Oser Communications Group

FROM THE EDITOR KITCHENWARE NEWS & HOUSEWARES REVIEW n MAY 2017 n www.kitchenwarenews.com Periodicals postage paid at Tucson, AZ and additional mail- ing office. Kitchenware News & Housewares Review (USPS012-625) is published 12 times per year (Jan., Feb., March, April, May, June, July, Aug., Sept., Oct., Nov., and Dec.) by Oser Communications Group, 1877 N. Kolb Road, Tucson, AZ, 85715 520.721.1300. Publisher assumes no responsibility for unsolicited material or prices quoted in newspaper. Contributors are responsi- ble for proper release of proprietary classified information. ©2017 by Oser Communications Group. All rightsreserved Reproduction, in whole or in part, without written permis- sion of the publisher, is expressly prohibited. Back issues, when available, cost $8 each within the past 12 months. Back issue orders must be paid in advance by check. Kitchenware News & Housewares Review is distributed without charge in North America to qualified professionals in the retail and distribution channels of the upscale kitchenware and tabletop trade. For subscriber services, in- cluding subscription information, call 520.721.1300. Printed in the USA. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Kitchenware News & Housewares Review, 1877 N. Kolb Road, Tucson, AZ 85715. PUBLISHER Kim Oser SR. ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER Jules Denton jules_d@oser.com ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER Carlos Velasquez carlos_v@oser.com EDITORIAL DIRECTOR Lorrie Baumann lorrie_b@oser.com EDITOR Micah Cheek micah_c@oser.com ASSOCIATE EDITOR Greg Gonzales greg_g@oser.com GRAPHIC DESIGNERS Jonathan Schieffer Yasmine Brown CUSTOMER SERVICE Caitlyn McGrath MANAGERS caitlyn_m@oser.com Sarah Glenn sarah_g@oser.com CIRCULATION DIRECTOR Tara Neal CIRCULATION MANAGER Jamie Green jamie_g@oser.com Kitchenware News & Housewares Review is a publication of Oser Communications Group Inc. 1877 N. Kolb Road • Tucson, AZ 85715 520.721.1300 www.kitchenwarenews.com www.oser.com OSER COMMUNICATIONS GROUP H o u s e w a r e s R e v i e w KITCHENWARE NEWS S E R V I N G K I T C H E N WA R E, H O M E D E C O R A N D G I F T WA R E M A R K E T S editor from the The current presidential administration has bowed out of the debate on what we should do about climate change. I want to point out here that that's the debate –it's no longer about whether climate change is happening. Scientists are nearly universal in their agreement that climate change is real. The questions at hand are whether the rest of us are going to go along with that, and if so, what do we do about it? For an answer to the first part of that question, I look back to 17th-century philosopher Blaise Pascal, who pointed out in a discussion of whether or not we should believe in God even if we also harbored doubts, that we should all consider the stakes. When it's your eternal soul that's in question, the stakes for being wrong are just too high to bet against the reality of God, he suggested. "Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite,"he wrote. In other words, his basic argument was that if what you see before you is a 50/50 chance –either God exists or not –then if you bet one way, what you have to lose lasts a lifetime, and if you bet the other way, then what you have to lose is your eternal soul. Well then, the smart bet is the one where you can win for eternity, he concluded. When I'm asked about my own position on climate change, global warming, what have you, I make exactly the same argument: consider the stakes. If we take the position that climate change is real, then the downside if we're wrong is finite. Maybe we've endured some inconvenience by conserving energy. Maybe we've taken steps to curb our waste of food. Maybe we've planted some trees. If climate change isn't really happening, then maybe those efforts didn't actually mean that much. But if climate change is real, the stakes are much higher. What we have to lose then is the ability of our descendants to survive on this planet. The entire human race could be wiped out. Blaise Pascal would argue that there's an obviously smarter side to bet on. Note that this is not a partisan political argument that depends on what President Trump and his administration plan to do. He has clearly decided not to exercise leadership in this area, but that doesn't mean that others can't pick up the baton he's decided to drop. You will read this month in the pages of both Gourmet News and Kitchenware News that business leaders across the U.S. are doing just that. They're not doing this just to honor their own beliefs. They're doing this in the knowledge that Millennial consumers already believe that climate change is real and observable, so for them there's no question. They're also inclined to act on their beliefs by voting with their dollars on brands that they believe share their values. For these businesses, that changes the terms of the bet a bit –they're not just betting on the survival of the human race; they're also betting on the survival of their brands. What that means is that there's only one smart bet here. KN Lorrie Baumann, Editorial Director 4

• Cover