Sorry for the massive linking lately without much commentary. I'm trying to find a bit more time to devote to this blog and wider coverage of the topics we look at here. One possibility is an actual/virtual news agency covering social enterprise and social entrepreneurship on the ground, an idea I'm kicking around with a few people and could possibly kick start in the new year. More on that later. Also, from Tuesday through Saturday I'll be away so probably no posting during that time.

Back to today's subject. One concept I've bounced around in my head for months now is the idea of 'anti-social entrepreneurs' ... people like arms dealers, drug runners, people traffickers, corruption, and how to combat these problems worldwide. Taking away the profit motive from these antisocial entrepreneurs would be the most important step. But how to do that? I don't know. I do wonder, however, if social enterprises and social entrepreneurial projects could supplant some of these dealings on local levels by giving those same people a means of employment that is at least or close to being as lucrative as their antisocial entrepreneurship behavior. These very same people, who often take great risks doing what they do, are, though we probably don't like to admit it, natural entrepreneurs. So why do we burn opium fields in Afghanistan, or spray toxic pesticide over jungle drug farms in Columbia when we could probably be spending this same money by helping these people switch over to different crops (and possibly giving that country free or fair trade status that allows them to sell their new crops on a more even playing field)? This is probably a bit simplistic ... drug production would likely just move somewhere else. But in the meantime that would disrupt production enough to make some get out of the biz, right? I don't know. I'd like to hear some of your ideas on how to make antisocial entrepreneurs into social entrepreneurs. The drug production example may be the easiest one to figure out. I haven't been able to think of social entrepreneurship alternatives other than local initiatives for combating things like illegal (and legal) arms dealing, people trafficking, or corruption. It will take much more than local entrepreneurship, though that could be an important part.

What jogged these thoughts this morning was this story from Metro-UK that arms spending has hit an all-time high.

Global spending on arms has hit a record high, swelling to 17 times the amount earmarked for alleviating world hunger.

This year, £561billion will be used to buy weapons - more than the £547billion spent at the peak of the Cold War.

The figure dwarfs the £32billion set aside for international aid and is more than double the total debt of developing countries.

Just imagine, if ONLY (as if it is a small number) £61 billion (that's in UK Pounds Sterling, folks so that's about $115 billion U.S. if I did the conversion correctly) were skimmed off that $1 trillion US dollar worldwide spending on arms and converted to investments in social entrepreneurship, social enterprise, international and sustainable development projects? Imagine the impact those investments could have. If just 10% of the U.S. spending on arms development were diverted to R&D in alternative energies, what impact could that have? What's better, and arms race or an alternative energy race?

And while we're on the topic, I just had a thought: why hasn't the CSR wave hit the arms and weapons manufacturers yet? Who builds the landmines that maim in the third world? Who makes the bullets to fill all those excess Soviet weapons that were sold off after the Cold War? Why aren't these companies the number one target of CSR advocates? You hardly ever hear anything about weapons makers when it comes to CSR. It's the 500-lb bunker busting bomb in the room that no one talks about. War and destruction from war causes massive environmental impact, massive human impact, and massive economic impact, and instability (all of which are preyed upon by antisocial entrepreneurs).

Just for one example, doesn't the stress and anxiety of war on mothers cause low fetal birth rates, thus causing many other problems throughout the lifetimes of those offspring in war torn areas?

In related news ...

A Canadian group called Development and Peace is urging the Canadian government to ensure responsible mining practices in the Global South.

It would also probably help if the UN would stop giving platforms to the world's worst dictators and purveyors of violence, and I'd count the current leadership in Washington as one who should not be given a platform at the UN. Bush and Chavez are simply two sides of the same coin. They are both part of the problem, neither part of the solution.

Water for Peace? Ugandan Rebels Say They Won't Assemble Until They Get Clean Water.

Maybe Sudan could be a test case for a lot of this.

And many people have already likely seen this: Iraq for Sale - The War Profiteers

And in a little better news, new microfinance institution provides credit to small Iraqi businesses.

In Afghanistan, new leaders emerge from the rubble.