I’m attending the Globe Conference on Business and the Environment this week, and I am struck by both the futility and hope of one of the presentations.

‘Now what? Implications for business from COP 15’ is a forum with Daniel Gagnier (ex-head of communications for Alcan, and advisor to government), Daniel Hendrix (President / CEO of Interface), David Parker (VP Sustainability, Teck Resources) and Graeme Sweeney (EVP of Carbon, Shell).

The tone is highlighted by Gagnier. He says that COP is a bit of a trauma. The international participants have convened with high hopes. The attendance has broken past records. And the convening governments are walking out with very, very little to show for their efforts.

There has not been much progress on regulation of carbon, beyond some limp wording on voluntary declarations and initiatives. Attendees recognize that the developing world needs to eradicate poverty before it can worry about C02.

In short, there is much hand-wringing, and serious expression-wearing. But no regulation or guidelines to steer business.

So is it an expensive waste of time and energy? Not quite.

Business must take the innovation lead.

While the panellists are discouraged by government inaction, they are encouraged by the void business has to fill.

Dan Hendrix of Interface explains it best: they went from being a toxic carpet company to an exemplary leader in green industry for one reason alone – because consumers demand it.

Certainty and guidelines from government do not lead business to green innovation (although they are welcome!) Consumer demand, however, created the impetus to accelerate sustainable progress.

All four panelists agree that bottom up, get-to-work-in-your-backyard activity will be the real green story of the coming years. That means corporations will be greening themselves, greening their products, greening their supply chains, and being rewarded by consumers who are demanding green.

There will be plenty of mis-steps – David Parker of Teck points out that innovations, like hybrid cars, create an inordinate demand for metals like copper – but failing often and quickly are key elements in bringing successful innovations to market.

And, as Dan Gagnier notes, the goal for the developed world is to make a difference without sacrificing our standard of living, while the developing world must make a difference while elevating living standards. A very attainabile goal if innovation is focused on providing solutions that answer an unmet global need.

The biggest take-away: the smartest companies are rapidly evolving to be more profitable while doing good. Shame the same couldn’t be said for government.

Have you seen the new Maddock Douglas homepage?

Follow Maddock Douglas on Twitter