Other retailers as well as producers are catching on. In August, U.K. grocer Tesco became one of the first to display carbon footprint information for one of its most popular products (milk). The company plans to label up to 500 other items by the end of the year. Product makers such as PepsiCo are also leading the way. The company’s popular Walkers branded chips have had carbon footprint labels for the past two years. Max, a Swedish burger chain, displays emissions calculations on its menus.

While all these efforts are commendable, and perhaps indicative of emerging consumer demands for more information, none are widespread or accurate enough to make a significant impact. Part of the problem is that the market for consumer information still lacks standards. For instance there is no single way to calculate a product’s carbon footprint or a set definition for “organic”. The practical measurement issues are also significant. With global supply chains, similar products may be produced in two different parts of the world and have widely different impacts on society and the environment.

Flexible, real time systems based on common standards are needed to truly revolutionize the way people make purchasing decisions. The tools already exist – sensors, RFID, supply chain management software and new analytics tools allow us to collect and analyze vast amounts of data about products including materials, components, sourcing and transportation. The information can be used to calculate the environmental impacts through life cycle assessment. Accounting and reporting standards are being developed by organizations such as The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative to provide a common set of frameworks and practices.

We are still a few years away from having all relevant information about our purchases at our fingertips. After all, even retailers and producers don’t have that single view yet. However, with ongoing initiatives at multiple levels, things seem to be moving in the right direction.

One such enterprise, called Zerofootprint, operates in three broad areas – enterprise carbon management software, development of carbon offsetting project and community engagement around climate change. The last part of the business is a not-for-profit venture that leverages the software and carbon offset units to run projects such as a green building innovation competition or an initiative to use carbon calculators to engage citizens. In practice, the various parts of the organization seamlessly work together to achieve the company’s goals, although technically the not-for-profit arm needs to be kept separate as social enterprises do not yet have legal status.

Another social enterprise, called Virgance, strives to change the world through activism campaigns all the while making a profit. The company uses its social media infrastructure to organize projects that make a positive social or environmental impact. Outside of Carrotmob, an initiative to use the power of consumers to influence businesses, Virgance runs a series of community based group purchasing programs to drive down the cost of solar panels. Other projects include Go Media, a network of green blogs, and the newest called Lend which organizes contests around social entrepreneurship. According to the founders the key in reconciling the for-profit motive with the activist goals is “full and total transparency.”

Other examples of social enterprises include Fairtrade drinks company Cafedirect, office equipment recycler Green-works and a U.K. based magazine called The Big Issue. One could argue that any company that is performing a service or creating a product that is broadly accepted to be good for society can be called a social enterprise. This definition could include any organization from a recycling company to a for-profit hospital network. On the other hand purists would argue that a for-profit motive is inherently incompatible with social good as the financial imperative will always come first. The debate is likely to continue for some time, but the emergence of organizations that are applying the management practices of for-profit companies to businesses with a positive social or environmental impact is certainly a good one.

Online tools are allowing aspiring growers to share tips, find help and even locate available land. People in the U.K., where allotment gardens have existed since WWII, are leading the way. An online community called “Landshare” lets users sign up as landowners, growers or helpers and connects them to others in their geographical area. To make things easy users can search using maps, by postal code or through a listing service. “People are keen on the sense of community” says Jane Lucy – Landshare’s producer. “If they have problems with pests or disease or want to share their results they have other interested people to talk to.”

People get involved for a variety of reasons – food security, environmental or even financial. With Landshare, over 40 000 people signed up in just over 4 months. Crucially landowners are embracing the concept with individuals as well as schools, companies, property developers, farmers and even the Church of England providing land.

Similar initiatives are being launched in North America. Hyperlocavore is an emerging community that is facilitating yard sharing, seed sharing and even produce exchanges across the continent. Smaller, community based sites in Toronto, Portland, Los Angeles and many other cities are creating their own platforms.

The land and yard sharing agreements typically don’t include financial exchanges. The growers simply share a part of their harvest in exchange for the land. Although, the abundance of produce in some areas is spurring the creation of secondary markets where items are not only traded but also bought and sold. In fact another community, called Veggie Trader, is facilitating these transactions through their online market.

While the rapid growth in urban gardening and community based agriculture is a promising trend it is unlikely to replace commercial farming anytime soon. It is also unlikely that people will be willing to give up the luxury of having all types of produce year round. However the local food movement, whether led by urban growers or proponents of the 100-mile diet, is playing an important educational role by teaching people about food and its impact on the environment. And should transportation costs ever increase, whether due to high oil prices or taxes, communities that have embraced the local diet will find themselves in a better position to cope.

• Changes in consumer behavior: the recession has made many consumers realize that they need to live within their means. Rising concern over the environment is also shifting consumption patterns.
• The introduction of a price on carbon: whether through a cap-and-trade system, taxation or other means it is almost inevitable that carbon will soon have a price changing the basic cost structures in almost all industries
• New regulatory pressures: whether imposed by the governments or by citizens many industries are exposed to increased scrutiny

Facing this uncertain environment companies are responding in many ways.

There are immense opportunities as we move to the low-carbon economy and some are investing heavily in building the infrastructure of tomorrow. Major players like GE, IBM and Cisco are developing and deploying new wind and solar technologies, creating smart grids and building energy friendly, networked appliances for the home. A host of startups are competing to give people the tools to measure and manage their resource usage – including energy, water and natural gas. Stimulus funding by world governments is fueling the growth.

Most companies are also making efforts to improve the efficiency of their own operations. Leaders such as Nokia are coming up with best practices and guidelines for their operations which are then implemented across the company and the supply chain. Eco-friendly product innovations are also shared across the board.

Despite overall progress some are still struggling to figure out how to deal with the green consumer. Industries, such as power generation, will have to undergo fundamental changes to better align with the 21st century. Companies that are merely “greenwashing” their products and services will soon need to contend with the better informed consumer. Those that don’t change risk obsolescence in the new economy.

Fundamentally the picture is optimistic. Businesses and corporations are here to serve their customers and as citizens become more educated and aware of looming environmental issues the private sector will need to follow.

Today Livable Streets is a loose collection of around 300 influential bloggers, community activists and those with interest in urban planning. That network in turn reaches out and influences many of the 100 000 or so people who, by Aaron’s estimate, are interested in transportation issues in general. There are local communities in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles and a new one on Capitol Hill.

The overall Livable Streets community is very collaborative, exchanging ideas and best practices on a daily basis. The community also rallies around bigger causes such as the recent $43 billion transportation component of the stimulus bill. Originally the majority of the money was earmarked for roads and highways leaving out public transport and other urban environment friendly investments. The community began to work on a campaign to influence the lawmakers and counteract the large highway lobby that was supporting the original bill. The community’s efforts, in collaboration with other advocacy groups, resulted in major adjustments to the bill.

The networked approach seems to be a very effective way to bring global expertise to support disparate local initiatives. While Livable Streets may be a relatively new effort the approach the organization takes should be a model for others.

We used a Cisco TelePresence system which is basically a conference room with a wall of screens so that you can see who you are meeting with. The ultra fast internet connection ensures that the video is clear and that there are no latency issues. The effect is impressive as you are able to conduct a normal conversation (including eye contact and body language) with people sitting half way around the world.

Following the meeting Ian and I talked about how systems such as Cisco’s TelePresence could boost productivity by making at least some business travel unnecessary. With my interest in sustainability I also started to think about the impact of collaboration technologies such as telepresence on the environment – in particular the possibility of cutting down on emissions generated by cars and planes.

In fact this impact has already been calculated by a team from WWF which developed an interactive tool to illustrate the potential. The team calculated the CO2 savings from the use of IT collaboration tools instead of air travel or commuting. The numbers are significant – in North America alone the impact of replacing some business travel could yield up to 2 Mt in CO2 reductions (equivalent of taking over 800 000 off the roads). The savings jump to 13 Mt (5.5 million cars) if employees are allowed to work from home instead of commuting. The numbers speak for themselves – collaboration tools such as telepresence can have a significant positive impact both in terms of work efficiency as well as environmental sustainability. The hope is that adoption of these technologies is rapid enough to make a difference in the near future.

View full size.

• Collaboration with citizens to change behavior or inform policy through an efficient flow of information. This can range from information on municipal recycling programs to citizen reporting of industrial pollution.

• Building platforms to integrate not for profit organizations with government provided services and initiatives. For example a government grant to clean up a ravine could galvanize local conservation organizations to help.

• Building of markets or platforms to spur innovation or adoption of greener alternatives in the private sector. This can be done through tax breaks such as ones encouraging home retrofitting or through spending on programs such as feed in tariffs.

• Collaboration with government employees to green the public sector by harnessing their knowledge and sharing best practices. For instance a waste reduction innovation in one department should be instantly applied across the entire government and beyond.

• Collaboration with other governments around policy. This includes sharing knowledge and experience on the effectiveness of various programs.

Several gadgets are already competing to provide this energy usage information. Devices such as TED, Cent-a-meter and Onzo clip onto the electrical wires coming into the house to measure the amount of current going through. The information is then transmitted to a display inside the home. A slightly more advanced system, called greenbox, puts the information online making it accessible through a dashboard or via text message or email. The system also allows users to compare their usage with that of their neighbors or others on the network.

Kill-A-Watt is a device that takes a different approach by measuring current going through an individual power plug. The more granular information allows users to see the energy usage of a single appliance like a fridge or dishwasher. The device can even be modified to transmit the data to Twitter.

Although the technology still has a ways to go the benefits of more granular information are clear. Smarter devices will allow customers to make better energy choices. The aggregate data can also be used by utilities to better manage their networks. The next few years will be critical as investments in the information infrastructure made now may help countries reach the ambitious emissions reduction targets that are necessary to limit the impacts of climate change.

Some early examples exist. One of the better known initiatives is called “Help a London Park – You Vote, We Makeover”. The idea was to give citizens of London a voice in deciding which parks would receive upgrades. A green twist on a budget consultation process. The site is very simple to use and allowed citizens to vote on their top choice. The process helped city officials select 10 parks that will receive up to £ 400 000 in improvement grants. Although not perfect the initiative illustrates a way governments can reach out to their citizens to inform their decision making. Similar 2.0 consultation processes have sprung up, mostly around budgeting, in Germany, Canada and Brazil. We would be very interested in hearing about any other initiatives that our readers might have heard of that focus on environmental issues.

Incredible Edible Todmorden was started by two women who decided that more local food should be grown and eaten in their town. The two have rallied the community to help them achieve this goal – a reminder that collaboration needs effective leadership. The town council was persuaded to donate public land. As has the old age home, railroad station, local school and a number of individual landowners. Hundreds of volunteers have been mobilized to help with the creation of gardens and orchards. Local businesses are contributing resources as well. The initiative is supported by a community website complete with RSS enabled news bulletins, blogs and maps. All in all, the initiative is an effective example of grassroots collaboration.

The story is even more interesting due to the speed in which it has spread. The initiative was started less than a year ago and picked up by a local newspaper. This quickly generated a story in the regional newspaper and ended up on the radar of the nationwide U.K. media. The BBC is in Todmorden this week shooting a documentary. Blogs like TreeHugger also picked up the story and quickly publicized it to millions of readers. The result is a number of similar initiatives that have been, or are being, launched across the world. One of the most advanced is in the nearby city of Huddersfield.

Although the local food growing movement is unlikely to solve the climate crisis, it may prove to be one of the puzzle pieces that will help society tackle this complex problem. Most importantly, it seems to be a cause that galvanizes certain communities into action. The combination of leadership and collaboration exhibited by Incredible Edible Todmorden provides a model while the various media forms have allowed for that model to be publicized and replicated across the world. It is likely that other successful grassroots initiatives will go through a similar process, and when added up, will amount to a significant reduction in our environmental impact.

The thinking behind the initiative is that investors (along with consumers) have the authority to persuade corporations to pay attention to the issue. Once the information is collected it is freely available to the public. Paul mentioned that the data is already used by investors and actuaries to analyze risk as well as by other companies to create emission-lowering solutions.

CDP is one of a number of organizations that are building the information infrastructure necessary for us to better manage our carbon footprints (or environmental impact in general). For instance the information that the CDP is collecting would be a powerful tool in the hands of the well informed consumer. Connecting CDP data with customer facing initiatives such as ClimateCounts or GoodGuide gives consumers the ability to make a more informed choice. Individuals and other organizations could also play a major role in interpreting the data as well as indentifying trends and even solutions that would help corporations become more environmentally friendly. All in all, the important ground work is being laid by organizations such as CDP. We would be interested to learn from our readers about any other initiatives that use such data to change behavior, shape policy or educate.

A number of sites have sprung up to help match drivers with riders. One of the more interesting initiatives has been organized by the Government of Massachusetts. Called MassRIDES the site has a database of 15 000 profiles complete with information on each person’s commute which are used to match people going in the same direction. A host of startups are also exploring the space of “social commuting” by developing communities around ride sharing. Some, such as GoLoco or Zimride rely on the social graph to create groups of friends who carpool. Others such as PickupPal or Carticipate, use geopositioning – either mobile or computer based – to match people. In large cities, services such as Zipcar and Connect by Hertz are establishing car sharing networks using company-owned fleets of cars.

The obvious benefits are motivating many people to join these networks, with the Net Generation leading the way. (As they are less likely to own a car and more likely to be comfortable with the social networking aspect of the various services) Although major investments in public transport are now being planned in many Western countries, it is unlikely that we will be rid of cars anytime soon. Till then making better use of what’s already on the road by using IT enabled mass collaboration seem like a good way to save costs while being friendlier to the planet.

Although the organization has only rated a handful of large companies the model of easy to use rankings looks very promising. ClimateCounts.org could improve the service by developing tools for consumers themselves to help rate businesses on their environmental performance. The organization could also make comparisons easier by pushing the data to sites which are used to make actual purchases or purchasing decisions. (Especially on mobile devices).

Overall the development of tools such as ClimateCoutns.org, GoodGuide and Knowmore.org as well as social responsibility data on sites like Amazon and eBay will help everyone become more conscientious shoppers. And through that put pressure on companies with irresponsible business practices.

• Easy to understand 10-point based rating for the health, environmental and social performance of the product
• Aggregate 10-point product rating based on 600 criteria derived from 71 product facts
• Scientific approach to calculating scores using information from government, not-for-profit and private databases
• Comparison ratings in various product categories
• Ability for users to add their own ratings and reviews with links to reviews by Amazon
• iPhone application for mobile browsing
• Tips on reducing environmental impact
• Intuitive interface which greatly speeds up browsing

The company is also working on a feature to let users setup filters based on their own criteria.
Given the number of competing consumer review sites GoodGuide is facing an uphill battle to attract users. (Only about 30 000 people in the U.S. visit the site monthly) However, the concept has a lot of merit. Most of the other sites pay lip service or completely ignore a product’s impact on society and the environment. Ultimately GoodGuide may be incorporated into one of the bigger sites that already has critical mass. Either way the service provides yet another tool that empowers the emerging green minded consumer.

However, the discussions around growth seem misguided in a new world where virtually all resources are scarce. Due to the banking crisis, the flow of capital has slowed to a trickle. Even after banks are reorganized, it seems that leverage will be used more sparingly, raising the cost of capital for all. Human capital, despite the recent layoffs, is also expected to become scarce as the boomers retire, albeit a few years later than they were planning. All forms of natural resources, including water, timber, oil and minerals will be in short supply, especially as emerging market consumers look for ways to bring up their standards of living.

The reality of scarcity implies that economies will need to fundamentally rethink how they judge progress. It seems that efficiency will be the new mantra. How much more can you get out of what you have? This goes for financial capital, human capital as well as natural resources. While the amount of resources used stays constant (or shrinks) people will need to think of more efficient ways of exploiting them to lift their living standards. The interesting question for us is how the principles of Wikinomics can be applied to help organizations deal with scarcity.

Companies will need to shed legacy business models in order to more effectively use their human and financial capital. The practice of laying off workers in bad times and fighting for talent in good times may be suitable to monolithic and hierarchical organizations, but not the modern 21st century enterprise. Organizations need to become more fluid, agile and transparent to enable more foresight and flexibility in their operations. A focus on collaborative innovation, especially when there is slack in the organization during downturns, leads to gains when the economy picks up.

All in all, the current crisis presents an enormous opportunity to move away from exalting aggregate consumption to embracing responsible management of resources. This requires a major mind-shift, however, the burning platform is certainly there. It seems that along with Obama’s Era of Responsibility the Age of Efficiency is here. The limits of unbridled consumption are now obvious – growth will need to come from doing more with less.

One of the best ways to do this is by enabling people to collaborate remotely. Much of the technology is already available – Blackberries, laptops, teleconference and telepresence systems allow for work to be done virtually anywhere. Similarly, Web 2.0 tools can help remote teams stay in touch and collaborate. The savings from a more distributed workforce strategy can be great, both in terms of financial and environmental impact.

One of the leaders in this area is Sun Microsystems, where half of the company’s employees work remotely at least some of the time. The company’s Open Work Platform has allowed it to reduce office space by a sixth while increasing worker productivity by a third. The move has also been good for the environment, preventing 29 000 tons of CO2 from being released into the atmosphere by employees driving to work.

Most companies still do not have the capability to effectively collaborate remotely, but many are experimenting with more flexible approaches to work. As cash strapped businesses look for ways to lower costs by cutting back on travel and offloading physical infrastructure the environmentally friendly virtual workplace might become a perfect option.

There is speculation that companies in countries like India and China will take the lead in terms of green innovation. Early examples support this notion. A project by the Center for Scientific and Industrial Research, an Indian organization, has resulted in a solar powered rickshaw with a top speed of 15 km an hour and a range of 50-70 km. The rickshaw runs on a 36-volt battery that can be replaced at a local solar-power charging station. The vehicle is now being tested in Delhi with the aim of replacing some of the city’s 500 000 rickshaws. If successful, the soleckshaw as it is called, will provide a clean and relatively speedy option for moving around Delhi’s crowded streets.

Another innovation in China produced an inexpensive solar powered car. The vehicle has a sticker price of just over $5000 with a range of up to 150 km. The tiny Chery QQ clone has been fitted with roof mounted solar panels that absorb 95% of the solar energy coming in. Although far from luxurious, the vehicle may be attractive to China’s rising middle class. It will be interesting to see if emerging economy companies and public sector institutions manage to leapfrog developed countries in both green technologies and their market applications. We would be interested to learn of any other green innovations from outside of the developed world that our readers might have come across.

The plan revolves around installing smart metering technology to monitor energy consumption in power hungry systems such as heating/cooling and lights. The meters are connected to the internet allowing for remote monitoring and management. The data collected by the meters can be analyzed to identify areas for improvement and to benchmark against other buildings.

The potential for the use of information technologies to manage and reduce energy consumption is enormous. As more devices, such as electronics, appliances and even cars are connected to the internet, the granular information collected on their energy consumption can be used to identify inefficiencies. Online tools and dashboards will help people and businesses manage their usage. Eventually online energy markets will also allow customers to select their source of power from particular providers. The way is being led by companies such as HSBC to see how this can be done in practice.

The San Francisco Solar Map is an excellent example of how easy to use mash-ups can be help promote a cause. The aggregated information is a one-stop-shop for anyone interested or considering an alternative energy source such as solar. The ultimate goal would be to map all potential alternative energy sources, such as wind, solar and hydroelectric, and combine the data with existing projects that capture or harness these sources. This would allow people to identify the most cost effective way to reduce their reliance on the electricity grid in their area. Including things like federal and state level tax breaks would make the ROI calculation very easy. There is also potential for community collaboration around reaching a common goal – San Francisco’s plan is to install 10 000 solar roofs by 2012. A country-wide energy map would expose underutilized alternative energy resources and could become a platform for collaboration around and co-ordination of green projects.

The latest partnership involves Visa and RePay International, a company that helps manage carbon emissions of products. The initiative allows business customers to sign up for a carbon neutral card that will automatically calculate the carbon emissions and offset them with a green project. Similar initiatives run by Barclays, Co-operative Bank and Rabobank promote responsible purchases or try to neutralize the environmental damage of products.

With detailed information on a customer’s spending, financial institutions are in a unique position to evaluate an individual’s environmental impact. Knowing that someone has a mortgage for a 5000 sq.ft house, a loan to buy an SUV, spends $200 a month on utility bills and $500 on fuel will allow a rough estimate of their carbon footprint. Keeping privacy in mind, banks can and should use this information to help customers make more educated choices.

Companies that operate data centers are now thinking of clever ideas to save money on running (and cooling) these football field sized facilities. Solutions include locating the centers in cold climates, near hydroelectric or thermal energy or in abandoned mines with access to cold water. Google, one of the largest operators of data centers, with an estimated 1 million servers, has recently filed a patent for one of the most novel ideas. The internet company wants to locate data centers on floating barges a few kilometers from shore. The idea is to use the power of waves to generate electricity and the water to cool servers.

While the industry’s carbon footprint is quickly growing it is encouraging to see such innovative thinking. It would be interesting if the same companies that revolutionized the online world did the same to power management.

Price comparison sites such as NexTag, BizRate, Shopzilla and Yahoo! Shopping already help users find the best deals by comparing retailers. However, most of these sites only include prices from online sources as opposed to physical stores. Some physical retailers have begun to put their inventory and price information online, however, comparison between them is usually cumbersome. (Not to mention the frequent inaccuracies)

Other forays into the physical world include Craigslist and eBay mashups which place real-estate, used cars and other goods on a map. These services are excellent in helping people locate things, but do little to make the markets for similar goods more efficient. Japan is one of the countries ahead of the curve. A shopper can use their mobile phone to scan QR codes on items like books and compare them to online retailers such as Amazon.

Perhaps the best example of sharing useful information on physical goods is GasBuddy.com, a website that compiles gas prices in the U.S and Canada. Volunteers text or go online to enter prices for gasoline and diesel at fuel stations in their area. The work of thousands of volunteers creates a price map that can be accessed online or though a mobile phone. Although this is unlikely to equalize gas prices across the country, local differences are less likely to persist. The maps also give analysts and regulators a better picture of the differentials across the country.

As the internet, and increasingly mobile technologies, allow people to compile information on various goods and services, the pricing power will slowly shift from sellers to buyers. Buyers in a given area essentially begin to act as one. This shift could have a profound effect on the retail industry.

The interesting part is that the bill has spurred young people to turn to more traditional means of political activism. One young person wrote “Besides voting, I’ve never taken action politically, but I’ve now got a face-to-face meeting set up with Guy Lauzon, our MP for on the 24th. He’ll know first-hand that this bill, if passed, will cause him to lose votes.” The website “Copyright for Canadians” allows people to automatically email their local Member of Parliament with their concerns – 6500 have already done so. Some think that the issue has the potential to bring down the government.

The political activism in opposition to the bill is proof that the Net Generation is not as apathetic as certain critics seem to believe. The key is that this issue is at the core of the Net Generation’s lifestyle. Most realize that if the harsher aspects of the copyright bill were to be implemented any young person with an iPod or MP3s on their computer would become a criminal overnight. It seems that every generation enters the political stage for the first time by adopting an issue important to it. For instance, the Baby Boomers opposed the war in Vietnam during the time of the draft. Although digital rights are not nearly as significant as a war, it will be interesting to see if the issue will become the first that the Net Generation adopts as its own.

Recent revelations about ISP’s use of traffic shaping, that is controlling the bandwidth and sometimes the packets sent to certain users, has again brought this issue to the fore. Although I am a supporter of net neutrality, I see traffic shaping as a necessity as long as it is not abused. In fact, traffic shaping may allow net neutrality to persist as it gives ISPs a way to price discriminate between users.

Simple economics dictate that someone will have to pay for the network upgrades needed to support the rapid growth in bandwidth usage. In a net neutral world, the burden will be on customers, which brings market forces into play. Customers who want high bandwidth services such as streaming video or file sharing can elect to pay more for the guarantee that their packets get delivered. Customers with lower bandwidth needs should be charged less. Traffic shaping should be used in order to guarantee the level of service that the customer pays for.

The controversy over traffic shaping has stemmed from its misuse by some ISPs. It is alleged that some used traffic shaping technology to detect the actual contents of streams of data and even slow down some “undesirable” packets such as those coming through P2P sites. This practice has significant privacy implications and should not be allowed. Using shaping technology to allow customers to select the level of service they want while allowing the bandwidth to be used for whatever the customer chooses will lead to continued innovation in content and services while ensuring that networks can keep up with demand.

The OECD numbers, however, show that this linear relationship does not exist. For instance, an average South Korean works almost 1000 hours per year longer than the average Norwegian, while enjoying half the GDP per person. Both countries rank in the top in terms of their use of advanced technologies – Korea might even have a slight edge in terms of internet and mobile adoption. Granted, there are many other factors at play including natural resource wealth, distortions such as wars, workforce participation rates and cultural norms. However, the differences are significant even between seemingly similar countries such as Germany and Italy.

The rough consensus among economists is that in the long term, productivity is key; that is how efficiently a country puts together its labor and capital. The OECD numbers seem to support that view, however, it is surprising that the differences can be that great. One thing is for sure – it seems that the Norwegians and the Dutch have it figured out.