The most obvious way to tackle the problem of promoting mass involvement would be to legislate for dietary change.

​

Inevitably, this approach would find little sympathy from politicians with an eye upon reelection, or those benefitting from the attentions of the food lobby.

 

Although apparently crying out for governmental acknowledgement of the problem, the public would be unlikely to respond well to what could be perceived a ‘Big Brother’ imposition upon their freedom of choice.

 

But the corporate world can play a much greater part in requesting change, with considerable impunity.  Generally speaking, corporates are not perceived as having 'agendas' and are trusted by their employees to be acting in their best interests. Therefore, when they present non-work specific input for their people, it is less likely to be looked upon with suspicion and mistrust.

​

Workplace initiatives in forward thinking companies have already been successful in tackling sensitive issues such as racism, sexism, bullying and other commonplace societal evils. In fact, influencing employee thinking has become an accepted component of a benevolent employer’s role. And all issues related to sustainability are an increasingly essential ingredient of ESG requirements.

​

​​The objective of this initiative is simply to bring about change. The beneficiary is the world at large. Its delivery would be an act of altruism. So why would a company NOT want to be involved? 

 

If the world suffers as a result of climate change, it will be a more limited place in which to do business, so being active in promoting positive change is an act of self-help.

​

But moreover, the circumstances faced by the world are sufficiently dire that a proactive approach to instigating change is not only wholly justified, but wholly necessary.

​

There is simply not enough time to NOT bring the truth of global circumstances to the attention of as many as possible and have them own their part in averting disaster.

​

Reliance upon self-guided, passive education methodologies have prompted virtually no change in our circumstances. Active measures must be taken.

​

In this light, it would be a cowardly stance to shrink from taking action when something needs to be done.

​

And for those who asre still unable to image them, there are, of course, benefits that accrue to the business as a result of proactivity.