The Guardian: ‘Not anti-beef but pro-planet’: recipe website reveals it secretly took cows off the menu.
Interesting update here from a food/recipe website. (Full disclosure – I am not specifically familiar with this food website, and have not specifically tracked their work in the past, although it appears to have a fairly extensive catalogue of recipes, and a significant user base.) They stopped adding/promoting recipes that contain beef – although some older recipes will remain visible for the time being.
The food website Epicurious will no longer feature beef in its recipes, in an effort to help drive more sustainable consumption.
The decision to cut cows from the menu was announced on Monday, but the organisation is confident readers will not miss the meat – because it actually made the change a year ago and has not published a beef recipe since.
……..
“We know that some people might assume that this decision signals some sort of vendetta against cows – or the people who eat them. But this decision was not made because we hate hamburgers (we don’t!). Instead, our shift is solely about sustainability, about not giving airtime to one of the world’s worst climate offenders. We think of this decision as not anti-beef but rather pro-planet.” (Bold mine).
One of the interesting pieces with this change is that it was made a year ago, without an announcement, and they have been watching the results, which have been positive over this test period. Their conclusion: people want great recipes – regardless of whether they have red meat in them or not. Not sure if they are planning on testing this theory further, but I would guess (and would love to see the data) on what would happen if they continue to shift their focus toward vegetarian and vegan recipes – which appears to perhaps be in their future.Some hints on their website appear to suggest that dairy may be the next to get cut, but that is only speculation, at this point.
If their followers simply love great recipes, what might they (and countless other recipe websites) offer if they switched – either further or completely – to plant-based recipes?
The ways we do things, within and outside of the non-profit world, is constantly evolving. COVID, along with many other challenges, are forcing a reckoning on what our “new normal” will look like. In my opinion, one of our biggest shortfalls, in the NGO world, is the frequency with which organizations compete for donors/funds/projects – or start a new org instead of supporting an existing organization – when supporting/collaborating would be a much more appropriate choice.
We work in this field because we desire a better, fairer, more equitable world – but sometimes forget to make sure that our actual work methods follow the same high standards we set for our external projects. If we are working on a peacebuilding project, why can’t we make peace with another NGO and collaborate instead of competing?
Although based on the US (and written for the American context), Non-Profit Impact Pledge is one step in the right direction, and is just as applicable globally as within the US. The commitments have two parts: From NGOs and from Funders and Donors. Both are important, in their own way, to helping reshape the sector as a whole, and to creating more positive change in the world — which is so critically needed.
To our communities and all those who benefit from the work of nonprofits…,
Our country is at a turning point, and so is the nonprofit sector. The disparate economic and social fallout from COVID-19 and the widespread reckoning with racial justice have put a spotlight on many long-standing problems with philanthropy and with the way nonprofits work. We cannot avoid these problems any longer, nor do we wish for things to return “to normal.” Our old way of existence, and many of our sector’s past practices for collaborating with funders, donors and our communities (while often well-intentioned), are broken. Instead, we wish to create a new future for the nonprofit sector, for the good of all.
As our country starts down the long road toward recovery from a tumultuous 2020, demand for our services continues to grow, resources continue to shrink, and outmoded systems and ways of thinking seem determined to keep our impact small. It has never been more challenging to run and sustain an effective nonprofit organization, but it has also never been more important, and we will rise up in the face of these challenges.
That is why we take this pledge and double down on these 10 commitments to you, the people and communities we work with. We also ask our donors, funders and those who support the sector to make a similar set of commitments to us.
Together, we can create a better future for our sector, for the good of all.
Among the 10 commitments in the pledge, all are important in their own way, and all contribute to better organizations, which are better able to make positive contributions, both locally and globally. Here is one example.
Commitment 1 We will collaborate, not compete. We recognize that we can do more good for our communities together than we can do alone. We will focus our efforts on making a specific contribution that only our organization can make, and when we encounter other organizations doing similar work, we commit to closely collaborating, partnering or merging with them rather than competing in an effort to maximize our collective impact. (Bold mine).
And, I would add – we commit to supporting others before staring a new NGO that is likely to compete with others, when supporting or joining is a more appropriate and sustainable choice for the sector as a whole.
Want to add your name to the pledge? Follow the link to sign up – and add your name, with others, to commit to a better NGO sector.
News@UofT: Is a calorie always a calorie? Not when it comes to almonds, U of T researchers find.
Looking for more great reasons to eat nuts? In addition to the lower emissions from a plant-based foods (more details on the website) compared to animal-based foods, here’s some more research, from the University of Toronto, looking specifically at the health benefits of almonds.
Researchers at the University of Toronto have found that a calorie labelled is not the same as a calorie digested and absorbed when the food source is almonds.
The findings, published in the journal Mayo Clinic Proceedings, should help alleviate concerns that almonds contribute to weight gain, which persist despite the widely recognized benefits of nuts as a plant-based source of protein, vitamins and minerals.
…………
The researchers found that after digestion, about 20 per cent of calories derived largely from fat in almonds remained unabsorbed, which they observed in stool samples. That translated to about two per cent less energy absorbed from the diet overall among study participants. (Bold mine).
A person eating the same amount of almonds in a daily diet of 2,000 to 3,000 calories would absorb 40 to 60 calories less than would be predicted by Atwater factors, on which many food labels are based.
The research does not specifically identify other nuts, but it’s certainly plausible/logical to guess that some of the same benefits would apply to other nuts, as well. So, here’s yet another reason to eat lots of nuts! Happy snacking!
I recently came across this article (see link above, and it’s posted on the NGO section of my website, along with other resources) and wanted to share it here, as well. While much of it I agree with, I have a few small points of possible disagreement (although it may be a misinterpretation of wording, not content).
The real data from National Center on Charitable Statistics reveals that approximately 30% of nonprofits fail to exist after 10 years, and according to Forbes, over half of all nonprofits that are chartered are destined to fail or stall within a few years due to leadership issues and the lack of a strategic plan, among other things.
Within in the NGO world, there is a lot of great work being done. At the same time, the cycle above (new NGOs starting, failing, and opening up a spot for the next one to open and then fail) is a significant problem. In my experience, it’s a problem that is not being talked about enough, and I think we can change that. So, let’s talk. 🙂
Reason #1: Empty Optimism – or Pie in the Sky Dreams (without the proper ingredients to bake a pie) I’ve seen some of the best, most needed (in my view), and earnest efforts falter and fail because the leaders simply did not accurately calculate the amount of support that would be available and the alliances and partnerships that they would need to support their humble beginnings. In other words – they lacked a sound business plan upon which to build a platform for success. The old saying ‘to fail to plan is to plan to fail’ is so very, very true. (Bold mine).
Many of the reasons given are clear, and I have no disagreement. Lack of strategic plans, failure to develop a strong organizational leadership team (outside of the founding CEO) and others are clearly top of the list for why countless small NGOs fail to make it through the first few years, and the transition to a new CEO. I have some disagreement with point #6:
Misplacing Priority #1 – or forgetting who the ‘real boss’ is At the end of the day, for nonprofit organizations – Money is more important than Mission. Nonprofits exist to serve and to meet needs on a global scale, and we care deeply for the causes we embrace, often to the detriment of our funders. A successful nonprofit knows that their #1 Customer is their donors, period. Without the donors, there would be no impact, no people served, no mouths fed, no backs clothed. Those we serve are important, but if we really want to have an impact, we must take care of our donors first, we must make sure that our programs are designed to give our donors an opportunity to fulfill the goals they have for their philanthropy, and then constantly communicate to them the impact their dollars are having. And when it comes to taking care of donors, relationships, personal relationships are KING! No fancy CRM or automated gift response mechanism will ever trump a personal relationship.
I agree that NGOs need money to operate, and that NGOs need to be clear, open and transparent with donors about what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how the money is being spent. I do not agree, however, that as non-profits, we are here to serve the donors. Rather, the organization and the donors together are working together for greater good, and to serve the communities in which we work. We share a common goal, and are on the same time to reach our goals.
Here is the author’s summary, along with the items earlier in the article (Nanoe) of the primary reasons NGOs fail:
Not Having a Qualified Leader.
No Website Or Poorly Designed Website.
Poor Planning and Record Keeping
Poor Accounting and Money Management
Marketing Only to Large Donors and Not Thinking Smaller Donors are Just As Important
Nonprofit Doesn’t Mean Tax Exempt.
Ultimately, the real reason nonprofits fail is because they shouldn’t have existed in the first place. (Bold mine).
One that I would add (perhaps as a subset of leadership or money management) is the expectation that goods and services (rent, IT support, computers, staff time, experts/consultants, advertising, pro bono work etc etc) are somehow automatically “owed” to the org, by virtue of the fact that the org is trying to do something good or is a registered non-profit. Volunteer recruitment is important, but does not substitute for a budget to cover the basic costs of running an organization and paying for the goods, services and skills that you need to get the job done. If you don’t have the money (or a plan to get money) to pay for any of the basic items or staff that are required to run an organization, you don’t have a viable plan yet.
And, further to his first point(s), I would emphasize that failure to plan (essentially variations on “I have never run an NGO and have no idea how to do it. I have a different full-time job, no strategic plans, no website and no money, but I’m sure that if I just start, everyone will hand me money, computers, a building and their expertise for free and it will all work out, because I’m such a nice person and I have a nice goal…”) is one of the most common mistakes I’ve seen. Failure to plan also includes lack of plans for how to successfully hand over the project from the founding CEO, in a reasonable time frame. (Considering starting a new NGO? Start at the end with your planning: Do you have a viable plan to hand the org to a new CEO in 10-15 years?)
On a related note, failure to seriously support other existing orgs that are already working in the same space (before starting a new org), is one of the biggest failures that I have come across.
For those of you in the non-profit world, do you have anything to add? Any adjustments you would make to the list?
Hey everyone! I have a quick action item here for you, if you are interested. There appears to be some movement on getting a National Citizen’s Assembly on Electoral Reform. Passing this would be a significant step towards a better, more equitable voting system here in Canada. Thank you for your support!
Please share with others, in your circles, who might be interested in supporting this important step.
Thanks to the leadership of the NDP’s Democratic Reform Critic, MP Daniel Blaikie, a motion on a National Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform is about to be put to a vote at the Procedures and House Affairs (PROC) Committee!
To win this vote, we need six principled MPs to say YES to a courageous next step to strengthen Canada’s democracy.
Send a message to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the MPs on the PROC Committee urging them to support a National Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform!
NOTE: The discrepancies above do not account for the fact that, in a Proportional System, Green Party supporters, for example, would be more free to vote for their true first choice, as opposed to voting for a lower choice, in order to avoid an even less desirable choice. With full PR, therefore, the “how we vote” shares would be more diverse than it is now, and that greater diversity would be represented more accurately in “what we got.”
Click the link above, or go here to send an email to the PM and the committee.
