must be twenty pounds of dates in your

arms. I can’t even carry all those!”

He insisted I take them, helping devise a way for me to

hold them more easily. And then he added, “Knowing you

have them will do me good. Don’t you think we need

reminders of how much love is out there?”

Yes, I said. I do. I do.

As Eleanor Roosevelt wrote long ago, the work of

renewing a world based on extending dignity to every being

on the planet begins in small places, close to home. As we

go through life on this tiny, blue planet, the only home we

know, imagine the changes that might arise if we each took

a step toward making it a home in which all of us could

participate, where each person could flourish with peace

and justice and a sense of wholeness for many, many

generations to come.

The world is waiting for you.

NOTES

Chapter 4: Listen to Voices Unheard

 

0. 1. From the poem “From the Republic of Conscience.”

Chapter 9: Use the Power of Markets, Don’t Be

Seduced by Them

0. 1. The economist and Nobel laureate Amartya Sen powerfully articulates

the idea of access to markets as a form of freedom in his book

Development as Freedom.

0. 2. According to the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water

Supply, Sanitation and Hygeine’s 2019 update report, Progress on

Household Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene 2000–2017: Special

Focus on Inequalities, more than 4 billion people live without safely

managed sanitation, even if some of them have access to a toilet.

SELECTED READINGS

Angelou, Maya. “Phenomenal Woman.” In Maya Angelou: The Complete Poetry.

New York: Random House, 2015.

Arendt, Hannah. Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. New

York: Penguin Classics, 2006.

Brooks, David. The Road to Character. New York: Random House, 2015.

Brooks, David. The Second Mountain: The Quest for a Moral Life. New York:

Random House, 2019.

Brooks, Gwendolyn. “Paul Robeson.” In The Essential Gwendolyn Brooks. New

York: Library of America, 2005.

Collier, Paul. The Future of Capitalism: Facing the New Anxieties. New York:

Harper, 2018.

Dalio, Ray. Principles: Life and Work. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2017.

Eliot, T. S. Four Quartets. Boston: Mariner, 1968.

Frankl, Viktor E. Man’s Search for Meaning. Boston: Beacon, 2006.

Gardner, John W. Self-Renewal: The Individual and the Innovative Society.

Brattleboro, VT: Echo Point, 2015.

Giridharadas, Anand. Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World.

New York: Knopf, 2018.

Godin, Seth. The Dip: A Little Book That Teaches You When to Quit (and When to

Stick). New York: Portfolio, 2007.

Godin, Seth. Linchpin: Are You Indispensable? New York: Portfolio, 2011.

Hafiz. The Gift. Translated by Daniel Ladinsky, New York: Penguin, 1999.

Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics

and Religion. New York: Pantheon, 2012.

Harari, Yuval Noah. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. New York: Harper

Perennial, 2018.

Havel, Václav. The Power of the Powerless: Citizens against the State in Central

Eastern Europe. New York: Routledge, 1985.

Helminski, Kabir, ed. The Rumi Collection: An Anthology of Translations of

Mevlâna Jalâluddin Rumi. Boston: Shambhala, 2005.

Howe, Marie. Magdalene: Poems. New York: W. W. Norton, 2017.

King, Martin Luther, Jr. “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” In I Have a Dream. Logan,

IA: Perfection Learning, 2007.

Lowney, Chris. Heroic Leadership: Best Practices from a 450-Year-Old Company

That Changed the World. Chicago: Loyola Press, 2005.

Lukianoff, Greg and Jonathan Haidt. The Coddling of the American Mind: How

Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure. New York:

Penguin, 2018.

Maalouf, Amin. In the Name of Identity: Violence and the Need to Belong.

Translated by Barbara Bray. New York: Arcade, 2001.

Machiavelli, Niccolò. The Prince. Edited and translated by David Wootton.

Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 1995.

Mandela, Nelson. “I Am Prepared to Die.” Testimony, Rivonia Trial, April 20,

1964, Pretoria, South Africa. Nelson Mandela Foundation,

http://db.nelsonmandela.org/speeches/pub_view.asp?

pg=item&ItemID=NMS010&txtstr=prepared to die.

Oliver, Mary. “Mysteries, Yes.” In Evidence: Poems. Boston: Beacon, 2009.

Ó Tuama, Pádraig. “The Pedagogy of Conflict.” In In the Shelter: Finding a Home

in the World. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 2015.

Ó Tuama, Pádraig. Sorry for Your Troubles. Norwich, UK: Canterbury Press, 2013.

Pagels, Elaine. Why Religion?: A Personal Story. New York: Ecco, 2018.

Plato, The Republic. Translated by Desmond Lee. New York: Penguin Classics,

2007.

Popova, Maria. BrainPickings.org blog.

Rohr, Richard. Falling Upward: A Spirituality for the Two Halves of Life. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2011.

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract. Translated by Maurice Cranston.

New York: Penguin Classics, 1968.

Rumi, Jalal ad-Din. The Essential Rumi. New expanded edition. Translated by

Coleman Barks. New York: HarperOne, 2004.

Sen, Amartya. Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor, 2000.

Smith, Adam. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. New York: Penguin Classics,

2009.

Solomon, Andrew. Far from the Tree: Parents, Children, and the Search for

Identity. New York: Scribner, 2012.

Stevenson, Bryan. Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. New York:

Spiegel & Grau, 2014.

Tippett, Krista. Becoming Wise: An Inquiry into the Mystery and Art of Living.

New York: Penguin, 2016.

Venkataraman, Bina. The Optimist’s Telescope: Thinking Ahead in a Reckless

Age. New York: Riverhead, 2019.

Whitman, Walt. Song of Myself. N.p.: Dover, 2001.

Yunus, Muhammad. A World of Three Zeros: The New Economics of Zero Poverty,

Zero Unemployment, and Zero Net Carbon Emissions. New York: PublicAffairs,

2017.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Jacqueline Novogratz is the New York Times

bestselling author of The Blue Sweater and founder

and CEO of Acumen. She has been named one of the

Top 100 Global Thinkers by Foreign Policy, one of the

25 Smartest People of the Decade by the Daily

Beast, and one of the world’s 100 Greatest Living

Business Minds by Forbes, which also honored her

with the Forbes 400 Lifetime Achievement Award for

Social Entrepreneurship. In addition to Acumen, she

is a sought-after speaker and sits on a number of

philanthropic boards. She lives in New York with her

husband. You can sign up for email updates here.

 

Thank you for buying this

Henry Holt and Company ebook.

 

To receive special offers, bonus content,

and info on new releases and other great reads,

sign up for our newsletters.

 

Or visit us online at

us.macmillan.com/newslettersignup

 

For email updates on the author, click here.

 

MANIFESTO FOR A MORAL REVOLUTION. Copyright © 2020 by Acumen Fund. All

rights reserved. For information, address Henry Holt and Co., 120

Broadway, New York, N.Y. 10271.

www.henryholt.com

Lines from “The Pedagogy of Conflict” by Pádraig Ó Tuama, originally

published in Sorry for Your Troubles (Canterbury Press, 2013).

Reprinted by permission of author.

Cover design by Karen Horton

Cover photograph of book cloth © Andrey Khokhlov / Alamy Stock;

cover photograph of fabric stripes © Fotosoroka / Shutterstock.com

The Library of Congress has cataloged the print edition as follows:

Names: Novogratz, Jacqueline, author.

Title: Manifesto for a moral revolution: practices to build a better

world / Jacqueline Novogratz.

Description: First edition. | New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2020.

Identifiers: LCCN 2019052281 (print) | LCCN 2019052282 (ebook) |

ISBN 9781250222879 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781250759269 | ISBN

9781250222862 (ebook) | ISBN 9781250759269 (international

edition)

Subjects: LCSH: Social responsibility of business. | Poverty.

Classification: LCC HD60 .N685 2020 (print) | LCC HD60 (ebook) | DDC

658.4/08—dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019052281

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019052282

e-ISBN 9781250222862

First Edition: May 2020

Our e-books may be purchased in bulk for promotional, educational,

or business use. Please contact the Macmillan Corporate and Premium

Sales Department at (800) 221-7945, extension 5442, or by e-mail at

[email protected]

CONTENTS

1. Title Page

2. Copyright Notice

3. Dedication

4. Acknowledgments

5. Introduction

6. 1. Just Start

7. 2. Redefine Success

8. 3. Cultivate Moral Imagination

9. 4. Listen to Voices Unheard

10. 5. You Are the Ocean in a Drop

11. 6. Practice Courage

12. 7. Hold Opposing Values in Tension

13. 8. Avoid the Conformity Trap

14. 9. Use the Power of Markets, Don’t Be Seduced by Them

15. 10. Partner with Humility and Audacity

16. 11. Accompany Each Other

17. 12. Tell Stories That Matter

18. 13. Embrace the Beautiful Struggle

19. 14. Manifesto

20. Notes

21. Selected Readings

22. Also by Jacqueline Novogratz

23. About the Author

24. Copyright

  • Title Page
  • Copyright Notice
  • Dedication
  • Acknowledgments
  • Introduction
  • 1. Just Start
  • 2. Redefine Success
  • 3. Cultivate Moral Imagination
  • 4. Listen to Voices Unheard
  • 5. You Are the Ocean in a Drop
  • 6. Practice Courage
  • 7. Hold Opposing Values in Tension
  • 8. Avoid the Conformity Trap
  • 9. Use the Power of Markets, Don’t Be Seduced by Them
  • 10. Partner with Humility and Audacity
  • 11. Accompany Each Other
  • 12. Tell Stories That Matter
  • 13. Embrace the Beautiful Struggle
  • 14. Manifesto
  • Notes
  • Selected Readings
  • Also by Jacqueline Novogratz
  • About the Author
  • Copyright

THIS IS A BORZOI BOOK

PUBLISHED BY ALFRED A. KNOPF

Copyright © 2020 by Christiana Figueres and Tom Rivett-Carnac All rights

reserved. Published in the United States by Alfred A. Knopf, a division of

Penguin Random House LLC, New York, and distributed in Canada by Penguin

Random House Canada Limited, Toronto.

www.aaknopf.com

Knopf, Borzoi Books, and the colophon are registered trademarks of Penguin

Random House LLC.

LCCN: 2019047560

ISBN (hardcover) 9780525658351

ISBN (ebook) 9780525658368

Cover image: NASA/Getty Images

Cover design by John Gall

v5.4

ep

We dedicate this book to Christiana’s daughters,

NAIMA AND YIHANA,

and Tom’s daughter and son,

ZOË AND ARTHUR,

and to the generations who will inhabit the future we

choose.

Let us not pray to be sheltered from dangers,

but to be fearless when facing them.

—RABINDRANATH TAGORE

CONTENTS

Cover

Title Page

Copyright

Dedication

Epigraph

Authors’ Note

Introduction: The Critical Decade

PART I TWO WORLDS

1. Choosing Our Future

2. The World We Are Creating

3. The World We Must Create

PART II THREE MINDSETS

4. Who We Choose to Be

5. Stubborn Optimism

6. Endless Abundance

7. Radical Regeneration

PART III TEN ACTIONS

8. Doing What Is Necessary

Let Go of the Old World

Face Your Grief but Hold a Vision of the Future

Defend the Truth

See Yourself as a Citizen—Not as a Consumer

Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Reforest the Earth

Invest in a Clean Economy

Use Technology Responsibly

Build Gender Equality

Engage in Politics

Conclusion: A New Story

What You Can Do Now

Appendix

Acknowledgments

Notes

Bibliography and Further Reading

AUTHORS’ NOTE

We are good friends and fellow travelers on this planet, but

we differ in many ways. We were born in two different

geological periods. Christiana was born in 1956, at the end

of the twelve-thousand-year Holocene epoch, when a stable

climate allowed humanity to flourish, and Tom in 1977,

when the Anthropocene epoch—characterized by

humanity’s destruction of the very conditions that allowed

us to thrive—began.

We come from opposite sides of the geopolitical map;

Christiana from Costa Rica, a small developing country that

has long been a model of economic growth in harmony with

nature, and Tom from the UK, the world’s fifth-largest

economy and the birthplace of the Industrial Revolution

and its reliance on coal.

Christiana comes from a deeply political family,

immigrants to Costa Rica on both sides. Her father was

three times president of the country and is considered the

father of modern Costa Rica. Not only did he initiate some

of the most far-reaching environmental policies in the

world, he remains the only head of state ever to have

abolished a national army. Tom stems from a family steeped

in British history and rooted in the private sector. He is a

direct descendant of the founding chairman of the East

India Company when it was the only company in history to

have a private army. Tom’s earliest memories are of looking

for oil with his petroleum geologist father.

Christiana is the mother of two adult daughters, and

Tom is the father of a daughter and a son, both under age

ten.

We could have had nothing in common, but we deeply

share that which is most important: concern for the future

of our children and yours. In 2013, we decided to work

together to forge a better world for all children.

From 2010 to 2016, Christiana was Executive Secretary

of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change, the organization tasked with guiding the response

of all governments to climate change. Assuming the highest

responsibility for negotiations right after the dramatic

debacle of the 2009 Copenhagen climate change

conference, Christiana refused to accept that a global

agreement was impossible.

In 2013, she heard about Tom, who was then president

and CEO of the Carbon Disclosure Project U.S.A. and a

former Buddhist monk. Intrigued by his unusual

combination of experiences, Christiana asked him to join

her in New York City to discuss his becoming her Senior

Political Adviser.

At the end of a walk around Manhattan that took the

better part of the day, Christiana turned to Tom and said,

“It’s clear to me that you have none of the experience

necessary for this job. But you have something far more

important: the humility to foster collective wisdom, and the

courage to work within a complexity that is beyond any

mapping.”

With that, she invited him to join the UN effort to

advance the negotiations for the Paris Agreement as her

chief political strategist. He designed and led the largely

covert Groundswell Initiative, which mobilized support for

the ambition of the agreement from a wide range of

stakeholders outside of national governments. A few years

later the most far-reaching international agreement on

climate change ever attempted was finally achieved.

When the green gavel came down at 7:25 p.m. on

December 12, 2015, adopting the Paris Agreement, five

thousand delegates who had been holding their breath for

hours jumped out of their seats in ecstatic delight, in

celebration of the historical breakthrough. One hundred

and ninety-five nations had just unanimously adopted an

agreement to guide their economies for the next four

decades. A new global pathway had been charted.

But pathways are valuable only if they are used.

Humanity has procrastinated for far too long on climate

change—now we have to walk the path, or rather we have

to run it. This book maps the route of that run, and we hope

you will run alongside us.

Join us at www.GlobalOptimism.com

INTRODUCTION

The Critical Decade

The world is on fire, from the Amazon to California, from

Australia to the Siberian Arctic. The hour is late, and the

moment of consequence, so long delayed, is now upon us.

Do we watch the world burn, or do we choose to do what is

necessary to achieve a different future?

Who we understand ourselves to be determines the

choice we will make. That choice determines what will

become of us. The choice is both simple and complex, but

above all it is urgent.

In Washington, D.C., at ten a.m. on a Friday, a twelve-

year-old girl marches with her friends, holding up a hand-

painted sign of the Earth enveloped by red flames. In

London, grown-up demonstrators dressed in black, wearing

riot police headgear, form a human chain blocking traffic at

Piccadilly Circus, as others glue themselves to the

pavement in front of the headquarters of BP. In Seoul,

South Korea, the streets teem with elementary

schoolchildren sporting multicolored backpacks and

carrying banners that say CLIMATE STRIKE—in English, for the

benefit of the media. In Bangkok, hundreds of teenage

students take to the streets. With firm resolve and heavy

hearts, they walk behind their defiant leader, an eleven-

year-old girl carrying a sign: THE OCEANS ARE RISING AND SO

ARE WE.

All over the world, millions of young people—inspired by

Greta Thunberg, the teenage girl who began a lone protest

in front of the Swedish parliament—are engaging in civil

disobedience to draw attention to climate change. Students

understand the scientific projections and are terrified about

the diminished quality of life on their horizon. They demand

decisive action now. They are helping to raise the level of

outrage about the insufficiency of our efforts to address the

crisis, and they have been joined by scientists, parents, and

teachers. From the quest for independence in India to the

civil rights movement in the United States, civil

disobedience has erupted when a reigning injustice became

intolerable, as we are now seeing with climate change.

Unacceptable generational injustice and a deplorable lack

of solidarity with the vulnerable have opened the floodgates

of protest. Those who will be most affected have taken to

the streets. Their anger is energy that we desperately need.

It can propel a wave of defiance against the status quo and

catalyze the ingenuity needed to realize new possibilities.

These protests should come as no surprise. We have

known about the possibility of climate change since at least

the 1930s and have been certain since 1960, when

geochemist Charles Keeling measured CO2 in the Earth’s

atmosphere and detected an annual rise.1

Since then we have done little to counter climate

change, the result being that greenhouse gas emissions,

the cause of climate change, are increasing. We continue to

pursue economic growth through the unbridled extraction

and burning of fossil fuels, with a fatal impact on our

forests, oceans and rivers, soil, and air. We have failed to

manage wisely the very ecosystems that sustain us. We

have wreaked havoc on them, unintentionally perhaps, but

relentlessly and decisively.

Our negligence has catapulted climate change from an

existential challenge to the dire crisis it is now, as we

rapidly approach limits beyond which Earth as we know it

will cease to be. And yet for many, these depredations are

invisible. Despite the increasing frequency and intensity of

natural disasters, we have still not connected the dots

between the ongoing destruction of our natural habitat and

our future ability to ensure our children’s safety, feed

ourselves, inhabit coastlines, and uphold the integrity of

our homes.

Governments have taken incremental steps to address

the issue. The farthest-reaching effort is the Paris

Agreement, which delineates a unified strategy for

combating climate change. All governments of the world

unanimously adopted it in December 2015, and most

ratified it into law in record time. Since then many

corporations, large and small, have set laudable emissions-

reduction goals for themselves; many local governments

have enacted effective policies; and numerous financial

institutions have shifted significant capital from fossil fuels

to alternative clean technologies. However, some

governments have started to declare a climate emergency

because as essential as the current corrective actions are,

taken together they still fall far short of what is necessary

to stop the rise—and start the reduction—of emissions

worldwide. Every day that passes is one day less that we

have to stabilize our increasingly fragile planet, by now on

its way to becoming uninhabitable for humans. We are

running out of time. Once we hit critical thresholds, the

damage to the environment, and consequently to our future

on this planet, will be irreparable.

Over the years, public reactions to climate change have

run the gamut. At one extreme are the climate deniers who

say they don’t “believe” in climate change. President

Donald Trump is the most prominent example. Denying

climate change is tantamount to saying you don’t believe in

gravity. The science of climate change is not a belief, a

religion, or a political ideology. It presents facts that are

measurable and verifiable. Just as gravity exerts its force

on all of us whether we believe in it or not, climate change

is already affecting us all no matter where we were born or

where we live. The irresponsibility of not “believing in

climate change” is becoming more apparent with every

new catastrophic event. Climate deniers are shamelessly

protecting the short-term financial interests of the fossil

fuel industry to the detriment of the long-term interests of

their own descendants.

At the other extreme are those who acknowledge the

validity of the science but are beginning to lose confidence

that we can do anything to address climate change. People

feel real grief over the unspeakable loss of ecosystems and

biodiversity, over how much more we are about to lose,

including the future of human life as we know it. Those who

are enveloped by this grief may have lost all faith in our

collective capacity to challenge the course of human

history. Every new documentary, every new scientific study,

every report of disaster deepens the pain. Grief can be a

powerful, transformative experience for some, and

arguably a major reason climate change has continued

largely unchecked for so long is that we have failed to truly

feel what it will mean. It is important that we all allow

ourselves adequate time and space to deeply feel our grief

and to openly express it. As we tune in to the raw emotion,

many of us will undergo a dark, unsettling period of

despair, but we cannot allow it to erode our capacity to

courageously mobilize for transformation.

Anger that sinks into despair is powerless to make a

change. Anger that evolves into conviction is unstoppable.

A larger group of people, between these two extremes,

understand the science and acknowledge the evidence but

take no action because they don’t know what to do, or

because it is far easier not to think about climate change.

It’s scary and overwhelming. To a large extent, many of us

stick our heads in the sand. Every time we see a report on

extreme weather—hurricanes that used to occur once every

five hundred years in a region now occur twice in a month,

droughts that shrivel entire villages off the face of the

Earth, heat waves that break record upon record, disasters

that illustrate what is really going on—we feel a knot in our

stomach. But then we turn off the news and distract

ourselves with something likely to make us feel less

hypocritical. Better to act as if nothing were happening, or

as if there were no way to stop it. That way we can delude

ourselves that life will continue unimpeded. While this

reaction is understandable, it is also a colossal mistake.

Complacency now will lock us into a future of guaranteed

scarcity, instability, and strife.

We are already too far down the road of destruction to

be able to “solve” climate change. The atmosphere is by

now too loaded with greenhouse gases and the biosphere

too altered for us to be able to turn the clock back on

global warming and its effects. We, and all our

descendants, will live in a world with environmental

conditions that are permanently altered. We cannot bring

back the extinct species, the melted glaciers, the dead

coral reefs, or the destroyed primary forests. The best we

can do is keep the changes within a manageable range,

staving off total calamity, preventing the disaster that will

result from the unchecked rise of emissions. This, at least,

might usher us out of the crisis mode. It is the bare

minimum that we must do.

But we can also do much more.

By addressing the causes of climate change now, we can

at once minimize risks and emerge stronger. Today we have

the unique chance to create a future where things not only

stabilize but actually get better. We can have more efficient

and cheaper transportation resulting in less traffic; we can

have cleaner air, supporting better health and enhancing

the enjoyment of city life; and we can practice smarter use

of natural resources, resulting in less pollution of land and

water. Achieving the mindset needed to attain this

improved environment would signal a maturation of

humanity.

Without diminishing the enormity of what we are facing

with climate change, we are capable of changing course,

and no objective evidence says otherwise. Our societies

have faced daunting challenges before—institutionalized

slavery and racism, the oppression and exclusion of

women, the rise of fascism. To be sure, none of these

challenges have been definitively solved, but addressed

collectively, we know they are surmountable. Climate

change is even more complex because of the finality it

portends for the human species, but we are well prepared

to deal with it. We have already achieved a host of social

and political successes; we have most, if not all, of the

technologies we will need; we have the necessary capital,

and we know which policies are most effective. We can do

this.

But we are far from doing what is needed.

Whether you are complacent about climate change, or in

pain, or angry, this book is an invitation for you to take part

in creating the future of humanity, confident that despite

the seemingly daunting nature of the challenge, collectively

we have what it takes to address climate change now.

This invitation requires your immediate response.

Two dates should now be seared in everyone’s mind:

2030 and 2050.

By 2050 at the latest, and ideally by 2040, we must have

stopped emitting more greenhouse gases into the

atmosphere than Earth can naturally absorb through its

ecosystems (a balance known as net-zero emissions or

carbon neutrality). In order to get to this scientifically

established goal, our global greenhouse gas emissions must

be clearly on the decline by the early 2020s and reduced by

at least 50 percent by 2030.

The goal of halving global emissions by 2030 represents

the absolute minimum we must achieve if we are to have at

least a 50 percent chance of safeguarding humanity from

the worst impacts. We are in the critical decade. It is no

exaggeration to say that what we do regarding emissions

reductions between now and 2030 will determine the

quality of human life on this planet for hundreds of years to

come, if not more. If we do not halve our emissions by

2030, we are highly unlikely to be able to halve emissions

every decade until we reach net zero by 2050.

That is our final limit. We cannot exceed it.

Why?

The effects of climate change do not proceed along a

straight line. A bit more doesn’t equate to a bit worse.

Several parts of our planet are critically sensitive, such as

the Arctic summer sea ice, the ice cover of Greenland, the

boreal forests of Canada and Russia, and the tropical forest

cover of the Amazon. They have been maintaining a stable

temperature on Earth for millennia.2 If those ecosystems

were to go up in flames or be otherwise compromised,

global temperature would rise precipitously, leading to

irreparable worldwide damage. Think of this as an

uncontrollable domino effect of devastation.3

Today’s decisions on energy, transportation, and land use

will all have direct and long-term effects on climate change

because they lock in their respective emissions levels for

decades, and cumulative emissions could push us over

tipping points permanently and catastrophically.4 (See the

graph in the appendix, this page.) There will be no putting

the genie back into the bottle. The milestones of 2030 and

2050 are rooted in the latest science that tells us just how

long we can go on doing little or nothing before disaster

sets in.

Here’s the good news.

We are still just barely inside a zone where we can stave

off the worst and manage the remaining long-term effects.

But only if we do what is required of us in the short term.

This is the last time in history when we will be able to do

this.

Soon it will be too late.

We know what to do, and we have everything we need.

Concern about climate change varies by country, but an

increasing majority of people want their governments to

address the issue.5 So as not to put our children’s future in

jeopardy, we must connect the urgency of now to the reality

of that future.

We tend to think of “saving the planet” as salvaging certain

iconic ecological features: polar bears, humpback whales,

or mountain glaciers. The prevailing logic is that nature is

suffering, and humans are complicit, therefore we should

act. While that sentiment is worthy in many ways, it can

also leave us feeling that the problem is “out there”

unrelated to our daily life.

Climate change has long been misunderstood as an

environmental issue affecting the survival of the planet.

The truth is, the planet will continue to evolve. It has done

so for 4.5 billion years, going through dramatic

transformations that for the most part did not support the

existence of humankind. We currently enjoy unique

environmental conditions that do support human life, but

we forget that modern civilization as we know it is only

about six thousand years old.6

The planet will survive, in changed form no doubt, but it

will survive.

The question is whether we will be here to witness it.

That’s why climate change is the mother of all issues.

This crisis both dwarfs and encompasses any other issue

we may care about. Climate change should be of concern to

all who care about social justice. It affects the poor in every

country disproportionately—not only because they are

often more exposed and invariably more vulnerable to

climate-related shocks, but also because they have fewer

resources with which to respond to disaster.

Climate change should be of concern to all who care

about health. The burning of fossil fuels releases the

greenhouse gas emissions that are responsible for climate

change. But the burning of the very same fossil fuels (coal

for industrial heat or electricity generation and diesel or

gasoline for transportation) also pollutes the local ambient

air with particulate matter. Microscopic pollutants in the

air slip past our body’s defenses, penetrating deep into our

respiratory and circulatory systems, damaging our lungs,

hearts, and brains. They are so pernicious to human health

that more than 7 million people die from air pollution each

year.

Climate change should be of concern to all who care

about economic stability and investment value.7 It is no

secret that coal has lost its financial viability in most parts

of the world because it can no longer compete with cheaper

and cleaner renewable energy options such as solar.8 Coal

mines and coal plants are closing, and there is increasing

momentum in the coal divestment movement, likely to be

followed by divestment from other fossil fuels.9 Central

banks around the world are assessing the macroeconomic

risk of trillions of dollars invested in those high-carbon

assets. The consensus is growing that we need to shift

smoothly but decisively into clean energy assets that will

more safely keep their value over the long term.10

Finally, and fundamentally, climate change should be of

concern to all who care about intergenerational justice—

which should be every one of us. If we fail to act as we

should, future generations will be powerless to undo the

inexorable consequences of our failure. Hence our

profound moral responsibility to them. Failure to make

hard choices now will rob our children and grandchildren

of their rightful future.

Some believe we are hardwired to react to threats only if

they are immediate. The threats from climate change are

now immediate. Superstorms, cyclones, wildfires, droughts,

and floods everywhere give us ample evidence of climate

change, and those disasters will increase in frequency,

scale, and location. We cannot deny or ignore climate

change any longer. We now need to let go of half-hearted

attempts and instead act in proportion to the magnitude of

the challenge.

PART I

 

 

TWO WORLDS

CHAPTER 1

 

 

Choosing Our Future

Geological time is long and slow. Or at least it used to be.

Ice ages, during which vast glaciers covered much of the

northern continents, have sluggishly come and gone

throughout the history of our planet. The last ice age lasted

about 2.6 million years. With very gradual warming

resulting from natural influences on Earth’s climate, we

slowly left that ice age and entered the Holocene epoch,

which stretched out over twelve thousand years—until the

twentieth century—under relatively stable temperatures,

fluctuating only 1 degree Celsius above or below the

average.1

Throughout that geological period, temperatures,

precipitation patterns, and terrestrial and ocean

ecosystems settled into a “sweet spot” of natural conditions

conducive to human propagation and well-being. That

environmental stability allowed the human species of

approximately ten thousand people living in small tribes to

start a sedentary life, evolve into agricultural farmers and

settlers, and eventually develop cities, supported by

industry and machine manufacturing. It allowed humans to

thrive and the population to grow to the current 7.7

billion.2

During the Holocene, “life created the conditions

conducive to life.”3 And we could have continued in that

geological era. But we didn’t.4

Over the past fifty years, we have severely undermined

the environmental integrity of our Blue Marble and

threatened our continued life here. Our post–Industrial

Revolution lifestyles have caused massive damage to all our

natural systems. Mainly because of the unbridled use of

fossil fuels and vast deforestation, the concentration of

greenhouse gases in the atmosphere today exceeds

anything we have had since well before the last ice age,5

resulting in extreme weather events of increasing

frequency and intensity all over the world: floods, heat

waves, droughts, wildfires, and hurricanes. Half the world’s

tropical forests have been cleared, and every year about 12

million more hectares are lost. In about forty years, at the

current rate, 1 billion hectares could be gone—a land mass

equivalent to Europe.6 In the last fifty years, the

populations of mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, and

amphibians have, on average, declined by 60 percent.

Some suggest we are already living through the sixth mass

extinction.7 According to the latest research, 12 percent of

all surviving species are currently threatened, and climate

breakdown will significantly amplify that threat.8 Oceans

have absorbed more than 90 percent of the extra heat we

have produced over the last fifty years.9 As a result, half

the world’s coral reefs are already dead,10 and the Arctic

summer sea ice, whose reflective capacity helps to regulate

temperatures all over the world, is shrinking rapidly.11 The

melt from land glaciers has already caused sea levels to

rise more than twenty centimeters, leading to major salt

intrusion in many aquifers, worsening storm surges and

existential threats to low-lying islands.12 In short, in just

the last fifty years we have catapulted humanity and the

planet out of the previous benevolent Holocene epoch and

into the Anthropocene, a new geological period where

biogeochemical conditions are dominated not by natural

processes but by the palpable impact of human activity.

Humans are for the first time ever the prime driver of

large-scale climate change on the planet.13

All studies you may read about the Anthropocene epoch

point to the unprecedented levels of destruction that we

have caused in just five decades.14 The underlying

assumption in those analyses is that we have irretrievably

cast our die and that increasing destruction will be the

leitmotif of the entire geological era.

We take a radically different view.

We argue that devastation is admittedly a growing

possibility but not yet our inevitable fate. While the

beginning of this period of human history has been

indelibly and painfully marked, the full story has not been

written. We still hold the pen. In fact, we hold it more firmly

now than ever before. And we can choose to write a story

of regeneration of both nature and the human spirit. But

we have to choose.

In deciding what kind of world we and future

generations will live in, we don’t have many options; we

have in fact only two, both of which are set out in the Paris

Agreement, and both of which we present here for your

consideration. Keep in mind that we have already warmed

the planet by 0.9 degrees Celsius more than the average

temperature before the Industrial Revolution. Under the

Paris Agreement, all nations committed to collectively limit

warming to “well under 2 degrees Celsius,” and ideally no

more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit),

through national emissions-reduction efforts that

substantially increase every five years. To start the process,

in 2015, 184 countries registered details of what they

would do in the first five years and agreed to come back

every five years to make stronger commitments, since the

first round of commitments was only the first step toward

achieving the long-term goal of net-zero emissions.

We present two scenarios. One or the other will become

our reality.

The world we are now creating, leading to warming of more than 3 degrees.15 The

first scenario we set out illustrates the very dangerous

trajectory we are on right now. If governments,

corporations, and individuals make no further efforts than

those registered in 2015, we will go to a warming of at

least 3.7 degrees Celsius by 2100. Worse yet, if they do not

fulfill even the registered commitments, we can expect

warming of 4 or 5 degrees. (See the appendix, page 172.)

Be forewarned, this picture is dark. Even though many of

the worst-case scenarios might not be realized until the

second half of the century, it is clear that by midcentury

human misery would be high, biodiversity would be

decimated, and that we and our children would live in a

world that is constantly deteriorating with no possible

recuperation.

The world we must create, limiting warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius.16

We cannot turn back the clock on past emissions. However,

even at this late stage, we can strive for and achieve a

better world in which nature and the human family will not

only survive but thrive together. Scientists have been

extremely clear that the 1.5-degree-Celsius-warmer

scenario is still attainable but that the window is rapidly

closing. To have at least a 50 percent chance of success

(which in itself is an unacceptably high level of risk), we

must cut global emissions to half their current levels by

2030, half again by 2040, and finally to net zero by 2050 at

the very latest.17 A change of this magnitude would require

major transformations in almost every area of life and

work, from massive reforestation to new agricultural

practices; from the cessation of coal production by 2020

and of oil and gas extraction soon thereafter to the

abandonment of fossil fuels and even the internal

combustion engine.

Precisely what we need to do is detailed later in the

book, but for now, we have to wake up to the fact that we

can choose our future and collectively create it. Our

collective responsibility is to ensure that a better future is

not only possible but probable, and then not only probable

but foreseeable.

The great baseball player Yogi Berra famously said that

predictions are hard to make, especially about the future.

In constructing these scenarios, we are aware that making

predictions about the world in thirty years’ time is to some

degree an imaginative enterprise. However, everything we

set out in these scenarios is predicted or expected by the

best science.18 Indeed, much of what science has foretold is

already happening. Read each scenario not as a prediction

of the future but as a warning of what may come and what

we still have a chance to change.

CHAPTER 2

 

 

The World We Are Creating

It is 2050. Beyond the emissions reductions registered in

2015, no further efforts were made to control emissions.

We are heading for a world that will be more than 3

degrees warmer by 2100.

The first thing that hits you is the air.

In many places around the world, the air is hot, heavy,

and depending on the day, clogged with particulate

pollution. Your eyes often water. Your cough never seems to

disappear. You think about some countries in Asia, where

out of consideration sick people used to wear white masks

to protect others from airborne infection. Now you often

wear a mask to protect yourself from air pollution. You can

no longer simply walk out your front door and breathe

fresh air: there might not be any. Instead, before opening

doors or windows in the morning, you check your phone to

see what the air quality will be. Everything might look fine

—sunny and clear—but you know better. When storms and

heat waves overlap and cluster, the air pollution and

intensified surface ozone levels can make it dangerous to

go outside without a specially designed face mask (which

only some can afford).1

Southeast Asia and Central Africa lose more lives to

filthy air than do Europe or the United States.2 There fewer

people work outdoors, and even indoors the air can taste

slightly acidic, sometimes making you feel nauseated. The

last coal furnaces closed ten years ago, but that hasn’t

made much difference in air quality around the world

because you are still breathing dangerous exhaust fumes

from millions of cars and buses everywhere. Some

countries have experimented with seeding rain clouds—the

process of artificially inducing rain—hoping to wash

pollution out of the sky, but results are mixed. Seeding

clouds to artificially create more rain is difficult and

unreliable, and even the wealthiest countries cannot

achieve consistent results.3 In Europe and Asia, the

practice has triggered international incidents because even

the most skilled experts can’t control where the rain will

fall, never mind that acid rain is deleterious to crops,

wreaking havoc on food supply.4 As a result, crops are

increasingly grown under cover, a trend that will only

increase.5

Our world is getting hotter. Over the next two decades,

projections tell us that temperatures in some areas of the

globe will rise even higher, an irreversible development

now utterly beyond our control. Oceans, forests, plants,

trees, and soil had for many years absorbed half the carbon

dioxide we spewed out. Now there are few forests left,

most of them either logged or consumed by wildfire, and

the permafrost is belching greenhouse gases into an

already overburdened atmosphere.6

The increasing heat of the Earth is suffocating us, and in

five to ten years, vast swaths of the planet will be

increasingly inhospitable to humans. We don’t know how

habitable the regions of Australia, North Africa, and the

western United States will be by 2100. No one knows what

the future holds for their children and grandchildren:

tipping point after tipping point is being reached, casting

doubt on the form of future civilization. Some say that

humans will be cast to the winds again, gathering in small

tribes, hunkered down and living on whatever patch of land

might sustain them.7

Passing tipping points has already been painful. First

was the vanishing of coral reefs. Some of us still remember

diving amid majestic coral reefs, brimming with

multicolored fish of all shapes and sizes. Corals are now

almost gone. The Great Barrier Reef in Australia is the

largest aquatic cemetery in the world. Efforts have been

made to grow artificial corals farther north and south from

the equator where the water is a bit cooler, but these

efforts have largely failed, and marine life has not returned.

Soon there will be no reefs anywhere—it is only a matter of

a few years before the last 10 percent dies off.8

The second tipping point was the melting of the ice

sheets in the Arctic. There is no summer Arctic sea ice

anymore because warming is worse at the poles—between

6 and 8 degrees higher than other areas. The melting

happened silently in that cold place far north of most of the

inhabited world, but its effects were soon noticed. The

Great Melting was an accelerant of further global warming.

The white ice used to reflect the sun’s heat, but now it’s

gone, so the dark sea water absorbs more heat, expanding

the mass of water and pushing sea levels even higher.9

More moisture in the air and higher sea surface

temperatures have caused a surge in extreme hurricanes

and tropical storms. Recently, coastal cities in Bangladesh,

Mexico, the United States, and elsewhere have suffered

brutal infrastructure destruction and extreme flooding,

killing many thousands and displacing millions. This

happens with increasing frequency now.10 Every day,

because of rising water levels, some part of the world must

evacuate to higher ground. Every day the news shows

images of mothers with babies strapped to their backs,

wading through floodwaters, and homes ripped apart by

vicious currents that resemble mountain rivers. News

stories tell of people living in houses with water up to their

ankles because they have nowhere else to go, their children

coughing and wheezing because of the mold growing in

their beds, insurance companies declaring bankruptcy

leaving survivors without resources to rebuild their lives.

Contaminated water supplies, sea salt intrusions, and

agricultural runoff are the order of the day. Because

multiple disasters are often happening simultaneously, it

can take weeks or even months for basic food and water

relief to reach areas pummeled by extreme floods. Diseases

such as malaria, dengue, cholera, respiratory illnesses, and

malnutrition are rampant.11

Now all eyes are on the western Antarctic ice sheet.12 If

it did ever disappear, it would release a deluge of fresh

water into the oceans, potentially raising sea levels by over

five meters. If that were to happen, cities like Miami,

Shanghai, and Dhaka would be uninhabitable—ghostly

Atlantises dotting the coasts of each continent, their

skyscrapers jutting out of the water, their people evacuated

or dead.

Those around the world who chose to remain on the

coast because it had always been their home have more to

deal with than rising water and floods—they must now

witness the demise of a way of life based on fishing. As

oceans have absorbed carbon dioxide, the water has

become more acidic, and the pH levels are now so hostile

to marine life that all but a few countries have banned

fishing, even in international waters.13 Many people insist

that the few fish that are left should be enjoyed while they

last—an argument, hard to fault in many parts of the world,

that applies to so much that is vanishing.

As devastating as rising oceans have been, droughts and

heat waves inland have created a special hell. Vast regions

have succumbed to severe aridification sometimes followed

by desertification,14 and wildlife there has become a distant

memory.15 These places can barely support human life;

their aquifers have dried up. Cities such as Marrakech and

Volgograd are on the verge of becoming deserts. Hong

Kong, Barcelona, Abu Dhabi, and many others have been

desalinating seawater for years, desperately trying to keep

up with the constant wave of immigration from areas that

have gone completely dry.

Extreme heat is on the march. If you live in Paris, you

endure summer temperatures that regularly rise to 44

degrees Celsius (111 degrees Fahrenheit). This is no longer

the headline-grabbing event it would have been thirty years

ago. Everyone stays inside, drinks water, and dreams of air-

conditioning. You lie on your couch, a cold, wet towel over

your face, and try to rest without dwelling on the poor

farmers on the outskirts of town who, despite recurrent

droughts and wildfires, are still trying to grow grapes,

olives, or soy—luxuries for the rich, not for you.

You try not to think about the 2 billion people who live in

the hottest parts of the world, where, for upward of forty-

five days per year, temperatures skyrocket to 60 degrees

Celsius (140 degrees Fahrenheit)—a point at which the

human body cannot be outside for longer than about six

hours because it loses the ability to cool itself down. Places

such as central India are becoming increasingly

challenging to inhabit. For a while people tried to carry on,

but when you can’t work outside, when you can fall asleep

only at four a.m. for a couple of hours because that’s the

coolest part of the day, there’s not much you can do but

leave. Mass migrations to less hot rural areas are beset by

a host of refugee problems, civil unrest, and bloodshed over

diminished water availability.16

Inland glaciers around the world are quickly

disappearing. The millions who depended on the

Himalayan, Alpine, and Andean glaciers to regulate water

availability throughout the year are in a state of constant

emergency: there is little snow turning to ice atop

mountains in the winter, so there is no more gradual

melting for the spring and summer. Now there are either

torrential rains leading to flooding or prolonged droughts.

The most vulnerable communities with the least resources

have already seen what can ensue when water is scarce:

sectarian violence, mass migration, and death.

Even in some parts of the United States, there are fiery

conflicts over water, battles between the rich who are

willing to pay for as much water as they want and everyone

else demanding equal access to the life-enabling resource.

The taps in nearly all public facilities are locked, and those

in restrooms are coin-operated. At the federal level,

Congress is in an uproar over water redistribution: states

with less water demand what they see as their fair share

from states that have more. Government leaders have been

stymied on the issue for years, and with every passing

month the Colorado River and the Rio Grande shrink

further.17 Looming on the horizon are conflicts with

Mexico, no longer able to guarantee deliveries of water

from the depleted Rio Conchos and Rio Grande.18 Similar

disputes have arisen in Peru, China, Russia, and many

other countries.

Food production swings wildly from month to month,

season to season, depending on where you live. More

people are starving than ever before. Climate zones have

shifted, so some new areas have become available for

agriculture (Alaska, the Arctic),19 while others have dried

up (Mexico, California). Still others are unstable because of

the extreme heat, never mind flooding, wildfire, and

tornadoes. This makes the food supply in general highly

unpredictable. One thing hasn’t changed, though—if you

have money, you have access. Global trade has slowed as

countries such as China stop exporting and seek to hold on

to their own resources. Disasters and wars rage, choking

off trade routes. The tyranny of supply and demand is now

unforgiving; because of its increasing scarcity, food can

now be wildly expensive. Income inequality has always

existed, but it has never been this stark or this dangerous.

Entire regions suffer from epidemics of stunting and

malnutrition. Reproduction has slowed overall, but most

acutely in those countries where food scarcity is dire.

Infant mortality has rocketed, and international aid has

proven to be politically impossible to defend in light of

mass poverty. Countries with enough food are resolute

about holding on to it.

In some places, the inability to gain access to such

basics as wheat, rice, or sorghum has led to economic

collapse and civil unrest more quickly than even the most

pessimistic experts had previously imagined. Scientists

tried to develop varieties of staples that could stand up to

drought, temperature fluctuations, and salt, but there was

only so much we could do. Now there simply aren’t enough

resilient varieties to feed the population. As a result, food

riots, coups, and civil wars are throwing the world’s most

vulnerable from the frying pan into the fire. As developed

countries seek to seal their borders from mass migration,

they too feel the consequences. Stock markets are

crashing, currencies are wildly fluctuating, and the

European Union has disbanded.20

As committed as nations are to keeping wealth and

resources within their borders, they’re determined to keep

people out. Most countries’ armies are now just highly

militarized border patrols. Lockdown is the goal, but it

hasn’t been a total success. Desperate people will always

find a way. Some countries have been better global Good

Samaritans than others, but even they have now effectively

shut their borders, their wallets, and their eyes.21

Ever since the equatorial belt started to become difficult

to inhabit, an unending stream of migrants has been

moving north from Central America toward Mexico and the

United States. Others are moving south toward the tips of

Chile and Argentina. The same scenes are playing out

across Europe and Asia. Enormous political pressure is

being placed on northern and southern countries to either

welcome migrants or keep them out. Some countries are

letting people in, but only under conditions approaching

indentured servitude. It will be years before the stranded

migrants are able to find asylum or settle into new refugee

cities that have formed along the borders.

Even if you live in areas with more temperate climates

such as Canada and Scandinavia, you are still extremely

vulnerable. Severe tornadoes, flash floods, wildfires,

mudslides, and blizzards are often in the back of your mind.

Depending on where you live, you have a fully stocked

storm cellar, an emergency go-bag in your car, or a six-foot

fire moat around your house. People are glued to weather

forecasts. Only the foolhardy shut their phones off at night.

If an emergency hits, you may only have minutes to

respond. The alert systems set up by the government are

basic and subject to glitches and irregularities depending

on access to technology. The rich, who subscribe to private,

reliable satellite-based alert systems, sleep better.

The weather is unavoidable, but lately the news about

what’s going on at the borders has become too much for

most people to endure. Because of the alarming spike in

suicides, and under increasing pressure from public health

officials, news organizations have decreased the number of

stories devoted to genocide, slave trading, and refugee

virus outbreaks. You can no longer trust the news. Social

media, long the grim source of live feeds and disaster

reporting, is brimming with conspiracy theories and

doctored videos. Overall, the news has taken a strange,

seemingly controlled turn toward distorting reality and

spinning a falsely positive narrative.

Those living within stable countries may be safe, yes, but

the psychological toll is mounting. With each new tipping

point passed, they feel hope slipping away. There is no

chance of stopping the runaway warming of our planet, and

no doubt we are slowly but surely heading toward some

kind of collapse. And not just because it’s too hot. Melting

permafrost is also releasing ancient microbes that today’s

humans have never been exposed to—and as a result have

no resistance to.22 Diseases spread by mosquitoes and ticks

are rampant as these species flourish in the changed

climate, spreading to previously safe parts of the planet,

increasingly overwhelming us. Worse still, the public health

crisis of antibiotic resistance has only intensified as the

population has grown denser in inhabitable areas and

temperatures continue to rise.23

The demise of the human species is being discussed

more and more. For many, the only uncertainty is how long

we’ll last, how many more generations will see the light of

day. Suicides are the most obvious manifestation of the

prevailing despair, but there are other indications: a sense

of bottomless loss, unbearable guilt, and fierce resentment

at previous generations who didn’t do what was necessary

to ward off this unstoppable calamity.

CHAPTER 3

 

 

The World We Must Create

It is 2050. We have been successful at halving emissions

every decade since 2020. We are heading for a world that

will be no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius warmer by 2100.

In most places in the world, the air is moist and fresh, even

in cities. It feels a lot like walking through a forest, and

very likely this is exactly what you are doing. The air is

cleaner than it has been since before the Industrial

Revolution.

We have trees to thank for that. They are everywhere.1

It wasn’t the single solution we required, but the

proliferation of trees bought us the time we needed to

vanquish carbon emissions. Corporate donations and public

money funded the biggest tree-planting campaign in

history. When we started, it was purely practical, a tactic to

combat climate change by relocating the carbon: the trees

took carbon dioxide out of the air, released oxygen, and put

the carbon back where it belongs, in the soil. This of course

helped to diminish climate change, but the benefits were

even greater. On every sensory level, the ambient feeling of

living on what has again become a green planet has been

transformative, especially in cities. Cities have never been

better places to live. With many more trees and far fewer

cars, it has been possible to reclaim whole streets for urban

agriculture and for children’s play. Every vacant lot, every

grimy unused alley, has been repurposed and turned into a

shady grove. Every rooftop has been converted to either a

vegetable or a floral garden. Windowless buildings that

were once scrawled with graffiti are instead carpeted with

verdant vines.

The greening movement in Spain began as an effort to

combat rising temperatures. Because of Madrid’s latitude,

it is one of the driest cities in Europe. And even though the

city now has a grip on its emissions, it was previously at

risk of desertification. Because of the “heat island” effect of

cities—buildings trap warmth and dark, paved surfaces

absorb heat from the sun—Madrid, home to more than 6

million people, was several degrees warmer than the

countryside just a few miles away. In addition, air pollution

was leading to a rising incidence of premature births,2 and

a spike in deaths was linked to cardiovascular and

respiratory illnesses. With a health-care system already

strained by the arrival of subtropical diseases like dengue

fever and malaria, government officials and citizens rallied.

Madrid made dramatic efforts to reduce the number of

vehicles and create a “green envelope” around the city to

help with cooling, oxygenating, and filtering pollution.

Plazas were repaved with porous material to capture

rainwater; all black roofs were painted white; and plants

were omnipresent. The plants cut noise, released oxygen,

insulated south-facing walls, shaded pavements, and

released water vapor into the air. The massive effort was a

huge success and was replicated all over the world.

Madrid’s economy boomed as its expertise put it on the

cutting edge of a new industry.

Most cities found that lower temperatures raised the

standard of living. There are still slums, but the trees,

largely responsible for countering the temperature rise in

most places, have made things far more bearable for all.

Reimagining and restructuring cities was crucial to

solving the climate challenge puzzle. But further steps had

to be taken, which meant that global rewilding efforts had

to reach well beyond the cities. The forest cover worldwide

is now 50 percent, and agriculture has evolved to become

more tree-based.3 The result is that many countries are

unrecognizable, in a good way. No one seems to miss wide-

open plains or monocultures. Now we have shady groves of

nut and fruit orchards, timberland interspersed with

grazing, parkland areas that spread for miles, new havens

for our regenerated population of pollinators.4

Luckily for the 75 percent of the population who live in

cities, new electric railways crisscross interior landscapes.

In the United States, high-speed rail networks on the East

and West Coasts have replaced the vast majority of

domestic flights, with East Coast connectors to Atlanta and

Chicago. Because flight speeds have slowed down to

increase planes’ fuel efficiency, passenger bullet trains

make some journeys even faster and with no emissions

whatsoever.5 The U.S. Train Initiative was a monumental

public project that sparked the economy for a decade.

Replacing miles and miles of interstate highways with a

new transportation system created millions of jobs—for

train technology experts, engineers, and construction

workers who designed and built raised rail tracks to

circumvent floodplains. This massive effort helped to

reeducate and retrain many of those displaced by the dying

fossil fuel economy. It also introduced a new generation of

workers to the excitement and innovation of the new

climate economy.

Running parallel to this mega public works effort was an

increasingly confident race to harness the power of

renewable sources of energy. A major part of the shift to

net-zero emissions was a focus on electricity; achieving the

goal required not only an overhaul of existing

infrastructure but also a structural shift. In some ways,

breaking up grids and decentralizing power proved easy.

We no longer burn fossil fuels. There is some nuclear

energy in those countries that can afford the expensive

technology,6 but most of our energy now comes from

renewable sources like wind, solar, geothermal, and hydro.

All homes and buildings produce their own electricity—

every available surface is covered with solar paint that

contains millions of nanoparticles, which harvest energy

from the sunlight,7 and every windy spot has a wind

turbine. If you live on a particularly sunny or windy hill,

your house might harvest more energy than it can use, in

which case the energy will simply flow back to the smart

grid. Because there is no combustion cost, energy is

basically free. It is also more abundant and more efficiently

used than ever.

Smart tech prevents unnecessary energy consumption,

as artificial intelligence units switch off appliances and

machines when not in use. The efficiency of the system

means that, with a few exceptions, our quality of life has

not suffered. In many respects, it has improved.

For the developed world, the wide-ranging transition to

renewable energy was at times uncomfortable, as it often

involved retrofitting old infrastructure and doing things in

new ways. But for the developing world, it was the dawn of

a new era. Most of the infrastructure that it needed for

economic growth and poverty alleviation was built

according to the new standards: low carbon emissions and

high resilience. In remote areas, the billion people who had

no electricity at the start of the twenty-first century now

have energy generated by their own rooftop solar modules

or by wind-powered minigrids in their communities. This

new access opened the door to so much more. Entire

populations have leaped forward with improved sanitation,

education, and health care. People who had struggled to

get clean water can now provide it to their families.

Children can study at night. Remote health clinics can

operate effectively.

Homes and buildings all over the world are becoming

self-sustaining far beyond their electrical needs. For

example, all buildings now collect rainwater and manage

their own water use. Renewable sources of electricity made

possible localized desalination, which means clean drinking

water can now be produced on demand anywhere in the

world. We also use it to irrigate hydroponic gardens, flush

toilets, and shower.8 Overall, we’ve successfully rebuilt,

reorganized, and restructured our lives to live in a more

localized way. Although energy prices have dropped

dramatically, we are choosing local life over long

commutes. Due to greater connectivity, many people work

from home, allowing for more flexibility and more time to

call their own.

We are making communities stronger. As a child, you

might have seen your neighbors only in passing. But now,

to make things cheaper, cleaner, and more sustainable,

your orientation in every part of your life is more local.

Things that used to be done individually are now done

communally—growing vegetables, capturing rainwater, and

composting. Resources and responsibilities are shared now.

At first you resisted this togetherness—you were used to

doing things individually and in the privacy of your own

home. But pretty quickly the camaraderie and unexpected

new network of support started to feel good, something to

be prized. For most people, the new way has turned out to

be a better recipe for happiness.

Food production and procurement are a big part of the

communal effort. When it became clear we needed to

revolutionize industrialized farming, we transitioned

quickly to regenerative farming practices, mixing perennial

crops, sustainable grazing, and improved crop rotation on

large-scale farms, with increased community reliance on

small farms.9 Instead of going to a big grocery store for

food flown in from hundreds, if not thousands, of miles

away, you buy most of your food from small local farmers

and producers. Buildings, neighborhoods, and even large

extended families form a food purchase group, which is

how most people buy their food now. As a unit they sign up

for a weekly drop-off, then distribute the food among the

group members. Distribution, coordination, and

management are everyone’s responsibility, which means

you might be partnered with a downstairs neighbor for

distribution one week and your upstairs neighbor the next.

While this community approach to food production

makes things more sustainable, food is still expensive,

consuming up to 30 percent of household budgets, which is

why growing your own is such a necessity.10 In community

gardens, on rooftops, at schools, and even hanging from

vertical gardens on balconies, food sometimes seems to be

growing everywhere.

We’ve come to realize, by growing our own, that food is

expensive because it should be expensive—it takes valuable

resources to grow it, after all. Water. Soil. Sweat. Time.11

For that reason, the most resource-depleting foods of all—

animal protein and dairy products—have practically

disappeared from our diets.12 But the plant-based

replacements are so good that most of us don’t notice the

absence of meat and dairy. Most young children cannot

believe we used to kill any animals for food. Fish is still

available, but it is farmed and yields are better managed by

improved technology.13

We make smarter choices about bad foods, which have

become an ever-diminishing part of our diets. Government

taxes on processed meats, sugars, and fatty foods helped us

reduce the carbon emissions from farming. The biggest

boon of all was to our collective health. Thanks to a

reduced number of cancers, heart attacks, and strokes,

people are living longer, and health services around the

world cost less and less. In fact, a huge portion of the costs

of combating climate change were recuperated by

governments’ savings on public health.14

Along with outrageous spending on health care, gasoline

and diesel cars are also anachronisms. Most countries

banned their manufacture in 2030,15 but it took another

fifteen years to get internal combustion engines off the

road completely. Now they are seen only in transport

museums or at special rallies where classic car owners pay

an offset fee to drive a few short miles around the track.

And, of course, they are all hauled in on the backs of huge

electric trucks.

When it came to making the switch, some countries were

already ahead of the curve. Technology-driven countries

such as Norway and bicycle-friendly nations like the

Netherlands managed to impose a moratorium on cars

much earlier. Unsurprisingly, the United States had the

hardest time of all. First, it restricted their sale, and then it

banned them from certain parts of cities—Ultra Low

Emission Zones.16 Then came the breakthrough in the

battery storage capacity of electric vehicles,17 the cost

reductions that came from finding alternative materials for

manufacture, and finally the complete overhaul of the

charging and parking infrastructure.18 This allowed people

easier access to cheap power for their electric vehicles.

Even better, car batteries are now bidirectionally

connected with the electric grid, so they can either charge

from the grid or provide power to the grid when they aren’t

being driven. This helps back up the smart grid that is

running on renewable energy.

The ubiquity and ease of electric vehicles were alluring,

but satisfaction of our appetite for speed finally did the

trick.19 Supposedly, to stop a bad habit you have to replace

it with one that is more salubrious or at least as enjoyable.

At first China dominated the manufacture of electric

vehicles, but soon U.S. companies started making vehicles

that were more desirable than ever before. Even some

classic cars got an upgrade, switching from combustion to

electric engines that could go from zero to sixty mph in 3.5

seconds.20 What’s strange is that it took us so long to

realize that the electric motor is simply a better way of

powering vehicles. It gives you more torque, more speed

when you need it, and the ability to recapture energy when

you brake, and it requires dramatically less maintenance.

As people from rural areas moved to the cities, they had

less need even for electric vehicles.21 In cities it’s now easy

to get around—transportation is frictionless. When you take

the electric train, you don’t have to fumble around for a

metro card or wait in line to pay—the system tracks your

location, so it knows where you got on and where you got

off, and it deducts money from your account accordingly.

We also share cars without thinking twice. In fact,

regulating and ensuring the safety of driverless ride

sharing was the biggest transportation hurdle for cities to

overcome. The goal has been to eliminate private

ownership of vehicles by 2050 in major metropolitan

areas.22 We’re not quite there yet, but we’re making

progress.

We have also reduced land transport needs. Three-

dimensional (3D) printers are readily available, cutting

down on what people need to purchase away from home.23

Drones organized along aerial corridors are now delivering

packages, further reducing the need for vehicles.24 Thus

we are currently narrowing roads, eliminating parking

spaces, and investing in urban planning projects that make

it easier to walk and bike in the city. Parking garages are

used only for ride sharing, electric vehicle charging, and

storage—those ugly concrete stacking systems and edifices

of yore are now enveloped in green. Cities now seem

designed for the coexistence of people and nature.

International air travel has been transformed. Biofuels

have replaced jet fuel. Communications technology has

advanced so much that we can participate virtually in

meetings anywhere in the world without traveling. Air

travel still exists, but it is used more sparingly and is

extremely costly. Because work is now increasingly

decentralized and can often be done from anywhere, people

save and plan for “slow-cations”—international trips that

last weeks or months instead of days. If you live in the

United States and want to visit Europe, you might plan to

stay there for several months or more, working your way

across the continent using local, zero-emissions

transportation.25

While we may have successfully reduced carbon

emissions, we’re still dealing with the aftereffects of record

levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The long-living

greenhouse gases have nowhere to go other than the

already-loaded atmosphere, so they are still causing

increasingly extreme weather—though it’s less extreme

than it would have been had we continued to burn fossil

fuels. Glaciers and Arctic ice are still melting, and the sea

is still rising. Severe droughts and desertification are

occurring in the western United States, the Mediterranean,

and parts of China. Ongoing extreme weather and resource

degradation continue to multiply existing disparities in

income, public health, food security, and water availability.

But now governments have recognized climate change

factors for the threat multipliers that they are. That

awareness allows us to predict downstream problems and

head them off before they become humanitarian crises.26

So while many people remain at risk every day, the

situation is not as drastic or chaotic as it might have

been.27 Economies in developing nations are strong, and

unexpected global coalitions have formed with a renewed

sense of trust. Now when a population is in need of aid, the

political will and resources are available to meet that need.

The ongoing refugee situation has been escalating for

decades, and it is still a major source of strife and discord.

But around fifteen years ago, we stopped calling it a crisis.

Countries agreed on guidelines for managing refugee

influxes—how to smoothly assimilate populations, how to

distribute aid and resources, and how to share the tasks

within particular regions. These agreements work well

most of the time, but things get thrown off balance

occasionally when a country flirts with fascism for an

election cycle or two.

Technology and business sectors stepped up, too, seizing

the opportunity of government contracts to provide large-

scale solutions for distributing food and providing shelter

for the newly displaced. One company invented a giant

robot that could autonomously build a four-person dwelling

within days.28 Automation and 3D printing have made it

possible to quickly and affordably construct high-quality

housing for refugees. The private sector has innovated with

water transportation technology and sanitation solutions.

Fewer tent cities and housing shortages have led to less

cholera.

Everyone understands that we are all in this together. A

disaster that occurs in one country is likely to occur in

another in only a matter of years. It took us a while to

realize that if we worked out how to save the Pacific Islands

from rising sea levels this year, then we might find a way to

save Rotterdam in another five years. It is in the interest of

every country to bring all its resources to bear on problems

across the world. For one thing, creating innovative

solutions to climate challenges and beta testing them years

ahead of using them is just plain smart. For another, we’re

nurturing goodwill; when we need help, we know we will be

able to count on others to step up.

The zeitgeist has shifted profoundly. How we feel about

the world has changed, deeply. And unexpectedly, so has

how we feel about one another.

When the alarm bells rang in 2020, thanks in large part

to the youth movement, we realized that we suffered from

too much consumption, competition, and greedy self-

interest. Our commitment to these values and our drive for

profit and status had led us to steamroll our environment.

As a species we were out of control, and the result was the

near-collapse of our world. We could no longer avoid seeing

on a tangible, geophysical level that when you spurn

regeneration, collaboration, and community, the

consequence is impending devastation.

Extricating ourselves from self-destruction would have

been impossible if we hadn’t changed our mindset and our

priorities, if we hadn’t realized that doing what is good for

humanity goes hand in hand with doing what is good for

the Earth. The most fundamental change was that

collectively—as citizens, corporations, and governments—

we began adhering to a new bottom line: “Is it good for

humanity whether profit is made or not?”

The climate change crisis of the beginning of the century

jolted us out of our stupor. As we worked to rebuild and

care for our environment, it was only natural that we also

turned to each other with greater care and concern. We

realized that the perpetuation of our species was about far

more than saving ourselves from extreme weather. It was

about being good stewards of the land and of one another.

When we began the fight for the fate of humanity, we were

thinking only about the species’ survival, but at some point,

we understood that it was as much about the fate of our

humanity. We emerged from the climate crisis as more

mature members of the community of life, capable not only

of restoring ecosystems but also of unfolding our dormant

potentials of human strength and discernment. Humanity

was only ever as doomed as it believed itself to be.

Vanquishing that belief was our true legacy.

PART II

 

 

THREE MINDSETS

CHAPTER 4

 

 

Who We Choose to Be

Our future is unwritten. It will be shaped by who we choose

to be now.

As we learned during our stewardship of the Paris

Agreement, if you do not control the complex landscape of

a challenge (and you rarely do), the most powerful thing

you can do is change how you behave in that landscape,

yourself a catalyst for overall change. All too often in the

face of a task, we move quickly to “doing” without first

reflecting on “being”—what we personally bring to the

task, as well as what others might. And the most important

thing we can bring is our state of mind.

Mahatma Gandhi reminds us to be the change we want

to see. The actions we pursue are largely defined by the

mindset we cultivate in advance of the doing. When we’re

faced with an urgent task, it may feel counterintuitive to

first look inside ourselves, but it is essential.

Attempting change while we are informed by the same

state of mind that has been predominant in the past will

lead to insufficient incremental advances. In order to open

the space for transformation, we have to change how we

think and fundamentally who we perceive ourselves to be.

After all, if what’s at stake is nothing less than the quality

of human life for centuries to come, it is worth digging

down to the roots of who we understand ourselves to be.

Paradoxically, systemic change is a deeply personal

endeavor. Our social and economic structures are a product

of our way of thinking.

For example, our economy is based on the belief that we

can extract resources boundlessly, use them inefficiently,

and discard them wantonly, drawing from the planet more

than it can regenerate and polluting more than we can

clean up. Over time we’ve developed a deeply exploitative

ethos as the basis of our actions.

This no longer works.

Natural scientists have provided ample evidence that we

have reached several planetary boundaries, beyond which

Earth’s biosystems cannot sustain life. Soon there will be

little left to extract and exploit. Concerned social scientists

are clear on what we need to do: we must move toward a

regenerative economy, an economy that operates in

harmony with nature, repurposing used resources,

minimizing waste, and replenishing depleted resources. We

must return to the innate wisdom of nature herself, the

ultimate regenerator and recycler of all resources.

Less understood but just as important is the fact that we

have reached the limits of our individualistic competitive

approach. For a long time, Western societies have tended to

prize self-interest over the well-being of the whole. We

need to enlarge our understanding of ourselves and our

relationships with others, and certainly with the natural

systems that enable human life on Earth.

Our current crisis requires a total shift in our thinking.

To survive and thrive, we must understand ourselves to be

inextricably connected to all of nature. We need to cultivate

a deep and abiding sense of stewardship. This

transformation begins with the individual. Who we are and

how we show up in the world defines how we work with

others, how we interact with our surroundings, and

ultimately the future we co-create.

We believe three mindsets are fundamental to us all in

our pursuit to co-create a better world. With intentional

provocation, we call them Stubborn Optimism, Endless

Abundance, and Radical Regeneration. These mindsets are

not new. We can find shining examples in famous historical

figures, but the future we want requires that they be

prevalent among us all. These qualities of being are innate

human capacities (individual and collective), values that

can be called forth, nurtured, and developed in the crucible

of daily practice.

A shift in consciousness may sound grandiose to some,

insufficient to others. But we live at a time of growing

awareness of the intimate connections between the outer

and inner worlds. As author Joanna Macy has pointed out,

“In the past changing the self and changing the world were

regarded as separate endeavors and viewed in either-or

terms. That is no longer the case.”1 Scientific

understanding and spiritual insights are converging on the

reality of human-nature interconnectedness.

The transformative power of the three mindsets lies not

only in themselves but also in the direction each one

provides. Attached as we are to many forms of status quo in

our lives (relationships, job, home, etc.), we often delude

ourselves that they are permanent. But the fact is, nothing

is permanent; everything is always changing, no matter

how much we insist on standing still, hanging on to fleeting

moments. And making desired change always demands

going in an intentional direction.

Our new intentional direction must move us beyond

defeatism to optimism, beyond extraction toward

regeneration, beyond linear toward circular economies,

beyond individual benefit toward the common good, beyond

short-term thinking toward long-term thinking and acting.

By cultivating the three mindsets, we give clearer, stronger

direction to our lives and to our world, setting the

necessary foundation for us to collectively co-create the

world we want.

CHAPTER 5

 

 

Stubborn Optimism

Twenty-five hundred years ago, Siddhartha Gautama, the

man who became known as the Buddha, understood

optimism. He said many times that a brightness of mind

was both the final goal of the path of enlightenment and

also the first step. A bright mind is how you proceed.

Without it, you can’t make progress.

The Buddha also understood that we are not subject to

our attitudes in a passive way but are active participants in

creating them. Neuroscience has now confirmed this. It

does not matter if our natural tendency is to see things

with optimism or with pessimism. At this point in history

we have a responsibility to do what is necessary, and for

most of us that will involve some deliberate reprogramming

of our minds.

Psychological research has shown that attitudes can be

transformed by first identifying our thought patterns, then

deliberately cultivating a more constructive approach. The

practice involves becoming aware of these patterns,

drawing out the unconscious assumptions, and challenging

them when they don’t serve you.1

It’s not complicated, but neither is it easy. Essentially, we

all have inbuilt reactions to adverse things that happen

around us. From the latest alarming report on climate

change to missing the bus, we have a learned response to

all phenomena that we encounter in life, and those learned

reactions dictate how we respond to a particular situation.

When it comes to climate change, the vast majority of us

have a learned reaction of helplessness. We see the

direction the world is headed, and we throw up our hands.

Yes, we think, it’s terrible, but it’s so complex and so big

and so overwhelming. We can’t do anything to stop it.

This learned reaction is not only untrue, it’s become

fundamentally irresponsible. If you want to help address

climate change, you have to teach yourself a different

response.

You can do it. You can switch your focus, and you will be

stunned by the impact such a shift can create. You don’t

need to have all the answers, and you certainly don’t need

to hide from the truth, nor should you. When you are faced

with the hard realities, look at them with clarity, but also

know that you are incredibly lucky to be alive at a time

when you can make a transformative difference to the

future of all life on earth.

You are not powerless. In fact, your every action is

suffused with meaning, and you are part of the greatest

chapter of human achievement in history. Make this your

mental mantra. Take notice of how your mind tries to insist

on your helplessness in the face of the challenge and

refuses to accept it. Notice it, and refute it. It will not take

long for your thought patterns to change.

When your mind tells you that it is too late to make a

difference, remember that every fraction of a degree of

extra warming makes a big difference, and therefore any

reduction in emissions lessens the burden on the future.

When your mind tells you that this is all too depressing

to deal with and that it is better to focus on the things you

can directly affect, remind yourself that mobilizing for big

generational challenges can be thrilling and can imbue

your life with meaning and connection.

When your mind tells you that it will be impossible for

the world to lighten its dependence on fossil fuels,

remember that already more than 50 percent of the energy

in the UK comes from clean power,2 that Costa Rica is 100

percent clean,3 and that California has a plan to get to 100

percent clean, including cars and trucks, by the time

today’s toddlers have finished college.4

When your mind tells you that the problem is the broken

political system and we can’t fix that so there is no point in

doing anything, remind yourself that political systems are

still responsive to the views of people, and that throughout

history people have successfully overcome extraordinary

odds to achieve political change.

And when your mind tells you that you are just one

person, too small to make a difference, so why bother, you

can remind yourself that tipping points are nonlinear. We

don’t know what is going to make the difference, but we

know that in the end systems do shift and all the little

actions add up to a new world. Every time you make an

individual choice to be a responsible custodian of this

beautiful Earth, you contribute toward major

transformations.

You may not be religious or spiritually inclined, but

consider the lot of the stonemason in medieval Europe

building one of the great cathedrals. He could have chosen

to throw down his tools because he was not going to

personally finish the entire cathedral. Instead, he worked

patiently and carefully on his one piece, knowing he was

part of a great collective endeavor that would lift the hearts

and minds of generations. That is optimism, and cultivating

it will not only be a crucial step to advancing our human

story, it will also improve your life today.

Václav Havel aptly described optimism as “a state of

mind, not a state of the world.”5 Three characteristics are

generally agreed upon as essential to making this mindset

transformative: the intention to see beyond the immediate

horizon, the comfort with uncertainty about the final

outcome, and the commitment that is fostered by that

mindset.

To be optimistic, you must acknowledge the bad news

that is all too readily available in scientific reports, your

newsfeed, your Twitter account, and kitchen table

conversations bemoaning our current state of affairs. More

difficult, but necessary for any degree of change to take

place, is to recognize the adversities and still be able to see

that a different future is not only possible but is already

tiptoeing into our daily lives. Without denying the bad

news, you must make a point of focusing on all the good

news regarding climate change, such as the constantly

dropping prices of renewables, an increasing number of

countries taking on net-zero-emissions targets by 2050 or

before, the multiple cities banning internal combustion

vehicles, and the rising levels of capital shifting from the

old to the new economy. None of this is happening yet at

the necessary scale, but it is happening. Optimism is about

being able to intentionally identify and prescribe the

desired future so as to actively pull it closer.

It is always easier to cling to certainty than it is to work

for something because it is right and good, regardless of

whether it currently stands a decent chance of success. All

the measures to address climate change still require

further maturation; none guarantee ultimate success. We

don’t know which renewables, if any, will predominate, or

which are more likely to scale quickly. Problems with the

batteries of electric vehicles (weight, cost, recycling) must

still be solved, and charging networks still require

substantial expansion to succeed. Financial instruments

must more effectively manage the risks of new

technologies. Market models that shift us from single

ownership of homes and cars to shared ownership must

gather steam and make peace with regulation.

When you look at the future broadly instead of narrowly,

you see that you must take these uncertainties in stride, or

you will stay stuck in the knowns of the past. You have to

be willing to risk mistakes, delays, and disappointments, or

you will be at the mercy of only the tried and true, to your

ultimate peril.

This mindset is all the more important once you realize

that the habits, practices, and technologies of the past will

lead us only to ecological demise and human suffering.

Viewing our reality with optimism means recognizing that

another future is possible, not promised. In the face of

climate change, we all have to be optimistic, not because

success is guaranteed but because failure is unthinkable.

Optimism empowers you; it drives your desire to engage,

to contribute, to make a difference. It makes you jump out

of bed in the morning because you feel challenged and

hopeful at the same time. It calls you to that which is

emerging and makes you want to be an active part of

change. Rebecca Solnit puts it well: “Hope is an ax you

break down doors with in an emergency;…hope should

shove you out the door, because it will take everything you

have to steer the future away from endless war, from the

annihilation of the earth’s treasures and the grinding down

of the poor and marginal….To hope is to give yourself to the

future, and that commitment to the future makes the

present inhabitable.”6

In other words, optimism is the force that enables you to

create a new reality.

Optimism is not the result of achieving a task we have

set for ourselves. That is a celebration. Optimism is the

necessary input to meeting a challenge.

Optimism is about having steadfast confidence in our

ability to solve big challenges. It is about making the choice

to tenaciously work to make the current reality better.

Optimism is about actively proving, through every

decision and every action, that we are capable of designing

a better future.

From the darkness of an Alabama jail, Martin Luther

King, Jr., kept calling for the realization of a deeply held

dream, no matter how bleak its prospects. Many others

have done the same throughout history: John F. Kennedy

refusing to accept that nuclear war was inevitable. Gandhi

marching to the ocean to collect forbidden salt.

In all these cases, key people believed that a better

world was possible, and they were willing to fight for it.

They didn’t ignore difficult evidence or present things in a

way that wasn’t true. Instead they faced reality with a

fierce belief that change could happen, however impossible

it might have seemed at the moment.

On the road to the Paris Agreement in 2015, we learned

just how critical optimism is to transformation. When

Christiana took over responsibility for the United Nations’

annual rounds of climate negotiations in 2010, it was in the

wake of a total collapse of the previous year’s negotiations,

which had been held in Copenhagen.

Copenhagen was nothing short of a disaster. After years

of preparation and two weeks of excruciating around-the-

clock negotiations, the only result was a weak, inadequate

accord that was politically unacceptable and legally

irrelevant. The United States had embarrassingly declared

success prematurely. China and India had put up major

roadblocks, supported by all developing countries. It had

been a free-for-all of political frustration, outrage, and

disagreement.

It was far from the “Hopenhagen” the hosts had

advertised.

In fact, there had been blood.

Claudia Salerno, the Venezuelan representative, had

been excluded from the small room where only a few

leaders had negotiated behind closed doors. She was so

angry and so adamant about getting the floor, she

incessantly banged her country’s metal nameplate on her

desk until her hand was bleeding.

“Do I have to bleed to get your attention?” she screamed

at the Danish chairman. “International agreements cannot

be imposed by a small exclusive group. You are endorsing a

coup d’état against the United Nations.”

Each sentence was punctuated with the pounding of

metal and blood.

If this is what saving the planet looked like, we were all

doomed.

Six months later, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon asked

Christiana to assume responsibility for the international

climate negotiations. There was little hope in his request:

pick up the pieces from the political garbage can and make

something of them.

No one, from a high-level administrator at the UN to a

government delegate to a climate activist working from

home, believed that the world had a shot at ever achieving

a workable agreement. Everyone thought it was too

complicated, too costly, and too late anyway.

As a result, one of the toughest challenges Christiana

faced was bringing everyone to believe that an agreement

was even possible. Prior to considering the political,

technical, and legal parameters of an eventual agreement,

she knew she had to dedicate herself to changing the mood

on climate. The impossible had to be made possible.

The very first step was to change her own attitude.

As the recently appointed Executive Secretary of the

United Nations Convention on Climate Change, Christiana

held her first and best-remembered press conference. The

new voice of the entire international process, she sat

before forty journalists, gathered in a windowless room in

the Maritim Hotel in Bonn, Germany.

After a few anodyne interjections, the most important

question was asked: “Ms. Figueres, do you think a global

agreement will ever be possible?”

Without thinking, she blurted, “Not in my lifetime.”

Christiana had instinctively spoken for the thousands of

people who had been in Copenhagen, and for millions more

who followed the proceedings online. Hope was gone, and

the pain was deep. Her words expressed the prevailing

mood, but they also ripped straight into her own heart. The

attitude she had just perpetuated was exactly the problem.

If she succumbed to despair, and by extension let this

whole political process succumb to it, it would define the

quality of life for millions of vulnerable people today and

determine the fate of future generations. She couldn’t let

that happen.

Impossible is not a fact. It is an attitude.

When Christiana walked out of the press conference that

day, she knew her primary task: to be a beacon of

possibility that would allow everyone to find a way to a

solution together. How it would happen she did not know,

but she knew with clarity that she had no other option.

Bringing about a complex, large-scale transformation is

akin to weaving a tapestry of elaborate design with

thousands of people who have never woven anything or

even seen the pattern. Almost two hundred nations, five

hundred supporting UN staff members, more than sixty

topics under negotiation across five (sometimes

intersecting) negotiating tracks, and thousands of

participants from all walks of life were involved. Of course,

everyone wanted a good future for humanity, but once you

dove just one level below that very basic goal, everything

else was under constant negotiation, from agreeing on the

agenda for one working session, to topics as contentious as

how science should be reflected in policy. Predictably,

setbacks and obstructions quickly became the norm.

Throughout the whole process, we paid attention to the

underlying challenging dynamics, guiding them into a

constructive space so that innovative solutions could

emerge from the fertile ground of collective participation

and wisdom. Careful and well-targeted interventions were

repeatedly necessary to ensure forward momentum but

could never become overbearing. The intention was to

constantly unblock pent-up energy and catalyze the next

level of work. Complex dynamic systems can be

intimidating if approached from the expectation of control,

but they are thrilling if seen as a carefully curated

landscape of potential that blossoms as problematic issues

find resolution and enrich the commonly agreed-upon

grounds.

In December 2015, 195 nations adopted the Paris

Agreement unanimously, and hundreds of millions of people

widely recognized it as a historic achievement.

Undoubtedly many factors contributed to this resounding

success, as well as thousands of individuals, but the key

was the contagious frame of mind that led to collective

wisdom and effective decision making. Everyone who was

there at the adoption, and millions of people following

online, felt optimistic about the future, but in fact optimism

had been the starting point of the journey. It had had to be,

or else we would never have reached any agreement.

We need to remember, however, that in the challenging

years to come, optimism on its own won’t be enough, as it

wasn’t enough in Paris. What sustained us through the long

nights and years of building that initial agreement was a

particular brand of optimism that is necessary for the most

difficult tasks: stubborn optimism.

Optimism is not soft, it is gritty. Every day brings dark

news, and no end of people tell us that the world is going to

hell. To take the low road is to succumb. To take the high

road is to remain constant in the face of uncertainty. That

we may be confronted by barriers galore should not

surprise anyone. That we may see worsening climate

conditions in the short term should also not surprise us. We

have to elect to boldly persevere. With determination and

utmost courage, we must conquer the hurdles in order to

push forward.

We need both systemic transformation and individual

behavioral changes. One without the other will not get us

to the necessary scale of change at the necessary pace. We

all sit at various points of society: members of families,

community leaders, CEOs, policy makers. No matter where

you sit, we all can and must exercise that responsibility in

favor of the common good. No one is irrelevant.

Particularly in the face of grand human challenges, the

only responsible approach we can take is to protect

humanity and other forms of life and steer the course of

history toward the better. Changing direction at this late

hour is entirely possible, but only with a collective intent

and optimism that is so robust, we jolt ourselves out of the

currently established default path.

The story of the five-year process toward Paris is in

many ways like the process we must now unleash. Today

most people believe it is impossible to transform our

economy in one decade. But we cannot afford that fatalism;

our only option is to turn our full attention to the

immediate actions we can undertake to change direction. It

starts with our own way of thinking about the challenge,

our determined attitude, and our capacity to infect others

with the same conviction, no matter how challenging that

is. That is stubborn optimism.

The evolution of humanity is a story of adaptive

ingenuity to the challenges of the time. We face the

greatest challenge of human history. We may be challenged

beyond our currently visible capacities, but that only means

that we are invited to rise to the next level of our abilities.

And we can.

CHAPTER 6

 

 

Endless Abundance

The feeling that we have to compete with others to get

what we want, or what we think we need, runs deep in

each of us. Most of us have grown up under the stifling

influence of the zero-sum paradigm, the notion that if one

person wins, another one has to lose. (One person’s gain

has to be “balanced” by another’s loss in order for the sum

of all gains and losses to be zero.) The zero-sum paradigm

has baked competition into our worldview. Without

competition, we could not have achieved many of the great

economic and social advances we have made over the

centuries. And we will still need a healthy competitive edge

to develop the new technologies that will help us address

climate change. But when we allow competition to become

the dominant feature of our decision making, we lose our

grounding and start to see scarcity in places it may not

even exist.

Few of us haven’t felt that rush of urgency and

determination to get ahead of the crowd for a seat on the

train or bus. It’s a feeling so ubiquitous that in some

countries transportation companies have announcements

reminding us to let passengers off the bus or train before

attempting to board. But the drive to compete for a seat is

sometimes so strong, the announcements cannot prevent

people from pushing in first to claim their spot.

The frenzy that dominates in these scenarios doesn’t

begin with our competitive impulse. It starts with the

deeply ingrained perception of scarcity—the view that

there is a limited amount of something regardless of what

the reality may be. We are convinced that there is only one

good seat, so we want to secure it before someone else

does. Whether it is based on objective reality or not, our

fear of scarcity elicits our competitive response, which in

turn feeds our fear of scarcity in a self-reinforcing cycle.

The perception of scarcity puts us into a very small

mental box. We can expand that box in either of two ways.

First, we can realize that quite often the perception of

scarcity is not objective but rather of our own making. We

can climb out of the mental scarcity box by understanding

that there are other seats on the train or bus, and that

more buses are coming a few minutes later.

The second way is to decide to step away from the zero-

sum paradigm, a rather odd construct when you think

about it. Yes, the number of seats on the bus is limited. But

another person’s gain does not necessarily have to be my

loss. Perhaps giving my seat on a bus or train to another

allows me to start an unexpected, delightful conversation.

Maybe that simple act improves the other person’s day or

adds joy to mine. Giving is well known to increase

individual happiness, so my “loss” can actually become my

“gain.” In fact, “my loss ↔ your gain” can actually become

“our gain.”

It’s all about the mindset.

Our mindset is so powerful that it can convince us that a

scarcity exists, throwing us into unnecessary competition

and thereby objectively creating the scarcity we initially

feared. For instance, Tucson, Arizona, is a desert

community, and over the years water has become more and

more scarce. The Santa Cruz River, which used to flow

freely through the community all year round, is now dry.

Only twenty-eight centimeters of rain fall on Tucson each

year. And perhaps because water has always been

perceived as scarce in this region, the growing population,

wanting more, has frantically pumped so much water from

the ground that the water table has dropped by more than

ninety-one meters. Trees and other vegetation, which used

to line the Santa Cruz, died along with the river itself. The

perception of water scarcity, which led to overpumping,

then contributed to even greater scarcity, because bare (or

paved over) land cannot easily absorb the little rain that

falls—most of which is washed away.

Here’s the interesting part: the twenty-eight centimeters

of rain that Tucson gets each year are actually more than

the municipal water it consumes each year.1 Water was

never measurably scarce, it was only perceived as being

scarce. Tucson has plenty of water if you consider the

abundance of the entire water cycle instead of focusing

only on the amount in your well at any given time. When a

resource is perceived as scarce but is in reality abundant

(plenty of seats on a bus or enough rain for everyone), we

have the option of reacting either in a narrowly competitive

way or in a more broadly collaborative manner. How we

react may be influenced by something as profound as our

degree of personal self-awareness, or by something as

simple as how we happen to be feeling that day. Our

attitude does not change any of the facts (how many seats

there are on the bus or how much rain falls), but it does

make a massive difference in the nature of our experience.

And in many cases, when we collaborate, we have more

rich experiences, not fewer.

However, when the resources are actually scarce and

getting scarcer, we face a very different situation in making

decisions. Contrary to what we might initially think, in

circumstances of real (not only perceived) scarcity, our only

viable option is collaboration. Fortunately, contrary to what

most of us believe, it is the option we human beings tend to

adopt, at least under certain circumstances.

In the face of disasters like hurricanes, earthquakes, and

even terrorist attacks, members of a community tend to

come together in solidarity with one another. Studies

conducted after Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and

Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, as well as many other

disasters around the world, have shown that communities

respond overwhelmingly with an altruistic spirit of

solidarity under the initial common pain and then

collaborate to reconstruct and recover afterward.2 At these

moments, our tendency to give, be it time, skills, money,

love, or simply a home-cooked meal, overrides our

tendency to be competitive. Key to this shift away from

competition is that giving makes us happy, so while we act

primarily in service to others during times of great

hardship, we are also, in fact, acting in service to

ourselves.3

On November 13, 2015, two weeks before the start of

the final session of negotiations for the Paris Agreement,

the city suffered its worst terrorist onslaught ever. The

attackers targeted six popular locations across the city,

killing 130 people and wounding almost five hundred.4 No

one who was there in the days following will ever forget the

sight of thousands of pairs of shoes placed in neat rows in

the Place de la République, including a pair of plain black

shoes sent by Pope Francis. And far from staying away, 155

heads of state and government traveled to Paris two short

weeks afterward for the largest ever gathering of heads of

state and government under one roof on a single day, partly

because of the importance of the need to reach a global

climate agreement, and partly as a mass demonstration of

solidarity with France.

In times of profound suffering and great need, we rise to

the occasion, we stand shoulder to shoulder in mutual

support. That impulse to gather in a circle of care for one

another must be extended to our efforts to address the

climate crisis.

Particular recent disasters that you may recall, and the

subsequent collaboration and solidarity they precipitated,

likely had only a local impact, but the situation we face

with global scarcity is vastly more challenging. Globally, we

have dramatically fewer insects, birds, and mammals than

we did just fifty years ago, and far less forest cover. Our

soils are less productive, and our oceans are less bountiful.

Harder to see but even more threatening in its

consequence is the fact that we are running out of

atmospheric space for our greenhouse gas emissions. Think

of the world’s atmosphere as a bathtub in which, for fifty

years, not water but greenhouse gases have been rising.

They are now approaching the rim, the limit that the

bathtub can hold, or the scientifically established maximum

amount of greenhouse gases that the atmosphere can

contain—its carbon budget. If we exceed the carbon

budget, the bathtub will start to overflow uncontrollably.

We are on the verge of atmospheric tipping points that are

frighteningly unpredictable and irreversible. Every bit of

carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted—no matter where in the

world—contributes to the possibility of disaster. We are

rapidly exhausting the space in the bathtub. This is the

ultimate scarcity.

Adopted in 1992, the UN Climate Change Convention is

based on the recognition that developed countries bear

overwhelming historical responsibility for climate change

because of the emissions caused by their fossil-fuel-based

industrialization. In contrast, developing countries have

insignificant historical responsibility but bear

disproportionately high destructive impacts in relation to

the size of their economies. That is not ideology, it is an

indisputable fact. At the same time, three decades later it is

evident that, as they develop and their growing populations

emerge from poverty, some developing countries are

rapidly increasing their emissions because their economic

growth is still largely linked to fossil fuels. As a result,

industrialized nations have been advocating that

developing countries assume more responsibility for

emission reductions. For years, developing countries have

flatly rejected these demands as hindering their economic

growth, even as they must shoulder increasing negative

impacts from climate change.

Suggestions for a fair allocation of what remains of the

carbon budget have been varied. Some have proposed

imposing a limit on emissions from industrialized nations so

that space remains for those of developing countries; the

developed nations deemed this unacceptable. Others have

proposed a gradual reduction of emissions in industrialized

countries and a managed growth of emissions in developing

countries. Unsurprisingly, no happy point of convergence

has been agreed on. Another proposal would impose a

worldwide limit of two tons of CO2 emitted per person per

year. As the range of national per capita yearly emissions

spans from 0.04 to more than 37 tons of CO2, it was

inevitable that those countries substantially above the

suggested two tons did not seriously consider the proposal.

Fair allocation of the remaining atmospheric space has

proven to be a futile exercise no matter the formula. A fair

outcome is not viable as long as we pursue it from a

mindset of scarcity and competition.

The state of the planet no longer allows for this mindset

because we have reached existential scarcity: limits to the

survival of many of the ecosystems that sustain us and that

help to maintain safe greenhouse gas levels in the

atmosphere. If the Amazon is destroyed, carbon emissions

will rise so high that the entire planet, not only Brazil, will

suffer the consequences. Likewise, if the Arctic permafrost

thaws, not only will the countries surrounding the North

Pole suffer, but so will the whole Earth. We are all in the

same boat. A hole at one end of the boat does not mean

that only the occupants sitting there will drown. We all win

or lose together.

The new zero-sum model presupposes collaboration, not

competition, as the necessary engine for regenerating the

biosphere and creating abundance.

It was close to midnight, and we were at our breaking

point.

The 2014 negotiations in Lima, Peru, had been moving

forward swiftly over the past days, but now we were at the

anticipated impasse: responsibility for emissions

reductions. We had known that the issue would raise its

head, and that this time the consequences were grave—

they would make or break next year’s Paris negotiations.

Without fail, at every major international negotiation

session, whenever we were on the cusp of an intractable

deadlock, there would be a soft knock on the office door,

often after midnight, and Minister Xie Zhenhua, for years

the head of the Chinese delegation, would walk in. As

anticipated, here he was again with a clear message. The

draft negotiating text did not properly account for the great

differences in responsibility for, and future ability to

respond to, climate change. Developing countries would

prefer no agreement in Lima or Paris next year, if it meant

accepting one that was unfair. He pointed to a recent

agreement between the United States and China that

steered away from an approach grounded in competition

and scarcity, toward collaboration and abundance. The

agreement did not focus on the historical responsibility of

industrialized nations nor on the obligations of developing

countries to reduce their emissions. It was based on a

different paradigm, one that encouraged the shared pursuit

of the benefits of emissions reductions for individual

nations as well as for the collective: a new model beyond

zero sum.

Now it was our job to adapt that conceptual model to the

context of a global agreement between 195 nations in a

way that was coherent with all the rest of the issues for

which we were finding common ground. First we had to

repeatedly negotiate every word and every comma of the

adapted text between the U.S. delegation, led by Todd

Stern and Sue Biniaz, and the Chinese delegation led by

Minister Xie. We had to move quickly but discreetly

between delegation offices so as to not give any visible

signs of frenzy to the thousands of other delegates who

were exhausted and anxious about the deadlock, wondering

if the whole session would go up in flames. But after

several iterations of goodwill on both parts, an agreed

version emerged, and each side undertook to bring their

respective group of countries on board.

The new understanding established that reducing

emissions is indeed a responsibility of every nation, for its

own enlightened self-interest as well as for the benefit of

the planet as a whole. The mindset shift and associated

new language in the text—away from competition and

toward shared winning, where everyone can gain from a

new abundance without impinging on each other—unlocked

the door to the global agreement that would be signed in

Paris the following year.

An increasing number of countries today fully

understand that their development in the twenty-first

century can and should be clean; that by decarbonizing

their economies, they can reap the benefits of more jobs,

cleaner air, more efficient transportation, more habitable

cities, and more fertile lands. This shift toward a mindset of

creating abundance does not negate the limitations of a

carbon economy; instead, it gives every country a wealth of

positive individual and collective reasons to stay within that

limit. As one country moves forward demonstrating the

national benefits of clean technologies and policies, others

will follow, momentum will be built, and the global rate of

decarbonization will increase, protecting the planet.

When we are motivated by a desire for collaboration, we

liberate ourselves from the restrictive framing of attaining

“what I want, or think I need,” and open ourselves up to a

broader framing of what is available and possible in many

other forms—available to me, but not only to me, to others

as well. The realization of abundance is not an illusory

increase in physical resources, but rather an awareness of

a broad array of ways to satisfy needs and wants so that

everyone is content. In this way resources will be protected

and replenished, and the relationships among us are

enriched.

Endless abundance.

At the individual level, we are called to enhance

collaboration and nurture abundance as a mindset. Making

that mindset shift is not as hard as it sounds. Consider, for

example the endless abundance of energy coming from the

sun, wind, water, sea waves, and heat within the Earth, all

of which we are now harnessing to produce electricity, and

none of which will ever get used up. Regenerated soils,

forests, and oceans can all be wisely managed for endless

abundance rather than squandered for imminent depletion.

In fact, ecosystems operate from the very principle of

abundance—they depend on components within them that

are naturally plentiful, such as waste, to provide the food

and nutrients for further growth.

We can also add creativity, solidarity, innovation, and

many other abundant human attributes available to us,

endlessly.

The rise of collectively generated and freely shared

knowledge on the internet has data challenges that remain

to be addressed, but it has made the notion of collaborative

systems and endless abundance easier to understand.

Think of Wikipedia, LinkedIn, or Waze. Each user of the

system is unique, but all users are interrelated through the

network of the endlessly growing system. Every user

contributes to the whole, but the total body of knowledge is

larger than the sum of all users. And the system is in

constant change, amplifying in some areas, correcting

course in others, and growing into previously unknown

spaces. Competition plays a role, but it is limited because

everyone contributes, everyone benefits, and everyone

partakes of a constantly increasing total. Collaboration is

the name of the game. Shared benefit from endless

abundance is the result of the game.

As a next step, one could imagine a world of “open

source everything,” an open approach in every field of

human endeavor, where competition is no longer the

operating principle, but rather collaboration. Following the

principles we observe in any natural ecosystem, this

approach explicitly promotes learning and growth

throughout the whole system. It allows us to constantly

teach one another, thereby exponentially increasing our

capacity to co-create knowledge and share goods and

services with open access, used by everyone for the benefit

of all.

The practice of abundance starts by shifting our minds

away from perceived scarcity to what we can collectively

make abundant. In so doing, we will become more aware of

others, what we can learn from them and share with them.

We will be more conscious of our own impulse to compete

and, as a corrective, develop a keener interest in how we

can all win. We will be more likely to show appreciation to

those who have contributed to a joint task, encouraging

ever-higher levels of teamwork and collaboration

everywhere. We will share the results of our labor with

anyone who can use it as input to their further work,

without mentally claiming any intellectual property rights.

Another person’s success is not our loss; it is our constantly

growing collective success.

We are entering the next phase of human evolution. The

human species (and many other animal and plant species)

must now adapt to the scarcity of natural resources we

have caused, and the rapidly diminishing space left in our

global atmosphere for carbon emissions. To do this, we

need to prioritize collaboration. Faced with the ultimate

scarcity, we must internalize the new zero sum (either we

all win or we all lose) and apply a mindset of abundance to

that which we have left and that which we can co-create

and share.

CHAPTER 7

 

 

Radical Regeneration

Exhausted after a long day’s work at the UN, we were

having a quiet meal at a little restaurant close to our office,

chatting and commenting on what had been done and what

was left to do. Two young men sitting next to us had

finished eating and were talking over their third beer about

what to do next. We tried to focus on our own to-do list, but

their conversation pulled us away.

“But why do you want to leave?”

“Because there’s nothing more for me here.”

“So where do you want to go?”

“I don’t know. Wherever I can get something better.”

We looked at each other with raised eyebrows. The man

had expressed a sentiment we’d heard so many times

before—that when there’s nothing left, it’s time to find

more elsewhere.

The man’s focus on “getting something better” was no

individual quirk. It has been with human societies for

centuries. Conquerors of distant lands pillaged colonies for

metals, minerals, and exotic foods, in many cases leaving

little more than chaos, infectious diseases, and Bibles in

exchange. As managers of fertile soils, we humans have

proved remarkably effective at extracting trees and

nutrients, leaving only depleted topsoil in our wake.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with these instincts.

They help us grow to meet rising challenges. But our

growth, both personal and professional, is a two-way street:

what we get and what we give. As a species, however, we

have become used to a one-way transaction, that of getting,

often losing sight of the void that our taking has created.

Our planet can no longer support one-directional

growth. We have come to the end of humanity’s extraction

road. The time for “getting” is over. Staring us in the face is

a huge red sign that reads STOP: PRECIPICE AHEAD.

Extraction is a propensity deeply ingrained in human

behavior. To move away from extracting and depleting, we

need to concentrate on another equally strong and intrinsic

trait: our capacity for supporting regeneration. Caring for

ourselves and others. Connecting with nature. Working

together to replenish what we use and to make sure plenty

remains for tomorrow. These tendencies are just as much

second nature, but they are less well developed in modern

society. It’s time to bring them to the surface.

Being regenerative is not strange to us.

If you have children, think about how supportive you are

with them when they go through periods of deep doubt.

Remember how patiently you listen to their worries and

help them stay hopeful. Or think of how encouraging you

are to friends who may have fallen into a professional hole,

how much time and energy you invest in helping them

replenish their self-confidence so that they can rise to the

top of their game once again.

Sometimes it’s easier to act in more regenerative ways

with our friends and families—or even with strangers

halfway across the world—than with ourselves. While this

may be noble, to be most effective, we need to begin with

ourselves.

Amid the climate crisis, we each have an urgent

responsibility to replenish ourselves and protect ourselves

from breaking down. In the face of imminent burnout, some

of our colleagues who have worked for years to address

climate change under extremely stressful circumstances

have at some point prudently taken time off to restore their

energies by turning to the healing arms of nature or the

loving embrace of a spiritual community. The wisest among

them have incorporated meditation and mindfulness

practices into their daily lives.

We know from our own experience that continual

personal grounding is key to being able to withstand the

daily bombardment of bad news from all sides. Without

such grounding, you will be a leaf in the wind—vulnerable

to the elements from all directions. Better to stand as a

tree, firmly rooted in your own values, principles, and

convictions. The two of us easily notice the difference

between a day in which we meditate and a day in which we

don’t. The benefits of meditation undoubtedly blossom with

years of practice, but they are also palpable on a day-to-day

basis. Maybe you don’t care for meditation, and a spiritual

practice holds no interest for you. Fair enough. But this

does not mean you should not be mindful of yourself.

Whether it is gardening, crafting, drawing, playing or

listening to music, exercising, meandering in the park, or

paddling down a river, identify what replenishes you and

your soul, and do it regularly and intentionally.

Our first responsibility is to notice how and when we are

depleted and to support ourselves. Our second

responsibility is to reaffirm and strengthen the

regenerative capacity we already display with family and

friends. But we cannot stop there. Our third responsibility

is to engage those beyond our innermost circle and, indeed,

nature itself.

In the natural world, the strictest interpretation of the

term regeneration is the self-generated healing process

that restores an organism’s injured bodily part from the

remaining healthy tissue. For instance, newts, lizards,

octopuses, and starfish have the capacity to regenerate lost

limbs or tails. In humans, adults can regenerate a damaged

liver to its original size after either partial removal or

injury. And all of us have witnessed the miracle of skin

repairing itself after a scrape or wound, sometimes leaving

no trace of the injury at all.

A broader interpretation of regeneration is the capacity

of a species or a biosystem to recover on its own, once

humans remove the pressure they had been exerting.

Whale populations and degraded lands are good examples.

Gray whales and humpbacks, once decimated by

nineteenth-century commercial whaling practices, have

now almost recuperated their numbers. The prohibition of

whaling shows that if we remove the extractive pressure,

animal populations have the ability to rebound (assuming of

course we have not driven them to extinction). The same is

true for ecosystems, as we can see in photos of ancient

ruins abandoned by humans that have been taken over by

the surrounding green growth. The recuperation of a

flourishing ecosystem around Chernobyl is a great

example. With humans gone, the plants started to grow

back, supporting worms and fungi that nourished the soil.

Birdsong is now abundant and even large mammals like

boars and bears have returned. If we remove the pressures

we have wielded, nature tends to return to health.

The converging crises of climate change, deforestation,

biodiversity loss, desertification, and acidification of the

oceans have taken us to the point where we can no longer

naïvely depend on the Earth’s natural resilience or capacity

to recuperate. While nature is innately restorative,

regeneration does not always occur completely on its own.

Right now, we have almost extinguished nature’s capacity

for self-renewal. In many cases, ecosystem restoration

requires intentional human intervention, such as rewilding,

by which we not only remove the destructive pressure of

grazing or unsustainable harvesting but also reintroduce

native animals and help nature bounce back, slowly

recuperating its rich biodiversity. Planting trees and shrubs

in degraded or deforested landscapes is an intentional

regenerative process that restores soil health, increases

productivity, and stabilizes underground aquifers. In one

well-known effort currently under way to reforest the

Scottish Highlands, researchers noticed that when the

trees were lost from the landscape, so were the fungi

normally found in the soil around them. It turns out that

mycorrhizal fungi are hugely beneficial for reforesting

degraded landscapes, and now a sprinkling of native

mushroom spores is added to the roots of new saplings as

they are planted to speed up and strengthen the revival of

the Great Caledonian Forest.

Coral farming, another fine example of intentional

regeneration, is the process whereby fragments of corals

are collected from local reefs, further broken up, raised in

nurseries where they mature much faster than in the open

sea, and then planted at the restoration site to regrow the

damaged reef. With the advent of innovative coral-farming

techniques, scientists will soon be able to launch large-

scale restoration efforts to revive the valuable coral reefs

that are at risk or already dead. Nature can restore itself,

but with intentional human help it has a better chance and

can speed up. With our support, regeneration can become

the predominant direction of the future evolution of this

planet.

We have brought our natural world to several perilous

brinks from which it may not be able to recover on its own.

It is like an elastic band that stretches and contracts

normally but if stretched too far will snap. Undoubtedly

regeneration of nature now needs to be intentional,

planned, and well executed at scale.

We will not recover everything. Many species are

already extinct and will not return, and some ecosystems

may already be damaged beyond their resilience threshold.

But fortunately we still have a relatively hardy natural

environment that responds positively to our care and

caring. Well-intentioned and well-planned regenerative

practices will restore our ecosystems, perhaps not to their

former state but to a new state of regained health with

enhanced resilience.

Let’s begin our regenerative mindset shift by

acknowledging and internalizing the simple fact that our

lives, our very physical survival, depend directly on nature.

Human beings cannot survive longer than a few minutes

without oxygen. The oxygen we breathe comes from the

photosynthetic processes of trees, grasses, and other plants

on land and of phytoplankton in the oceans. Every sip of

water we drink comes from rain, glaciers, lakes, and rivers.

Without land we would have no food to eat, no fruits,

vegetables, or grains, no cows, chickens, or sheep; and

without rivers and oceans, we would have no fish or

seafood to consume. Humans cannot survive for more than

a week without water or for three weeks without food.

Every breath we take, every drop of liquid we drink, and

every morsel of food we eat comes from nature and

connects us profoundly to it. It is a simple basic truth, yet

one we often tend to ignore or take for granted.

It is not only our immediate survival that depends on

functioning ecosystems. In large part our health, physical

and emotional, relies on having contact with the natural

world around us. This contact is under threat from rising

rates of urbanization and from time spent with our

electronic devices. Sedentary indoor life—often

characterized by limited natural light, poor air quality,

walled surroundings, and increasing screen time—leads not

only to obesity and loss of physical strength but also to

feelings of isolation and depression. This family of

symptoms has been broadly diagnosed as “nature-deficit

disorder.”1 Conversely, studies show a significant decrease

in mortality, stress, and illness for those who exercise and

spend time in the natural world. Nature-based play,

gardening, and access to natural landscapes heighten our

sense of well-being while sensitizing us to the ever-

changing light, weather, and seasons.

Reconnection to nature is a powerful antidote to anxiety

and stress, as well as a counter to physical illnesses. The

Japanese health system has developed the practice of

shinrin-yoku—literally, forest “bath” (not with water)—or

spending mindful time in the woods. It is beneficial for soul

and body as it boosts the immune system, lowers blood

pressure, aids sleep, improves mood, and increases

personal energy. It has become a cornerstone of preventive

health care and healing in Japan.

A growing number of pediatricians are prescribing more

unstructured time in nature for children to fight childhood

obesity while engendering a sense of wonder and love of

local wildlife, fauna, and special places. In fact, some

doctors argue that watching documentaries about

endangered species and faraway ecosystems cannot

substitute for personally caring for plants at home and

directly exploring the flights of butterflies, birds, and

dragonflies.

Public consciousness of our dependence on, and

interconnectedness with, the planetary life-support system

is growing, along with an increasing awareness of the need

to restore ecosystems and planetary health. Countless

efforts are under way around the world to plant trees,

protect mangroves and peatlands, reestablish wetlands,

and restore degraded lands via rain harvesting, perennial

grains, grasses, and agroforestry. But more is needed so

that these solutions can be taken to scale globally.

A regenerative mindset is most effective if pursued

intentionally and consistently. It is both a tough mental

discipline and a gentleness of spirit that needs to be

cultivated. It is about understanding that beyond getting

what we want and need from our fellow human beings, we

have the responsibility to replenish ourselves and to help

others to restore themselves to levels of greater energy and

insight. It is about understanding that beyond extracting

and harvesting what we need from nature, it is our

responsibility and in our enlightened self-interest to protect

life on this planet, indeed even enhance the planet’s life-

giving capacity. Personal and environmental goals are

interlinked, mutually reinforcing, and they both need our

attention.

A regenerative mindset bridges the gap between how

nature works (regeneration) and how we humans have

organized our lives (extraction).2 It allows us to “redesign

human presence on Earth”3 driven by human creativity,

problem solving, and fierce love of this planet.

Sir David Attenborough, one of the most renowned

naturalists of our time, has warned us that “the Garden of

Eden is no more.” We agree. That is why we now have to

create a Garden of Intention—a deliberately regenerative

Anthropocene.

Instead of strip-mined mountains, destroyed forests, and

depleted oceans, imagine millions of rewilding projects

covering over a billion hectares of forests, regenerating

wetlands and grasslands, and restoring coral farms in all

tropical oceans.

We will not have a regenerative Anthropocene by

default, but we can create it by design. With directional

intent, we can shift our aspirations from our current

extractive growth to a life-sustaining society of

regenerative values, principles, and practices.

We can ignite regenerative human cultures that seek to

ensure that humanity becomes a life-sustaining influence

on all ecosystems and on the planet as a whole. We will

need artists as well as policy experts, farmers as well as

leaders of industry, grandmothers as well as inventors, and

indigenous leaders as well as scientists.

We can choose regeneration as the overarching design

principle of our lives and our activities. We can restore the

resilience of the land and our communities while healing

our souls. Our corporate strategy meetings and family

reunions should be carbon neutral for sure, but beyond

that, they can include regenerative projects in which we

put our hands in the soil or in the water, together taking

actions that restore rather than degrade life on our planet.

We have to shift our action compass from self-centric to

nature-aligned. We have to filter every action through a

consequential stress test, and we have to be pretty radical

about it. When considering an action, we have to ask: Does

it actively contribute to humans and nature thriving

together as one integrated system on this planet? If yes,

green light. If not, red light. Period.

This is not a distant dream. It is already happening.

Together with renowned author Arundhati Roy, we can say,

“Another world is not only possible, she is on her way.

Maybe many of us won’t be here to greet her, but on a

quiet day, if I listen very carefully, I can hear her

breathing.”

PART III

 

 

TEN ACTIONS

CHAPTER 8

 

 

Doing What Is Necessary

Toward the end of the first week of the Paris negotiations in

December 2015, we were working in Christiana’s office

when we heard a knock on the door.

Kevin O Hanlon, head of UN Security, came in. We had

all worked together for years, so the concern on his face

was easy to read.

“We found a bomb.”

It was the nightmare scenario we had been dreading.

Because of the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, we had

allowed the security forces of the host country to assume

responsibility for the arrival and departure area of the UN

meeting grounds. By law, the location of a UN negotiation

meeting is considered extraterritorial for the duration of

the meeting, therefore not under the sovereignty of the

host country. But for COP21, we had transformed Le

Bourget Airport into a large conference center, and with

195 countries and 25,000 people in attendance, it was an

obvious potential target. We knew we needed help from

French law enforcement, especially the specialized French

antiterrorism police and their bomb-sniffing dogs.

Thirty thousand police officers had been deployed across

the country, and 238 security checkpoints had been set up.

Security was unprecedented. What we were attempting to

accomplish inside the UN grounds was unprecedented as

well. Now we were five days into the largest climate

change negotiations in UN history. The stakes were

enormous.

Kevin explained that the bomb had been found in a trash

bag in the transportation hub of the Le Bourget subway

station, the main train stop for our conference—every

single one of the 25,000 participants streamed through that

station all day long. Christiana’s two daughters used the

station at least twice a day. Tom had two children at home,

waiting for him to return. We looked at each other and saw

in each other’s eyes the scenes from three weeks earlier in

Paris and Saint-Denis. Broken glass. Blood. Dead bodies.

Family members weeping.

The bomb had been deactivated, but there was no way to

determine if there were more explosive devices in the area.

Everything hung in the balance. After years of

development, we finally had a draft text of a global climate

agreement. We had the long-term target of a net-zero

emissions economy, language to protect the vulnerable, and

even a ratchet mechanism to periodically deepen emission

reductions to try to keep the world to “well below 2

degrees Celsius” of temperature rise. These ambitious

goals were in the draft text but were not guaranteed to

survive many countries’ political pressure to remove them.

Plus, we wanted more. We wanted the agreement to put us

on a path to a 1.5-degree-Celsius maximum temperature

rise. A 2-degree world would result in up to three times as

much infrastructure destruction, biological destruction,

and life-threatening heat, hunger, and water scarcity. The

difference would save millions of lives and perhaps even

give low-lying islands and coastlines a chance of survival. If

we called off the conference, we didn’t know whether we

could ever achieve an agreement again—formidable

political obstacles remained, and the forces of resistance

were beginning to gather to prevent the world from

achieving what it needed to do.

This was our chance.

And now a decision was needed.

Should we close down the conference and with it the

chance for a global climate agreement, or should we keep it

open, with all the risk that this entailed? Christiana was no

stranger to making hard choices, but this wasn’t a choice a

mother should ever have to make.

All the risks, the fears, and the loss washed over us both

in that moment. It was a terrifying place to be, but we

couldn’t stay there long. We had to act—one way or

another.

You also have a choice ahead of you, and by now you

understand the risks.

The time you have to make that choice and act on it is

vanishingly small. We have discussed the mindset everyone

needs to cultivate in order to meet the global challenge of

the climate crisis, but on its own, this is not enough. For

change to become transformational, our change in mindset

must manifest in our actions.

There are ten necessary actions for the making of a

regenerative future, the future we hope you will choose.

Some may be familiar; others will be new. We have

considered not only the world we are trying to create but

also the risks inherent in the effort.

On one level, the big solution to the climate crisis is

blindingly obvious; we need to stop filling our atmosphere

with greenhouse gases. But in order to deliver on that goal,

we need to find myriad small solutions.

Greenhouse gases are emitted as a direct result of the

things humans do to survive, such as sourcing food and

getting around. Our ways of doing and being have become

so entangled with what is killing the planet that we cannot

feasibly just flip a switch and stop emitting greenhouse

gases.1 Consider the implications: if in an imaginary world,

we stopped using all fossil fuels in an instant, if we denied

people what they are used to—we would have a global

revolution in a matter of weeks if not days.

On the other hand, if governments do not do enough and

keep endangering the lives of young people and their

future children, a major uprising is also likely and perhaps

even already underway.2

We need transformational change at the speed that

science demands and in a manner consistent with

democracy—that is, if we do not wish to descend into

tyranny or anarchy. This point is critical. In the coming

decades, climate change will show up in larger and more

lethal ways, leading to more forced migrations, changes in

agricultural output, and more extreme weather.

Increasingly populist leaders will try to justify their actions

by claiming to protect the short-term interests of those they

govern. This could hinder attempts to deal with the root

causes of climate change, thereby worsening the crisis.

Even the most casual observers of today’s politics see that

this risk is not merely theoretical. A five-year drought in

Syria—the worst ever recorded—destroyed agriculture and

caused many rural families to migrate to cities. Large

numbers of refugees were already pouring in from the war

in Iraq, and the combined tensions gave rise to the civil war

and the atrocities committed by Bashar al-Assad. Then a

flow of refugees, largely from Syria, made their way to

Europe, where Chancellor Angela Merkel eventually

accepted many into Germany.3 This led to fundamental

changes in the German political system as the AfD

(Alternative for Germany), a far-right movement, jumped

from averaging 3 percent in the polls to 16 percent and is

now a major political force.4 This weakened Merkel, then

the de facto leader of the European Union, and it continues

to affect politics in Europe and beyond.

If we are to resist extremist politics as the effects of

climate change grow ever more critical, we will have to be

vastly better prepared than we are today. The ten action

areas we set out here attempt to portray not only how we

can reduce emissions but also how as a society we can

make ourselves more resilient to extremist movements that

could pull us back in the wrong direction.

The ten actions that we call for are not only about

moving beyond fossil fuels and investing in technological

solutions. They also call for a fairer economic system that

does not strain the social net even further. They call for

strong political engagement by everyone, and for

relinquishing nostalgia for a past that might be dangerous

to re-create. The additional pieces may feel remote from

the issue of climate change, but they are fundamental parts

of our response. We must reject the cycle of blame and

retribution and embrace the shared endeavor we so

desperately need. We cannot strain the social safety net

and continue to expand inequality, or else our democratic

systems will refuse to allow further changes to the

economy. We have to get our arms around the whole issue

at the same time.

What we will ask of you is significant. It is not simply

about making minor changes to your lifestyle, although

those can be important too; it is about transforming our

priorities in order to create a future in which all of us may

thrive. It will involve developing and utilizing the qualities

of mind we talked about in the previous section and using

them to take greater steps toward creating a new world.

None of us has complete control over which path the

world ultimately chooses to take and which future will be

ours. But each of us individually can engage in these ten

action areas, giving direction to the transformation toward

a regenerative world.

We are all weavers of the grand tapestry of history. As

we cast our minds back and consider those who lived at

moments of great consequence, we naturally feel that if we

had lived then, we would have been among those who made

the noble choices rather than those who stumbled along,

head down, changing nothing. Well, this is our chance.

Every one of the needed actions is something you can

personally achieve as a human being, even if that boils

down to urging others to take climate change seriously. Our

hope is that by the time you put this book down, you will

understand that you can make a significant difference.

We can no longer afford the indulgence of feeling

powerless.

We can no longer afford to assume that addressing

climate change is the sole responsibility of national or local

governments, or corporations or individuals. This is an

everyone-everywhere mission in which we all must

individually and collectively assume responsibility. You play

many roles in your life—parent, spouse, friend,

professional, person of faith, agnostic. You may have great

means or none at all. You may sit on the board of a

corporation or lead a city, province, or country. Whoever

you are, you are needed now in every one of your roles.

Changing our mindset is critical but does not suffice. We

invite you to dive into doing as soon as possible. Focus on

doing one or two of the ten actions at first. Choose the

areas that make the most sense for you, and then challenge

yourself to do more over time. Know that our discussion

can only point the way, shining a light on what we think is

critical at this unique moment, but all of us can do myriad

other things to make a difference.5 If you leave this book

with a commitment to be part of this journey, then you will

need to go beyond what we set out here.

You already know the end of our bomb story.

We had to do what was necessary, no matter the cost.

We knew the only way to truly protect our own children

was to courageously continue the work of protecting all

humanity and our planetary home. The metro station

stayed open. The conference proceeded. Taking this action

was not without risk, but neither of us regrets it. We hope

that, in ten years, we will be able to say the same about our

collective action.

The time for doing what we can has passed.

Each of us must now do what is necessary.

ACTION 1: Let Go of the Old World

To meet the challenges of the climate crisis and preserve

all that we hold dear; to retain democracy, social justice,

human rights, and other hard-won freedoms in the future,

we must part ways with that which threatens to destroy

them. Now is the time to make profound shifts in how we

live, work, and relate to each other. To be successful, we

need to make a series of intentional moves.

The first of these is to honor the past, then let it go.

Fossil fuels have given a huge boost to humanity’s

development, but their continued use is no longer

supportable because of the extraordinary damage they

cause to our health, our ecosystems, and our climate.

Viable alternatives are safer. Now is the time for us to

thank fossil fuels, retire them, and move on.

It is the same story for so many of the profound shifts we

need to make today. The building blocks of our current

society—energy, transportation, and agricultural systems,

which we now know to be harmful—must undergo radical

transformations.

We all find change difficult. We tend to cling to what we

know and resist what is new—even when the new brings

tremendous benefits. Opposition to onshore wind turbines

in the UK is a good example. Even though onshore wind is

now the cheapest form of energy6 (cheaper than coal, oil,

gas, and other renewable sources), rural landowners have

significantly resisted it, keen to preserve the appearance of

the countryside. When the Conservative Party (which

derives much of its support from these rural communities)

came to power in 2015, it slashed subsidies and changed

planning laws for onshore wind—leading to an 80 percent

reduction in new capacity.7 Only now, with climate change

awareness rapidly rising among the UK public, is support

for onshore wind starting to outweigh an attachment to

yesterday’s aesthetics.

Be mindful that some individuals and industries are

actively fighting the changes we need to make to achieve a

world that is only 1.5 degrees warmer. They are sowing

fear and uncertainty, sponsoring divisiveness, and seducing

us into an unconstructive blame game, all of which we

would do well to resist.

Change makes us vulnerable to tribalism and to the

illusion of certainty. In the transition to a regenerative

world, one of the biggest risks is that the political center

does not hold, and people succumb to the easy promises of

populist leaders at either end of the political spectrum.

History and early signs both suggest that this might be our

new reality, with the real potential to turn democracy into

tyranny. We cannot go back to the way of life that created

the climate emergency in the first place, but treading new

ground is politically challenging. The political shocks

currently reverberating across the world are just the start.

Change can also trigger blame. Some people who claim

to be on the right side of the climate change debate will

have a narrative laced with exclusion or blame. Blame is

already a powerful current in our relationship to climate

change—it is directed toward the developed world, the oil

industry, capitalism and corporations, particular countries,

and the older generation. Outrage is understandable,

particularly now that we know beyond a doubt that some

companies hid the truth about climate change for decades

in order to continue making money.8 In those cases, justice

and due process are called for and should certainly be

delivered.

But blame does not serve us. It creates a sense of

needed restitution but does not actually deliver it. Blame

can consume us and cause us to lose years of constructive

action. History shows very clearly that once humans start

pointing the finger of blame at each other, it can be hard to

stop. In the aftermath of the First World War, the Allied

powers humiliated Germany, forced her to accept full blame

for the war, and imposed crippling reparations payments.

Historians agree that that paved the way for the rise of

fascism and a second massive global conflict twenty years

later.9

Here’s what we can do to let go of the old world and

keep the worst of our impulses in check:

Focus on where you’re going, not on where you’ve been. Cultivate your

constructive vision for the future and hold on to it, come

what may. When you can see where you’re going, you won’t

be so afraid of losing your grip on the past.

Build resilience to nostalgia. Recognize and understand the inherent

impermanence of our world, and build a practice of

nonattachment. We can all be susceptible to a desire to re-

create the past. However, history teaches us that at

moments of profound change, our nostalgia can be used

against us. It can distract us from the urgent work ahead,

and political leaders may appeal to the past to manipulate

our emotions and secure our consent to act immorally.

Burst out of your bubble. We will not be able to make big changes

in our society without fully understanding and accepting

one another’s deeply held values and legitimate concerns.

Certain segments of our society may continue to resist

change for good reasons, and our failure to understand

them may set us all back. In 2018 French President

Emmanuel Macron tried to approach reducing emissions

and air pollution by increasing the fuel tax. But he failed to

bring everyone on board—those struggling to make ends

meet faced unacceptable increases in the cost of their

commutes. The result was a fury of protest, catching the

government completely off guard. And the French gilets

jaunes (“yellow jackets”) activists spectacularly forced

Macron to abandon his plan.10 Why do these disconnects

happen? Partly because we are becoming increasingly

divided by the type of media we consume. We tend to read

opinion pieces that reflect or support our own views,

reinforcing what we want to hear and already believe.

Cleverly programmed algorithms turbocharge that process

on the internet and social media.11

This means that often we have no idea what other people

deeply value or think.

Get offline and get to know your neighbors, people in the

grocery line, or fellow commuters. Challenge your own

assumptions, and be mindful of misinformation and

disinformation. Share your hopes and fears in person, listen

to others, and be honest and respectful.

In 1990, after spending twenty-seven years in prison,

Nelson Mandela was informed by President F. W. De Klerk

that he would be freed in less than twenty-four hours. The

following day Mandela walked out of Victor Verster Prison

and into history. He had to pass through a courtyard,

beyond which he would be a free man. As he later

recounted, he knew that if he did not forgive his captors

before he reached the outer wall, he never would. So he

forgave them. This did not mean that he forgot. The Truth

and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) that he later

established played a remarkable role in helping post-

apartheid South Africa let go of its past. The TRC allowed

anyone who had been a victim of violence to be heard in a

formal setting. In addition, anyone who had perpetrated

violence could also give testimony and request amnesty

from prosecution. Mandela’s achievement and the process

he established greatly aided the transition from one state

to another very different one.

The past was relinquished, and the future finally had

room to emerge.

We too must let go of the fossil-fuel-dominated past

without recrimination. The process of letting go is

essential, and it must be intentional. The more work we do

to let go of the old world and walk with confidence into the

future, the stronger we’ll be for what lies ahead.

ACTION 2: Face Your Grief but Hold a Vision of the Future

The winters, springs, summers, and autumns, the rainy and

dry seasons that we remember will not be those that our

children and their children will enjoy. It’s rare today to find

someone over fifty who isn’t conscious that the weather

patterns that defined their childhoods are being quickly

and drastically altered. Glaciers and lakes are rapidly

retreating, and our oceans are choking in plastic.12 Ancient

bones and diseases are surfacing in the permafrost.13 As

our weather and landscapes change before our eyes, as

millennial signposts of natural rhythms disappear, our

understanding of the ways of the world is unraveling.

Things don’t make sense the way they used to.

We cannot hide from the grief that flows from the loss of

biodiversity and the impoverished lives of future

generations. We have to feel the full force of this new

reality in our bones. There is a power to consciously

bearing witness to all that is unfolding without turning

away, and counterintuitively, you may actually feel better

about the situation when you deeply accept the reality of it.

And beyond this, we also then need to look to the future

and set our sights on what we can still create. The changes

to come will be more disorienting than those we have

already experienced, and it will be easy to lose our footing

unless we can clearly see where we want to go. We need to

take responsibility for this reality by facing the uncertain

future with as much courage as we can muster. Doing so

requires us to understand why we must meet this moment

with energy and commitment.

For years, the countries of the world tried to reach a

global agreement on climate change. The effort became so

all-encompassing that the challenge being attempted began

to merge with the reason for doing it. The vision became

securing a global agreement. As powerful and important as

it was, the global agreement was actually a goal in service

of a vision. The vision was, and still is, a regenerative world

where humans and nature can thrive.

Confusing vision with goals is easy. A goal is a specific

target that we set on the way to achieving a vision. It

includes the strategies and tactics we use in moving toward

the vision. Goals are critical, but we also need a vision to

inspire the kind of commitment and energy we will need to

get through the difficult years ahead. If we don’t have a

vision, our goals alone may not afford us the flexibility

necessary to achieve the vision.

And if we lose sight of the big picture and become

fixated on how to achieve it, at best, progress can grind to

a halt, or worse, divisiveness can take hold.

However, for those eager to take action, fixating on the

vision can feel irresponsible and unconnected to reality.

When we are caught up in the issues of today—

communities decimated by increasingly violent weather

patterns; the unbridgeable chasm between the rich and the

poor; rapacious multinational companies focused on short-

term profits rather than long-term value; and political

leaders bent on driving divisions between nations (and

within nations)—having a vision can seem naïve and wishful

thinking. The distance between projecting a vision of a

better world and realizing it through concerted action can

sometimes seem unbridgeable.

Having a vision is essential, but we have to be open to

doing things in new ways. So hold on to your vision, but

remain flexible and adaptive about the route to get there.

The route may change based on circumstances, while the

vision remains a fixed North Star, a guide and a

destination.

Start with why. You do not have to believe your vision is likely to

be achieved, or that the struggle to achieve it is going well,

to keep pursuing it.

Pondering the different scenarios presented at the

beginning of this book, you may conclude that we cannot

turn this ship around in time, that we are going to crash,

and that our vision is unattainable. That thought is not

irrational. What would be irrational is to imagine that the

reasons for building a better future are therefore

diminished. Stubborn optimism needs to motivate you

daily; you always need to bear in mind why you feel the

future is worth fighting for. The essential “why” should be

the driving force of all efforts to combat climate change no

matter what.

Imagination is essential. Ideologies and ways of organizing this

world can seem very ingrained, but they are subject to

major disruption more easily than you think. It took

Emmeline Pankhurst and the suffragette movement slightly

more than a decade to force the British government to give

women the right to vote.14 The Soviet Union seemed so

solid as to be eternal, but once cracks started to appear,

the edifice crumbled in just a few months.15

In 1939 General Motors presented visitors to the World’s

Fair in New York City with an imaginative vision of what

the future could look like. It was called Futurama and

consisted of an enormous model of multiple high-rise

buildings, vast suburbs, and large motorways for travel

between them, necessitating the use of cars.16

Imagination is going to be critical as we work to

transform today’s urban sprawl to make it fit for the future.

Some futurists have predicted that in the course of a

decade, the rise of the autonomous, shared, on-demand

electric car means we will need 80 percent fewer cars on

the roads than we do now.17 This will free up huge areas of

urban space that are currently used as parking lots.

In London, for instance, it could mean that 70 percent of

the space currently used for parking cars, or the equivalent

of about five thousand sports fields, could become available

for growing food, rewilding, or building sustainable

housing.18

Much of what we imagine to be permanent is more

ephemeral than we realize. Sometimes imagination can

seem naïve, but don’t belittle thinking big. Time and again

societies have turned seeming fantasies into realities when

circumstances require something new.

Keep your eyes on what’s to come. There will be times when we feel

we are failing. However much we progress, we will see

some deterioration in our environment and our society.

Heartbreakingly, people will die as a result of climate

change, land that people live on will become uninhabitable,

and species will continue to become extinct—all causes for

real grief, and grieving is needed. Give adequate time and

space for that necessary mourning, and seek support from

your communities—both are extremely important. We

cannot and should not turn away from the pain, but that

heartbreak should spur us on to greater action rather than

sink us into a pit of blame, despair, or hopelessness.

As Maya Angelou said so eloquently: “You may

encounter many defeats, but you must not be defeated. In

fact, it may be necessary to encounter the defeats, so you

can know who you are, what you can rise from, how you

can still come out of it.”19

A compelling vision is like a hook in the future. It

connects you to the pockets of possibility that are emerging

and helps you pull them into the present. Hold on to that.

Stay firmly fixed to a vision of a world you know is possible.

This act is radical resistance to the belief that solving our

problems is beyond us.

When Martin Luther King, Jr., stood on the steps of the

Lincoln Memorial in August 1963, the outlook for race

relations in the United States was grim. Just months earlier,

Alabama governor George Wallace had stood outside the

Alabama state capitol and declared, “Segregation now,

segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.” To enforce

segregation, police unleashed dogs and water cannons on

protesters, even on children as young as six. Even those

who supported civil rights felt that change was too far off

and the campaign was hopeless. Given that context, King’s

words about having a dream were like a light in darkness.

He didn’t know how it was going to happen, but he held

tight to his vision of a society in which people were treated

equally regardless of their race. The following year his

persistence led to the passage of the Civil Rights Act, and

his vision lived on after his death, inspiring equal rights

movements across the world and embedding nonviolent

protest as a cornerstone of political protest movements.20

A world that has become richer in the active use of

vision and imagination is a much more vibrant, inspiring,

and joyful place. In these complex times, we often lament

the lack of global leaders who can show us the way and

help guide us. Those people are important, but we must all

believe that the world is worth saving and a regenerative

future is utterly possible. In the end, we are not going to

solve this problem by hoping that our democratic systems

produce enlightened leadership. They might, but the

survival of our species can’t depend on the partisan lines of

a divided electorate. Instead, we must all embrace a strong

vision of a better future.

ACTION 3: Defend the Truth

Three centuries ago Jonathan Swift wrote, “Falsehood flies,

and truth comes limping after it.”21 How prophetic this

turned out to be. A recent analysis by MIT shows that on

Twitter lies spread on average six times faster than truth,

and that truth never reaches the same level of

penetration.22 Social media is an engine for the production

and dissemination of lies.

This fact has serious consequences for our society and in

particular for our ability to come together to deal with

complicated long-term threats like the climate crisis. In this

“post-truth era,” the undermining of science now has

currency.

The fabric of the scientific method is fraying. Objectivity

is under attack. Some political leaders have chosen to part

company with objective reality. The rise of social media has

afforded these leaders ample opportunity to obscure facts.

This move toward subjectivity creates a breeding ground

for oppression and tyranny. We all have an urgent

responsibility to recognize and defend such an attack on

truth because if it persists, our small window of opportunity

to turn back the tide on the climate crisis will be lost

forever.

In no period of history did leaders ever speak the truth

at all times, but right now an altogether different level of

lying is evident in the political arena.

Humans are vulnerable to the post-truth world for a

reason. Our natural inclination seems to be to seek

confirmation of things we already believe to be true, rather

than evidence for an objective reality.23

It feels good to have our beliefs confirmed, and we

respond with positive emotion to anyone who makes us feel

this way. Thus, if a leader affirms our belief that vaccines

cause autism, or that climate change is a hoax, or that

anything else that we feel to be true is true, then we get a

frisson of positive emotion. This well-documented and –

researched phenomenon is called confirmation bias.24

Climate change will result in disasters, lots of them:

inundations of major cities, loss of islands, a rising tide of

migration. At these moments of extreme vulnerability,

leaders with authoritarian instincts will want to seize the

chance to consolidate their power. Populist authoritarian

rulers will not seek to address the complex climate crisis

with long-term solutions; instead they will find someone to

blame. We cannot allow them to use the coming disasters to

exacerbate tragedy to the detriment of us all.

Here’s what we can do to defend the truth:

Free your mind. In the end, you are responsible for what you

choose to believe in a post-truth world. Make no mistake,

this problem is not ancillary to the climate crisis. If we

can’t agree on something as basic as a verified fact, our

hands will be tied when it comes to the big stuff, and

climate change is huge.

The reality of climate change is finally provoking

genuine public anger, spurring people onto the streets. Our

democratic systems cannot resist our voices for long,

provided we can maintain the basis of objective truth

within our societies. We must consciously enter into a state

of self-reflection, questioning whether we are making a

conscious choice to adhere only to information that does

not challenge our position. For example, the fact that you

are reading this book might be an instance of your own

confirmation bias. Pay attention to your own eagerness to

believe political leaders you agree with and to disbelieve

those with whom you don’t. Fight to force your mind down

avenues and ways of thinking that you are unused to.

Thinking outside established patterns is a radical act for

preserving our collective freedom. Get good at it.

Learn to distinguish between real science and pseudoscience. In 2017, the

Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank funded in

part by the Mercer Family Foundation, sent beautifully

produced textbooks on climate science to three hundred

thousand schoolteachers across the United States. The

book, originally targeting policy makers and published in

2015 to coincide with the Paris negotiations, was titled Why

Scientists Disagree About Global Warming and began with

this statement: “Probably the most widely repeated claim in

the debate over global warming is that ‘97% of scientists

agree’ that climate change is man-made and dangerous.

This claim is not only false, but its presence in the debate is

an insult to science.” This textbook, authored by

“distinguished climate scientists,” was sent to teachers,

with a letter urging them to use the book and its

accompanying DVD in their classrooms. The Heartland

Institute, which promotes denial of established climate

science, encouraged people to “seek out advice from

independent, non governmental organizations and

scientists who are free of financial and political conflicts of

interest” rather than relying on the UN Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for scientific advice.

It would have been extremely difficult for some

recipients of that book to determine whether this was real

science or bunk, and whether the authors were indeed

distinguished climate scientists. In fact, one author was

formerly director of environmental science at Peabody

Energy (a coal company that went bankrupt). That author

has a master’s degree and a Ph.D. in geography, not

climate science. One of his credits is that he is the lead

author of the reports of the Nongovernmental International

Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). Note the striking and

confusing similarity of that name to the UN-backed IPCC.

The NIPCC is actually a project sponsored by the Heartland

Institute. Many teachers immediately saw the textbook as

the unscientific propaganda it was, but those who didn’t

and used it in their classrooms had a lasting impact on

their students.

This story teaches us a good lesson: even when a

document looks “official,” is beautifully produced, and is

authored by real scientists, we should approach its

contents with caution. It is essential that you make the

extra effort to determine whether you are basing your

opinions on fact or fiction. Check where your information

comes from. If necessary, follow the money. Determine the

source of the funding for the research in question, be it a

climate science statement, report, or article. See if the

research is accredited by an established university or other

well-known academic body. The simplest way to do this is to

find out if the study was “peer reviewed,” meaning

reviewed and evaluated by other experts in the field. For

example, the IPCC report on 1.5 degrees Celsius, released

in October 2018, was a collaboration of ninety-one authors

and review editors from forty different countries. Most

mainstream newspapers will have an editorial policy to

ensure that sources are either peer reviewed or have

similar criteria for reliability, but it is always worth

checking.

Don’t give up on climate deniers. As we enter the post-truth world

more fully, the fault line between a desire for truth and an

adherence to ideology runs closer to each of us. Some of us

may have a natural inclination for one point of view but a

deeper desire for truth, whereas others will exhibit a

slavish adherence to one perspective, whatever the facts.

In fact, those at the latter extreme have left the arena in

which facts make a difference. Many people are now

experiencing this even within their own families. Facts

aren’t enough to change the mind of a climate denier, so

presenting statistics and sources won’t help. If you reach

them, it will be because you sincerely listened to them and

strove to understand their concerns. By giving care, love,

and attention to every individual, we can counter the forces

pulling us apart.

For people who came of age between the fall of the Berlin

Wall and the fall of the Twin Towers, today’s world can

indeed appear strange. Those days were marked by a

general consensus about how humanity should advance.

Some may now wish for that simpler time, making us

vulnerable to the promises of leaders who would take us

back instead of focusing on what lies ahead.

The future will be different, it will be complex, and the

genie of social media can’t be put back in the bottle. There

is no getting away from the fact that humanity needs to

come to grips with the truth if it wishes to contain a

monster of its own creation. If we wish to come together to

address the climate crisis, and halt the rapidly accelerating

extinctions that are now taking place in greater and

greater numbers, we need to accept our responsibility to

always defend the incontrovertible truths of climate change

and their consequences. We are all responsible for what we

hold to be true and for defending that truth against attack.

We will succeed by applying a thoroughly critical approach

to the information that shapes our ideas, opinions, and

actions. We will succeed by calling out falsehoods,

particularly those that may determine how we act on

climate change. Once this becomes a habit, once we

become better practiced at determining what is real, the

fog of misinformation that we are currently cloaked in and

the daily distractions vying for our attention will be easier

to navigate. When we work this way to defend and advance

a fact-based reality, the view of the regenerative future we

want, and the path we will travel to get there, will come

more sharply into focus.

ACTION 4: See Yourself as a Citizen—Not as a Consumer

The South Indian monkey trap is an ingenious but cruel

device. It consists of a coconut staked to the ground with a

hole in it and a ball of sweet rice inside. A monkey

approaches and fits his hand through the hole to grasp the

rice he can smell inside. However, the hole is not large

enough for his clenched fist to pass back through. His

instinct is to keep his hand clasped over the ball of rice, so

he is trapped by his instinct, not by anything physical: if he

would let go of the rice, he would be free.

Such is our relationship with consumption (purchasing,

using, and throwing away): we know it is trapping us, but it

has become so embedded in our psyche—to the point of

being almost instinctive—that we cannot let go.

Much of what we buy is intended to enhance our sense

of identity. Particular brands of clothes, soap, cookies,

televisions, and cars are designed with a tribe in mind,

their attributes carefully cultivated by the consumer goods

companies that sell the products. Identity and consumption

keep moving closer together. In the UK, for example, the

average person consumes more than sixty-five pounds of

clothes every year, equivalent to about five loads of

laundry.25 These purchases are driven mainly by the fact

that fashion trends change each season. These cycles, by

their very nature, require us to clear out our closets

regularly and hop back in line for more clothes.

But the fashion industry has an enormous carbon

footprint. Textile production is second only to the oil

industry for pollution. It adds more greenhouse gases to

our atmosphere than all international flights and maritime

shipping combined. Estimates suggest that the fashion

industry is responsible for a whopping 10 percent of global

CO2 emissions,26 and as we increase our consumption of

fast fashion, the related emissions are set to grow rapidly.

Our engines of economic growth depend on us

continuing to spend money. In the 1920s, some Americans

were concerned that a new generation was emerging that

had satisfied its needs—and that would lead to a drag on

growth. President Herbert Hoover’s Committee on Recent

Economic Change in 1929 concluded that advertising was

necessary to create “new wants that will make way for

endlessly newer wants as fast as they are satisfied.”27

Today consumer goods companies spend a great deal of

money to make sure we remain stuck in the consumption

cycle. Their marketing and advertising budgets are

enormous. In the United States, the price of one thirty-

second advertisement during the Super Bowl—one of the

most-watched sporting events on television—was more than

$5 million in 2019.28 Amazon, the online marketplace,

raked in an extraordinary $10 billion in revenue from

advertising sales in 2018 alone.29 Every year more than

$550 billion is spent on advertising in a world of

consumption and fast consumerism.30

What is more, billions of products are intentionally

designed to become obsolete, fueling even more economic

growth as we strive to replace them. Single-use plastics are

the epitome of that, but obsolescence—the process of

becoming outdated and discarded—is designed into almost

all consumer goods. Warranties for certain products rarely

go beyond three years because the product is likely to

break after that period. And often a new item costs less

than the replacement part. New software updates won’t

install on old computers, meaning those too must be

replaced. The list is endless and depressing. As a result, the

practice of mending, repairing, and restoring is becoming a

dying art.

In the global economy, supply chains often reach across

the world and back again. Each link represents a different

production stage, often performed by a different company,

from the mining of precious metals in Bolivia for your

smartphone to the packaging of the final product in China.

As a result, it is hard to know which parts of the supply

chains of major corporations practice sustainability and

which contribute to climate change.

Here’s what you can do.

Reclaim your idea of a good life. Consumerism is the prevailing

definition of a good life: you are in perpetual pursuit of the

almighty upgrade, whether it is to your phone, your

clothes, or your car. But rather than meeting our needs,

buying things in order to achieve a sense of satisfaction or

belonging can become addictive and lead to self-doubt and

confusion about our very identity and life direction.31

Identifying as a consumer—of any particular type of

product or brand—implies passivity, and it also implies that

consuming that product meets our needs.

Consumerism traps us into thinking we can purchase

personality. Moreover, it eats up our mental space and

creates a constricted view of the world, one in which our

value and identity are built upon the proliferation of

disposable waste. Psychological studies have shown that

mass consumption creates a bigger and bigger hole in our

lives that we keep trying to fill.32 As we consciously or

unconsciously attempt to consolidate our sense of identity

through curated buying habits, we drive the engine of mass

consumption faster and faster, bringing ourselves ever

closer to the edge of disaster.

Despite all the ways culture is pushing us in the

direction of blind consumerism, we can start to

intentionally push back. We can develop the mental

discipline to resist the imperatives of consumerism. We can

change our consumption habits and vote with our money

for products that are sustainable.

Further, we can change the way we identify as

consumers, to reboot our relationship with materialism.

Freeing ourselves from the influence of advertising can be

a liberating experience and a radical political act.

Become a better consumer. In the short term, we can improve

matters by changing our consumption patterns within the

system. Not all purchases are equal. Buying high-quality

clothes made from organic cotton that will last and be

handed down is different from buying cheap, disposable

items that end up in a landfill after a few weeks of wear. If

you have the option of voting with your money, make more

educated decisions about the products you do need to buy.

Buy from companies that are public about their values,

have made commitments to sustainability, and are part of

organizations that certify they are following through on

their pledges. The impact will be significant.

Vote with your money. Most important, eliminate waste.

Apply the old-fashioned adage of reduce, reuse, recycle.

When we need to buy things, our choices should be

informed and enlightened.

Dematerialize. Consider how we made the change from vinyl,

cassette tapes, and CDs to downloading or streaming

music. Technology in many instances now allows us to do

without material objects while still enjoying the services

that they provide. Less can be more. In the near future,

even individual ownership of cars may cease to exist as the

dominant paradigm—the transportation we need might be

offered by shared vehicles, probably self-driving and

certainly electric.33 One day consumers may come to define

themselves not as owners of products but as beneficiaries

of systems of service delivery. Already the world’s largest

provider of overnight accommodation (Airbnb) owns no

buildings. The world’s largest provider of personal

transport (Uber) owns no cars.34 This shift from ownership

to stewardship will fundamentally change our relationship

to consumerism. We can help accelerate it by engaging

with it and welcoming it with open arms.

The story of the happy fisherman, first made popular by

Paulo Coelho, has several versions. A content fisherman is

relaxing on the beach in his little village after catching a

few big fish. A businessman walks past, notices the bounty,

and asks the fisherman how long it took to catch all those

big fish. Not very long, says the fisherman. The

businessman asks why then, if it didn’t take long, the

fisherman doesn’t spend more time at sea, so as to catch

more fish. The fisherman replies that the fish he caught are

enough to feed his whole family, and that when he finishes

with his catch, he can go home to play with his children,

take a nap with his wife, then join his friends for drinks and

music making in the evening.

The businessman suggests to the fisherman that he

could lend him some money to be more successful. Then

the fisherman can spend more time at sea and buy a bigger

boat to catch lots more fish that he could sell to make more

money. He can then invest the money in more boats and set

up a big fishing company. Over time the fishing company

can go public on the stock exchange and make the

fisherman millions.

“And then what?” asks the fisherman.

The businessman proudly explains that then the

fisherman can retire. He can finally enjoy spending his days

as he wishes: catching a few fish in the morning, spending

time playing with his children, taking an afternoon nap

with his wife, and joining his friends for drinks and music

making in the evenings.

It has been said that the most important things in life are

not things. If, like Coelho’s fisherman, we can learn to

recognize what is enough, we might also move beyond the

mindset of consumption and ownership, consciously

avoiding the forces that feed that mindset. We can begin to

appreciate that with a different approach to life, our

capacity for happiness will increase and that our drain on

the planet will dramatically slow down.

ACTION 5: Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

The assumption that we will always need fossil fuels comes

from mental attachment to the past. In order to move

beyond fossil fuels, we must let go of the conviction that

they are necessary for humanity to thrive in the future.

Only when this mindset is challenged can we migrate our

thinking, finances, and infrastructure to the new energies.

Fossil fuel companies are deliberately slowing the

transition. As providers of these still plentiful and potent

energy sources, these companies have power that has

grown exponentially, and now their influence is deep and

wide.

Many businesses continue to invest heavily in lobbying

to water down new regulations that would help shift the

economy beyond fossil fuels.35 Some individuals in senior

leadership positions, however, wish to address the issue

and transform their businesses. That desire is sincere—we

know this firsthand. But they are in a tough spot: if they

shift their companies too far and too fast, they destabilize

their business model, and investors will punish them. If

they delay the shift too long, the value of their company

may crumble. Several are playing the dangerous waiting

game to be the “last one out,” continuing to derive income

from the market space left by companies that are leaving

fossil fuels behind.

Almost all governments are still subsidizing fossil fuels.

The fossil fuel industry may dispute it, but it receives huge

government handouts. Globally, governments spend about

$600 billion every year keeping prices of fossil fuels

artificially low.36 That’s around three times as much as

subsidies provided for renewable energy.37 Governments

may claim their administrations support renewable energy,

but until they stop subsidizing fossil fuels, our progress will

stall.

Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England,

famously said that unless we make a smooth transition

from today’s fossil-fuel-based economy to the fully

decarbonized economy we need in the future, at some point

there will be a “jump to distress,”38 meaning that high-

carbon assets will suddenly drop in value by a large

percentage. Carney urged us to avoid that at all costs.

When you think about how much of our economy is built on

a foundation of fossil fuels, his prediction comes as no

surprise. Entire industries, companies, and governments

could go bankrupt or lose a lot of value very suddenly if we

delay transition to the point of crisis.

If we allow a jump to distress to happen, it will affect all

of us. Governments rely on tax receipts from fossil fuels to

finance their services. Many pensions are invested in fossil

fuels and in companies reliant on them. The systemic

nature of the financial services system means that if a

major drop in value occurs, it will quickly affect lots of

other, seemingly unrelated entities. Such a jump to distress

could make the financial crisis of 2008 pale in comparison.

Given all this, the urgent shift from fossil fuels must

happen in a planned and measured way and not as the

result of panic. In 2017, heads of central banks came

together to establish the Network for Greening the

Financial System (NGFS) and are now united in their

efforts to be vigilant of the impacts of climate change on

global monetary stability.39

A growing body of financial research and information

about how countries and companies are likely to perform in

a future that is fundamentally different from the past is

helping investors understand the risk. For example,

Moody’s rating agency (one of the highly influential

agencies that assess risks to companies and countries) now

has a controlling stake in RiskFirst, a firm that measures

the physical risks of climate change.40 Investors are

reallocating capital away from what are now commonly

known as “stranded assets.” That reallocation is moving

markets and catching the attention of corporate leaders,

but it needs to go much further, much faster.

Stand up for 100 percent renewable energy. In the past few years, energy

generation from renewable sources has undergone an

impressive surge. We are currently on track to supply 30

percent of power demand in 2023 from renewables, and 50

percent by 2030.41 Corporations are taking the lead.

Almost two hundred companies, including well-known ones

such as Apple, IKEA, Bank of America, Danone, eBay,

Google, Mars, Nike, and Walmart, have already shifted to

100 percent renewables as sources of electricity or are on

their way to doing so.42 Seventy-five percent of people in

Europe and North America support government taking

strong action for electricity to be generated by 100 percent

renewable power.43 To become our new reality, renewable

power will have to be delivered at the systemic level by

leaders in political and institutional situations of authority.

Those leaders represent the priorities of the people who

elect them, so let’s vote for leaders who advocate clean

energy.

If those in positions of power and influence today expect

to be remembered as loyal public servants, responsible for

representing the people, then they must look to the future

with clearer vision. We should reward with our votes only

the leaders who step forward with genuine insight.

We can do this with real confidence, because solar and

wind power have developed at a speed and scale that few

believed possible just a few years ago. With a 90 percent

drop in costs for solar panels in the past decade,

renewables now compete with coal on price alone in most

places around the world, and increasingly with gas as

well.44 A similar story is unfolding for both onshore and

offshore wind energy production. The storage solutions

required to smooth out energy from solar and wind are also

rapidly evolving to become economically viable.

As costs have dropped, innovators are reimagining how

energy grids of the future will operate. Far more intelligent

and interconnected grids are emerging.

Make a time-bound, ambitious plan. We have ten years to cut our

global emissions in half and another twenty years after

that, at maximum, to get them to net zero. Corporations

and countries have great responsibility for leading the

charge, but we can all play our part by reducing our own

personal emissions. If we think clearly and act when we

need to, this is enough time.45 The 50 percent reduction

necessary over the next ten years is where we must now

focus our attention. That is a global figure, but the number

can be averaged out in this way: those of us who have been

using far more than our share should reduce our emissions

more than 50 percent. Let’s aim for a minimum of 60

percent, knowing that we humans tend to overestimate

what we can achieve in a year and underestimate what we

can achieve in ten.

What would your life look like in ten years if you were

using at least 60 percent less fossil fuel than you are now?

Most of your current emissions probably come from flying,

driving, and heating and cooling your house. The key

culprits tend to be expensive items that we can’t easily

abandon, such as cars, boilers, and air conditioners. Once

you have bought a car, you will use it, and while you may

try to use it less, there is a limit to what you can achieve.

Consider shifting to an electric vehicle within the next ten

years. The increased efficiency and range of electric

vehicles, combined with price drops and innovative

financing models, are putting them within the reach of

more and more of us. Even midrange models are now

capable of driving 150 miles in one stretch, and charging

stations are more abundant than ever before.46 Others may

consider moving beyond the car, and even away from car

ownership, a possibility that is becoming increasingly

viable.

As for heating and cooling your house, you should aspire

to buy renewable electricity through the grid and to

generate more at home. Improving insulation and switching

to electric heating all at once may seem daunting. Take one

step at a time. Start by performing an energy audit in your

home to identify energy leakages and inefficiencies. This

will help you to prioritize your energy upgrade investments.

You can do the cheaper energy improvements first, then

plan phased investments over a few years when, say, a

boiler would have to be replaced anyway. Over time you

will save money and reduce emissions.

Reducing flying is likely to have the biggest impact if you

live in a wealthy country. Much of what is wonderful about

the world has come from the fact that we can visit different

parts of it, have cultural exchanges, and see amazing

places. It is an unbelievable privilege for those who are

able to afford it to get on a plane in one part of the world

and get off, ten hours later, on the other side. If you enjoy

travel adventures, take business trips, or visit family

abroad, you will not find it easy to give up flying.

Only 6 percent of the world’s population has ever set

foot on a plane.47 If you are among them, it is incumbent

upon you to take a stance and make a plan. You might

decide never to set foot on a plane again, and if you do, we

applaud and celebrate you. But in reality, that may not be

possible for you today, but you can still make a

contribution. You can commit to not flying for holidays, or

to taking the train to places within, say, five hundred miles

of your home. You might commit to taking only a certain

number of flights per year, or to taking meetings via

videoconferencing.

However you approach it, air transportation is one of the

critical issues we are going to have to grapple with on the

path to a 60 percent reduction by 2030. Neither it nor the

other changes discussed here have to be frightening. When

people consider such lifestyle changes, they can become

alarmed and feel that something precious is being taken

from them. However the opposite is the case. While we may

resist change, the reality is that the speed, scale, and

reckless use of resources in our wasteful economy are

making few of us happy. As we focus on making thoughtful

changes to help preserve what we really care about, finding

a sense of purpose often improves our quality of life. Try it

for yourself, and see what you find.

ACTION 6: Reforest the Earth

The future we must choose will require us to pay more

attention to our bond with nature. Ancient stands of trees

teeming with life are integral to our survival. Extracting

more and more output from increasingly depleted and

exhausted soil is a formula for our own destruction. If we

want to thrive over the long term, we need to find the

sweet spot of working to regenerate nature for its own

benefit and ours, and drawing from it only what we need to

support our lives. Achieving this balance on a global scale

is still possible. We can be the generation to achieve it.

Forests create the conditions for forests, in a self-

sustaining system. They give up moisture to the sky, which

creates clouds and rain, moving water back to all parts of

the forest. Microscopic fungi in vast underground networks

of mycelia stretch between trees across thousands of miles

and connect them, sharing nutrients. Soils build up and

create the rich foundation for future generations of trees.

This symbiotic interplay makes a forest vulnerable,

however. If we destroy enough of it, or fragment it, thereby

hindering its interconnectedness, the whole system can

collapse. We will lose the great forests of this Earth the

way, in an old saying, people go bankrupt: first very slowly,

and then very fast.

Since the dawn of agriculture, humans have cut down

approximately 3 trillion trees, or half the trees on Earth. As

a result, almost half the land on our planet has been

severely degraded from its natural state. In 2018 alone, 12

million hectares of forest—equivalent to thirty football

fields a minute—were razed, a third of which was pristine

primary rain forest.48 If we carry on in the same vein, we

will destroy everything that is left of our forests within a

very few short decades. Even if we avert this fate,

generations to come will wonder in astonishment at how

close we came and how mindlessly we almost threw the

forests away.

Almost all tropical deforestation is driven by demand for

four commodities: beef, soy, palm oil, and wood. Beef cattle

are responsible for more than double the deforestation of

the other three combined. In the Amazon, providing land

for beef cattle to graze on is directly responsible for more

than 80 percent of the deforestation.49 In addition, much of

the soy is used as feedstock for chickens, pigs, and cattle.

This situation is bad and about to get worse, with Brazil

lifting previous forest-protecting policies,50 and China now

massively increasing its meat and dairy consumption.51

Industrial agriculture and the food industry, which often

prioritize profitable food over nutritious food, are almost as

big a driver of climate change as fossil fuels. Yet much of

the food produced is never eaten. It doesn’t even

necessarily get to the people who need it. In the Global

South, a lack of roads and storage facilities means that food

often rots before it gets to people, and even if it does reach

them in time, they might not have the money to buy it. In

the Global North, food languishes in home and store

refrigerators until well past its use-by date, or it is left

uneaten on the plate at the end of a meal and then thrown

away. Such waste then drives greater food production.

We can achieve food security for all. At least two

distinguished ecologists have calculated we could feed the

world adequately by making selective improvements in

agricultural productivity, sharply reducing food waste, and

changing our diets,52 which health experts recommend

anyway.53 We can do all these things without destroying

another square inch of nature.

Plant trees. Vast land areas around the world are potentially

available for reforestation and tree planting. One study

found that 900 million hectares, about the size of the entire

United States, are available for reforestation without

interfering with either human habitation or agriculture.54

Once new forests were mature, they would absorb and

store 205 billion tons of carbon, while supporting

biodiversity and making the planet more beautiful. That

equates to absorption of nearly 70 percent of all the CO2

released into the atmosphere since the Industrial

Revolution.

In addressing climate change, few actions are as critical,

as urgent, or as simple as planting trees. This ancient

carbon-absorbing technology needs no high technology, is

completely safe, and is very cheap. It literally reverses the

process that has led to climate change, in that as trees (and

all other biomasses) grow, they absorb CO2 from the air,

release oxygen, and return carbon to its rightful location: in

the soil. In addition, trees provide coveted green areas in

cities, reduce ambient temperature, may produce food, and

stabilize aquifers in rural and suburban areas.

Unfortunately, over the past five to ten years, we have

come to think of planting trees and reforesting as a

penance we must pay for the sin of emitting greenhouse

gases, or worse yet, as a pretended benefit that hides the

reality of emissions. “Offsetting” has developed a bad

reputation among some environmentalists. It is time to

correct this mistake. Every single one of us should plant

one tree, ten trees, or twenty. Don’t even think of it as an

offset—in itself it is a critically important contribution to

addressing climate change now, without the need for

sophisticated energy technologies. Those will be developed,

but even when we count on them, we will still need to

absorb carbon out of the air to reach net-zero emissions.

In short, we could return the climate to how it was

decades ago just by planting trees.55

Massive reforestation and restoration provide real

benefits for people. In China in the 1990s, vast areas of

land began to resemble the Dust Bowl of the American

Midwest, but China was able to halt this rapid degradation.

Programs were established to reforest 100 million hectares

by paying farmers directly to plant trees. The program is

ongoing and highly successful. It has resulted in more

stable rainfall, more fertile soil, and increased production

from farmland.56 Ethiopia, having diminished its forest

cover to a mere 4 percent of its territory, undertook a

record-breaking campaign by planting 350 million trees at

one thousand sites across the country, most of which were

planted in a single day.57 Not all of them will survive, but

those that do will make an important contribution.

The benefits of planting trees are not limited to rural or

agricultural areas. Trees will cool a city by up to 50

degrees Fahrenheit.58 That amount can make up for the

significant additional heat that cities will have to endure

under any climate scenario, and as cities in India are

already reaching temperatures in excess of 122 degrees

Fahrenheit, it could mean the difference between life and

death for millions of people. Trees also clean the air in

cities by filtering fine particulate matter and absorbing

pollutants. They regulate water flow, buffer flooding and

increase urban biodiversity. Their impact is so pronounced

that urban properties surrounded by trees are worth an

average of 20 percent more than those that are not.59 If we

are to make the transition to urban living that is needed to

provide space for nature to thrive, we need to bring nature

into cities and integrate it as never before.

Let nature flourish. The term rewilding has been coined to

describe the growing practice of allowing land to return to

its natural processes. Rewilding has the potential to

radically change the carbon balance of the atmosphere and

to preserve the web of life. Multiple large- and small-scale

rewilding initiatives are already taking place all over the

world. An excellent example is the Knepp Wildland Project

in West Sussex, England. In 2001, the project obtained

more than 3,500 acres of land that had been farmed

intensively since World War II. The land was severely

degraded, and the farm had rarely made a profit. Knepp

Wildland’s ethos is to allow natural processes to play out

rather than aiming for any particular goals or outcomes.

Free-roaming grazing animals—cattle, ponies, pigs, and

deer—drive this process-led regeneration, acting as proxies

for herbivores that would have grazed the land thousands

of years ago. Their different grazing preferences create a

mosaic of habitats from grassland and scrub to open-grown

trees and wood pasture. These animals need minimal

intervention. At low cost, they provide wild-range, slow-

grown, pasture-fed organic meat for which the market is

growing. In just over a decade, Knepp has seen astonishing

results in biodiversity. It is now a breeding hotspot for

purple emperor butterflies, turtle doves, and 2 percent of

the UK’s population of nightingales.

Go plant-based. If you eat less meat and dairy, your carbon

footprint will decrease, and your health will improve.

Eating less meat and dairy is better, and eating none at all

is best. While this may feel like a stretch for most of us, for

the vast majority of human history we ate very little meat.60

Many countries are already shifting toward plant-based

diets. Even if you feel that you cannot completely forgo

meat and dairy, adopting a flexible diet in which you enjoy

other foods for certain meals or certain days of the week

can have a huge impact. In reality, this is likely to be where

the biggest dietary changes will come in the next years. In

many countries the number of people planning to become

vegan or vegetarian is relatively low, but fully 50 percent of

the U.S. population would like to eat less meat. Plant-based

meat replacements are already becoming cheaper, more

efficient, and more delicious. By 2040, these products are

expected to make up 60 percent of the market, up from 10

percent today.61 The market is beginning to recognize the

future of plant-based food. You have the chance to join a

food revolution by adopting and normalizing a more plant-

based diet.

Boycott products contributing to deforestation. Too many ingredients in

the products we consume every day come from deforested

land. In 2010, Greenpeace released an advertisement

featuring an office worker opening a Kit Kat candy bar.

However, the bar was made not of chocolate but of

orangutan fingers, and as the office worker took a bite,

blood poured across his keyboard.62 The video hit a nerve,

helping people make the connection between candy

ingredients and the mass destruction of the orangutan’s

natural habitat. More than two hundred thousand e-mails

were sent to Nestlé; protests were held outside its offices.

Within six weeks one of the largest companies in the world

completely reversed its policy, committing to zero-

deforestation palm oil.63

It’s easy to forget how much power we all have if we

choose to use it. If a company is engaging in destructive

land practices, we can work to make that fact clear to

everyone. As that happens, you can remove your consent

from that company by refusing to buy its products.

We are not powerless.

ACTION 7: Invest in a Clean Economy

A linear model of growth rewards extraction and pollution.

We need to move from that model toward one that

regenerates natural systems. We are going to require a

clean economy that operates in harmony with nature,

repurposes used resources as much as possible, minimizes

waste, and actively replenishes depleted resources.

This new economic model will need better policies and

strong institutions so that the great market forces of

investment and entrepreneurialism can work toward

regeneration instead of extraction. Finance and investment

will play a key role. While we have managed capitalism

moderately well over the centuries, with successful

institutions such as law, taxation, and charity, we have not

yet perfected it. Now is the time to do so.

We are used to thinking of the economy as the primary

indicator of how we are performing as a species. More

economic growth is good, less is bad; negative growth, or a

recession, is a disaster. Politicians will do anything in their

power to keep the numbers moving in the upward

direction, and most regard this as their principal

responsibility.

Economic growth is currently measured by GDP, or gross

domestic product, the market value of goods and services

produced in a year. The idea that endless GDP growth is

the aim of responsible countries is highly embedded into

our cultures and becomes self-perpetuating, as the media,

politicians, business leaders, and others constantly refer to

it as second nature.64

But GDP is a poor marker of what human beings need in

order to thrive, as it is all about extracting, using, and

discarding resources. As a marker of success, it does not

effectively take into consideration the impacts of pollution

or inequality, or prioritize the value of health, education, or

even happiness. It also places no value on the actions that

regenerate degraded lands or that bring ailing oceans back

to health. To illustrate the point, if you drink coffee from a

disposable cup every day, GDP will go up, but the forests

will disappear and emissions will go up too. If you drink

coffee from a reusable ceramic mug, GDP will go down. If

you throw away your ceramic mug every day and buy a new

one, GDP will go through the roof.

In the current transition, strictly linear GDP growth can

no longer be the priority. More stuff does not mean a better

life, and indeed it is contributing to our existential crisis.

Moving away from quantity of products that can be

purchased, we must reorient our underlying sense of value

toward quality of life, including within all of Earth’s

ecosystems. Prioritizing growth according to its

contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

would be a good place to start. These seventeen

interconnected goals aspire to sustainably increase global

prosperity, equality, and well-being.65

Put your money where it matters. Capital tends to flow toward

investments that have worked in the past, as if the future

will resemble the past in any meaningful way. The world’s

capital is guarded by ranks of extremely cautious people

who are looking to secure a good return, and their top

priority is often to avoid risking a loss of value. This is

technically right, of course, but it presents us with a

problem. We’re not going to create the future we want

without some risk.

In June 2019, the Norwegian parliament voted into law

new plans for its sovereign wealth fund (the world’s

largest, managing $1 trillion in assets). It will divest more

than $13 billion of investments in fossil fuels and invest up

to $20 billion in renewables, beginning with wind and solar

projects in developed markets.66

You can help precipitate similar seismic shifts in

allocation of capital. In 2012, Bill McKibben and 350.org

began a grassroots divestment campaign to encourage

financial institutions to stop investing in projects and

companies that perpetuate the causes of climate change.67

It has grown into one of the most successful campaigns in

history. Financial firms with more than $8 trillion in

combined assets have divested their fossil fuel holdings.

This has made money available for climate solutions and

sent a warning signal to those still building the past. In

2016, Peabody, the world’s largest coal company, listed

divestment as one of the reasons for its bankruptcy.68 Shell

has listed divestment as a material risk to the future of its

business.69

Divesting from the past and reinvesting in the future can

be done right now. Your money has the power to destroy or

to build, and it is no longer acceptable to remain oblivious

to the fact. If you have a pension fund or savings, find out

where your money is invested. Do not underestimate the

power of the default option in defined pension schemes—if

you work for a company that has such a scheme, request

that it shift away from fossil fuels. Write to your pension

fund trustees and find out if they are divesting from the old

economy or how they propose to change the behavior of

corporations they are invested in so as to promote the

clean economy. Encourage your friends and colleagues to

do the same.

Once capital starts flowing in increasing amounts to

companies and projects that are advancing the future—and

we are making serious progress in that direction already—a

moment will come when we reach the zenith of our uphill

efforts and things will start to roll more easily in the right

direction. We are already seeing that dirty, polluting,

irresponsible investments perform less well than the

alternatives. Companies that shy away from considering

the future of the planet are also getting awkward questions

from customers (keep asking them!) and investors, and are

struggling to find bright young people to work for them.

With continued pressure, the money and momentum will

start flowing to those who are building the clean economy.

The building blocks for a regenerative economy are already

robust and thriving around the world. In January 2019,

Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand, announced

that her government would soon present a “well-being

budget” to gauge the long-term impact of policy on the

quality of people’s lives. “We need to address the societal

well-being of our nation, not just the economic well-being,”

she said. This type of thinking, Prime Minister Ardern

argued, could help us shift beyond short-term cycles and

learn to see politics through a lens of “kindness, empathy

and well-being.”70 This is what we are called to do, as we

work to build the infrastructure and systems that will

benefit us, and retire those that are harming us.

Economic growth can deliver tremendous benefits, and

economic growth has lifted more people out of poverty than

any other model in history. But the days of valuing how

quickly we can dig stuff up and turn it into trash have to

come to an end, not as a matter of ideology or policy but as

a matter of survival. The reduction of poverty under the old

model may well be temporary, since our structure of

prioritizing short-termism and GDP will likely send many

people back into unforgiving poverty as climate change

accelerates. The good news is that economists increasingly

consider the seventeen Sustainable Development Goals to

be sensible objectives. Advancing the SDG framework

makes it absolutely possible for us to achieve sustainable

growth, effect emissions reductions, and reduce poverty in

consonance with one another in mutually reinforcing

systems.

In Costa Rica, President José Figueres Ferrer,

Christiana’s father, made the decision in 1948 to abolish

the army. He invested in education and expanded forest

cover from a low of less than 20 percent. Now Costa Rica

has one of the highest literacy rates in Latin America,71

forest cover is more than 50 percent,72 and the nation’s

electricity is provided almost exclusively by renewable

energy. Costa Rica measures its progress both by GDP and

by indicators that help the government make decisions that

maximize well-being. On the Happy Planet Index, Costa

Rica ranked number one as the happiest place on Earth in

2009, 2012, and 2018.73

ACTION 8: Use Technology Responsibly

Evolving new technologies have enormous potential for

delivering emissions reductions. We must embrace them

carefully but rapidly and not rely on them as a silver bullet.

As we grow more comfortable with machines being part of

our lives, we will need to use technology responsibly,

mindful of its power and influence, and ensure that proper

governance systems are in place.

If we make it through the climate crisis and arrive on the

other side with humanity and the planet intact, it will be

largely because we have learned to live well with

technology.

Artificial intelligence (AI) supported by sensors (to

gather data) and robotics (to automate physical activities)

together with the network of smart devices known as the

“internet of things” have huge potential to become our

greatest allies in the fight for survival.74 But these very

same technologies are also the ones that could destroy that

better future. For example, autonomous self-driving electric

vehicles could eliminate the need for unnecessary private

ownership of vehicles, but on the downside, they could also

allow unscrupulous governing bodies to track and control

the movements of every citizen.

A fire that warms you on a cold night is good; one that

consumes your home is bad.

Likewise, technology is neither inherently good nor

inherently bad. It just has to be managed properly.

Many people alive today will at some point likely

encounter a machine that is smarter than they are in

almost every way. The world famously got a taste of what

that might be like in 2017. The AI program AlphaGo Zero

figured out how to win at the ancient and notoriously

difficult Chinese strategy game of Go, learning entirely by

itself, essentially accumulating thousands of years of

human knowledge, and improving on it, in just forty days.75

Deep Mind, the company that developed AlphaGo Zero,

says the technology is not limited to machines that can

outcompete human beings in strategy games but is

intended to be used to inform new technology that will

positively impact society.76 But we can’t rely on the

promises of corporations to ensure that a technology is

aligned with our goals for regenerating nature and

pursuing the conditions that will help humanity thrive.

AI machines learn quickly, although we may not be able

to predict exactly what they will be used for. Machines

could become better at extracting what resources remain

on Earth and hoarding them for those who control the

technology—which is why protection against the abuse of

AI needs to be woven into policy oversight and governance

from the start.

Politicians and CEOs who are unwilling to lead or do

what we need to confront the climate crisis have often

touted future technology as a solution. But if we allow the

potential of future technology to blind us to the scale and

urgency of what we need to do today, we will be taking a

terrible risk. Not only might innovations not arrive in time,

but new technology will only fit well into a society that is

already moving in the right direction. Belief in innovation is

no excuse for lack of a plan.

To be sure, we need technology to avert climate disaster,

but technology also has huge potential to increase the

already-vast wealth disparities in our societies. In a world

where 70 percent of the population has to survive on a

share of only 2.5 percent of global wealth,77 the rise of

automation could exacerbate inequality and social

instability and complicate the advance of solutions to

complex problems like climate change.

For all the talk in certain political circles about

immigration taking jobs away from native citizens, it is

automation that is driving the vast majority of job losses

around the world.78 This problem will worsen in coming

decades. Likewise, the decline of meat consumption, as it is

replaced with plant-based and lab-grown alternatives, will

transform the economies of whole countries. In Brazil,

more than 20 million people are involved in the agriculture

industry.79 Up to two-thirds of them either raise cattle for

beef, or grow soy to feed cattle. To switch to more

sustainable agriculture, they could convert the land to

biofuel production, assuming increased demand for such in

the near future. The shift away from beef and toward

advanced biofuels will have huge benefits ecologically, but

if the transition is managed badly, without supporting

alternative training or jobs, the sudden unemployment of

millions could result in enormous human hardship,

increasing the appeal of extremist politicians. Even if we

develop all the technology needed to address the climate

crisis, humans may be so impacted by the transition that

we will elect leaders who pander to populist impulses and

divert our focus from the narrow gate toward a

regenerative future.

If properly managed, machines might make all the

difference in our ability to deal with the climate crisis in

time. Almost every sector that requires breakthroughs to

bring about a regenerative future will be massively aided

by machine learning. For example, one of the big problems

associated with securing large amounts of renewable

power on energy grids is that its generation is intermittent

—producing only when the sun is shining or the wind is

blowing.

With AI algorithms, it is now possible to completely

redesign our centralized energy grids. AI-informed energy

grids can be much more decentralized, acting as neural

networks, dynamically predicting what power is needed

when. AI-informed grids would “intuitively” map supply and

demand, flexing between storage and energy flow so that

greater amounts of renewable energy can be produced,

thus reducing gas and coal use, perhaps completely.80

AI is accelerating our decarbonization efforts in many

other areas. Machine learning is being used to prevent the

leakage of methane from gas pipelines, to accelerate the

development of solar fuels (synthetic chemical fuels

produced directly/indirectly from solar energy), to improve

battery storage technologies, to optimize freight and

transport for better efficiency, to reduce energy use in

buildings, to plant forests using drones, and much more.81

AI is also showing promising signs of improving our ability

to predict extreme weather and even of removing

greenhouse gases directly from the air.

Reaching the Paris Agreement was complicated, but

agreeing on a collective global approach to governing AI

could be even more so. Right now countries are in a race to

develop the skills and conditions to be leaders in this new

field, and different populations have different attitudes

about the acceptable degree of involvement of AI in our

lives. For instance, people in Nigeria and Turkey would be

happy to have AI systems perform major surgery on them,

but people in Germany and Belgium would not.82

Governments experience different degrees of pressure to

develop appropriate guidelines for managing AI, and as a

result some are very lax and some are highly stringent.83

Understandable as this is, it isn’t really good enough for

something as important as dealing with the climate crisis.

The effort of the French and Canadian governments to

create an International Panel for Artificial Intelligence is a

good start.84

Find out if your government, your local community, or the company you work for is

investing in AI, and what they are using it for. Take responsibility for

pressuring them, in whatever way you can, to look to the

international efforts already under way, and to put policies

in place to ensure that the AI they support will also

accelerate the regenerative future, not hinder our chances

of success.

In a few decades more than 9 billion people could inhabit

the planet, possibly more than 10 billion. It will be

impossible for so many people to live here if we have the

same impact per capita on our atmosphere as we do today.

Technology, specifically machine learning and AI, has the

potential to transform our presence here. Issues and

problems, including how we can effectively use natural

resources in a circular rather than linear way, that have

long eluded us may finally be unlocked.

When AlphaGo Zero was learning to play and win at Go,

the developers noticed that as it taught itself techniques

perfected by professional players over generations, it

occasionally made decisions to discard those techniques in

favor of new, better ones that human beings had not yet

had time to learn. In a race against time, the speed of

learning that AI offers has extraordinary—exponential—

potential to accelerate climate solutions, if it is deployed

and governed well.

A humbling story of how this might unfold took place at

Google’s data centers in 2016. For more than ten years

Google engineers had been at the cutting edge of

optimizing their data systems. Their servers were among

the most efficient in the world, and it seemed that any

improvements from then on would be marginal. Then they

unleashed DeepMind algorithms on the system. Energy

demand for cooling was consistently reduced by 40

percent.85 This illustration is just a tiny example of the

power of AI to make possible what seems impossible to the

human mind.

At present, investment in applying AI to the climate

crisis is lower than it should be. In the future, governments

and corporations around the world will have to carefully

support the responsible application of AI and invest quickly

in its capacity to deliver material breakthroughs in

emissions reductions. In that scenario, technology may be

our greatest ally on the road to a brighter future.

ACTION 9: Build Gender Equality

We must ensure that decision making at all levels of society

involves increasing numbers of women, because when

women lead, good things happen. That is the unequivocal

conclusion of years of research. Women often have a

leadership style that makes them more open and sensitive

to a wide range of views, and they are better at working

collaboratively, with a longer-term perspective. These traits

are essential to responding to the climate crisis.86

We know this because the early evidence is already in.

Companies, countries, NGOs, and financial institutions all

take stronger climate action when they are led by women

or have a high proportion of women in decision-making

roles.87 Recasting our society so that women play at least

an equal role in decision making at all levels (family,

community, professions, government) is now a matter of

survival.

In many countries, discrimination based on gender is

assumed to be a thing of the past. Yet studies show that all

industries still strongly tend to overestimate male

performance and underestimate female performance. While

women are aware of this discrepancy, men tend to dismiss

it. The vast majority of leadership role models remain male:

just look at any photo of G20 leaders from any year. The

well-publicized pay gap (women are paid 20 percent less

than men for the same work) is another manifestation and

shows that many perceptions continue to be subjective and

discriminatory.88

Before we can work to correct the imbalance of power

and decision making, we have to acknowledge that it exists,

often but not always based on structural unconscious bias.

Right now that is still lost on many.

Nonetheless many women have recognized the unique

gravity of our situation on climate change. Intrepid leaders

like Natalie Isaacs, Isra Hirsi, Nakabuye Flavia, Greta

Thunberg, and Penelope Lea have mobilized millions of

young people who are now demanding urgent climate

action and implementing it themselves. Women are at the

forefront of collaborative efforts to support each other in

the face of our changing climate. In many countries,

women’s intimate knowledge of the land means they are

quicker to spot environmental changes, to learn from them,

and out of necessity, find ways to adapt. Women are

pioneers of innovative climate solutions within their

communities, and they are instinctively good at deep

listening, at empathy and collective wisdom gathering,

especially in times of transition. These qualities have never

been more important or necessary.

A world with true gender equality would look different

from ours. Some seem to assume that it would look the

same but with a tilted gender power balance. But the

interesting element of gender equality, apart from its

evident moral rightness, is the opportunity it provides for

all of humanity to co-create a world that is regenerative

and in which we can thrive together. Nations with greater

female representation in positions of power have smaller

climate footprints. Companies with women on their

executive boards are far more likely to invest in renewable

energy and develop products that help solve the climate

crisis. Women legislators vote for environmental

protections almost twice as frequently as men, and women

who lead investment firms are twice as likely to make

investment decisions based on how companies treat their

employees and the environment.89

It is imperative that women be afforded educational

opportunities worldwide. Educated women can work, be

economically more productive, and help society make

better decisions. Crucially, education helps women stand

up for themselves and empowers them to make their own

choices, in particular about their reproductive health.

Keeping girls in school means they are less likely to marry

young or have as many children. According to the

Brookings Institution, in certain parts of the world, a girl

with twelve years of education compared to one with no

schooling will have up to five fewer children in her

lifetime.90

Today 130 million girls are being denied the right to

attend school, condemning a massive number of future

women to constant pregnancy, bringing more and more

children into parts of the world that will scarcely be able to

support them. By these calculations, 100 percent

enrollment of girls in school today would lessen the

anticipated global population in 2050 by 843 million

people,91 a boon in confronting the climate crisis.

If you are a woman, now is the time to consider running

for public office or being more assertive about a deserved

promotion at work. If you are a man, now is the time to

support and encourage your female colleagues, partners,

friends, and family members. Women may feel particularly

empowered by joining a wider movement or a cohort that

shares their aims. The Brand New Congress movement in

the United States, which played a significant role in a

record number of women being chosen for the 2018

primaries, is a powerful example.92 Female candidates,

including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez—now a seriously

influential leader on climate action—drew on huge reserves

of confidence to run for office by standing shoulder to

shoulder with other women.93

We will be able to manage climate change better if we

can improve the ratio of women making the decisions about

how to do it. It’s time to either become one of those

decision makers or support women you know to become

one.

In the remote, sun-cracked desert of India’s westernmost

state, Gujarat, women are harnessing renewable power and

improving their livelihoods by acting collectively. Gujarat,

the source of nearly 76 percent of India’s salt, remains

largely disconnected from the electrical grid. For decades,

more than forty thousand salt-pan worker families (locally

called agariyas) have relied on diesel-powered pumps—

often spending more than 40 percent of their annual

revenue for the season’s production. Now that is all

changing. With visionary leadership and support from

Reemaben Nanavaty, a native of Gujarat and director of the

Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA)—which, with 2

million members, is the largest trade union for informal

workers in the world—the agariyas are shifting to solar.

The first one thousand women who made the shift have

benefited from a doubling of their income—helping them to

achieve greater financial and social independence and

enabling them to send their children to middle and high

school. When rolled out to the 15,000 SEWA members who

work on the salt pans, the project will prevent the emission

of 115,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide—the equivalent of

taking nearly 25,000 cars off the road.94

Solar Sister, a social enterprise operating in Nigeria and

Tanzania, recruits women and trains them to sell

affordable, renewable energy sources, like solar lamps and

clean cookstoves. Deforestation and climate change mean

women must often walk farther than they used to in order

to collect water or find firewood for cooking. If they don’t

collect enough water or firewood, they are more likely to

experience domestic violence. The increased workload also

means that they have less time to spend on education or

income-generating activities. Solar Sister has recruited and

trained four thousand women who are now entrepreneurs

and have brought clean energy solutions to 1.6 million

people in Africa and relieved some of the pressure on

women.95

These are just two examples of women improving their

own lives and livelihoods and those of their sisters when

given the resources and freedom they need.

The potential is global.

ACTION 10: Engage in Politics

Finally, the action that we feel is ultimately the most

important. Democracies are threatened by the climate

crisis and must evolve to meet the challenge. In order to

help them do so, we all need to actively participate.

The transition to a regenerative world is possible only if

we have stable political systems that are responsive to our

planet’s changing needs and our citizens’ changing desires.

Since climate change threatens political security itself,96

stability is both an essential condition for the transition and

an outcome of managing it successfully.

If the first duty of government is to protect its people,

then across much of the world the form of democracy we

have become used to is failing. Climate change is an

existential threat and is likely to intensify faster than most

people today realize. If our systems of government can’t

protect us from that existential threat, they will in time be

replaced. But those replacements may take a long time to

evolve and will not necessarily be any better at advancing

us toward a regenerative future in the available time frame.

In many countries today, corporate interests have

captured our democracies. Just as with the tobacco

industry, a small minority of companies have used a

relatively limited amount of money to purchase

extraordinary influence in major legislative capitals and

thereby have prevented elected representatives from

protecting the people. Often this occurs through trade

associations, so even when corporations themselves do not

directly lobby for an outcome, it is done on their behalf.97

This has become a major issue. In the United States, for

example, in 2016, the National Association of

Manufacturers (NAM) won a long-fought battle to delay

implementation of the Clean Power Plan. In 2017, NAM

supported the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.

Companies such as Microsoft, Procter & Gamble, Corning,

and Intel are all members of NAM, yet all claim to support

strong climate action under the Paris Agreement.98

On a national level, voter action (or inaction) and intent

underpin larger global moves. Over the last twenty years,

climate change has been steadily climbing up the list of

voter priorities.99 While this is good news, no significant

proportion of voters actually see climate as their highest

priority. That is a serious problem. In the United States,

new presidents have a very short window of time to

actually get big things done. For example, Barack Obama

came into office very committed to taking strong action on

climate, and he had a majority in both houses of Congress.

He could have chosen to prioritize—and would probably

have passed—ambitious climate legislation. However,

instead he made a decision to pursue health-care reform,

another campaign pledge and a domestic priority. Passing

health care required Obama to use up a significant part of

his political capital, and it built a knot of fierce resistance

to his other policies in the Republican Party, to the point

that they stonewalled anything he proposed. As a result,

not until his second term was he able to turn his political

attention to climate change. Even then, it was only by using

executive power that he made progress, not through

legislation.

Rather than wait for things to get worse, we must

embrace engagement at all levels of politics. We must see it

as one of our most pressing responsibilities, and we must

hold every politician to account. We must elect only leaders

who see far-reaching action on climate change as their

absolute first priority and who are prepared to act on the

first day they assume office. Large numbers of people must

vote on climate change as their number-one priority. As we

are in the midst of the most dire emergency, we must

urgently demand that those who seek high office offer

solutions commensurate with the scale of the problem.

Their policy platforms must strictly be informed by science.

It’s time to participate in nonviolent political movements

wherever possible.

In April 2019, the group Extinction Rebellion, building

on years of work by various nonprofit organizations, some

politicians, and other activists, seized the moment and

began a series of global protests, the first of which was to

take over central London for ten days in nonviolent protest.

Thousands of first-time activists, people who had never

marched or signed a petition in their lives, blocked roads,

linked arms, and planted trees on Waterloo Bridge. Within

two months of that initial protest, the UK declared a

climate emergency, adopted a target of net-zero emissions

by 2050 (less ambitious than what Extinction Rebellion was

calling for, but still a big step), and established a citizens’

assembly to look at how it could be achieved.100

Civil resistance by members of the public can outdo

efforts by political elites to achieve radical change. This is

not an aberration; it is how change happens, typically when

injustice in the prevailing system becomes too great.

Civil disobedience is not only a moral choice, it is also

the most powerful way of shaping world politics.101

Historically, systemic political shifts have required civil

disobedience on a significant scale. Few have occurred

without it. The numbers required may seem large, but they

are not impossible. History has shown that when

approximately 3.5 percent of the population participates in

nonviolent protest, success becomes inevitable.102 No

nonviolent protest has ever failed to achieve its aims once

it reached that threshold of participation. In the UK, this

would be 2.3 million people. In the United States, 11

million.

These numbers are now within our reach.

The remarkable rise to prominence of Greta Thunberg

and the Fridays for Future movement is showing us that

the world is ready for the next phase of direct action.103

Greta’s single, defiant act of civil disobedience—striking

from school every Friday—has captured the zeitgeist. She

inspired, in a relatively short period of time, a peaceful

process for igniting and harnessing the anger of millions of

young people in many countries and enrolling them in

regular climate activism.

Adding further momentum to the successful capital

divestment movement (in which money is moving away

from assets linked to fossil fuels), in 2019, the head of the

Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC)

described the mass mobilization of world opinion against

oil as the greatest threat its industry faces.104 This

mobilization has as its motivating force people from all

walks of life, spanning all generations, across all

continents. Every additional person who chooses to

participate will bring us closer to the tipping point for

success.

We acknowledge that participating in school strikes or

civil disobedience demonstrations is not always possible or,

in undemocratic societies and even in some democracies

around the world, safe. What is important is for you to

assess the avenues that might be open to you to engage in

the political process and to find ways to work within them.

Beyond directly addressing governments, other political

actions are needed. Corporations and trade associations

fund and engage in political lobbying against citizen action

on climate change. We need to remove our consent from

these corporations. The simplest way is to vote with your

money: stop buying their stocks, and stop buying their

products and services where alternatives exist. Talk to your

bank, talk to the institutions that manage your insurance

products or debts. Find out if your money is invested in

these corporations and ask for alternative options. Some

financial institutions are already taking protective action,

but others may not yet feel sufficient pressure from their

customers to make a serious shift in capital allocation.

Governments that are stable now and trying to find ways

to meet this challenge should be worked with, not

dismantled. We all have a responsibility to exert what

leverage we can inside the traditional power systems and

push them as far and as fast as we can. As we press both

inside and outside the system for the overdue political

changes that need to occur, we should also be mindful of

the role that institutions have played in upholding our basic

rights and our ability to weather transitions together. For

hundreds of years—thousands, in some cases—our

institutions of government, learning, communication, law,

and religion have held us to a norm. It is possible to argue

that this is what has kept us back, and at times in history

that has been true. But equally true is that they have

protected us from our worst instincts at moments of rage

and insanity. Let’s be mindful of what they have given us

and find ways, when appropriate, to protect them. Once

they are gone, they cannot be easily replaced.

Because climate change is unlike any other challenge

that humanity has had to face, we have no template for the

kind of political, economic, and societal transformation

needed now—but there are a range of extraordinary

examples we can learn from. Movements of civil

disobedience from the early twentieth-century suffragettes

to Gandhi’s drive for Indian independence to Martin Luther

King, Jr., and the 1960s civil rights movement to the 2003

Rose Revolution in Georgia—to name just a few—are all

inspirational insofar as they mobilized vast numbers of

people to champion their causes. An open, inclusive

narrative and a sense of working collectively to change

history for the better took them further than they ever

imagined possible. As Nelson Mandela said, “It always

seems impossible until it is done.”

Now is the time for us to participate—in our schools,

businesses, communities, towns, and countries—to ensure

that the battle to survive the climate crisis becomes the

biggest political movement in history. It is not about

changing governments or political leaders. It is about

waging sustained political action and engagement. The

ingredients to achieve our goal are ripe. We have huge

momentum with millions of people on the streets calling for

change. Corporations, cities, investors, and governments

all over the world are taking highly sophisticated and

coordinated action toward a 1.5-degree-Celsius future, and

are open and listening to the calls of emergency from the

streets.

If democracy is to survive and thrive into the twenty-first

century, climate change is the one big test that it cannot

fail.

CONCLUSION

 

 

A New Story

We want you to know two things.

First, even at this late hour we still have a choice about our future, and

therefore every action we take from this moment forward counts.

Second, we are capable of making the right choices about our own

destiny. We are not doomed to a devastating future, and humanity is

not flawed and incapable of responding to big problems, if we act.

Future generations will most likely look back at this

moment as the single most significant turning point for

action.

But the path we have set out is not easy, and success is

not assured. The road ahead is winding. We are at a

moment of real darkness, but there is no turning back. We

may kick against this reality, but actually, it is a moment of

truth, just as we find in all good stories. What is needed

now is a steadfast commitment to the task and an

understanding that failure is not an option.

We can be informed by art, literature, and history as

much as by science. Meeting the challenge of climate

change needs to become part of a new story of human

striving and renewal.

Right now, the predominant stories we are telling

ourselves about the climate crisis are not very inspiring.

But a new story can reinvigorate our efforts.

When the story changes, everything changes.

In October 1957, Americans looked upward as the Soviet

Union’s Sputnik I satellite crossed over the country.1 For

the first time, there was a satellite in the sky, and their

“enemy” had beaten them to it. That night, from

Pennsylvania to Kansas to Colorado, families realized in

dismay that the enemy could see them, was watching them.

How did the country respond? Within a few years,

President John F. Kennedy gave his famous speech about

landing a man on the moon within that decade, a feat far

more challenging than launching a satellite.2 He spoke of it

without knowing whether it could be done, and without a

detailed budget, plan, or timeline. He was reclaiming the

narrative and placing Americans inside a story that was

hopeful and in which they could prevail.

The speech both terrified and electrified NASA. Within a

few months it reorganized itself in line with this new goal.

Teams worked harder than ever to innovate, which was

particularly galvanizing and thrilling for young people; the

average age of the team that launched the Apollo missions

was twenty-eight.3 Everyone was part of a shared endeavor

that gave their lives meaning.

When Kennedy first paid a visit to NASA Mission

Control, at one point he came across a janitor who was

cleaning the control room. “And what is your role here?” he

asked.

“Mr. President, sir,” came the reply, “I’m putting a man

on the moon.”4

The compelling vision made this man feel that he was

part of something great, and he was. Someone had to keep

the room clean: it would not have been possible to put a

man on the moon if that didn’t happen. Imagine how the

janitor would have felt, however, if he had been cleaning a

control room for a government agency that had been

bested by a rival and was facing relative decline. It was the

story that motivated him to action.

Consider also the story that Great Britain told itself as it

was enduring the blitzkrieg raids of 1941. As late as 1939,

Britain had torn itself to pieces over different ideas of how

to deal with Hitler. Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was

committed to a policy of appeasement and had great

support. With the memories of the First World War still

fresh, a good proportion of people would have done

anything to avoid facing the reality that Hitler would stop

at nothing to conquer Europe. Eventually, Chamberlain fell,

and in his place came Winston Churchill. Churchill is

remembered for many things, not all of them positive, but

his most remarkable achievement in those early days was

embedding a new story into the national psyche that

prepared people for what was to come. An island alone. A

greatest hour. A greatest generation that would fight them

on the beaches and fight them in the hills and in the

streets. A country that would never surrender.

Countless interviews with those who lived through that

time have again and again described how a spirit of shared

endeavor infused all actions, from the pilots in the Battle of

Britain, to the people who turned their gardens and green

spaces into food production on a massive scale. The simple

task of pulling potatoes from the soil became an act of

service in support of absent loved ones at the front and

part of the pursuit of victory.

Even with the Paris Agreement, for the longest time, the

story that prevailed was that climate change was too

complicated; it was impossible to get countries to agree,

and the structure of the UN would not allow agreement.

The negotiations were populated with thousands of people

who could explain in great detail and for many hours why

there was absolutely no way through the myriad complexity

to reach agreement. Changing that mindset was the

hardest but most critical step we took. The journey from

the failure in Copenhagen to the culmination in Paris was

marked by a gradual buildup of momentum, and as the

momentum built, the story changed.

At first there were only a few, but over time, thousands

of people became convinced that the moment for progress

was possible and that they had an important role to play. As

each country made a commitment, more people believed in

this possibility. The price of solar panels fell, cities took

leadership positions, people marched in the streets,

corporations took action, and investors moved money out of

fossil fuels. They all became steps on the journey to a new

story.

At this moment, when we have reached the limits of the

planet’s ability to sustain life in the form in which we know

it, we have also reached the limits of the stories that define

our lives. Personal achievements through individualistic

competition, continuous consumption, skepticism about our

ability to come together as humanity, and an inability to see

the deeper impacts of what we are doing to the planet—all

are no longer useful.

Now we must move toward understanding our shared

existence on this planet, not because it is a nice addendum

to what we do but because it is a matter of survival. Our

current quest for a regenerative future has even higher

levels of complexity and is decisively more consequential

than the U.S. quest to put a man on the moon or the UK’s

determination to defeat Hitler.

This is not the quest of one nation. This time it’s up to all

of us, to all the nations and peoples of the world. No matter

how complex or deep our differences, we fundamentally

share everything that is important: the desire to forge a

better world for everyone alive today and all the

generations to come.

Imagine, just for a moment, a world in which we had

achieved this quest. It may seem far-fetched to you, utopian

even, but since the very survival of humanity is at stake,

ironically we believe that our chances of rising to this

challenge are greater now than they have ever been.

Humanity is capable of coming together to do this. Whether

we will succeed in doing so will become apparent in a few

short years.

With this book, we have begun to weave together some

of the elements of our new story.

We can, together, reimagine our place in this world. As

human beings, we all have the outrageous fortune to be

here on this planet at this moment of profound

consequence.

When the eyes of our children, and their children, look

straight into ours, and they ask us “What did you do?” our

answer cannot just be that we did everything we could.

It has to be more than that.

There is really only one answer.

We did everything that was necessary.

So let us begin today to tell the story of how we did not

balk at this seemingly insurmountable challenge, of how we

were not defeated by the multiple setbacks we

encountered. Let us tell the story of how we made the

choice to pull away from the brink of peril, of how we took

our responsibility seriously and did everything that was

necessary to emerge from the crisis while rekindling our

relationships with each other and with all the natural

systems that enable human life on Earth.

Let it be a story of great adventure, against

overwhelming odds.

A story of survival.

And of a thriving existence.

WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW

This Action Plan is part of a growing movement of stubborn climate
activists committed to fulfilling the vision of a regenerative world.

We can only do this together and we hope you will join us at
www.GlobalOptimism.com.

RIGHT NOW

Take a deep breath and decide that collectively we can do this, and that

you will play your part. You will be a hopeful visionary for humanity

through these dark days. From this moment, despair ends and tactics

begin.

Decide that you will be part of the politics of the future. You will vote for,

campaign for, and support candidates who champion emissions reductions.

Reject the politics of nostalgia. For the next ten years, this will be your

number-one political priority.

Commit to reducing your impact on the climate by more than half of what

it is today by 2030. Aim for 60 percent. Just because right now you don’t

know how you will do so does not need to stop you. We are all learning.

TODAY OR TOMORROW

Determine where your principal elected officials stand on climate change;

write to them about your commitments and let them know. Tell them you

are watching.

Choose at least one day of the week to go meat-free, and decide how soon

you will add more days to that commitment.

Think big. How do you most impact climate change, and what big things

can you do to effect a regenerative future?

Tell others about your commitments, in person or on social media. Don’t be

shy! Invite others to follow suit. Your example will motivate them.

THIS WEEK

Share your personal plan to reduce emissions by more than half with your

partner, kids, and friends, and invite them to do so as well. Preserving the

future of all life should be joyful. Have fun with it.

Take some actions and stick to them over time—it will give you momentum.

Reduce daily energy use, bike instead of driving a car, switch your energy

supplier to 100 percent clean. It’s all good and all needs doing. Consider

what else you can do, while remembering there is still much to be done.

Go outside and look around. This world is damaged and hurting, but it is

also beautiful and intact and whole. Pay attention to something you have

forgotten—emerging leaves in the spring or frost on dead leaves in winter.

Feel the gratitude we owe the Earth for her bounty and beauty.

THIS MONTH

Find out who in your vicinity is organizing political action involving climate

change. Attend meetings and meet the concerned citizens. Go to

demonstrations and marches! Allow yourself to be inspired by the miracle

of committed groups intent on changing the world.

Start a conversation with someone who is not active on climate change

with a view toward understanding their stance and gently enlarging their

awareness of the crisis from their perspective.

Enact your commitments: What precisely will you do this year? How will it

affect you and your family? How will you begin to apply the changes you

plan to make?

Challenge your consumerism. Look at what you have bought, and ask

yourself whether it brings you joy. Question your impulses to buy more,

and begin to see how liberating it is to buy less.

Start a mindfulness practice, perhaps a breathing exercise of gratitude. Do

it every day, if only for a few minutes. Learn to create a gap of light

between yourself, the world, and your reactions.

Plant trees. As many as you can. Look for a local group doing tree planting.

Get out there when you can, and when you can’t, support others to do so.

Understand your privilege in relation to others, and commit to helping

level the playing field for all.

THIS YEAR

Be political in your daily life. Seek collective opportunities to advance the

cause of emissions reductions. It will inspire you and help you feel you are

part of a shared endeavor. Engage regularly in direct action if that is

possible where you live. VOTE!

Be consistent. You may have changed your electricity supply to 100

percent renewable energy, rethought your commute, changed your air

travel habits, and altered your diet. If you can sustain your effort for the

first year, you stand a good chance of doing so every year. Recognize your

accomplishment.

BY 2030

Deliver on your plan to cut your emissions by more than half. Celebrate

your achievement.

Finance others to plant more trees as a symbol of the fact that you still

have some way to go. Trees are good, and the world needs more of them.

Ensure you have voted in line with these priorities in national and regional

elections and been vocal about the fact that you have done so.

Continue to practice the other new habits you have developed.

Encourage those closest to you—family, friends, loved ones—to be climate

conscious.

Start the plan to reduce your emissions again by more than half over the

next decade.

BEFORE 2050

Be at net-zero emissions, having been part of the generation that chose a

better future for all of us.

APPENDIX

Tipping Points

Exponential Roadmap 2019 (www.exponentialroadmap.org). Adapted

from Steffen et al., “Trajectories of the Earth System in the

Anthropocene,” PNAS 115, no. 33 (2018): 8252–59

Temperature Scenarios

Temperature Scenarios. Adapted from Climate Action Tracker

(https://climateactiontracker.org/ global/ temperatures/)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First, we would like to thank those family members and mentors who have

shaped and guided our worldviews. Among them are José Figueres Ferrer, Kofi

Annan, Thich Nhat Hanh, Bee Rivett-Carnac, Nigel Topping, Antony Turner,

Paul Dickinson, Fraser Durham, Howard and Sue Lamb, Vivienne and Michael

Zammit Cutajar, Sister True Dedication, Brother Phap Lai, and Brother Phap

Linh.

This book is in many ways an outcome of the work of all those people who

co-created the Paris Agreement of 2015, and of the many efforts since then to

ensure we meet the challenge of our times.

A significant group of trusted friends and advisers helped us develop and

hone the ideas in the book in a direct way. We are grateful to them all for their

patient reviewing and wise counsel. In particular we would like to mention

Natasha Rivett-Carnac, Jesse Abrams, Stephanie Antonian, Rosina Birbaum,

Amanda Eichel, Nick Foster, Thomas Friedman, Sarah Goodenough, Callum

Grieve, Dave Hicks, Andrew Higham, John Holdren, Sarah Hunter, Merlin

Hyman, Raj Joshi, Andy Karsner, Satish Kumar, Graham Leicester, Lindsay

Levin, Thomas Lingard, Thomas Lovejoy, Mark Lynas, Michael Mann, Marina

Mansilla Hermann, Mark Maslin, Bill McKibben, Jennifer Morgan, Jules Peck,

Matthew Phillips, Brooks Preston, Shyla Raghav, Chloe Revill, Mike Rivett-

Carnac, Bill Sharpe, Nicholas Stern, Betsy Taylor, Anne Topping, Patrick

Verkooijen, Daniel Wahl, Steve Waygood, Martin Weinstein, and Kerem Yilmaz.

Extra special thanks are due to Zoe Tcholak-Antich, Lauren Hamlin, and

Victoria Harris.

A much larger group of friends and colleagues have been our fellow

travelers both in the creation of the Paris Agreement and in the vital next steps

the world is now taking to address the climate crisis and deliberately choose a

better future. This list is vast, and it would be impossible for us to mention

everyone here, but we would like to pay special mention to Alejandro Agag,

Lorena Aguilar, Fahad Al Attiya, Ken Alex, Ali Al-Naimi, Carlos Alvarado

Quesada, Christiane Amanpour, Chris Anderson, Mats Andersson, Monica

Araya, John Ashford, David Attenborough, AURORA, Mariana Awad, Peter

Bakker, Vivian Balakrishnan, Ajay Banga, Greg Barker, Ecumenical Patriarch

Bartholomew, Nicolette Bartlett, Oliver Bäte, Kevin Baumert, Marc Benioff, Jeff

Bezos, Dean Bialek, Sue Biniaz, Fatih Birol, Michael Bloomberg, May Boeve,

Gail Bradbrook, Piers Bradford, Richard Branson, Jesper Brodin, Tom Brookes,

Jerry Brown, Sharan Burrow, Felipe Calderon, Kathy Calvin, Mark Campanale,

Miguel Arias Cañete, Mark Carney, Clay Carnill, Andrea Correa do Lago, Anne-

Sophie Cerisola, Robin Chase, Sagarika Chatterjee, Tomas Anker Christensen,

Pilita Clark, Helen Clarkson, Jo Confino, Aron Cramer, David Crane, John

Danilovich, Conyers Davis, Tony de Brum, Bernaditas de Castro Muller, Brian

Deese, Claudio Descalzi, Leonardo DiCaprio, Paula DiPerna, Elliot Diringer,

Sandrine Dixson Decleve, Ahmed Djoghlaf, Claudia Dobles Camargo, Alister

Doyle, José Manuel Entrecanales, Hernani Escobar, Patricia Espinosa,

Emmanuel Faber, Nathan Fabian, Laurent Fabius, Emily Farnworth, Daniel

Firger, James Fletcher, Pope Francis, Gail Gallie, Grace Gelder, Kristalina

Georgieva, Cody Gildart, Jane Goodall, Al Gore, Kimo Goree, Ellie Goulding,

Mats Granryd, Jerry Greenfield, Ólafur Grímsson, Sally Grover Bingham,

Emmanuel Guerin, Kaveh Guilanpour, Stuart Gulliver, Angel Gurria, Antonio

Guterres, William Hague, Thomas Hale, Brad Hall, Winnie Hallwachs, Simon

Hampel, Kate Hampton, Yuval Noah Harari, Jacob Heatley-Adams, Julian

Hector, Hilda Heine, Ned Helme, Barbara Hendricks, Jamie Henn, Anne

Hidalgo, François Hollande, Emma Howard Boyd, Stephen Howard, Arianna

Huffington, Kara Hurst, Mo Ibrahim, Jay Inslee, Natalie Isaacs, Maria Ivanova,

Lisa Jackson, Lisa Jacobson, Dan Janzen, Michel Jarraud, Sharon Johnson,

Kelsey Juliana, Yolanda Kakabadse, Lila Karbassi, Iain Keith, Mark Kenber, John

Kerry, Sean Kidney, Jim Kim, Ban Ki-moon, Lise Kingo, Richard Kinley, Sister

Jayanti Kirpalani, Isabelle Kocher, Caio Koch-Weser, Marcin Korolec, Larry

Kramer, Kalee Kreider, Kishan Kumarsingh, Rachel Kyte, Christine Lagarde,

Philip Lambert, Dan Lashof, Penelope Lea, Guilherme Leal, Bernice Lee, Jeremy

Leggett, Thomas Lingard, Andrew Liveris, Hunter Lovins, Mindy Lubber,

Miguel Ángel Mancera Espinosa, Gina McCarthy, Stella McCartney, Bill

McDonouh, Catherine McKenna, Sonia Medina, Bernadette Meehan, Johannes

Meier, Maria Mendiluce, Antoine Michon, David Miliband, Ed Miliband, Amina

Mohammed, Jennifer Morris, Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu, Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko,

Kumi Naidoo, Nicole Ng, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, Indra Nooyi, Michael

Northrop, Tim Nuthall, Bill Nye, Jean Oelwang, Rafe Offer, Ngozi Okonjo-

Iweala, Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim, Kevin O Hanlon, René Orellana, Ricken

Patel, Jose Penido, Charlotte Pera, Jonathan Pershing, Stephen Petricone,

Stephanie Pfeifer, Shannon Phillips, Bertrand Piccard, François-Henri Pinault,

John Podesta, Paul Polman, Ian Ponce, Carl Pope, Jonathon Porritt, Patrick

Pouyanne, Manuel Pulgar Vidal, Tracy Raczek, Jairam Ramesh, Curtis Ravenell,

Robin Reck, Geeta Reddy, Dan Reifsnyder, Fiona Reynolds, Ben Rhodes, Alex

Rivett-Carnac, Chris Rivett-Carnac, Nick Robins, Jim Robinson, Mary Robinson,

Cristiam Rodriguez, Matthew Rodriguez, Kevin Rudd, Mark Ruffalo, Artur

Runge-Metzger, Karsten Sach, Claudia Salerno Caldera, Fredric Samama,

Richard Samans, M. Sanjayan, Steve Sawyer, Jerome Schmitt, Kirsty

Schneeberger, Seth Schultz, Klaus Schwab, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jeff

Seabright, Maros Sefcovic, Leah Seligmann, Peter Seligmann, Oleg Shamanov,

Kevin Sheekey, Feike Sijbesma, Nat Simons, Paul Simpson, Michael Skelly, Erna

Solberg, Andrew Steer, Achim Steiner, Todd Stern, Tom Steyer, Irene Suárez,

Mustafa Suleyman, Terry Tamminen, Ratan Tata, Astro Teller, Tessa Tenant,

Halldór Thorgeirsson, Greta Thunberg, Svante Thunberg, Susan Tierney, Halla

Tomasdottir, Laurence Tubiana, Keith Tuffley, Jo Tyndall, Hamdi Ulukaya, Gino

van Begin, Ben van Beurden, Andy Vesey, Mark Watts, Dominic Waughray,

Meridith Webster, Scott Weiner, Helen Wildsmith, Antha Williams, Dessima

Williams, Mark Wilson, Justin Winters, Martin Wolf, Farhana Yamin, Zhang Yue,

Mohammed Yunus, Jochen Zeitz, and Xie Zhenhua.

We would like to thank each and every one of the outstanding colleagues of

the secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change, the always thorough UN security personnel, and the exemplary

Mission 2020 team.

This book would not have been possible without the remarkable skills of the

editors at Knopf and Bonnier that we were privileged to work with, Erroll

McDonald and Margaret Stead, with their respective teams.

After spending a good two years thinking about writing a book and making

almost no progress, the big transformation occurred when we met Doug

Abrams in September 2018. Doug and the team at Idea Architects transformed

our approach and made the project real in a way it simply would never have

been without them. In many ways, the book owes its genesis to this team more

than any other and, alongside Doug, to wordsmith Lara Love and efficient Ty

Gideon Love. Our gratitude goes also to Caspian Dennis, Sandy Violette, and

the whole team at Abner Stein, as well as Camilla Ferrier, Jemma McDonagh,

and the entire team at the Marsh Agency.

Finally, we cannot end this acknowledgment without thanking the close

friends and family members who supported us through the writing of this book.

The few months of actual writing time were marked by a remarkable intensity

of major events in our lives, of both sadness and joy. These included the passing

of two of Christiana’s brothers, Mariano and Martí; of Tom’s mother-in-law,

Irene Walter; and of Doug’s father, Richard Abrams. It also included the

wedding of Christiana’s daughter Yihana. We are left with a deep sense of

gratitude toward those closest to us who generously and patiently supported us

throughout this period, in particular Naima Ritter, Yihana Ritter, Kirsten

Figueres, Mariano Figueres, Chaco Delgado, David Hall, Ron Walter, Diana

Strike, Sara Rivett-Carnac, and Natasha Rivett-Carnac.

You are our past, our present, and our future.

NOTES

INTRODUCTION: THE CRITICAL DECADE

1. Charles Keeling, “The Concentration and Isotopic Abundances of Carbon

Dioxide in the Atmosphere,” Tellus 12, no. 2 (1960): 200–203,

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/ epdf/ 10.1111/ j.2153-

3490.1960.tb01300.x. The Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC

Davis has kept records of global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration

since 1958, updating the Keeling Curve: https://scripps.ucsd.edu/

programs/ keelingcurve/.

2. David Neild, “This Map Shows Where in the World Is Most Vulnerable to

Climate Change,” ScienceAlert, February 19, 2016,

https://www.sciencealert.com/ this-map-shows-the-parts-of-the-world-most-

vulnerable-to-climate-change.

3. These two articles explain the science well and contain helpful visuals: D.

Piepgrass, “How Could Global Warming Accelerate If CO2 Is

‘Logarithmic’?” Skeptical Science, March 28, 2018,

https://skepticalscience.com/ why-global-warming-can-accelerate.html;

Aarne Granlund, “Three Things We Must Understand About Climate

Breakdown,” Medium, August 30, 2017, https://medium.com/

@aarnegranlund/ three-things-we-dont-understand-about-climate-change-

c59338a1c435.

4. Neild, “This Map Shows Where in the World Is Most Vulnerable to Climate

Change.”

5. Including in the UK and United States, for example: Sandra Laville, “Two-

thirds of Britons Want Faster Action on Climate, Poll Finds,” Guardian (U.S.

edition), June 19, 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/ 2019/

jun/ 19/ britons-want-faster-action-climate-poll; Valerie Volcovici, “Americans

Demand Climate Action (As Long As It Doesn’t Cost Much): Reuters Poll,”

Reuters, June 26, 2019, https://www.reuters.com/ article/ us-usa-election-

climatechange/ americans-demand-climate-action-reuters-poll-

idUSKCN1TR15W.

6. Elizabeth Howell, “How Long Have Humans Been on Earth?” Universe

Today, January 19, 2015, https://www.universetoday.com/ 38125/ how-long-

have-humans-been-on-earth/; Chelsea Harvey, “Scientists Say That 6,000

Years Ago, Humans Dramatically Changed How Nature Works,”

Washington Post, December 16, 2015, https://www.washingtonpost.com/

news/ energy-environment/ wp/ 2015/ 12/ 16/ humans-dramatically-changed-

how-nature-works-6000-years-ago/.

7. Margherita Giuzio, Dejan Krusec, Anouk Levels, Ana Sofia Melo, et al.,

“Climate Change and Financial Stability,” Financial Stability Review, May

2019, https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ pub/ financial-stability/ fsr/ special/ html/

ecb.fsrart201905_1~47cf778cc1.en.html.

8. Megan Mahajan, “Plunging Prices Mean Building New Renewable Energy

Is Cheaper Than Running Existing Coal,” Forbes, December 3, 2018

(updated May 6, 2019), https://www.forbes.com/ sites/ energyinnovation/

2018/ 12/ 03/ plunging-prices-mean-building-new-renewable-energy-is-

cheaper-than-running-existing-coal/ #61a0db2631f3.

9. Fossil Free, “What Is Fossil Fuel Divestment?” https://gofossilfree.org/

divestment/ what-is-fossil-fuel-divestment/.

10. Chris Flood, “Climate Change Poses Challenge to Long-Term Investors,”

Financial Times, April 22, 2019, https://www.ft.com/ content/ 992ba12a-

c02a-3bca-b947-0e2fbc5e91b7.

1. CHOOSING OUR FUTURE

1. For more on ice ages, see, for example, Michael Marshall, “The History of

Ice on Earth,” New Scientist, May 24, 2010, https://www.newscientist.com/

article/ dn18949-the-history-of-ice-on-earth/.

2. The world’s population is expected to hit 9.8 billion by 2050. United

Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, “Growing at a Slower

Pace, World Population Is Expected to Reach 9.7 Billion in 2050 and Could

Peak at Nearly 11 Billion around 2100,” June 17, 2019, https://www.un.org/

development/ desa/ en/ news/ population/ world-population-prospects-

2019.html.

3. Daniel Christian Wahl, “Learning from Nature and Designing as Nature:

Regenerative Cultures Create Conditions Conducive to Life,” Biomimicry

Institute, September 6, 2016, https://biomimicry.org/ learning-nature-

designing-nature-regenerative-cultures-create-conditions-conducive-life/.

4. The Industrial Revolution and the explosion of fossil fuel use changed our

direction. For more on this, see History.com, “Industrial Revolution,” July

1, 2019 (updated September 9, 2019), https://www.history.com/ topics/

industrial-revolution/ industrial-revolution for a history of the Industrial

Revolution; and Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser, “Fossil Fuels,” Our World

in Data, https://ourworldindata.org/ fossil-fuels, for the development of

fossil fuel use.

5. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, “Changes in the Carbon

Cycle,” NASA Earth Observatory, June 16, 2011,

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ features/ CarbonCycle/ page4.php.

6. Rémi d’Annunzio, Marieke Sandker, Yelena Finegold, and Zhang Min,

“Projecting Global Forest Area Towards 2030,” Forest Ecology and

Management 352 (2015): 124–33, https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/

article/ pii/ S0378112715001346; John Vidal, “We Are Destroying

Rainforests So Quickly They May Be Gone in 100 Years,” Guardian (U.S.

edition), January 23, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/ global-

development-professionals-network/ 2017/ jan/ 23/ destroying-rainforests-

quickly-gone-100-years-deforestation.

7. Josh Gabbatiss, “Earth Will Take Millions of Years to Recover from Climate

Change Mass Extinction, Study Suggests,” Independent, April 8, 2019,

https://www.independent.co.uk/ environment/ mass-extinction-recovery-

earth-climate-change-biodiversity-loss-evolution-a8860326.html.

8. Richard Gray, “Sixth Mass Extinction Could Destroy Life as We Know It—

Biodiversity Expert,” Horizon, March 4, 2019, https://horizon-magazine.eu/

article/ sixth-mass-extinction-could-destroy-life-we-know-it-biodiversity-

expert.html; Gabbatiss, “Earth Will Take Millions of Years.”

9. LuAnn Dahlman and Rebecca Lindsey, “Climate Change: Ocean Heat

Content,” Climate.gov, August 1, 2018, https://www.climate.gov/ news-

features/ understanding-climate/ climate-change-ocean-heat-content.

10. Lauren E. James, “Half of the Great Barrier Reef Is Dead,” National

Geographic, August 2018, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ magazine/

2018/ 08/ explore-atlas-great-barrier-reef-coral-bleaching-map-climate-

change/.

11. T. Schoolmeester, H. L. Gjerdi, J. Crump, et al., Global Linkages: A Graphic

Look at the Changing Arctic, Rev. 1 (Nairobi and Arendal: UN Environment

and GRID-Arendal, 2019), http://www.grida.no/ publications/ 431.

12. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, “As Seas Rise, NASA

Zeros In: How Much? How Fast?” August 3, 2017, https://www.nasa.gov/

goddard/ risingseas.

13. Joseph Stromberg, “What Is the Anthropocene and Are We in It?”

Smithsonian, January 2013, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/ science-

nature/ what-is-the-anthropocene-and-are-we-in-it-164801414/.

14. An exploration can be found in Darrell Moellendorf, “Progress,

Destruction, and the Anthropocene,” Social Philosophy and Policy 34, no. 2

(2017): 66–88. See also the documentary film Anthropocene: The Human

Epoch, 2018, https://theanthropocene.org/ film/.

15. More than 3 degrees Celsius warmer than the preindustrial average global

temperature.

16. That is, 1.5 degrees Celsius higher than the preindustrial average global

temperature.

17. For a full explanation, see Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change,

“Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5 ºC,” 2018, https://www.ipcc.ch/

sr15/.

18. Nebojsa Nakicenovic and Rob Swart, eds., Special Report on Emissions

Scenarios (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000),

https://www.ipcc.ch/ report/ emissions-scenarios/.

2. THE WORLD WE ARE CREATING

1. Department of Public Health, Environmental and Social Determinants of

Health, World Health Organization, “Ambient Air Pollution: Health

Impacts,” https://www.who.int/ airpollution/ ambient/ health-impacts/ en/.

2. Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Latest Air Pollution Data Ranks World’s Cities

Worst to Best,” March 5, 2019, https://www.greenpeace.org/ southeastasia/

press/ 679/ latest-air-pollution-data-ranks-worlds-cities-worst-to-best/.

3. “Cloud Seeding,” ScienceDirect, https://www.sciencedirect.com/ topics/

earth-and-planetary-sciences/ cloud-seeding.

4. Acid rain is any form of precipitation that contains high levels of nitric and

sulfuric acids. It can also occur in the form of snow and fog. Normal rain is

slightly acidic, with a pH of 5.6, while acid rain has a pH between 4.2 and

4.4. Most acid rain is a product of human activities. The biggest sources

are coal power plants, factories, and automobiles. See Christina Nunez,

“Acid Rain Explained,” National Geographic, February 28, 2019,

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ environment/ global-warming/ acid-

rain/.

5. Heather Smith, “Will Climate Change Move Agriculture Indoors? And Will

That Be a Good Thing?” Grist, February 3, 2016, https://grist.org/ food/ will-

climate-change-move-agriculture-indoors-and-will-that-be-a-good-thing/.

6. Johan Rockström, “Climate Tipping Points,” Global Challenges Foundation,

https://www.globalchallenges.org/ en/ our-work/ annual-report/ climate-

tipping-points [inactive].

7. See David Wallace-Wells, The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming

(New York: Tim Duggen Books, 2019).

8. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, “Climate Change,” 2018,

http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/ our-work/ threats-to-the-reef/ climate-change.

9. Aylin Woodward, “One of Antarctica’s Biggest Glaciers Will Soon Reach a

Point of Irreversible Melting,” Business Insider France, July 9, 2019,

http://www.businessinsider.fr/ us/ antarctic-glacier-on-way-to-irreversible-

melt-2019-7.

10. Roz Pidcock, “Interactive: What Will 2C and 4C of Warming Mean for Sea

Level Rise?” Carbon Brief, September 11, 2015,

https://www.carbonbrief.org/ interactive-what-will-2c-and-4c-of-warming-

mean-for-global-sea-level-rise; Josh Holder, Niko Kommenda, and Jonathan

Watts, “The Three-Degree World: The Cities That Will Be Drowned by

Global Warming,” Guardian (U.S. edition), November 3, 2017,

https://www.theguardian.com/ cities/ ng-interactive/ 2017/ nov/ 03/ three-

degree-world-cities-drowned-global-warming.

11. United Nations Climate Change News, “Climate Change Threatens

National Security, Says Pentagon,” October 14, 2014, https://unfccc.int/

news/ climate-change-threatens-national-security-says-pentagon. For more

useful resources, see American Security Project, “Climate Security Is

National Security,” https://www.americansecurityproject.org/ climate-

security/.

12. Polar Science Center, “Antarctic Melting Irreversible in 60 Years,”

http://psc.apl.uw.edu/ antarctic-melting-irreversible-in-60-years/.

13. Ocean Portal Team, “Ocean Acidification,” Smithsonian Institute, April

2018, https://ocean.si.edu/ ocean-life/ invertebrates/ ocean-acidification.

14. Chang-Eui Park, Su-Jong Jeong, Manoj Joshi, et al., “Keeping Global

Warming Within 1.5 °C Constrains Emergence of Aridification,” Nature

Climate Change 8, no. 1 (January 2018): 70–74.

15. Regan Early, “Which Species Will Survive Climate Change?” Scientific

American, February 17, 2016,

https://www.scientificamerican.com83647/article/which-species-will-

survive-climate-change/.

16. Scientific Expert Group on Climate Change and Sustainable Development,

“Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Unmanageable and Managing

the Unavoidable,” Sigma Xi, February 2007, https://www.sigmaxi.org/ docs/

default-source/ Programs-Documents/ Critical83647-Issues-in-Science/

executive-summary-of-confronting-climate83647-change.pdf.

17. For more on the risks of climate change on these river systems, see John

Schwartz, “Amid 19-Year Drought, States Sign Deal to Conserve Colorado

River Water,” New York Times, March 19, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/

2019/ 03/ 19/ climate/ colorado-river-water.html; Sarah Zielinski, “The

Colorado River Runs Dry,” Smithsonian, October 2010,

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/ science-nature/ the-colorado-river-runs-

dry-61427169/; “Earth Matters: Climate Change Threatening to Dry Up the

Rio Grande River, a Vital Water Supply,” CBS News, April 22, 2019,

https://www.cbsnews.com/ news/ earth-day-2019-climate-change-

threatening-to-dry-up-rio-grande-river-vital-water-supply/.

18. Gary Borders, “Climate Change on the Rio Grande,” World Wildlife

Magazine, Fall 2015, https://www.worldwildlife.org/ magazine/ issues/ fall-

2015/ articles/ climate-change-on-the-rio-grande.

19. Brian Resnick, “Melting Permafrost in the Arctic Is Unlocking Diseases and

Warping the Landscape,” Vox, September 26, 2019, https://www.vox.com/

2017/ 9/6/ 16062174/ permafrost-melting.

20. “How Climate Change Can Fuel Wars,” Economist, May 23, 2019,

https://www.economist.com/ international/ 2019/ 05/ 23/ how-climate-change-

can-fuel-wars.

21. Silja Klepp, “Climate Change and Migration,” Oxford Research

Encyclopedias: Climate Science, April 2017, https://oxfordre.com/

climatescience/ view/ 10.1093/ acrefore/ 9780190228620.001.0001/ acrefore-

9780190228620-e-42.

22. Resnick, “Melting Permafrost.”

23. Derek R. MacFadden, Sarah F. McGough, David Fisman, Mauricio

Santillana, and John S. Brownstein, “Antibiotic Resistance Increases with

Local Temperature,” Nature, May 21, 2018, https://www.nature.com/

articles/ s41558-018-0161-6.

3. THE WORLD WE MUST CREATE

1. P. J. Marshall, “Reforestation: The Critical Solution to Climate Change,”

Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation, December 7, 2018,

https://www.leonardodicaprio.org/ reforestation-the-critical-solution-to-

climate-change/.

2. Julio Díaz, public health and environment expert at the National School of

Public Health in Madrid, which is part of the Carlos III Health Institute,

reports that individuals with kidney problems and neurodegenerative

diseases such as Parkinson’s visit the doctor more frequently in hot

weather. Excessive heat also increases the risk of premature births and low

birth rates. Cited in Manuel Planelles, “More Than a Feeling: Summers in

Spain Really Are Getting Longer and Hotter,” El País, April 3, 2019,

https://elpais.com/ elpais/ 2019/ 04/ 03/ inenglish/ 1554279672_888064.html.

3. E. O. Wilson Biodiversity Foundation, “Half-Earth: Our Planet’s Fight for

Life,” https://eowilsonfoundation.org/ half-earth-our-planet-s-fight-for-life/;

Emily E. Adams, “World Forest Area Still on the Decline,” Earth Policy

Institute, August 31, 2012, http://www.earth-policy.org/ indicators/ C56/

forests_2012.

4. Project Drawdown, “Tree Intercropping,” https://www.drawdown.org/

solutions/ food/ tree-intercropping; Project Drawdown, “Silvopasture,”

https://www.drawdown.org/ solutions/ food/ silvopasture.

5. Petra Todorovich and Yoav Hagler, “High-Speed Rail in America,” America

2050, January 2011, http://www.america2050.org/ pdf/ HSR-in-America-

Complete.pdf; Anton Babadjanov, “Can We Replace Cross-Country Air with

Rail Travel? Yes, We Can!” Seattle Transit Blog, February 15, 2019,

https://seattletransitblog.com/ 2019/ 02/ 15/ can-we-replace-cross-country-air-

with-rail-travel-yes-we-can/.

6. Project Drawdown, “Nuclear,” https://www.drawdown.org/ solutions/

electricity-generation/ nuclear. See also Union of Concerned Scientists,

“Nuclear Power & Global Warming,” May 22, 2015 (updated November 8,

2018), https://www.ucsusa.org/ nuclear-power/ nuclear-power-and-global-

warming.

7. RMIT University, “Solar Paint Offers Endless Energy from Water Vapor,”

ScienceDaily, June 14, 2017, https://www.sciencedaily.com/ releases/ 2017/

06/ 170614091833.htm.

8. Global Water Scarcity Atlas, “Desalination Powered by Renewable Energy,”

https://waterscarcityatlas.org/ desalination-powered-by-renewable-energy/.

9. Project Drawdown, “Pasture Cropping,” https://www.drawdown.org/

solutions/ coming-attractions/ pasture-cropping. See also Taylor Mooney,

“What Is Regenerative Farming? Experts Say It Can Combat Climate

Change,” CBS News, July 28, 2019, https://www.cbsnews.com/ news/ what-

is-regenerative-farming-cbsn-originals/.

10. For more on climate change and food prices, see Nitin Sethi, “Climate

Change Could Cause 29% Spike in Cereal Prices: Leaked UN Report,”

Business Standard, July 15, 2019, https://www.business-standard.com/

article/ current-affairs/ climate-change-could-cause-29-spike-in-cereal-

prices-leaked-un-report-119071500637_1.html.

11. For more on this concept, see Anna Behrend, “What Is the True Cost of

Food?” Spiegel Online, April 2, 2016, https://www.spiegel.de/ international/

tomorrow/ the-true-price-of-foodstuffs-a-1085086.html; Megan Perry, “The

Real Cost of Food,” Sustainable Food Trust, November 2015,

https://sustainablefoodtrust.org/ articles/ the-real-cost-of-food/.

12. Sarah Gibbens, “Eating Meat Has ‘Dire’ Consequences for the Planet, Says

Report,” National Geographic, January 16, 2019,

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ environment/ 2019/ 01/ commission-

report-great-food-transformation-plant-diet-climate-change/.

13. Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, Food and Agriculture Organization

of the United Nations, “Climate Change Mitigation Strategies,” September

28, 2016, http://www.fao.org/ fishery/ topic/ 166280/ en.

14. Jennifer L. Pomeranz, Parke Wilde, Yue Huang, Renata Micha, and Dariush

Mozaffarian, “Legal and Administrative Feasibility of a Federal Junk Food

and Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax to Improve Diet,” American Journal of

Public Health, January 10, 2018, https://ajph.aphapublications.org/ doi/

10.2105/ AJPH.2017.304159; Arlene Weintraub, “Should We Tax Junk Foods

to Curb Obesity?” Forbes, January 10, 2018, https://www.forbes.com/ sites/

arleneweintraub/ 2018/ 01/ 10/ should-we-tax-junk-foods-to-curb-obesity/;

Mexico and Hungary are already piloting the idea of taxing junk food; see

Julia Belluz, “Mexico and Hungary Tried Junk Food Taxes—and They Seem

to Be Working,” Vox, January 17, 2018 (updated April 6, 2018),

https://www.vox.com/ 2018/ 1/17/ 16870014/ junk-food-tax.

15. This is already happening: “China’s Hainan Province to End Fossil Fuel Car

Sales in 2030,” Phys.org, March 6, 2019, https://phys.org/ news/ 2019-03-

china-hainan-province-fossil-fuel.html.

16. This is already happening in the UK: Tom Edwards, “ULEZ: The Most

Radical Plan You’ve Never Heard Of,” BBC News, March 26, 2019,

https://www.bbc.com/ news/ uk-england-london-47638862.

17. Smart Energy International, “Storage Advancements Fast-Track New

Power Projects, Experts Say,” June 21, 2018, https://www.smart-

energy.com/ news/ energy-storage-new-power-projects/.

18. Adela Spulber and Brett Smith, “Are We Building the Electric Vehicle

Charging Infrastructure We Need?” IndustryWeek, November 21, 2018,

https://www.industryweek.com/ technology-and-iiot/ are-we-building-

electric-vehicle-charging-infrastructure-we-need.

19. Echo Huang, “By 2038, the World Will Buy More Passenger Electric

Vehicles Than Fossil-Fuel Cars,” Quartz, May 15, 2019, https://qz.com/

1618775/ by-2038-sales-of-electric-cars-to-overtake-fossil-fuel-ones/; Jesper

Berggreen, “The Dream Is Over—Europe Is Waking Up to a World of

Electric Cars,” CleanTechnica, February 17, 2019,

https://cleantechnica.com/ 2019/ 02/ 17/ the-dream-is-over-europe-is-waking-

up-to-a-world-of-electric-cars/.

20. We can already achieve this acceleration in 2019. See James Gilboy, “The

Porsche Taycan Will Do Zero-to-60 in 3.5 Seconds,” The Drive, August 17,

2018, https://www.thedrive.com/ news/ 22984/ the-porsche-taycan-will-do-

zero-to-60-in-3-5-seconds; and classic car retrofits are already starting to

take off: Robert C. Yeager, “Vintage Cars with Electric-Heart Transplants,”

New York Times, January 10, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/ 2019/ 01/ 10/

business/ electric-conversions-classic-cars.html.

21. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, “68% of the

World Population Projected to Live in Urban Areas by 2050, Says UN,” May

16, 2018, https://www.un.org/ development/ desa/ en/ news/ population/ 2018-

revision-of-world-urbanization-prospects.html.

22. David Dudley, “The Guy from Lyft Is Coming for Your Car,” CityLab,

September 19, 2016, https://www.citylab.com/ transportation/ 2016/ 09/ the-

guy-from-lyft-is-coming-for-your-car/ 500600/.

23. Annie Rosenthal, “How 3D Printing Could Revolutionize the Future of

Development,” Medium, May 1, 2018, https://medium.com/

@plus_socialgood/ how-3d-printing-could-revolutionize-the-future-of-

development-54a270d6186d; Elizabeth Royte, “What Lies Ahead for 3-D

Printing?” Smithsonian, May 2013, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/

science-nature/ what-lies-ahead-for-3-d-printing-37498558/.

24. Marissa Peretz, “The Father of Drones’ Newest Baby Is a Flying Car,”

Forbes, July 24, 2019, https://www.forbes.com/ sites/ marissaperetz/ 2019/

07/ 24/ the-father-of-drones-newest-baby-is-a-flying-car/.

25. The “slow-cation” was already popular from the seventeenth to the

nineteenth centuries, in the form of the “Grand Tour.” Richard Franks,

“What Was the Grand Tour and Where Did People Go?” Culture Trip,

December 4, 2017, https://theculturetrip.com/ europe/ articles/ what-was-

the-grand-tour-and-where-did-people-go/.

26. International Organization for Migration mission statement,

https://www.iom.int/ migration-and-climate-change-0. See also Erik Solheim

and William Lacy Swing, “Migration and Climate Change Need to Be

Tackled Together,” United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change, September 7, 2018, https://unfccc.int/ news/ migration-and-climate-

change-need-to-be-tackled-together.

27. Richard B. Rood, “What Would Happen to the Climate If We Stopped

Emitting Greenhouse Gases Today?” The Conversation, December 11,

2014. http://theconversation.com/ what-would-happen-to-the-climate-if-we-

stopped-emitting-greenhouse-gases-today-35011.

28. The 3D-printed version is already building houses at speed. See Adele

Peters, “This House Can Be 3D-Printed for $4,000,” Fast Company, March

12, 2018, https://www.fastcompany.com/ 40538464/ this-house-can-be-3d-

printed-for-4000.

4. WHO WE CHOOSE TO BE

1. Joanna Macy and Chris Johnstone, Active Hope: How to Face the Mess

We’re in Without Going Crazy (San Francisco: New World Library, 2012),

32.

5. STUBBORN OPTIMISM

1. Kendra Cherry, “Learned Optimism,” Verywell Mind, July 25, 2019,

https://www.verywellmind.com/ learned-optimism-4174101.

2. Jeremy Hodges, “Clean Energy Becomes Dominant Power Source in U.K.,”

Bloomberg, June 20, 2019, https://www.bloomberg.com/ news/ articles/ 2019-

06-20/ clean-energy-is-seen-as-dominant-source-in-u-k-for-first-time.

3. Jordan Davidson, “Costa Rica Powered by Nearly 100% Renewable

Energy,” EcoWatch, August 6, 2019, https://www.ecowatch.com/ costa-rica-

net-zero-carbon-emissions-2639681381.html.

4. Sammy Roth, “California Set a Goal of 100% Clean Energy, and Now Other

States May Follow Its Lead,” Los Angeles Times, January 10, 2019,

https://www.latimes.com/ business/ la-fi-100-percent-clean-energy-

20190110-story.html.

5. Václav Havel, Disturbing the Peace: A Conversation with Karel Huizdala

(New York: Vintage Books, 1991), 181–82.

6. Rebecca Solnit, Hope in the Dark: Untold Histories, Wild Possibilities

(Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2016), 4.

6. ENDLESS ABUNDANCE

1. Brad Lancaster, “Planting the Rain to Grow Abundance,” lecture at

TEDxTucson, March 6, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?

v=I2xDZlpInik.

2. American Sociological Association, “In Disasters, Panic Is Rare; Altruism

Dominates,” ScienceDaily, August 8, 2002, https://www.sciencedaily.com/

releases/ 2002/ 08/ 020808075321.htm.

3. Therese J. Borchard, “How Giving Makes Us Happy,” Psych Central, July 8,

2018, https://psychcentral.com/ blog/ how-giving-makes-us-happy/.

4. Wikipedia, “November 2015 Paris Attacks,” https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/

November_2015_Paris_attacks.

7. RADICAL REGENERATION

1. Richard Louv, Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-

Deficit Disorder (New York: Algonquin, 2005).

2. Gregory Bateson, Steps to an Ecology of Mind (Chicago: University of

Chicago Press, 1972).

3. Daniel Christian Wahl, Designing Regenerative Cultures (Charmouth, UK:

Triarchy Press, 2016), 267.

8. DOING WHAT IS NECESSARY

1. Even if we did, the world would not stop warming. See Ute Kehse, “Global

Warming Doesn’t Stop When the Emissions Stop,” Phys.org, October 3,

2017, https://phys.org/ news/ 2017-10-global-doesnt-emissions.html.

2. Caitlin E. Werrell and Francesco Femia, “Climate Change Raises Conflict

Concerns,” UNESCO Courier, no. 2 (2018), https://en.unesco.org/ courier/

2018-2/ climate-change-raises-conflict-concerns.

3. “Germany on Course to Accept One Million Refugees in 2015,” Guardian

(U.S. edition), December 7, 2015, https://www.theguardian.com/ world/

2015/ dec/ 08/ germany-on-course-to-accept-one-million-refugees-in-2015.

4. Benedikt Peters, “5 Reasons for the Far Right Rising in Germany,”

Süddeutsche Zeitung, https://projekte.sueddeutsche.de/ artikel/ politik/ afd-

5-reasons-for-the-far-right-rising-in-germany-e403522/.

5. Project Drawdown is a great additional resource, and outlines one hundred

solutions to reverse global warming.

6. Reality Check team, “Reality Check: Which Form of Renewable Energy Is

Cheapest?” BBC News, October 26, 2018, https://www.bbc.com/ news/

business-45881551.

7. Michael Savage, “End Onshore Windfarm Ban, Tories Urge,” Guardian

(U.S. edition), June 30, 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/

2019/ jun/ 30/ tories-urge-lifting-off-onshore-windfarm-ban.

8. Shannon Hall, “Exxon Knew About Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago,”

Scientific American, October 26, 2015,

https://www.scientificamerican.com/ article/ exxon-Knew-about-climate-

change-almost-40-years-ago/.

9. Sarah Pruitt, “How the Treaty of Versailles and German Guilt Led to World

War II,” History.com, June 29, 2018 (updated June 3, 2019),

https://www.history.com/ news/ treaty-of-versailles-world-war-ii-german-

guilt-effects.

10. S.P., “What, and Who, Are France’s ‘Gilets Jaunes’?” Economist, November

27, 2018, https://www.economist.com/ the-economist-explains/ 2018/ 11/ 27/

what-and-who-are-frances-gilets-jaunes.

11. Alex Birkett, “Online Manipulation: All the Ways You’re Currently Being

Deceived,” Conversion XL, November 19, 2015 (updated February 7,

2019), https://conversionxl.com/ blog/ online-manipulation-all-the-ways-

youre-currently-being-deceived/.

12. Stephanie Pappas, “Shrinking Glaciers Point to Looming Water Shortages,”

Live Science, December 8, 2011, https://www.livescience.com/ 17379-

shrinking-glaciers-water-shortages.html.

13. Bridget Alex, “Artic [sic] Meltdown: We’re Already Feeling the

Consequences of Thawing Permafrost,” Discover, June 2018,

http://discovermagazine.com/ 2018/ jun/ something-stirs.

14. Fern Riddell, “Suffragettes, Violence and Militancy,” British Library,

February 6, 2018, https://www.bl.uk/ votes-for-women/ articles/ suffragettes-

violence-and-militancy.

15. Office of the Historian, Department of State, “The Collapse of the Soviet

Union,” https://history.state.gov/ milestones/ 1989-1992/ collapse-soviet-

union.

16. “Futurama: ‘Magic City of Progress’ ” in World’s Fair: Enter the World of

Tomorrow, Biblion, http://exhibitions.nypl.org/ biblion/ worldsfair/ enter-

world-tomorrow-futurama-and-beyond/ story/ story-gmfuturama.

17. Abby Norman, “Aliens, Autonomous Cars, and AI: This Is the World of

2118,” Futurism.com, January 11, 2018, https://futurism.com/ 2118-

century-predictions; Matthew Claudel and Carlo Ratti, “Full Speed Ahead:

How the Driverless Car Could Transform Cities,” McKinsey & Company,

August 2015, https://www.mckinsey.com/ business-functions/ sustainability/

our-insights/ full-speed-ahead-how-the-driverless-car-could-transform-cities.

18. Brad Plumer, “Cars Take Up Way Too Much Space in Cities. New

Technology Could Change That,” Vox, 2016, https://www.vox.com/ a/new-

economy-future/ cars-cities-technologies; Vanessa Bates Ramirez, “The

Future of Cars Is Electric, Autonomous, and Shared—Here’s How We’ll Get

There,” Singularity Hub, August 23, 2018, https://singularityhub.com/ 2018/

08/ 23/ the-future-of-cars-is-electric-autonomous-and-shared-heres-how-well-

get-there/.

19. Tim Walker, “Maya Angelou Dies: ‘You May Encounter Many Defeats, but

You Must Not Be Defeated,’ ” Independent, May 28, 2014,

https://www.independent.co.uk/ news/ people/ maya-angelou-dies-you-may-

encounter-many-defeats-but-you-must-not-be-defeated-9449234.html.

20. “Martin Luther King Jr.—Biography,” NobelPrize.org,

https://www.nobelprize.org/ prizes/ peace/ 1964/ king/ biographical.

21. Jonathan Swift, “The Art of Political Lying,” The Examiner, Nov. 9, 1710,

https://www.bartleby.com/ 209/ 633.html.

22. Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy, and Sinan Aral, “The Spread of True and False

News Online,” Science, March 9, 2018, https://science.sciencemag.org/

content/ 359/ 6380/ 1146.full.

23. Carolyn Gregoire, “The Psychology of Materialism, and Why It’s Making

You Unhappy,” Huffington Post, December 15, 2013 (updated December 7,

2017), https://www.huffpost.com/ entry/ psychology-materialism_n_4425982.

24. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online, “Confirmation Bias,”

https://www.britannica.com/ science/ confirmation-bias.

25. Ben Webster, “Britons Buy a Suitcase Full of New Clothes Every Year,”

Times (UK), October 5, 2018, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/ article/ britons-

buy-a-suitcase-full-of-new-clothes-every-year-wxws895qd.

26. United Nations Climate Change News, “UN Helps Fashion Industry Shift to

Low Carbon,” United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,

September 6, 2018, https://unfccc.int/ news/ un-helps-fashion-industry-shift-

to-low-carbon.

27. Al Gore, The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change (New York: Random

House, 2013), 159.

28. Christina Gough, “Super Bowl Average Costs of a 30-Second TV

Advertisement from 2002 to 2019 (in Million U.S. Dollars),” Statista,

August 9, 2019, https://www.statista.com/ statistics/ 217134/ total-

advertisement-revenue-of-super-bowls/.

29. Garett Sloane, “Amazon Makes Major Leap in Ad Industry with $10 Billion

Year,” Ad Age, January 31, 2019, https://adage.com/ article/ digital/ amazon-

makes-quick-work-ad-industry-10-billion-year/ 316468.

30. A. Guttmann, “Global Advertising Market—Statistics & Facts,” Statista,

July 24, 2018, https://www.statista.com/ topics/ 990/ global-advertising-

market/.

31. A great article summing up the research can be found here: Tori

DeAngelis, “Consumerism and Its Discontents,” American Psychological

Association, June 2004, https://www.apa.org/ monitor/ jun04/ discontents.

32. Ibid.

33. Tony Seba and James Arbib, “Are We Ready for the End of Individual Car

Ownership?” San Francisco Chronicle, July 10, 2017,

https://www.sfchronicle.com/ opinion/ openforum/ article/ Are-we-ready-for-

the-end-of-individual-car-11278535.php.

34. A great article and podcast on this can be found here: Hans-Werner Kaas,

Detlev Mohr, and Luke Collins, “Self-Driving Cars and the Future of the

Auto Sector,” McKinsey & Company, August 2016,

https://www.mckinsey.com/ industries/ automotive-and-assembly/ our-

insights/ self-driving-cars-and-the-future-of-the-auto-sector.

35. Rosie McCall, “Millions of Fossil Fuel Dollars Are Being Pumped into Anti-

Climate Lobbying,” IFLScience, March 22, 2019,

https://www.iflscience.com/ environment/ millions-of-fossil-fuel-dollars-are-

being-pumped-into-anticlimate-lobbying/.

36. Eliot Whittington, “How Big Are Fossil Fuel Subsidies?” Cambridge

Institute for Sustainability Leadership, https://www.cisl.cam.ac.uk/

business-action/ low-carbon-transformation/ eliminating-fossil-fuel-subsidies/

how-big-are-fossil-fuel-subsidies.

37. Global Studies Initiative, “What We Do: Fossil Fuel Subsidies and Climate

Change,” International Institute for Sustainable Development,

https://www.iisd.org/ gsi/ what-we-do/ focus-areas/ renewable-energy-

subsidies-fossil-fuel-phase-out.

38. Mark Carney, “Breaking the Tragedy of the Horizon—Climate Change and

Financial Stability,” speech given at Lloyd’s of London, September 29,

2015, https://www.fsb.org/ wp-content/ uploads/ Breaking-the-Tragedy-of-the-

Horizon-%E2%80%93-climate-change-and-financial-stability.pdf.

39. The official website for the Network for Greening the Financial System is

https://www.ngfs.net/ en. See A Call for Action: Climate Change as a Source

of Financial Risk (NGFS, April 2019, https://www.banque-france.fr/ sites/

default/ files/ media/ 2019/ 04/ 17/ ngfs_first_comprehensive_report_-

_17042019_0.pdf.

40. Moody’s, “Moody’s Acquires RiskFirst, Expanding Buy-Side Analytics

Capabilities,” press release, July 25, 2019, https://ir.moodys.com/ news-and-

financials/ press-releases/ press-release-details/ 2019/ Moodys-Acquires-

RiskFirst-Expanding-Buy-Side-Analytics-Capabilities/ default.aspx.

41. Fatih Birol, “Renewables 2018: Market Analysis and Forecast from 2018 to

2023,” International Energy Agency, October 2018, https://www.iea.org/

renewables2018/.

42. RE100, “Companies,” http://there100.org/ companies.

43. David Roberts, “Utilities Have a Problem: The Public Wants 100%

Renewable Energy, and Quick,” Vox, October 11, 2018,

https://www.vox.com/ energy-and-environment/ 2018/ 9/14/ 17853884/

utilities-renewable-energy-100-percent-public-opinion.

44. Stefan Jungcurt, “IRENA Report Predicts All Forms of Renewable Energy

Will Be Cost Competitive by 2020,” SDG Knowledge Hub, January 16,

2018, http://sdg.iisd.org/ news/ irena-report-predicts-all-forms-of-renewable-

energy-will-be-cost-competitive-by-2020/.

45. United Nations Climate Change, “IPCC Special Report on Global Warming

of 1.5 °C,” United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,

https://unfccc.int/ topics/ science/ workstreams/ cooperation-with-the-ipcc/

ipcc-special-report-on-global-warming-of-15-degc.

46. Sunday Times Driving, “10 Electric Cars with 248 Miles or More Range to

Buy Instead of a Diesel or Petrol,” Sunday Times (UK), July 1, 2019,

https://www.driving.co.uk/ news/ 10-electric-cars-248-miles-range-buy-

instead-diesel-petrol/.

47. Christine Negroni, “How Much of the World’s Population Has Flown in an

Airplane?” Air & Space, January 6, 2016, https://www.airspacemag.com/

daily-planet/ how-much-worlds-population-has-flown-airplane-180957719/;

original analysis was carried out by Tom Farrier, an air safety specialist, on

Quora: Farrier, “What Percent of the World’s Population Will Fly in an

Airplane in Their Lives?” Quora, December 13, 2013,

https://www.quora.com/ What-percent-of-the-worlds-population-will-fly-in-

an-airplane-in-their-lives.

48. Liz Goldman and Mikaela Weisse, “Technical Blog: Global Forest Watch’s

2018 Data Update Explained,” Global Forest Watch, April 25, 2019,

https://blog.globalforestwatch.org/ data-and-research/ technical-blog-global-

forest-watchs-2018-data-update-explained; Gabriel daSilva, “World Lost 12

Million Hectares of Tropical Forest in 2018,” Ecosystem Marketplace, April

25, 2019, https://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/ articles/ world-lost-12-

million-hectares-tropical-forest-2018/.

49. Rhett A. Butler, “Beef Drives 80% of Amazon Deforestation,” Mongabay,

January 29, 2009, https://news.mongabay.com/ 2009/ 01/ beef-drives-80-of-

amazon-deforestation/; full report here: Greenpeace Amazon, “Amazon

Cattle Footprint, Mato Grosso: State of Destruction,” February 2010,

https://www.greenpeace.org/ usa/ wp-contentuploads/ legacy/ Global/ usa/

report/ 2010/ 2/amazon-cattle-footprint.pdf.

50. Herton Escobar, “Deforestation in the Amazon Is Shooting Up, but Brazil’s

President Calls the Data ‘a Lie,’ ” Science, July 28, 2019,

https://www.sciencemag.org/ news/ 2019/ 07/ deforestation-amazon-shooting-

brazil-s-president-calls-data-lie.

51. Yuna He, Xiaoguang Yang, Juan Xia, Liyun Zhao, and Yuexin Yang,

“Consumption of Meat and Dairy Products in China: A Review,”

Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 75, no. 3 (August 2016): 385–91,

https://doi.org/ 10.1017/ S0029665116000641.

52. David Tilman, Michael Clark, David R. Williams, et al., “Future Threats to

Biodiversity and Pathways to Their Prevention,” Nature 546, (June 1,

2017): 73–81, https://www.nature.com/ articles/ nature22900; Jonathan A.

Foley, Navin Ramankutty, Kate A. Brauman, et al., “Solutions for a

Cultivated Planet,” Nature 478 (October 12, 2011): 337–42,

https://www.nature.com/ articles/ nature10452.

53. EATForum, “The EAT-Lancet Commission on Food, Planet, Health,”

https://eatforum.org/ eat-lancet-commission/.

54. Jean-Francois Bastin, Yelena Finegold, Claude Garcia, et al., “The Global

Tree Restoration Potential,” Science 365, no. 6448 (July 5, 2019): 76–79,

https://science.sciencemag.org/ content/ 365/ 6448/ 76.

55. Ibid.

56. World Agroforestry, “New Look at Satellite Data Quantifies Scale of China’s

Afforestation Success,” press release, May 5, 2017,

https://www.worldagroforestry.org/ news/ new-look-satellite-data-quantifies-

scale-chinas-afforestation-success.

57. United Nations Environment Programme, “Ethiopia Plants over 350 Million

Trees in a Day, Setting New World Record,” August 2, 2019,

https://www.unenvironment.org/ news-and-stories/ story/ ethiopia-plants-

over-350-million-trees-day-setting-new-world-record.

58. Roland Ennos, “Can Trees Really Cool Our Cities Down?” The

Conversation, December 22, 2015, http://theconversation.com/ can-trees-

really-cool-our-cities-down-44099.

59. Amy Fleming, “The Importance of Urban Forests: Why Money Really Does

Grow on Trees,” Guardian (U.S. edition), October 12, 2016,

https://www.theguardian.com/ cities/ 2016/ oct/ 12/ importance-urban-forests-

money-grow-trees.

60. Humans’ meat consumption has varied throughout history but has

generally been much lower than at present. Prehistoric humans ate

occasional scavenged carrion, while ancient Greeks and Romans consumed

between 20 and 30 kilograms per person per year. In the Middle Ages,

European consumption stood at 40 kilograms per capita per year, and in

the post-plague Renaissance, at 110 kilograms. During the Industrial

Revolution the average dropped to only 14 kilograms per person per year.

See Tomorrow Today, “A History of Meat Consumption,” video, Deutsche

Welle, January 18, 2019, https://www.dw.com/ en/ a-history-of-meat-

consumption/ av-47130648. Post-industrialization and -refrigeration, meat

consumption has steadily increased: from 20 kilograms per person globally

in 1960 to 40 kilograms per person globally today. Consumption is highest

across high-income countries (with the greatest meat-eaters residing in

Australia, consuming around 116 kilograms per person in 2013). The

average European and North American consumes nearly 80 kilograms and

more than 110 kilograms, respectively. (Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser,

“Meat and Dairy Production,” Our World in Data, August 2017,

https://ourworldindata.org/ meat-and-seafood-production-consumption.)

61. Areeba Hasan, “Signal of Change: AT Kearney Expects Alternative

Meats to Make Up 60% Market in 2040,” Futures Centre, July 16, 2019,

https://www.thefuturescentre.org/ signals-of-change/ 224145/ kearney-

expects-alternative-meats-make-60-market-2040.

62. Paul Armstrong, “Greenpeace, Nestlé in Battle over Kit Kat Viral,” CNN,

March 20, 2010, http://edition.cnn.com/ 2010/ WORLD/ asiapcf/ 03/ 19/

indonesia.rainforests.orangutan.nestle/ index.html.

63. Greenpeace International, “Nestlé Promise Inadequate to Stop

Deforestation for Palm Oil,” press release, September 14, 2018,

https://www.greenpeace.org/ international/ press-release/ 18400/ nestle-

promise-inadequate-to-stop-deforestation-for-palm-oil/. For further analysis

of Nestlé’s predicament and its response, see Aileen Ionescu-Somers and

Albrecht Enders, “How Nestlé Dealt with a Social Media Campaign Against

It,” Financial Times, December 3, 2012, https://www.ft.com/ content/

90dbff8a-3aea-11e2-b3f0-00144feabdc0.

64. Two extremely useful articles on this subject are Jonathan Rowe and Judith

Silverstein, “The GDP Myth,” JonathanRowe.org, http://jonathanrowe.org/

the-gdp-myth, originally published in Washington Monthly, March 1, 1999;

and Stephen Letts, “The GDP Myth: The Planet’s Measure for Economic

Growth Is Deeply Flawed and Outdated,” ABC.net.au, June 2, 2018,

https://www.abc.net.au/ news/ 2018-06-02/ gdp-flawed-and-out-of-date-why-

still-use-it/ 9821402.

65. United Nations, “About the Sustainable Development Goals,”

https://www.un.org/ sustainabledevelopment/ sustainable-development-

goals/. These goals are: No Poverty; Zero Hunger; Good Health and Well-

being; Quality Education; Gender Equality; Clean Water and Sanitation;

Affordable and Clean Energy; Decent Work and Economic Growth;

Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure; Reduced Inequalities; Sustainable

Cities and Communities; Responsible Consumption and Production;

Climate Action; Life Below Water; Life on Land; Peace, Justice, and Strong

Institutions; Partnerships for the Goals.

66. Dieter Holger, “Norway’s Sovereign-Wealth Fund Boosts Renewable

Energy, Divests Fossil Fuels,” Wall Street Journal, June 12, 2019,

https://www.wsj.com/ articles/ norways-sovereign-wealth-fund-boosts-

renewable-energy-divests-fossil-fuels-11560357485.

67. 350.org, “350 Campaign Update: Divestment,” https://350.org/ 350-

campaign-update-divestment/.

68. Chris Mooney and Steven Mufson, “How Coal Titan Peabody, the World’s

Largest, Fell into Bankruptcy,” Washington Post, April 13, 2016,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/ news/ energy-environment/ wp/ 2016/ 04/

13/ coal-titan-peabody-energy-files-for-bankruptcy/.

69. 350.org, “Shell Annual Report Acknowledges Impact of Divestment

Campaign,” press release, June 22, 2018, https://350.org/ press-release/

shell-report-impact-of-divestment/.

70. Ceri Parker, “New Zealand Will Have a New ‘Well-being Budget,’ Says

Jacinda Ardern,” World Economic Forum, January 23, 2019,

https://www.weforum.org/ agenda/ 2019/ 01/ new-zealand-s-new-well-being-

budget-will-fix-broken-politics-says-jacinda-ardern/.

71. Enter Costa Rica, “Costa Rica Education,” https://www.entercostarica.com/

travel-guide/ about-costa-rica/ education.

72. World Bank, “Accounting Reveals That Costa Rica’s Forest Wealth Is

Greater Than Expected,” May 31, 2016, https://www.worldbank.org/ en/

news/ feature/ 2016/ 05/ 31/ accounting-reveals-that-costa-ricas-forest-wealth-

is-greater-than-expected.

73. See http://happyplanetindex.org/ countries/ costa-rica.

74. For a helpful introduction to AI, see Snips, “A 6-Minute Intro to AI,”

https://snips.ai/ content/ intro-to-ai/ #ai-metrics.

75. David Silver and Demis Hassabis, “AlphaGo Zero: Starting from Scratch,”

DeepMind, October 18, 2017, https://deepmind.com/ blog/ alphago-zero-

learning-scratch/.

76. DeepMind, https://deepmind.com/.

77. Rupert Neate, “Richest 1% Own Half the World’s Wealth, Study Finds,”

Guardian (U.S. edition), November 14, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/

inequality/ 2017/ nov/ 14/ worlds-richest-wealth-credit-suisse.

78. Amy Sterling, “Millions of Jobs Have Been Lost to Automation. Economists

Weigh In on What to Do About It,” Forbes, June 15, 2019,

https://www.forbes.com/ sites/ amysterling/ 2019/ 06/ 15/ automated-future/.

79. Trading Economics, “Brazil—Employment in Agriculture (% of Total

Employment),” https://tradingeconomics.com/ brazil/ employment-in-

agriculture-percent-of-total-employment-wb-data.html.

80. For more information, see Olivia Gagan, “Here’s How AI Fits into the

Future of Energy,” World Economic Forum, May 25, 2018,

https://www.weforum.org/ agenda/ 2018/ 05/ how-ai-can-help-meet-global-

energy-demand.

81. David Rolnick, Priya L. Donti, Lynn H. Kaack, et al., “Tackling Climate

Change with Machine Learning,” Arxiv, June 10, 2019, https://arxiv.org/ pdf/

1906.05433.pdf.

82. PricewaterhouseCoopers, “What Doctor? Why AI and Robotics Will Define

New Health,” April 11, 2017, https://www.pwc.com/ gx/ en/ industries/

healthcare/ publications/ ai-robotics-new-health/ ai-robotics-new-health.pdf.

83. Nicolas Miailhe, “AI & Global Governance: Why We Need an

Intergovernmental Panel for Artificial Intelligence,” United Nations

University Centre for Policy Research, December 10, 2018,

https://cpr.unu.edu/ ai-global-governance-why-we-need-an-

intergovernmental-panel-for-artificial-intelligence.html.

84. Tom Simonite, “Canada, France Plan Global Panel to Study the Effects of

AI,” Wired, December 6, 2018, https://www.wired.com/ story/ canada-france-

plan-global-panel-study-ai/.

85. Richard Evans and Jim Gao, “DeepMind AI Reduces Google Data Centre

Cooling Bill by 40%,” DeepMind, July 20, 2016, https://deepmind.com/ blog/

deepmind-ai-reduces-google-data-centre-cooling-bill-40/.

86. United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (UNDAW), “Equal

Participation of Women and Men in Decision-Making Processes, with

Particular Emphasis on Political Participation and Leadership,” report of

the Expert Group Meeting, October 24–25, 2005; Kathy Caprino, “How

Decision-Making Is Different Between Men and Women and Why It Matters

in Business,” Forbes, May 12, 2016, https://www.forbes.com/ sites/

kathycaprino/ 2016/ 05/ 12/ how-decision-making-is-different-between-men-

and-women-and-why-it-matters-in-business/; Virginia Tech, “Study Finds

Less Corruption in Countries Where More Women Are in Government,”

ScienceDaily, June 15, 2018, https://www.sciencedaily.com/ releases/ 2018/

06/ 180615094850.htm.

87. United Nations Climate Change News, “5 Reasons Why Climate Action

Needs Women,” United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change, April 2, 2019, https://unfccc.int/ news/ 5-reasons-why-climate-

action-needs-women; Emily Dreyfuss, “Here’s a Way to Fight Climate

Change: Empower Women,” Wired, December 3, 2018,

https://www.wired.com/ story/ heres-a-way-to-fight-climate-change-

empower-women/.

88. Thais Compoint, “10 Key Barriers for Gender Balance (Part 2 of 3),” Déclic

International, March 5, 2019, https://declicinternational.com/ key-barriers-

gender-balance-2/.

89. Anne Finucane and Anne Hidalgo, “Climate Change Is Everyone’s Problem.

Women Are Ready to Solve It,” Fortune, September 12, 2018,

https://fortune.com/ 2018/ 09/ 12/ climate-change-sustainability-women-

leaders/.

90. Project Drawdown.

91. Ibid.

92. Brand New Congress, https://brandnewcongress.org/.

93. Andrea González-Ramírez, “The Green New Deal Championed by

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Gains Momentum,” Refinery29, February 7,

2019, https://www.refinery29.com/ en-us/ 2018/ 12/ 219189/ alexandria-

ocasio-cortez-green-new-deal-climate-change; on female solidarity and the

recognition of U.S. female politicians for the suffragist movement: Sirena

Bergman, “State of the Union: How Congresswomen Used Their Outfits to

Make a Statement at Trump’s Big Address,” Independent, February 6,

2019, https://www.independent.co.uk/ life-style/ women/ trump-state-union-

women-ocasio-cortez-pelosi-suffragette-white-a8765371.html.

94. Natural Resources Defense Council, “Salt of the Earth, Courtesy of the

Sun,” January 30, 2019, https://www.nrdc.org/ stories/ salt-earth-courtesy-

sun.

95. Solar Sister, https://solarsister.org.

96. Laurie Goering, “Climate Pressures Threaten Political Stability—Security

Experts,” Reuters, June 24, 2015, https://uk.reuters.com/ article/

climatechange-security-politics/ climate-pressures-threaten-political-

stability-security-experts-idUKL8N0ZA2H220150624.

97. Laura McCamy, “Companies Donate Millions to Political Causes to Have a

Say in the Government—Here Are 10 That Have Given the Most in 2018,”

Business Insider France, October 13, 2018, http://www.businessinsider.fr/

us/ companies-are-influencing-politics-by-donating-millions-to-politicians-

2018-9.

98. Influence Map, “National Association of Manufacturers (NAM),”

https://influencemap.org/ influencer/ National-Association-of-Manufacturing-

NAM.

99. On the United States, for example, see Andy Stone, “Climate Change: A

Real Force in the 2020 Campaign?” Forbes, July 25, 2019,

https://www.forbes.com/ sites/ andystone/ 2019/ 07/ 25/ climate-change-a-real-

force-in-the-2020-campaign/.

100

. For more on Extinction Rebellion, see their website,

https://rebellion.earth/; Brian Doherty, Joost de Moor, and Graeme Hayes,

“The ‘New’ Climate Politics of Extinction Rebellion?” openDemocracy,

November 27, 2018, https://www.opendemocracy.net/ en/ new-climate-

politics-of-extinction-rebellion/.

101

. For more resources on civil disobedience, see “Civil Disobedience,”

ScienceDirect, https://www.sciencedirect.com/ topics/ computer-science/

civil-disobedience.

102

. Erica Chenoweth, “The ‘3.5% Rule’: How a Small Minority Can Change the

World,” Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, May 14, 2019,

https://carrcenter.hks.harvard.edu/ news/ 35-rule-how-small-minority-can-

change-world.

103

. Fridays for Future, https://www.fridaysforfuture.org/.

104

. Jonathan Watts, “ ‘Biggest Compliment Yet’: Greta Thunberg Welcomes Oil

Chief’s ‘Greatest Threat’ Label,” Guardian (U.S. edition), July 5, 2019,

https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/ 2019/ jul/ 05/ biggest-

compliment-yet-greta-thunberg-welcomes-oil-chiefs-greatest-threat-label.

CONCLUSION: A NEW STORY

1. More on Sputnik from NASA: National Aeronautics and Space

Administration, “Sputnik and the Dawn of the Space Age,” October 10,

2007, https://history.nasa.gov/ sputnik/.

2. An analysis of this speech, fifty years on, can be found here: Marina Koren,

“What John F. Kennedy’s Moon Speech Means 50 Years Later,” The

Atlantic, July 15, 2019, https://www.theatlantic.com/ science/ archive/ 2019/

07/ apollo-moon-landing-jfk-speech/ 593899/.

3. Space Center Houston, “Photo Gallery: Apollo-Era Flight Controllers,” July

2, 2019, https://spacecenter.org/ photo-gallery-apollo-era-flight-controllers/.

4. For an analysis of the “JFK and the janitor” incident and what it reveals

about inspiration and motivation, see Zach Mercurio, “What Every Leader

Should Know About Purpose,” Huffington Post, February 20, 2017,

https://www.huffpost.com/ entry/ what-every-leader-should-know-about-

purpose_b_58ab103fe4b026a89a7a2e31.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FURTHER READING

THE PROBLEM

Archer, David. The Long Thaw: How Humans Are Changing the Next 100,000

Years of Earth’s Climate. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Science Library, 2016.

Carson, Rachel. Silent Spring. New York: Mariner Books, 1962.

Evans, Alex. The Myth Gap: What Happens When Evidence and Arguments

Aren’t Enough. Bodelva, Cornwall, UK: Eden Project Books, 2017.

Ghosh, Amitav. The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017.

Goodell, Jeff. The Water Will Come: Rising Seas, Sinking Cities, and the

Remaking of the Civilized World. New York: Back Bay Books, 2018.

Hansen, James. Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth About the Coming

Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity. New York:

Bloomsbury, 2010.

Henson, Robert. The Rough Guide to Climate Change. London; Rough Guides,

2011.

Jamail, Dahr. The End of Ice: Bearing Witness and Finding Meaning in the Path

of Climate Disruption. New York: New Press, 2019.

Jamieson, Dale. Reason in a Dark Time: Why the Struggle Against Climate

Change Failed—And What It Means for Our Future. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2014.

Keeling, Charles. “The Concentration and Isotopic Abundances of Carbon

Dioxide in the Atmosphere.” Tellus 12, no. 2 (1960).

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/ epdf/ 10.1111/ j.2153-

3490.1960.tb01300.x.

Kolbert, Elizabeth. Field Notes from a Catastrophe: Man, Nature, and Climate

Change. New York: Bloomsbury, 2015.

Lancaster, John. The Wall: A Novel. New York: W. W. Norton, 2019.

Lynas, Mark. Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet. Boone, Iowa:

National Geographic, 2008.

Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P. R. Shukla, A.

Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J. B. R.

Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M. I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M.

Tignor, and T. Waterfield, eds. Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special

Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C Above Pre-Industrial

Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the

Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate

Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. In

press.

Moellendorf, Darrell. “Progress, Destruction, and the Anthropocene.” Social

Philosophy and Policy 34, no. 2 (2017): 66–88.

Wallace-Wells, David. The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming. New York:

Tim Duggan Books, 2019.

DESIGNING THE FUTURE: POLITICAL, SOCIAL, TECHNOLOGICAL, AND

CULTURAL CHANGE

Davey, Edward. Given Half a Chance: Ten Ways to Save the World. London:

Unbound, 2019.

Franklin, Daniel. Mega Tech: Technology in 2050. London: Economist Books,

2017.

Gold, Russell. Superpower: One Man’s Quest to Transform American Energy.

New York: Simon and Schuster, 2019.

Harvey, Hal. Designing Climate Solutions: A Policy Guide for Low-Carbon

Energy. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2018.

Hawken, Paul, ed. Drawdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed to

Reverse Global Warming. London: Penguin Books, 2017.

Latour, Bruno. Down to Earth: Politics in the New Climate Regime. Cambridge,

UK: Polity Press, 2018.

Leicester, Graham. Transformative Innovation: A Guide to Practice and Policy.

Charmouth, UK: Triarchy Press, 2016.

Lovelock, James. The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning. London:

Penguin, 2010.

McKibben, Bill. Falter: Has the Human Game Begun to Play Itself Out? New

York: Henry Holt, 2019.

O’Hara, Maureen, and Graham Leicester. Dancing at the Edge, Competence,

Culture and Organization in the 21st Century. Charmouth, UK: Triarchy

Press, 2012.

Robinson, Mary. Climate Justice: Hope, Resilience, and the Fight for a

Sustainable Future. London: Bloomsbury, 2018.

Sachs, Jeffrey D. The Age of Sustainable Development. New York: Columbia

University Press, 2015.

Sahtouris, Elisabet. Gaia: The Story of Earth and Us. Scotts Valley, Calif.:

CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2018.

Smith, Bren. Eat Like a Fish: My Adventures as a Fisherman Turned

Restorative Ocean Farmer. New York: Knopf, 2019.

Snyder, Timothy. On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century.

New York: Tim Duggan Books, 2017.

Wahl, Daniel Christian. Designing Regenerative Cultures. Charmouth, UK:

Triarchy Press, 2016.

Walsh, Bryan. End Times: A Brief Guide to the End of the World. London:

Hachette Books, 2019.

Wheatley, Margaret J. Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a

Chaotic World. Oakland, Calif.: Berrett-Koehler, 2006.

ECONOMICS

Assadourian, Erik. “The Rise and Fall of Consumer Cultures.” In Worldwatch

Institute, ed., State of the World 2010: Transforming Cultures from

Consumerism to Sustainability. New York: W. W. Norton, 2010.

Jackson, Tim. Prosperity Without Growth: Economics for a Finite Planet.

London: Routledge Earthscan, 2009.

Klein, Naomi. On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal. New York:

Simon and Schuster, 2019.

———. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. New York: Simon

and Schuster, 2015.

Lovins, L. Hunter, Stewart Wallis, Anders Wijkman, and John Fullerton. A Finer

Future: Creating an Economy in Service to Life. Philadelphia: New

Society, 2018.

Meadows, Donella H., Dennis L. Meadows, Jørgen Randers, and William W.

Behrens III. Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update. Chelsea, Vt.: Chelsea

Green, 2004.

Nordhaus, William. The Climate Casino: Risk, Uncertainty, and Economics for a

Warming World. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2015.

Raworth, Kate. Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century

Economist. New York: Random House, 2017.

Rowland, Deborah. Still Moving: How to Lead Mindful Change. New York:

Wiley Blackwell, 2017.

PERSONAL ACTION AND MOVEMENT BUILDING

Bateson, Gregory. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: Chandler, 1972.

Berners-Lee, Mike. There Is No Planet B: A Handbook for the Make or Break

Years. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2019.

Extinction Rebellion. This Is Not a Drill: An Extinction Rebellion Handbook.

London: Penguin, 2019.

Foer, Jonathan Safran. We Are the Weather: Saving the Planet Begins at

Breakfast. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2019.

Friedman, Thomas L. Thank You for Being Late: An Optimist’s Guide to

Thriving in the Age of Acceleration. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux,

2016.

Havel, Václav. Disturbing the Peace: A Conversation with Karel Huizdala. New

York: Vintage Books, 1991.

Louv, Richard. Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-

Deficit Disorder. New York: Algonquin, 2005.

Macy, Joanna, and Chris Johnstone. Active Hope: How to Face the Mess We’re

in Without Going Crazy. San Francisco: New World Library, 2012.

Mandela, Nelson. A Long Walk to Freedom. New York: Time Warner Books,

1995.

Martinez, Xiuhtezcatl. We Rise: The Earth Guardians Guide to Building a

Movement That Restores the Planet. New York: Rodale Books, 2018.

Plous, Scott. The Psychology of Judgment and Decision Making. Philadelphia:

Temple University Press, 1993.

Quinn, Robert E. Building the Bridge As You Walk on It: A Guide for Leading

Change. Greensboro, N.C.: Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Scranton, Roy. Learning to Die in the Anthropocene: Reflections on the End of

Civilization. San Francisco: City Lights, 2015.

Seligman, Martin E. P. Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your

Life. London: Vintage, 2006.

Sharpe, Bill. Three Horizons: The Patterning of Hope. Charmouth, UK:

Triarchy Press, 2013.

Solnit, Rebecca. Hope in the Dark: Untold Histories, Wild Possibilities.

Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2016.

Thunberg, Greta. No One Is Too Small to Make a Difference. London: Penguin,

2019.

Wheatley, Margaret J. Who Do We Choose to Be? Facing Reality, Claiming

Leadership, Restoring Sanity. Oakland, Calif.: Berrett-Koehler, 2017.

NATURE

Baker, Nick. ReWild: The Art of Returning to Nature. London: Aurum, 2017.

Brown, Gabe. Dirt to Soil: One Family’s Journey into Regenerative Agriculture.

London: Chelsea Green, 2018.

Eisenstein, Charles. Climate: A New Story. Berkeley, Calif.: North Atlantic

Books, 2018.

Glassley, William E. A Wilder Time: Notes from a Geologist at the Edge of the

Greenland Ice. New York: Bellevue Literary Press, 2018.

Kolbert, Elizabeth. The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History. London:

Picador, 2015.

Monbiot, George. Feral: Rewilding the Land, Sea and Human Life. London:

Penguin, 2015.

Oakes, Lauren E. In Search of the Canary Tree: The Story of a Scientist, a

Cypress, and a Changing World. New York: Basic Books, 2018.

Simard, Suzanne. Finding the Mother Tree. London: Penguin Random House,

2020.

Tree, Isabella. Wilding: The Return of Nature to a British Farm. London:

Picador, 2018.

Wohlleben, Peter. The Hidden Life of Trees: What They Feel, How They

Communicate—Discoveries from a Secret World. Vancouver, B.C.:

Greystone Books, 2016.

Wulf, Andrea. The Invention of Nature: Alexander von Humboldt’s New World.

New York: Vintage, 2015.

THE SCIENCE: USEFUL RESOURCES

Earth Observatory, NASA, https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

National Geographic, nationalgeographic.com

Nature: Climate Change, nature.com

Our World in Data, Ourworldindata.org

ScienceAlert.com

ScienceDirect.com

Smithsonian Magazine, smithsonianmag.com

Skeptical Science: Getting skeptical about global warming skepticism,

https://skepticalscience.com/

Water Scarcity Atlas, waterscarcityatlas.org

World Health Organization, who.int

Drawdown.org: https://www.drawdown.org/ references

W�at’s next on
your reading list?

Discover your next
great read!

Get personalized book picks and up-to-date news about this author.

Sign up now.

  • Title Page
  • Copyright
  • Dedication
  • Epigraph
  • Contents
  • Authors’ Note
  • Introduction: The Critical Decade
  • Part I: Two Worlds
    • 1. Choosing Our Future
    • 2. The World We Are Creating
    • 3. The World We Must Create
  • Part II: Three Mindsets
    • 4. Who We Choose to Be
    • 5. Stubborn Optimism
    • 6. Endless Abundance
    • 7. Radical Regeneration
  • Part III: Ten Actions
    • 8. Doing What Is Necessary
      • • Let Go of the Old World
      • • Face Your Grief but Hold a Vision of the Future
      • • Defend the Truth
      • • See Yourself as a Citizen—Not as a Consumer
      • • Move Beyond Fossil Fuels
      • • Reforest the Earth
      • • Invest in a Clean Economy
      • • Use Technology Responsibly
      • • Build Gender Equality
      • • Engage in Politics
  • Conclusion: A New Story
  • What You Can Do Now
  • Appendix
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • Bibliography and Further Reading

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code ESSAYSHELP