New York, United States, Nov. 01, 2023 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The Global Medical Packaging Films Market Size ... Furthermore, rising environmental concerns about the environmental impact of plastics used in medical packaging have prompted manufacturers ...

Global Medical Packaging Films Market Size to Worth USD 12.3 Billion by 2032 | CAGR of 5.5%

It is designed specifically to help policymakers and organizations that want to create more effective laws on plastics.  The information in the database is separated into nine specific areas: design and reuse;

Environmental groups launch global plastic laws database

A new report from Beyond Plastics and IPEN, two groups that have been critical of the plastics industry, calls chemical recycling "more of a marketing and lobbying tactic."

Beyond Plastics report says chemical recycling not viable solution

The Pharmaceutical Secondary Packaging Industry is expected to be worth US$ 41,950 million in 2023, rising to US$ 72,010 million by 2032. Revenue from pharmaceutical secondary packaging sales is predicted to grow at a CAGR of 6.

Pharmaceutical Secondary Packaging Industry Growth Rising to US$ 72,010 Million by 2032: In Depth Market Analysis

The UK Refill Coalition has launched a pilot at Aldi UK in its Solihull store, featuring a reusable bulk vessel to deliver refills at scale.

UK Refill Coalition launches first in-store trial at Aldi

The Global Building and Construction Tapes Market size was valued at USD 4400 Million in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 7800 Million by 2030, growing at a CAGR of 7.30% from 2023 to 2030.

Adhesive Advancements: A Deep Dive Into The Building And Construction Tapes Market Themarketpublicist

The Alliance For Good in partnership with Nanyang Technological University NTU and the Asia Family Office Association announces the Business and Philanthropy Forum 2023 on November 9 and 10 in Singapo

2023 Business and Philanthropy Forum by Alliance For Good: Catalysing Next-Gen Leaders to Drive Change

The Plastic Films & Sheets Market is projected to grow from USD 140.0 billion in 2023 to USD 182.5 billion by 2028, at a CAGR of 5.4% from 2023 to 2028. as per the recent study by MarketsandMarkets™.

Plastic Films & Sheets Market worth $182.5 billion by 2028 Globally, at a CAGR of 5.4%, says MarketsandMarkets™

Berry Global, InfinyCup, and Stratus have teamed up to serve beverages in the reusable plastic SuperCup at the Rugby World Cup, aligning with France's ban on single-use plastic cups.

Berry Global and InfinyCup circulate reusable SuperCups at Rugby World Cup

Get the most recent info and news about Berry Global Group on HackerNoon, where 10k+ technologists publish stories for 4M+ monthly readers.

Berry Global Group, Inc. manufactures and supplies non-woven, flexible, and rigid products. Its Consumer Packaging International segment offers narrow neck blow molded and injection-stretch molded packaging solutions; injection molded and thermoformed pails, jars, and tubs; closures, dispensing systems, and applicators; inhalers and dose counters; polythene films; and molds and molded components, as well as recycles rigid and flexible end of life materials from industrial and consumer sources. Its Consumer Packaging North America segment provides containers for branded and private label customers; lightweight polypropylene cups and lids for hot and cold beverages; child-resistant, continuous-thread, and tamper closures, as well as aerosol overcaps; bottles and prescription vials; and extruded and laminate tubes. Its Engineered Materials segment offers engineered materials, including stretch and shrink films, and converter films; trash-can liners and food bags; cloth and foil, splicing and laminating, flame-retardant, flashing and seaming tapes, double-faced cloth, masking, mounting, OEM, and medical and specialty tapes; and food and consumer films, retail bags, and polyvinyl chloride films, and agriculture films. Its Health, Hygiene & Specialties segment provides medical garment materials, surgical drapes, household cleaning wipes, and face masks for infection prevention; components for baby diapers, adult incontinence, and other absorbent hygiene products, elastic films and laminates, and substrates for dryer sheets; and products and components of products for geosynthetics and filtration products. The company serves consumer and industrial end markets in North America, South America, Europe, the Middle East, India, Africa, and the Asia Pacific. The company was formerly known as Berry Plastics Group, Inc. and changed its name to Berry Global Group, Inc. in April 2017. Berry Global Group, Inc. was founded in 1967 and is headquartered in Evansville, Indiana.

Berry Global Group

237 Stories To Learn About Innovation

Lately, I have come across some hype over a new package manager called PNPM and I think it has a promising future. What is PNPM? PNPM is a drop-in replacement for npm. It is built on top of npm and is much faster and more efficient than its predecessor. It is highly disk efficient and solves inherent issues in npm. In this article, we will discuss pnpm in detail. We will explain how it works and explain why pnpm is a perfect replacement for npm or yarn. Why not NPM or YARN? uses flattened node_modules. The flattened dependency results in many issues, such as: NPM **The algorithm for flattening a dependency tree is complex.
\ Some of the packages have to be duplicated inside another project’s node_modules folder. **Modules have access to packages they do not depend on.
\ Let’s explain this with a basic example. One of your projects needs an express module, and express has a dependency package named “debug”. Your code can require(‘debug’), even if you do not depend on it explicitly in the package.json file. Let’s discuss two scenarios that can cause issues: Express updates its debug dependency with breaking changes. Express does not depend on debugging anymore. In both cases, your code will fail because it has an implicit dependency to debug. That is a big problem. Similarly, if you work with a large mono repo, then it will be much more difficult to track particular dependencies a project uses. Duplicate packages are another issue here. Now yarn is slightly better in terms of optimizing disk space as it makes use of hoisting, however, that approach fails in some cases. How does PNPM solve these problems? PNPM uses and to maintain a semistrict node_modules structure. So what’s the difference between a hard link and a ? hard links symlinks soft link Well, a hard link is a different reference to the same file. In soft link, you create a new file, and the contents of the file point to another path. Symlinks are symbolic links that pnpm uses to create a nested structure of dependencies. The pnpm version of the express and node modules The first thing you will notice is that your code cannot access the “ ” package because it is not directly under the root level node_modules directory. debug PNPM has created a particular folder named “.pnpm” that contains hard links to all the modules. When you download a dependency, pnpm first checks whether the dependency is present in this store or not. If it finds the dependency in the store, pnpm fetches it by creating a hard link. Because of this approach, pnpm re-uses the same packages if they are already installed for another project. This brings us to the many benefits that pnpm provides. Let’s discuss some of those. Pnpm Performance and Disk Efficiency For NPM It is still a bit slower when compared to Yarn and PNPM. Yarn uses the same flattened node_modules directory but is comparable to NPM in speed and installs packages parallelly. On the other hand, PNPM is and more efficient than NPM. 3 times faster With both cold and hot cache, PNPM is faster than Yarn. PNPM simply links files from the global store, while yarn copies files from its cache. Package versions are never saved more than once on a disk. The algorithm of pnpm does not use a flattened dependency tree, which makes it easier to implement, and maintain, and requires less computation. Pnpm Security For NPM, there have been some security vulnerabilities that have directly affected many projects due to the way npm handles bad packages. For YARN, checksums are stored in yarn. Locks have been used by Yarn Classic and Yarn Berry ever since. Yarn also prevents you from installing malicious packages, if a mismatch is detected, the installation will be aborted. Similar to Yarn, PNPM also uses checksums and in addition to the use of checksums, pnpm also verifies the integrity of its code before executing it. Structure of the projects We all know that with npm install it takes the package-lock.json and generates the node_modules folder. Yarn creates yarn.lock file and a node_modules folder. PNPM doesn’t create a flattened dependency tree. In node_modules, everything had its own node_modules folder within package.json, and every dependency was precisely specified in package.json. Before npm version 3, the node_modules structure was predictable. The problem with this approach was twofold: Windows were frequently having trouble with long directory paths caused by packages with too deep dependency trees Packages were copied several times to satisfy multiple dependencies PNPM solved this issue without flattening the dependency tree. Each package’s dependencies were grouped in a node_modules folder and symlinks were used to group dependencies together, so the directory tree is flat. .
├── node_modules/
│ └── .pnpm/
├── .npmrc
├── package.json
└── pnpm-lock.yml A package.json file is created once you install the dependencies using pnpm, Also a node_modules folder is generated but the structure of it will differ completely from npm and yarn because of its content-addressable storage approach. Conclusion Pnpm has brought many improvements, built on top of existing npm features. pnpm has adopted all the good things of npm while removing its weaknesses, making pnpm the best of both worlds. npm install -g pnpm Sources PNPM bechmark JavaScript Package Managers: NPM Vs YARN Vs PNPM Why you should prefer using pnpm over npm and yarn? Also published here.

Choosing the Right Package Manager: NPM, Yarn, or PNPM?

190 Stories To Learn About Hardware

400+ Thought-Provoking Software Engineering Quotes

And here is how to make it a reality >> This article is for informational purposes only and is not financial advice. The information does not constitute investment advice or an offer to invest. What makes crypto so great? There are many possible answers to that question, but I think most of you would say ‘decentralization.’ Since the beginning, when Satoshi Nakamoto first published his groundbreaking Bitcoin whitepaper, decentralization, along with anonymity and security, have been cornerstones of the cryptocurrency value proposition. But sentiment may be changing. Many argue that, instead of helping crypto, decentralization is holding the sector back, relegating it to the fringes of finance and slowing mass adoption. Money talks. And when it comes to money, people like protection. We like rules, we like a process, and we want a neck to choke if things go wrong. So, is decentralization on its way out? I believe it is, partially. Is Decentralization Falling Out of Favor with Blockchain Startups? Berry Silbert, a crypto venture capitalist who founded The Digital Currency Group, addressed the issue of decentralization in a recent . interview with Forbes Silbert, who runs the Digital Currency Group (a VC and holding company), believes ICOs and other fundraising should be managed by a centralized authority. He suggests disintermediating the funding process, arguing that too many fundraisers back projects with no practical purpose in the real world. Silbert’s skepticism isn’t unfounded, and the numbers paint a bleak picture. According to , ICO fundraisers raised a whopping $6.3 billion in the first quarter of 2018 alone. These startups range from the revolutionary to the silly. They include projects like Golem, a network that aims to create a global market for idle computational power, alongside projects like TrumpCoin, a value token designed to support the American president by paying users to write weekly Facebook posts in his favor. data from Investopedia You may laugh now, but at its’ peak, TrumpCoin had a market cap of . That’s a “YUGE” amount of cash to put behind an obvious joke. $3.38 million The decentralized ICO system is great because it lets regular people from all over the world participate in a process that was previously reserved for large institutions. It also allows money to flow to projects that would otherwise never see the light of day. But as the cryptocurrency market matures, cracks are beginning to show in this process, calling its’ decentralized structure into question. Let’s look at the numbers. According to , there have been over 1,110 ICOs so far in 2018, and they have raised a little over $7.14 billion. This is a big jump from last year’s figure. But when we zoom in on the monthly data for 2018, a different picture emerges. Starting in January, when $1.52 billion was raised, the market has experienced a precipitous decline in the total funds raised through ICOs. In September only $163.88 million was raised, and in October, the figure is a paltry $54 million. ICOdata.com Is Centralized Funding the solution? The numbers paint a bleak picture for decentralized fundraising in its current form. But what does the data say about centralized raises, like venture capital? Let’s look at the numbers. In February, on venture capital funding in the crypto space using a proprietary dataset. The report analyzed blockchain and blockchain-adjacent startups in the sector using data from 2012 to February 2018. Crunchbase News published a report In 2017, 300 venture capital funded blockchain projects raised over $900 million while ICOs raised $6.21 billion in the same period. More recent data highlights a similar disparity. In January and February of 2018, around 60 raises generated approximately $400 million in capital. ICOs generated almost $2.8 billion in the same time frame. However, as we know, the ICO trend has slowed drastically in the latter half of 2018. To be fair, the trend changes (a lot!) when you start adding other, non blockchain related raises, which collected over $80 billion in 2017, and over $57 billion in the first half of 2018, according to . These amounts dwarf even the billions raised during the “ICO boom” of 2017 and early 2018. So centralization still rules the fundraising game, at least in the United States. Pitchbook Balancing the Tradeoffs Between Centralization and Decentralization Okay, so there is a clear negative tradeoff between decentralized raises and their centralized, venture capital driven counterparts. But love them or hate them, ICOs still generate a huge amount of money. They also create opportunities for a variety of unique startups that would have otherwise never had a chance to enter the market. And they are global. Centrally funded startups aren’t close to perfect either. These raises are exclusive (for “accredited investors” only) and do not allow the general public to participate in the raise, nor reap the rewards of a possible successful exit. This model is inherently flawed, it benefits only the top-tier VCs and creates classes of people who are treated differently, while perpetuating “the rich are getting richer” paradigm. The market, and the regulators, must find a way to be more inclusive. This would be a win-win for everyone — larger pool of investors and potential liquidity for startups, and more opportunities to those that want to invest and earn a return. Decentralized Exchanges vs. Centralized Exchanges The story of decentralization does not end with ICOs. Cryptocurrency exchanges provide an even more compelling case study on the tradeoffs between centralization and decentralization. Decentralized exchanges (DEXs) allow counterparties to locate each other and trade directly on the blockchain without any intermediary. The benefit of this system is that traders don’t have to entrust their crypto to an exchange wallet and face the risk of being hacked or having funds stolen. There are lots of different decentralized exchanges, employing varying degrees of decentralization in their structures, but the most successful DEX platforms seem to rely on a synergy of centralization and decentralization. Let’s look at the numbers. , the most popular decentralized exchange, currently ranks in at 100th place on Coinmarketcap’s trade volume ranking. Compare this to , its’ centralized counterpart, which claims the top spot on the list. IDEX Binance While IDEX hosts a mere $2.45 million in daily trade volume, Binance handles around 340x more with approximately $829.15 million worth of cryptocurrency changing hands in the same time frame. IDEX also hosts 447 currency pairs, which is significantly more than most other decentralized exchanges — it is also more than Binance can claim with only 385 pairs hosted on its platform. The next largest DEX is the , taking the 107th spot on Coinmarketcap. Let’s compare it to , the second-largest centralized exchange. Waves Decentralized Exchange OKEx While the Waves Exchange hosts $1.58 million in daily trade volume, OKEx tops that by around 450x with $712.34 million worth of crypto changing hands in the same time frame. On top of the massive volume disparity, OKEx also hosts way more markets than Waves with 512 currency pairs compared to 72. This trend continues, but the point is clear: the top exchanges by trade volume are highly centralized. Crypto Lending — The New Frontier Lending is the new frontier in crypto, and the market already indicates a preference for centralization. Let’s compare Genesis Capital, a centralized lender, with its decentralized counterparts. Right now, Genesis Capital has $130M in active loans according to the Let’s compare that to Dharma, a decentralized lending protocol. According to , Dharma issued approximately $10,000 worth of loans in the past 30 days. latest YTD data for 2018. Loanscan There are also “decentralized” marketplaces like SALT, however, they are a centralized business that simply utilize the blockchain for a specific purpose. I would not attribute their balance to the decentralized side, because they are not. While Genesis and other centralized lenders are increasing their loan volume by the month, their decentralized competitors are lagging behind. What Is the Future of Decentralization? Has the dream of decentralization disappeared into a centrally-managed reality? No. At the end of the day, decentralization is still one of blockchain’s core value propositions. Its’ benefits range from immutable records, democratic governance, privacy, and security. Decentralized organizations have to evolve. They must learn from past mistakes and develop ways to integrate decentralized organizational structures more seamlessly into real-world use cases. Going fully decentralized via protocols like is one solution. Another is to bring decentralization to enterprises, like what Dharma is doing with its’ new offering (over $10 million of loan volume has been requested in its’ alpha version). Aragon Lever Whatever the solution is, we know that when it comes to money, people want to feel secure. And still the best way to accomplish that is to continue to build trustless protocols to enable exchanges of value without a central intermediary. As we all know, even the “nicest” companies can take wrong unilateral actions, just . ask Mr. Pompliano Disclaimer: Virtual currency is not legal tender, is not backed by the government, and accounts and value balances are not subject to consumer protections. This article is for informational purposes only, and is not financial advice. The information does not constitute investment advice or an offer to invest.

Decentralization on the Blockchain Is a Pipe Dream

How to biohack your intelligence — with everything from sex to modafinil to MDMA

Cómo biohackear tu inteligencia: con todo, desde sexo hasta modafinilo y MDMA

The ‘design’ brief to redesign the human impact on Earth from predominantly exploitative and destructive to by and large regenerative and health-generating invites us to ask fundamental questions that define the story we tell about the world and our role in it. Innovating and designing a regenerative culture requires us to and reflect on our participatory relationship with life and nature. We need to re-examine the founding mythology (and scientific record) of our origin, the cosmological framework that defines our context and offers answers to: Where do we come from?; Who are we?; Where are we going? live the questions So, where do we come from? There are many ways to answer this question. Cosmology is how a culture answers this story. Over the last 250 years our scientific cosmology has become the dominant story of origin, and what an awe-inspiring story science tells! Yet, as any story tries to establish itself, there is a tendency to discredit alternative ways of seeing and complementary narratives. This seems to be due to the way we tend to frame things in either/or-type exclusive dualisms. The big challenges in changing something as important as our cultural and civilizational narrative is to avoid turning culturally creative narrative into a new dogma and to value the positive aspects of what the previous narrative helped to create. Dogmatic and ideological tendencies have deprived the scientific cosmology of the guiding role that plays in cultural narrative. Science has revealed so much to us, and in part it has done so thanks to the way that the narrative of separation (objectifying the world) enabled many useful scientific and technological innovations. meaning Scientific insights from all disciplines tell an awe-inspiring and meaningful story about our intimate connection with the processes of life and consciousness. Rather than dismissing science we simply need to question where dogmatic tendencies might have made us blind to deeper meaning and significance. Our current scientific cosmology has been distorted by an overly zealous rationalism and materialism, a bias towards quantitative and reductionistic analysis, towards mechanistic instead of organismic metaphors. The economic and biological stories of scarcity and competition offer a mutually reinforcing excuse for inequity, war, and competitive behaviour. We may not yet be ready to offer a definitive answer to the deeper question whether consciousness or matter is primary. We might have to live this question a little longer and explore the wealth of wisdom that the world’s spiritual traditions offer as complementary perspectives to the developing scientific story. It might also not be the appropriate question to ask. Maybe consciousness pervades matter and at a certain levels of complexity this leads to autopoietic distinctions between self and world (life emerging) and at yet higher levels of complexity living beings become self-refelctive and capable of bringing forth more and more complex world through cultural evolution (through the story they tell about themselves)? Fact is that we can, retell the remarkable story of our cosmological origin, using science to deepen our understanding of and the role of symbiosis and collaboration, rather than reinforcing the cultural dominance of the story of separation and competition. interbeing My friend Brian Swimme and his mentor Thomas Berry were among the first to explore how we could find a higher synthesis of scientific and spiritual cosmologies. The magnificence that science has reveal about the nature and history of the universe and life on earth can offer us a cosmology capable of re-enchanting the Earth and our participatory role in the Universe story. Uni-verse — I do not use a preposition on purpose since there is nothing outside, and therefore Universe is not an ‘it’ (object) but a process that spans the inner and outer dimensions (quadrants) of consciousness. The word refers to the all-connecting and transforming process of which all of our lives are creative expressions. Universe is neither object nor purely material, simply put, is ‘one verse’ of relationship, perspective, and participation. Universe uni-verse the Universe came into being some 14 thousand million years ago in an event we now refer to as the big bang. Whether this beginning was simply an initiation of a new cycle of universal expansion and contraction is a question we have not yet answered. Cosmic microwave background as echos of the time immediately after the ‘big bang’, little ripples that may have given the subtle gravitational impulses for galaxies to form and clouds of gas to form and densify until they ignited into stars. Fact is, the atoms and molecules that make up our tissue, our bones, our hearts and our brains were forged over many thousands of millions of years, as giant gas clouds coalesced by gravity to ignite into stars, lighting up the planets around them, only to collapse a mere 500 million years later in giant supernova explosions, releasing the forces that are believed to have shaped many of the elements we find on Earth today. If you are wearing a golden wedding ring or other golden jewellery, pause, I invite you to marvel at the enormity of space and time as you contemplate that the atoms of all gold on Earth were forged in the immense pressures and temperatures generated by aging stars exploding in giant supernovas, long before the Earth was formed. Earth, the beautiful blue planet we call our home, has been the setting for all the poetry, art, dance, music, and science we have invented to make sense of the mystery of our existence. Our relatively young home planet began to take shape some 4700 million years ago. A few hundred million years later, Life started to transform the conditions on Earth, following life’s universal creative principle: Life creates conditions in which more life can thrive, diversify, and evolve. For another 1400 million years planet Earth, which would have been more aptly named planet Water, was the home to primitive bacteria that lived of the chemical transformation of complex molecules present in the primordial ocean. About 3200 million years ago life invented the alchemy of photosynthesis, the ability to use sunlight to turn water and carbon dioxide into sugars that can serve as structural building blocks or food. Early life diversified and proliferated in the oceans. The spreading practice of photosynthesis began to chance the planet’s atmosphere through the oxygen that is released in the process. In an act of profound collaboration and symbiosis, some 1800 million years ago, early cells began to cooperate by one cell engulfing another without destroying it, instead diversifying roles and functions until the first complex eukaryotic cells were formed. These nucleated cells became the building blocks for more and more complex life forms, so that by 570 million years ago the shallow oceans were teaming with strange and wondrous creatures of different shapes and sizes. Life on land did not begin to take hold until about 400 million years ago, with giant forests spreading across the Earth some 380 million years ago. The first adventurous amphibians made their way out of the water and onto dry land. Over the next tens of millions of years insects and reptiles began to diversify across the giant super-continent Pangea that, around 300 million years ago, united all of the Earth’s landmasses. Suddenly, disaster struck at the end of the Permian period, some 250 million years ago, when a combination of meteor impacts and giant volcanic eruptions triggered a series of tipping points in the Earth’s climate system that resulted in run-away climate change. Methane stored in the deep oceans was released rapidly and caused catastrophic global warming which led to more that 96% of all marine and 70% of all terrestrial species going extinct over a relatively short period of time. Life took more than 10 million years to recover from this largest mass extinction in the history of our planet. What followed was the emergence of the dinosaurs and the first small (rodent-like) mammals, along with the evolution of a vast diversity of flowering plants. The continents started to drift apart and take the shape we are familiar with today. About 66 million years ago, the most famous of the Earth’s extinction events occurred as a giant asteroid struck the Gulf of Mexico creating vast clouds of smoke and ash that covered the Earth in darkness blocking our sunlight and leading to the extinction of more than 75% of all life on Earth, including all of the non-avian dinosaurs. This planetary crisis created the opportunity for the success story of mammalian evolution. Mammals began to occupy ecological niches previously inhabited by the dinosaurs. The large mountain ranges of the Alps and the Himalayas formed as continents drifted towards each other. In Africa, over millions of years, little mammals similar to today’s lemurs of Madagascar began to diversify into many species of monkeys and later apes. Until, some 4 million years ago, our earliest ancestors of the genus began to walk up-right across the African savannas on two feet, still with brains not much larger than a modern day chimpanzee. Lucy, the most famous of our early ancestors lived about 3.2 million years ago. Australopithecus The first humans evolved as little as 2.5 million years ago. From the early to modern the size of the human brain doubled and developed its characteristic temporal lobes and pre-frontal cortex. This enabled many of the higher brain functions that today distinguish us from other apes and the rest of the animal kingdom. Homo habilis Homo sapiens While we learned to use tools and fire quite early on during this period, we might not have developed the ability to speak and use complex language until as little as 50,000 years ago when a group of early migrated out of Africa and successfully populated Europe, Asia, Australia and the Americas. The earliest representatives of ‘modern’ humans ( ) are the Cro-magnon culture of Southern France dating back to only 43,000 years ago. Homo sapiens Homo sapiens sapiens For ten thousands of years our species survived by the guiding stories tribal elders told around the fireplace, passing on the indigenous wisdom that taught our ancestors how to survive and thrive, intimately adapted to the specific conditions of the particular ecosystems within which they lived nomadic lives. It was not until a remarkable period between 12,000 to 5,000 years ago — which we now refer to as the agricultural revolution — that more and more tribal bands of our ancestors started to develop agricultural techniques enabling them to settle in a particular place and turn their minds to building villages, towns and the first empires. With the onset of this new settled agriculturalist and pastoralist lifestyles the human impact on the planet started to intensify and the population started to grow steadily, but slowly at first. While exact data is obviously hard to come by, it is fair to assume that the global population of humans around 10000 years ago was about 5 million. At the beginning of our (Christian) calendar the global population had reached about 150 million. The first billion (1000 million) was not reached until 1804! It took only 123 years for the human population to double to 2000 million by 1927 and just 33 years until our population reached the 3 billion mark by 1960. The next billion were added in only 27 years. By 1987 there were already 5 billion humans on Earth. It took only 12 years to add another 1000 million so that by 1999 human population had reach 6 billion and after only another 12 years 7 billion by 2011 ( ). We are failing to understand the significance of this exponential growth at our peril! two ref According to a study published by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, published in 2004, the human population will peak at 9.2 billion by 2075 and then start to decline slightly, reaching 8.97 billion by 2300. Obviously such projections are not an exact science and do not account for the diverse possibilities that could result in a rapid population decline due to climate catastrophes, epidemics, war, famine, and unforeseeable catastrophic events like another asteroid impact. Too few environmentalist dare to address the issue of overpopulation head on despite the fact that population numbers (and our behaviour) are the major factor influencing the rapid environmental degradation and biodiversity loss we are witnessing. This is not to say that we can’t co-create a thriving human civilization of 8 or 9 billion people within the limits of planetary boundaries. The answer to the question whether we can or not achieve this will shape the future of our species and life on Earth. Doing so is not simply an issue of technological innovation and global collaboration with regard to resource management. It will require a deeper shift in human consciousness that will lead us to celebrate the evolution of life and the story of Universe as a unifying creative process of which we all are expressions in time. We can tell an inspiring scientific story of where we come that can help us to better understand who we really are. Only then will we be able to cultivate the wisdom to help guide us to where we might want to go. Seeing ourselves as expressions of universal creativity and life’s continued exploration of novelty — in full awareness of our dependence on ecosystems services and the life support systems of the biosphere — will lead us to ask deeper questions about equity and ecological justice: How do we enable our path into the future by sharing the abundance of this living planet more fairly within the human family and the community of Life - between those alive today and future generations? We are beginning to understand that throughout evolution life has created conditions conducive to life. Our future depends on maintaining conditions on Earth favourable for human beings and the rest of the family of life. is the basis of creating a regenerative culture and a prerequisite for humanity’s long-term survival. Informed by science, in particular, ecology (knowledge of the household) and inspired by philosophy (the love of wisdom), we can learn to love our communion with life and nature. The love for all living (biophilia) and love for nature as our home and the ground of our being are cornerstones of a regenerative culture. Creating conditions conducive to life “Beyond a simple ecology, ecosophy is a of the earth. “The new equilibrium” is not so much between man and the earth, as between , between spatio-temporality and consciousness. is neither a mere ’ of the earth’ ( ) nor even ‘ the earth’, but rather a ‘ the earth herself’ that is made manifest to man when he knows how to listen to her with love.” wisdom-spirituality matter and spirit Ecosophy science ecology wisdom about wisdom of — r Raimon Panikka [If you enjoyed this article, you migh also like my book published by Triarchy Press in May 2016. This piece was edited out to keep the book at an engaging length.] Designing Regenerative Cultures Image Source

BERRY GLOBAL GROUP

berryglobal.com

10K+ employees

Since 1967

COMPANY RANKING

BERRY GLOBAL GROUP

EVERGREEN INDEX #1849

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

Berry Global Group WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!

BERRY GLOBAL GROUP

berryglobal.com

10K+ employees

Since 1967

COMPANY RANKING

BERRY GLOBAL GROUP

EVERGREEN INDEX #1849

RELATED COMPANIESRANK

STORIES ABOUT BERRY GLOBAL GROUP

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

Berry Global Group WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!