The Enbridge Northern Gateway Project is a proposal to construct twin pipeline between Bruderheim, Alberta and Kitimat, British Columbia.  The eastbound pipeline would import natural gas condensate to dilute crude oil produced from the Athabasca oil sands.  The westbound pipeline would then transport petroleum to the new marine terminal in Kitimat, BC where it would be transported to Asia by oil tankers.

Although Enbridge claims that the proposed pipelines would provide residents of northern BC and Alberta employment opportunity, skills development, procurement opportunities and contributions to the community and province through a secure tax base, the project has been highly contested by First Nations groups, environmentalists and oil sands opponents.

“The war is on,” said Nadleh Whut’en Chief Martin Louie after an Enbridge shareholder meeting.  “Enbridge and the government are going to go on fighting us. How far are they willing to go to kill off the human beings of this country?”

Environmental groups including GreenPeace have cited their opposition to the pipeline proposal.  Environmentalists argue that the transport of crude oil from Kitimat is risky.  In a YouTube video, environmental activists describe the narrow passageway off the coast of Kitimat that prove to be rough navigation for an oil tankard.  Should a spill occur, it would be especially hazardous due to the explosive properties of diluted bitumen and the concentration of toxins.

Whole Foods has established strong brand recognition as your local organic food foraging, pesticide and GM-food criticizing grocery store.  It’s sustainable values  attract a clear market segment of “foraging foodies” and “vivacious vegans” who are more than willing to pay premium for a bag of high quality granola.  But in an ironic twist, WholeFood’s CEO, John Mackey, is not your average “Green” CEO.  Despite having lived on a vegetable commune (oops, I mean co-op) and maintained a vegan lifestyle, he does not share the same liberal views as most sustainability advocates.  In fact, he doesn’t believe in climate change.

In an interview with ABC News, Mackey described climate change as “not a big deal.”  In fact, climate change is “perfectly natural and not necessarily bad.”

This blog post is not intended to lay waste to Mackey’s views; however, skeptical they may be.  The question is how will Mackey’s views conflict with the Whole Foods brand?  Mackey has already ticked off progressive grocery store go-ers, by comparing Obama-care to Fascism.  It’s his views on climate change, however, that conflict with the values of Whole Foods.  Surely, if Whole Foods values are centered on sourcing sustainable opportunities of growing and distributing food, it must hold some opposition towards climate change.  Perhaps it just goes to show that “hippie companies” aren’t really as liberal as you might think.

In an article by Forbes magazine, Prof. Edward E. Lawler made the not so surprising conclusion that organizational programs aimed at social responsibility do not produce long-term results.  Like programs that are focused on improving areas such as quality, costs, and customer service, these sustainability programs produce initial gains that soon dissipate.

Lawler concludes that organizations must make environmental and social performance a part of the way the corporation operates just as much as it does financial performance.  The “triple bottom line” approach has worked well for new start-ups whose sustainability goals are an integral part of their business model.  Consider ethicalDeal, an e-commerce “Group-on” of sorts whose promotion of sustainable products and services is a core component of its brand.

Recent surveys show, however, that most organizations “pre-sustainability” do not integrate social and environmental performance into the way the organization operates.  They are not always on the table when new projects and products are being considered. They are not part of the training programs of organizations.  They are, in fact, an add-on to effectively counteract public criticism.  According to the Green Marketing Strategy Matrix, most organizations would then be labeled “Defensive Green.”  Low in terms of differentiability of greenness, but high in terms of segmentation of green markets, these organizations will continue to be criticized and vilified for their poor social and environmental performance.