corporate social responsibility | Eric Block On Responsible Branding

When Quality and Sustainability Meet

8 04 2023

Graphic: EPA

An integrated approach to quality and sustainability leads to increased efficiency and cost savings. By Bob Ferrone via The Quality Digest • Reposted: April 8, 2023

Quality and sustainability are two critical aspects of modern business operations that are closely intertwined. While quality refers to the level of excellence or standard achieved in a product or service, sustainability relates to the ability to maintain or improve that quality over time while minimizing negative impacts on the environment, society, and the economy.

These two concepts are not mutually exclusive and can, in fact, complement each other when integrated into an organization’s operations. Bringing quality and sustainability together in an organization can create synergies that drive innovation, reduce costs, and enhance reputation, among other benefits.

One of the most significant advantages of integrating quality and sustainability is the ability to identify and address environmental and social risks early in the product design process. By leveraging quality management systems, such as ISO 9001, organizations can establish procedures for identifying, assessing, and managing risks that could affect the quality of their products or services.

Similarly, sustainability standards, such as ISO 14001, can help organizations identify and manage environmental risks that could affect their operations, supply chain, or stakeholders. By combining these two systems, organizations can develop a more comprehensive risk management approach that considers both quality and sustainability effects, thereby reducing the likelihood of costly product recalls, repetitional damage, or legal liabilities.

Holistic manufacturing

When quality and sustainability meet, the result is a harmonious combination of two important principles that drive businesses and consumers toward a better future. Quality is the measurement of excellence in products and services, while sustainability is the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Quality products are designed to last longer, perform better, and provide greater value to the consumer. On the other hand, sustainable products are produced in a manner that minimizes harm to the environment and conserves natural resources. The combination of these two principles creates products that are not only of high quality but also environmentally responsible.

To achieve this balance, companies must take a holistic approach to product development and manufacturing. They must consider the entire life cycle of a product, from the sourcing of raw materials to the disposal of the end product (cradle to cradle). By using environmentally friendly materials, reducing waste, and implementing energy-efficient processes, companies can create products that not only perform well but also have a minimal impact on the environment.

Consumers also play a critical role in promoting sustainability and quality. By choosing to purchase products that are of high quality as well as sustainable, they are sending a message to the market that these principles are important to them. This demand for quality and sustainability drives companies to invest in these areas and encourages them to continue to innovate and improve their practices.

Two departments with shared goals

Quality and sustainability managers must collaborate and work together to achieve the best possible outcomes for their organization. While their areas of focus may be different, there is significant overlap in their goals, including reducing waste, improving efficiency, and enhancing customer satisfaction.

By working together, quality and sustainability managers can identify opportunities to streamline processes, reduce environmental impacts, and increase profitability. Today, with advances in technology such as artificial intelligence (AI), it is now also possible to collect and analyze large amounts of data to identify trends and patterns that can help organizations improve their processes, products, and environmental effects in real time.

When quality and sustainability meet, everyone benefits. Companies are able to produce products that are both environmentally responsible and of high quality, while consumers are able to enjoy products that not only perform well but also contribute to a better future. This harmonious combination is crucial in shaping a more sustainable future for all.

A framework for sustainable development

As the world becomes more aware of the effect of human activity on the planet, consumers and businesses alike are taking steps to mitigate its impact and ensure a sustainable future. Sustainable development strategy for all organizations has become an important issue around the globe. (Evidence for climate change abounds, from the top of the atmosphere to the depth of the oceans.) It has required organizations to review their current systems to improve the overall triple bottom-line performance (i.e., economic, environmental, and social). Rising to these challenges requires transforming management systems and incorporating sustainable management systems throughout the organization.

Synergies between total quality management (TQM) and sustainable development have been discussed, but further important synergies between quality management and environmental management have not yet been fully explored. Process focus and process management are believed to be important for realizing these synergies. Assuming TQM effects on organizations will continue, what types of TQM improvement initiatives will develop in the future to meet the anticipated organizational changes?

Sustainable development frameworks encourage businesses to ask better questions about effects on stakeholders, society, and the environment, and they seek to develop the tools and measures needed to demonstrate improvements. The sustainability of the organization relies on its ability to monitor the external environment for opportunities, trends, and risks, and also its ability to learn, change, and innovate in response to the results of monitoring. To achieve environmental sustainability, organizations should focus on results as well as process.

An industrial revolution in quality

The quality revolution that took place in manufacturing companies during the late 1970s offers a number of parallels that can help city government and corporate decision-makers understand and address sustainability challenges. At the onset, quality initiatives were viewed by most companies as nothing more than an added cost—something to be tacked onto the end of existing manufacturing systems to prevent low-quality products from reaching customers.

The evolution from quality inspection at the end of a line to total quality management in the United States was in direct response to a quality revolution in Japan following World War II. Japan had a widely held reputation for shoddy, poor-quality exports, and their goods were shunned by international markets. This led Japanese organizations to explore new ways of thinking about quality. The Japanese welcomed input from foreign companies and lecturers, including two American quality experts who changed the world’s leaders’ thinking about TQM. More than a half-century ago, quality pioneers W. Edwards Deming and Joseph Juran encouraged organizations to ask better questions about corporate challenges, enabling companies to redesign systems for improvement.

It started with a systems approach, and then incorporated quality by means of practical analytical tools to foster product, service, and organizational improvements. In the process of bringing quality improvement, they also elevated quality management’s value to the corporation. Their work inspired corporations to move quality management from a noncritical process to the mainstream.

Quality management has evolved significantly over the years, from a technical and inspection-oriented approach to a more holistic and customer-focused approach. Today, quality management is an integral part of organizational performance, with an emphasis on continuous improvement, risk-based thinking, and data-driven decision making.

Environmental awareness

Two other prominent figures who had a significant effect on the environment were John Kenneth Galbraith and Rachel Louise Carson. Both individuals were influential in their respective fields, and their contributions helped shape the way we view and understand the natural world. Galbraith’s work (The New Industrial State; Princeton University Press, revised edition 2007) helped bring attention to the issue of environmental degradation and its relationship to the economy. His ideas influenced the development of environmental policy and helped shape the modern environmental movement.

Carson’s work (Silent Spring; Houghton Mifflin, 1962) also helped inspire a shift in public opinion regarding the natural world. Her vivid descriptions of the beauty and fragility of nature helped create a new appreciation of the natural world and its importance to human well-being.

Both individuals were instrumental in the development of the modern environmental movement, and their work continues to inspire and influence environmental policy and conservation efforts that are underway worldwide today.

These four individuals had a major influence on business and the private sector. Juran and Deming opened the eyes of industry to the importance of quality management. Galbraith, who was known for his critical analysis of modern capitalism, opened the eyes of the business community to how the economy affects environment issues. Carson’s book inspired the general public toward innovative thinking.

Innovative thinking

There a number of forward-looking organizations that view quality and sustainability as a competitive advantage. Take the case of Toyota: It viewed quality as an opportunity rather than a cost, and its investment in total quality management paid off handsomely. Rather than simply posting inspectors at the end of the assembly line, Toyota integrated quality considerations earlier in its assembly lines and the processes that preceded manufacturing, such as product design, and research and development (R&D). Next, Toyota pushed quality considerations even further upstream by working with suppliers to develop quality standards for the materials flowing into the assembly lines.

Eventually Toyota expanded quality management beyond products into behaviors, asking how its people could collaborate more effectively to ensure higher-quality processes. This deeper, more integrated approach to TQM paid off in the form of competitive advantage, as the success of Toyota in the 1990s and beyond demonstrates. The quality effort took Toyota from the back of the pack to the industry leader in automobile quality, reliability, and sales. In setting the standard for others to meet, Toyota is integrating quality and environmental cultures to gain a true understanding of total waste. In the future, it may set the standard in the auto industry on sustainability management as well.

Sustainability as a business function

Sustainability has not left its infancy, but there are strong signs that select companies are positioning themselves to benefit from sustainability opportunities. Walmart, General Electric, FedEx, Toyota, Hilton, and Budweiser are among those managing environmental risks, just as others used the quality revolution to succeed in their markets.

Rather than treating sustainability as a risk and cost to be managed, leaders are starting to integrate sustainability into their processes and cultures, in some cases collaborating with a broad range of partners, including governmental and nongovernmental organizations and initiatives. A prime example of this collaboration is the Energy Star program, which was developed by industry and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The powerful external forces of competition, government, and consumers are driving sustainability and may soon nudge its evolution into a full-blown revolution. As the development of sustainability programs continues, companies with the structure and talent necessary to integrate sustainability capabilities deeper in their organizations and cultures will have a competitive advantage. As we struggle with approaches to reduce our effects on our climate, the answers may be in the quality tools that all sectors understand.

Sustainability does, however, mean that TQM should not be left as an “act of fate.” It needs to be managed through a strategic perspective, emphasizing measurement and action. It should also focus not only on meeting the end-customer’s requirements but also on all those who interact through their products or processes. Companies should look at how TQM could contribute to sustainability by reinforcing the economic dimension.

This could be seen as making sustainability more business-focused. The opposite would be to see how sustainability could contribute to TQM by broadening the focus to all the dimensions of the total business, widening the focus from the supply chain to customers to stakeholders.

New opportunities

The question is whether we can effect a cross-organizational collaboration to build a new approach to sustainability in government, industry, and the private sector. An important issue is whether organizations can build the bridges to bring the culture of quality management and environmental management together. Both have much to offer on the battlefield of efficiency.

I believe there’s definitely a disconnection there. But there are opportunities through collaboration and education, with the same vision and goals in becoming efficient in all areas and cutting waste. I strongly believe in the use of technologies, design, processes, and cultural change as keys to solving global issues and climate change.

By integrating quality management and sustainability management, organizations can ensure that they are producing high-quality products and services while minimizing their environmental impact, promoting social equity, and preserving natural resources for future generations. This can include implementing sustainable production processes, reducing waste and emissions, ensuring ethical sourcing of raw materials, and promoting the use of renewable energy sources.

Moreover, an integrated approach to quality and sustainability management can also lead to increased efficiency and cost savings, as well as improved reputation and brand value. It can help organizations to meet the expectations of increasingly socially and environmentally conscious consumers and stakeholders, and to stay competitive in a rapidly changing business environment. It can be a challenging process, but it can also lead to significant benefits for the organization and society as a whole.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.qualitydigest.com/inside/lean-column/when-quality-and-sustainability-meet-040623.html

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, Quality, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, TQM
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG

We All Own Sustainability: A Q&A with The Home Depot’s Chief Sustainability Officer Ron Jarvis

8 04 2023

Ron Jarvis, Home Depot chief sustainability officer, gives a lecture in Jessica Thomas’ MBA 582: Sustainability and Business course Oct. 30, 2019 at Nelson Hall. Photo: NC University

From The Home Depot • Reposted: April 8, 2023

ReducingThe Home Depot’s environmental impact is essential to our efforts to build a better business, workplace and world. Home Depot’s chief sustainability officer Ron Jarvis has spent more than two decades driving sustainability improvements at The Home Depot. Here he offers insights into our progress.

Who drives ESG at The Home Depot?

Many associates and business leaders throughout our enterprise! They take pride in improving their departments and businesses in multiple ESG aspects. Our leadership understands that an effective environmental, social and governance strategy cannot happen in isolation. It is not the sole responsibility of a corporate ESG team. Rather, our ESG strategy must reflect The Home Depot’s core values, and it must be embedded in all aspects of how we run our business. Everybody owns it.

How have associates helped drive ESG progress at The Home Depot?

One of our eight core values is Do The Right Thing, which drives our associates to find new ways that our organization can reduce its environmental impact. This can be seen through our packaging team who looks for ways to reduce the package footprints and ways to use more sustainable materials for our private-label products. Another example are our associates who work to find ways to upcycle the packaging waste in our stores and supply chain into new products like Trex composite decking.

How is The Home Depot helping customers increase the sustainability of their homes and businesses?

Our Eco Actions program, which builds on our original Eco Options program that we launched in 2007, helps our customers take on more sustainable DIY projects and choose greener products that can save water, conserve energy or are formulated to reduce certain chemicals. Products can only qualify for this distinction if manufacturers provide third-party verification of environmental claims that meet our program’s requirements. This program also offers customers green project ideas and tips, for example, how to grow an organic garden.

In addition, we encourage our customers to drop off used compact fluorescent light bulbs and rechargeable batteries for recycling. In 2021, we collected 1,162,800 pounds of recycled batteries, a 24% increase since 2014.

We also help our customers go greener in ways that may be less apparent to them. For example, we offer circularity-centered products like our Home Depot-branded moving boxes, made from 100% post- consumer recycled paper fiber, as well as composite deck boards made from recycled plastic waste from our stores. We continue to make progress on our goal to exclude expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) film from our private-brand product packaging by the end of 2023.

When customers rent tools from us, they help avoid the environmental impact of new product manufacturing. Another example: Our stores have cut electricity consumption 50% since 2010, providing our customers a lower energy intensive shopping environment.

Is sustainability a competitive advantage for The Home Depot?

Overall, we believe good business decisions drive sustainability.

Examples of this can be seen through the investments we’ve made to create the most efficient supply chain in home improvement. These investments have helped us reduce the number of trucks needed and distance traveled to get our products from our supplier to our customers, while also reducing fuel emissions. Another example of this is our store investments, part of which included transitioning stores to LED lighting, which helped us reduce operating costs and electricity consumption.

We also believe that by working with our suppliers to bring innovative and sustainable products to market, we help our customers create more sustainable homes and workplaces. Our efforts to drive innovation can be seen in every aisle of the store, and we believe this is a key differentiator in the market.

We also want to see sustainability be the norm for our entire industry. We are encouraged when we see other retailers take big swings and do innovative things that push all of us to do a better job of protecting the planet, and we hope the innovation that we bring through our operations and products motivates others to do the same.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/own-sustainability-q-home-depots-135000484.html

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, Home Depot, responsible brands, Ron Jarvis, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG

The Role of the CFO in Sustainability Reporting

6 04 2023

Image: Controllers Council

With increased expectations to assume the role of climate controller in business, how should CFOs go about measuring the success of their organization’s environmental policies? By KIRSTY GODFREY-BILLY from sustainable brands.com • RepostedL April 6, 2023

The changing role of the Chief Financial Officer has been widely discussed in recent years. CFOs today must be prepared to respond to growing interest from stakeholders in their company’s sustainability practices and are increasingly becoming some of the most important drivers of sustainability initiatives across every industry. So, let’s look at why.

In the face of climate change, transparency is becoming non-negotiable in modern business. CFOs have always handled financial and business reporting; so, we are a natural fit for to take on sustainability reporting. It’s not a question of whether CFOs will assume this new responsibility — but rather, when. Robust, data-driven reporting is key to building and maintaining trust with customers, partners, investors and employees; and this is something we need to deliver on now.

This shift in public sentiment and expectation shouldn’t come as a surprise. As we witness the climate changing around us, the average consumer expects the brands they support to be proactive and communicative about their environmental impact and how they will reduce it. In fact, a recent PwC study found that 83 percent of consumers think companies should be actively shaping ESG practices. The benefits flow internally, too — in a recent study from the European Investment Bank, three-quarters of young employees surveyed say the climate impact of prospective employers is an important consideration when job hunting.

With increased expectations to assume the role of climate controller in business, how exactly should a CFO go about measuring the success of their organization’s environmental policies?

3 KEY INSIGHTS TO SUPPORT CARBON-LABELING AMBITIONS

The SB Socio-Cultural Trends Research, conducted in partnership with Ipsos, tracks the changing drivers and behaviors of consumers around the intersection of brands and sustainable living. Our latest report explores how brands can maximize the impact of their sustainability efforts by approaching carbon-label strategies through the lens of consumer perceptions — learn more in SB’s Q4 Pulse highlights report.

As you can imagine, this is not a one-size-fits-all process. Every company and every leadership team has a unique purpose and set of values; and no two industries are necessarily impacting the environment in the same way. As a starting point, your climate strategy must be closely linked to your company strategy and purpose. Whether an agriculture company has pledged to eliminate pesticide usage or a financial institution is decarbonizing its lending portfolio, their respective CFOs should ensure clear performance targets are established and a company-wide plan is in place so meaningful progress can be delivered and reported on.

Externally, it might be assumed that because tech businesses aren’t typically considered among the biggest greenhouse gas emitters, we don’t face as much pressure to reduce and report our emissions. However, every business has a role to play in supporting the transition to a net-zero economy. The tech industry is still accountable — researchers from Lancaster University estimate that tech companies could contribute 2.1-3.9 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

This is why — in conjunction with a company’s sustainability experts and leaders across the business — tech CFOs should work to integrate their company’s environmental practices with their everyday compliance and tracking systems. From there, the idea of publishing their progress is much less daunting come reporting season. Whether they decide to mesh their financial and sustainability reporting into a single document such as an Annual Report or publish them separately, their sustainability practices and performance should be clear for all to see.

In an effort to introduce more transparency around our environmental impact at Xero, we’ve shared our plans to work towards net-zero emissions and set clear emissions-reduction targets — which we will share in our Annual Reports, in line with climate science. We are looking to reduce our carbon emissions right across the business — from reducing various contributors such as energy used in office spaces to indirect emissions in our value chain from cloud hosting, business travel, corporate catering and IT equipment.

Thankfully, many organizations and standards bodies exist to provide direction for companies looking to improve their sustainability performance and reporting. For example, the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures and the UN Global Compact CFO Taskforce are encouraging and supporting companies to integrate sustainable practices into all aspects of their business and report on performance. The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) is also developing standards for climate accounting that are due to be released in 2023.

The most important thing to remember in all of this is to approach climate action genuinely and with commitment. Publicly reporting your sustainability performance has become as critical as reporting financial performance. Not only is it the right thing to do; it also gives leaders a broader picture of organizational performance and will support the long-term success and sustainability of every business.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/finance-investment/role-cfo-sustainability-reporting

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Chief Financial Officer, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, International Financial Reporting Standards, responsible brands, SB Socio-Cultural Trends Research, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, UN Global Compact CFO Taskforce
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG, responsible brands, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Anti-ESG Efforts to Restrict Responsible Investing Will Cost Taxpayers Billions

6 04 2023

Image credit: Patrick Weissenberge/Unsplash

By Mary Riddle from triple pundit.com • Reposted: April 6, 2023

U.S. President Joe Biden used the first veto of his presidency last week. The reason? ESG investing. On March 27, President Biden moved to reject a bill, approved by the House and Senate, that sought to overturn a new Department of Labor rule allowing U.S. retirement fund managers to take environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations into account in their investment decisions.

The latest chapter in an ongoing political battle over ESG in the U.S., Biden’s veto came just a few days after more than 270 companies and investors signed an open letter pushing back against anti-ESG policies.

In the letter, investors and companies emphasized the need to consider all financial risks and opportunities — including those associated with the climate crisis — in order to make smart investments. Calling their movement Freedom to Invest, these capital market leaders urged federal and state policymakers to protect their freedom to invest responsibly, noting they must be free to consider all material financial risks and opportunities in order to plan for the long-term.

“Managing risk and opportunities is our job as investors,” said Anne Simpson, global head of sustainability for Franklin Templeton, one of the letter’s signatories, in a statement. “Our duty and our loyalty are with the people who entrust us with their money. If we don’t pay attention to the accelerating frequency of severe weather disasters and the hundreds of billions of dollars they cause, nor to scientists’ forecasts for severe risk of more of that, and to entrepreneurial companies’ innovations for solving the resulting market needs, then we are not fulfilling our fiduciary duty.” The leaders noted that ESG considerations are not political nor ideological, but rather prudent risk management and investment considerations.

The skyrocketing price tag of anti-ESG policies

Anti-ESG legislation in a number of states is poised to cost taxpayers and retirees billions. State legislatures have been forced to roll back bills that sought to limit ESG investing practices, citing financial harm to state pension funds. Texas and Florida are continuing to push for anti-ESG legislation, even as Texas’ anti-ESG policies have already cost the state millions. Pension funds in the state are warning the legislature that the most recent round of anti-ESG proposals could cost retirees in Texas $6 billion over the next 10 years.

ESG is good for business

Climate change, social injustices, and environmental catastrophes all threaten workforces, supply chains, global markets and long-term economic growth. At the same time, “strong climate action will bring tens of trillions of dollars in additional value to the global economy along with millions of new jobs in the coming decades,” the financial leaders wrote in their letter.

Their claims are backed up by strong evidence. One recent study, for example, showed that companies with robust ESG programs saw a 9.7 percent revenue boost between 2019 and 2022, compared with a 4.5 percent boost for companies without ESG programs. The same study showed that 84 percent of companies that embrace ESG principles find it easier to attract investors and raise funds.

The group of Freedom to Invest signatories highlighted the business case for ESG in their letter, writing: “Our consideration of material environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors is not political or ideological. Incorporating these issues into financial decision-making represents good corporate governance, prudent risk management, and smart investment practice consistent with fiduciary duty. We factor financially material considerations, including the impacts of climate change, into our standard investment and risk management decisions, in order to protect our operations and our investments.”

Even as ESG investing is facing backlash among some policymakers, ESG investing principles are growing in popularity. Almost $8.5 trillion in assets are currently managed by ESG-friendly investors, which is about an eighth of all total assets under management globally, and demand for sustainable funds is higher than for those that do not include ESG considerations.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/anti-esg-cost-taxpayers/770481

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, Department of Labor, ESG, Freedom to Invest, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, Wall Street
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG, reputation management, responsible brands

New SEC Climate Rule Faces Pushback, But Climate Reporting is Here to Stay

6 04 2023

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Headquarters in Washington D.C. Photo: triple pundit

By Tina Casey from triplepundit.com • Reposted: April 6, 2023

When the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission proposed new rules for climate risk disclosure last year, they were met with an unprecedented flood of public comments. Part of the firestorm could be an effect of partisan politics. However, some commenters raised legitimate concerns, and the SEC is reportedly poised to make some changes in the coming weeks.

The SEC responds to investor trends, not partisan ideology

When the climate disclosure rules were proposed last year, SEC Chair Gary Gensler emphasized the agency’s founding mission to ensure that investors are fully informed about risks. “Our core bargain from the 1930s is that investors get to decide which risks to take, as long as public companies provide full and fair disclosure and are truthful in those disclosures,” he said in a press statement announcing the rules, dated March 21, 2022.

Gensler was also quick to note that the proposed SEC climate rules are not derived from partisan ideology. They are based on the clear and indisputable fact that climate disclosures already have broad support among investors.

“Today, investors representing literally tens of trillions of dollars support climate-related disclosures because they recognize that climate risks can pose significant financial risks to companies, and investors need reliable information about climate risks to make informed investment decisions,” Gensler explained.

The proposed rules were also intended to level the playing field by creating a uniform standard for climate disclosures. “Companies and investors alike would benefit from … the clear rules of the road proposed in this release,” Gensler said. More information and more disclosures also allow issuers to meet investor demands for clarity on climate risks, he argued.

Pushback against new SEC climate rules

The fact-based genesis of the new SEC climate rules is a stark contrast to the mounting pushback against environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations in business. High-profile public officials have been railing against ESG investing as a threat to the health of public pensions. However, they offer no facts to back up their arguments, which on closer inspection appear to be nothing more than thinly disguised efforts to protect fossil energy stakeholdersfrom competition. The anti-ESG messaging has also become entwined with the rhetoric of right-wing extremism and “anti-woke” posturing, which doesn’t help its legitimacy.

It is no surprise to see well-known conservative lobbying organizations promote anti-ESG messaging in their public comments on the proposed SEC climate rules. For example, the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, colored its critique of the rules with a jab at ESG advocates in a lengthy public comment submitted on June 1, 2021, describing them as “increasingly strident” in their efforts to achieve “various social or political objectives.”

“This is being done under the banner of social justice; corporate social responsibility (CSR); stakeholder theory; environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria; socially responsible investing (SRI); sustainability; diversity; business ethics; common-good capitalism; or corporate actual responsibility,” the Heritage Foundation’s comment reads.

“The social costs of ESG and broader efforts to repurpose business firms will be considerable,” the group warned. “Wages will decline or grow more slowly, firms will be less productive and less internationally competitive, investor returns will decline, innovation will slow, goods and services quality will decline and their prices will increase,” it added, without substantiation.

Another look at the SEC climate rules

All in all, Heritage dismissed the entire effort as a pointless, politics-driven exercise. “When all is said and done, climate change disclosure requirements will have somewhere between a trivial impact and no impact on climate change,” its comment reads.

In contrast, other commenters underscored the extent to which ESG principles and ESG reporting have already been adopted as a matter of business, not ideology. “The impacts of the climate crisis on our lives and our livelihoods are worsening at a dramatic rate,” the nonprofit B Lab — which operates the voluntary B Corp certification for responsible businesses — and the B Corp Climate Collective wrote in a joint comment to the SEC, in just one example

Commenters also noted that the economic landscape is fraught with physical risks from climate impact, as well as bottom-line risks involving changes in regulatory, technological, economic, and litigation scenarios as the economy shifts to net-zero.

“The risks can combine in unexpected ways, with serious, disruptive impacts on asset valuations, global financial markets, and global economic stability,” the B Corp groups argued, in making the case for stronger, more detailed disclosure rules based on the recommendationsof the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).

The SEC has some changes in store

The SEC has yet to announce a decision on what will be included in the revised rules. However, in a recent interview with CNBC, Chairman Gensler reminded the public of the agency’s investor protection mission. “I like to say we’re merit-neutral, whether it’s crypto or climate risk,” he told the outlet earlier this year. “But we’re not investor-protection-neutral or capital-formation-neutral.”

He reiterated that the new SEC climate rules are “about bringing consistency and comparability to disclosures that are already being made about climate risks,” adding that “investors seem to be, today, making decisions about this information.”

Some SEC observers anticipate that the agency will propose easing the original rules, in order to prevent unreasonable burdens on companies that are already engaged with climate disclosure.

That may be so. However, it is unlikely that the revised rules will provide a cloak of invisibility for companies that have not made plans for transitioning to a low-carbon economy.

In the CNBC interview, Gensler emphasized that the proposed rules don’t force companies to make a climate transition plan if they don’t already have one. “If a company doesn’t have a climate transition plan, that disclosure was: ‘We don’t we don’t have that such a plan or target,’” he explained.

That sounds simple enough. If that feature of the proposed rule remains in place when the SEC announces the revisions — which are expected later this month — investors will have a clear, accessible way in which to assess which companies are preparing to respond to the massive risks posed by climate impacts, and which still have their heads in the sand.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/sec-climate-rule-changes/770581

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Climate Rules, Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)., corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, responsible brands, SEC, SEC Chair Gary Gensler, SRI, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG

Has Purpose-Driven Marketing Become Less Relevant to Consumers?

5 04 2023

Photo: Unsplash / AbsolutVision

By Tom Ryan from retailwire.com • Reposted: April 5, 2023

A new study finds over 57 percent of U.S. consumers cannot name a brand that is making a difference when it comes to either the environment or diversity.

Slightly fewer, 54 percent, could not name a brand that gave back to the community, according to GfK’s first “Purpose Impact Monitor” study.

The study found that three-quarters of generic ads captured the attention of consumers. The proportion dropped to two-thirds for cause-focused ads.

“The truth today is that purpose-driven efforts and campaigns have become commonplace – even mundane,” said Eric Villain, client solutions director for Marketing Effectiveness at GfK, in a statement. “If a brand were to completely shun causes, that would likely be noticed; but supporting them is not a differentiator anymore. This means marketers and brands need to work harder – in keeping with their brand essence and the category – to really make an impression with their purpose efforts.”

Recent research from CivicScience found 73 percent of U.S. adults agree that a company’s “social consciousness and overall kindness” is either “very important” (29 percent) or “somewhat important” (44 percent) when choosing where to shop and what to buy.

The importance peaked in 2020 during the Black Lives Matter protests and the presidential election. Sentiment “softened over the past year, likely as price sensitivity and economic concerns grew.”

The socially responsible marketing consultancy Good.Must.Grow’s “Tenth Annual Conscious Consumer Spending Index” found the momentum for conscious consumerism and charitable giving surged to a record high of 51 on a scale of 100 in 2021 as the pandemic “reenergized the pursuit of purpose.” It eased to 49 in 2022.

The decline in 2022 was attributed to inflation as 46 percent of Americans said the cost of socially responsible goods and services prevented them from buying more.

“I believe this year’s data demonstrates several things, one of which is the tension involved with following through on good intentions in the face of economic pressures,” said Heath Shackleford, founder of Good.Must.Grow. “Those of us working for the growth of socially responsible brands must continue to prioritize competitive pricing.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://retailwire.com/discussion/has-purpose-driven-marketing-become-less-relevant-to-consumers/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Civic Science, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, GfK, green marketing, Purpose Driven Brands, Purpose Impact Monitor, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands

Should sustainability teams report directly to the CEO?

5 04 2023

Image: GreenBiz photocollage via Shutterstock

By Lynelle Cameron & Mark Spears from Greenbiz.com • Reposted: April 5, 2023

Companies large and small are setting up internal sustainability functions. How should these teams be structured and who is accountable at the executive level varies widely depending on the company, the size, the industry, the strategy and the leadership team. What does this mean for your company and how should you set up a sustainability team to be most successful? Given that sustainability is increasingly tied directly to a company’s success, should the chief sustainability officer (CSO) necessarily report into the CEO?

We recently posed this question to the members of Sustainability Veterans, a group of professionals who have held senior positions leading corporate sustainability teams at global brands. The group comes together regularly to leverage their collective intellectual, experiential and social capital in service of helping the next generation of sustainability leaders be successful. Collectively, the group has set up, reorganized and restructured sustainability teams at brands as diverse as Autodesk, Dell, Herman Miller and Nike.

“CSO and innovation leader roles are combined at Dupont,” says Dawn Rittenhouse, formerly the director of sustainable development there for 20 years. “I spent much of my sustainability career reporting up through the operations function. Transitioning the focus from ‘doing less bad’ to thinking about how the company is ‘investing for the future’ was a refreshing transition and really allowed us to drive changes that would impact the company for decades to come.”

Nike was similar, shares Sarah Severn, who spent over two decades in senior sustainability roles at the apparel and footwear giant. “Until recently, the CSO had a dual reporting structure, to the president of innovation and to the CEO. The sustainability team evolved over the years as did its reporting structure.”

At EMC, the CSO reports into the general counsel. Kathrin Winkler, former CSO for EMC, co-founder of Sustainability Veterans and now an editor at large for GreenBiz, shared the following: “At EMC, I reported into the GC. We were yin and yang, which ensured my arguments were well-reasoned and honed. He taught me a ton about governance, risk and wielding influence. His remit — and therefore mine — was the entire business, which he knew cold, and he had the ear and trust of the CEO and board. For a well-established company, I’d advocate reporting to the general counsel or CFO, who would have equivalent attributes.”

Ellen Weinreb, another co-founder of Sustainability Veterans, referenced research her firm published this month titled the 2023 Weinreb Group CSO Report. It found that roughly a third of CSOs report to the CEO and a third report to the chief operating officer or head of strategy. This finding held true in CSO surveys Weinreb Group ran in both 2011 and 2023.

CMO or CFO?

Being aligned with marketing is what has worked at other companies. Trisa Thompson, a lawyer and former chief responsibility officer at Dell Technologies, said, “My team at Dell reported into the chief marketing officer. It was very helpful because I had dedicated marketing and communications support — something we really needed to get our message out.” She went on to explain that “the CSO should regularly and necessarily interact with all of the CxOs on the executive team.”

“One strong option would be to report to the CFO since they typically own strategy and financial reporting, which enables a deeper integration with sustainability,” explains Mark Spears, a former sustainability director at The Walt Disney Company. “Integrating non-financial strategy and reporting with its financial counterpart encourages a balance of business performance, risk management and meaningful and measurable sustainability impact.”

At Autodesk, sustainability and impact reporting shifted from the CMO to the CFO, according to Lynelle Cameron, the company’s former VP of sustainability, now an ESG adviser to regenerative companies. “The move from CMO to CFO partly reflected a natural evolution as sustainability became more tightly integrated with investor relations and the performance of all aspects of the business. At the end of the day, the key factor for us was identifying the executive who had significant clout at the executive table and would be most effective driving it forward with the CEO and the board.”

“Good relationships across the executive team are what’s essential, regardless of where the sustainability leader reports,” explains Mark F. Buckley, former VP of sustainability at Staples and founder of One Boat Collaborative. “The final 16 years of my sustainability career at Staples, I reported into senior leaders who reported directly to the CEO and chairman, which provided good support and visibility. As a result, I had good working relationships with all functional leaders.”

Bart Alexander, former chief corporate responsibility officer at Molson Coors, agrees that having a broad spectrum of high-level relationships is key. “The primary role of the CSO is to foster sustainable change across the enterprise, in all functions and geographies. To do so, they must have excellent and trusting relationships with senior leaders throughout the organization, as well as with key stakeholders. Engagement is fostered when staffing is detailed from the business units, since that is where the real work happens.”

Frank O’Brien-Bernini, former CSO at Owens Corning, has a slightly different perspective. CSOs, he says, should report to the executive with the most influence. “The CSO should report to the person within the company who can most directly advance the sustainability agenda being pursued, leaving no ‘go-between’ executive. At Owens Corning, the CSO reports directly to the CEO, which is consistent with the depth and breadth of the sustainability agenda, cutting across and demanding progress from all functions. In most companies, all the C-suite functions come together at the CEO, so the CSO becomes a unique and key partner in sharing and operating from that holistic perspective.”

In the end, there’s no one right answer. For example, another finding from the Weinreb Group report was that the remaining third of CSOs report all over the place: ESG; diversity; HR, supply chain; R&D; investor relations.

Opinions, too, are varied. Alexander points out, “The formal reporting is not so important as long as the CSO has regular access to and support from the CEO and the corporate board.” Thompson believes, “In the future, the CSO should report into the CEO, as the role is becoming increasingly strategic to the entire company and to your customers.” For early-stage companies, says Winkler, “the CSO should report to the CEO.”

What matters most is access to and direct communication with the CEO and the board. “Having experienced an ever-evolving reporting structure, it is vital accountability ultimately resides with the CEO,” explains Spears. Severn agrees: “Given the broad nature of ESG requirements, I would always advocate for the CSO to have a direct line to the CEO because it avoids potential conflicts of interest if situated within other departments.”

Cecily Joseph, former VP of corporate responsibility at Symantec, put it this way: “I don’t think it matters where the CSO/sustainability team sits in the company. Reporting into functions such as legal, marketing, finance or directly into the CEO can all be impactful. What matters is that the person overseeing the sustainability function has access to the C-suite, CEO and board, and can directly influence the company’s strategy.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/should-sustainability-teams-report-directly-ceo

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: CEO, CFO, CMO, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSO, CSR, ESG, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG

How Sustainability Impacts Consumer Preferences in the Grocery Industry

5 04 2023

Contributed by The Ashkin Group via Cleanlink.com • Reposted: April 5, 2023

A March 2023 study released by Glow, a research technology company, and NielsenIQ, a global information services company, finds that sustainability in the food and grocery (F&G) industry is becoming more and more imperative.

According to the researchers, “Consumers are increasingly willing to align their purchases with their values” about sustainability. The study, conducted from April 2022 to December 2022, included more than 33,000 respondents. Researchers said the respondents were a representative sample of US consumers based on age, gender, and geography.

Among the key takeaways from the report are the following:

• Sustainability is good for business. Companies focused on sustainability are outpacing their competitors regarding sales and market share.

• Consumers are switching brands based on sustainability. Switching brands based on how sustainability-focused a company is viewed is happening across all market categories, especially among younger consumers.

• Sustainability outweighs cost. With inflation, some consumers are looking for less costly product alternatives. But many consumers won’t trade down to a less expensive brand if that organization is not practicing sustainability.

• Sustainability communications matter. The study found that many brands are not getting the recognition they deserve – along with the related market share and profits – because they are not promoting their sustainability practices to consumers.

“We must remember this study focused on the food and grocery industry,” says Steve Ashkin, president of The Ashkin Group and the professional cleaning industry’s leading advocate for sustainability. “Consumers and end-customers may differ on the importance of sustainability by industry. However, F&G is closely connected to the professional cleaning industry. What happens in food and grocery will likely follow very quickly in professional cleaning — if it has not already.”

The study supports this view. In F&G, the three sustainability drivers most important in the overall sustainability of a brand are the following:

1. Reducing emissions to slow climate change.

2. Protecting natural resources

3. Protecting wildlife and ecosystems.

“These are among the same key drivers in the professional cleaning industry driving the industry to operate more sustainably as well,” says Ashkin.

The full study is available here.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.cleanlink.com/news/article/How-Sustainability-Impacts-Consumer-Preferences-in-the-Grocery-Industry—29591

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Glow Research, green marketing, Grocery, Nielsen IQ, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG, sustainability, sustainable branding

Responsible Investment Requires a Deep Understanding of Water Risks and Opportunities

4 04 2023

The Milwaukee River flows through the city’s downtown harbor district. Image credit: Girish Shah/Flickr

By Cindy Bohlen, Chief Mindfulness Officer and Director of ESG Investing at Riverwater Partners via Triplepundit.com • Reposted: April 4, 2023

Milwaukee is gaining recognition as a global hub for expertise on water challenges and solutions. The Wisconsin city is located at the confluence of three rivers and Lake Michigan. That makes it part of one of the largest freshwater systems in the world. As a Milwaukee-based enterprise, Riverwater Partners has a great appreciation for the significance of water stewardship. Our proximity to these important bodies of water and the growing hub has led us to focus on water stewardship as a major theme in our responsible investment practice.

The importance of water stewardship

Water is one of the most important natural resources on the planet. It is integral to both life on Earth and conducting business. Seventy percent of the world’s freshwater is used in agriculture, making it critical for food production. Additionally, 57 percent of CEOs who responded to the U.N. Global Compact/Accenture survey in 2022 reported that air, water, and land pollution are having a high or moderate impact on their business today.

Water stewardship ensures that resources are managed sustainably for communities and industry — making it critical for the well-being of society and business alike. Proper stewardship protects water quality and quantity, reduces the risk of water scarcity, and safeguards everyone’s access to clean water.

A business risk and opportunity

Responsible investment advisors should seek to understand potential water-related risks and opportunities in the areas of access, regulation, reputation and more as part of their due diligence. They can do this by using publicly available company data, third-party data, and having a dialogue with management teams to learn about the potential for water to impact the business — or for the business to impact the water supply.

At Riverwater, our engagement practice seeks to raise awareness among management teams of the potential risks and opportunities that are presented by water. We offer educational information and suggestions for best practices to companies for which water stewardship is a salient issue. This is particularly applicable for businesses that rely on water for their operations — such as food and beverage companies, manufacturing companies, and extractive companies — as well as water technology companies and utilities that may potentially benefit from a focus on stewardship.

The Water Council is a helpful resource for investors who want to learn more about water. The Milwaukee-based nonprofit has an international reputation for supporting corporate water stewardship and fostering water-related technology, both of which could interest sustainable investors. Its Water Champions program, corporate water stewardship educational site, and thought leadership events like the annual Water Leaders Summit help individuals and organizations learn, connect and collaborate on important water topics.

Examples of scarcity and pollution

Water is a complicated issue that requires more attention. For example, low water levels in the Colorado River basin have already caused scarcity issues for communities and businesses in the western portion of the U.S., with more struggle and devastation expected. This is leading some to question new housing developments and increasing residential populations in places like Arizona. But the key factor is land use, said Kathryn Sorensen, director of research at the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University, and speaker at the 2022 Water Leaders Summit. Several cities have stored up water reserves and increased efficiencies to handle the changing circumstances, she said.

Meanwhile, since agriculture uses up to 80 percent of Colorado River resources, it could be hit hard as resources diminish. The discussion with Sorensen provided valuable insights for Riverwater’s continued dialogue with a portfolio company that grows citrus and avocados in California and Nevada and relies heavily on water from the endangered source.

Not even Milwaukee, with its access to abundant freshwater from Lake Michigan, is immune from water problems. High levels of per-and poly-fluoroalkyl substances — otherwise known as PFAS, or “forever chemicals” — have been found in the water in several areas around Wisconsin, including in groundwater and in private wells near Milwaukee’s airport. This could affect where and how businesses choose to operate in Milwaukee. But it also offers an opportunity for investment in companies working on the destruction and mitigation of PFAS.

Stewardship avoids “greenwashing”

The sustainable investment community is also desperately seeking credible frameworks from which to verify sustainability efforts and avoid “greenwashing” in their portfolio. This is particularly true for water stewardship, which can be difficult to quantify due to the resource’s complex and hyperlocal nature.

The Water Council addresses this problem through its program for enterprise-wide water stewardship verification (WAVE). WAVE is an ideal tool for management teams that are interested in identifying their greatest water challenges and opportunities so that they can create a plan that will address them. Essentially, it rapidly moves companies from intention to action.

As responsible investors, our goal is to use sustainable investing to reduce business risk for portfolio companies while enabling better outcomes for our clients and society alike. Stewardship of our most precious natural resource has the potential to benefit the planet and its people while providing prosperity for all.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/responsible-investment-water-stewardship/769931

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, PFAS, responsible brands, Responsible Investing, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, The Water Council, U.N. Global Compact, Water Stewardship', WAVE
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG

Global Hunger: The Growing ESG Issue That Few Companies Want to Face

3 04 2023

USAID distributes food assistance in East Africa, where an unprecedented drought is pushing millions to the brink of starvation. Image credit: USAID U.S. Agency for International Development/Flickr

By Eric Bebernitz, Director of External Relations, Action Against Hunger via Triplepundit.com • Reposted: April 3, 2023

Companies are working to meet rising stakeholder expectations on environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues in ways that can differentiate, build brand reputation, and engage employees. Yet the predominant approach misses a critical opportunity since it doesn’t focus on a critical issue that few want to face: global hunger.

Hear me out. Just as the climate crisis is a universal challenge, global hunger is a fundamental issue that ultimately impacts business success — and humanity as a whole. In 2021, an Action Against Hunger survey with The Harris Poll found that nearly half of all Americans worry about increases to the price of food as a result of climate change. The most recent Trust Barometer found that 67 percent of people globally are worried about food shortages leading to hoarding, riots and hunger, which Edelman characterizes as an existential societal fear. As a priority, the issue ranked behind climate change and just ahead of energy shortages. It’s not hard to see why.

After decades of progress showed that it is possible to dramatically slash rates of malnutrition, global hunger is once again on the rise. Approximately 828 million people — 1 in 10 worldwide — are undernourished, and as many as 50 million people in 45 countries are on the verge of famine. The costs of inaction are high.

Yet global hunger is a predictable and preventable problem that we can solve in our lifetimes. Doing so can provide a strong return on investment. As a 2022 study showed, every $1 invested in preventing chronic malnutrition in children can result in gains from $2 to $81 annually. Among the range of ESG issues, addressing malnutrition stands out for its ability to advance other corporate priorities, such as the following.

Long-term workforce development

Hungry children struggle to learn, and hungry workers are less productive. Hunger robs the U.S. economy of at least $167.5 billion annually, and research published in The Lancet found that, across 95 low- and middle-income countries, childhood stunting costs the private sector at least $135.4 billion in sales annually, amounting to around 1.2 percent of national GDP.

Socio-economic growth

The U.S. Secretary of Commerce believes an aging population will hit the country “like a ton of bricks,” with migration as a potential solution. Africa is the only region projected to enjoy strong population growth long-term, which can provide a global demographic dividend — but only if we invest in the potential. Africa has the world’s youngest population as well as the highest hunger rates, with 9 out of 10 children not receiving even the minimum acceptable diet, according to the World Health Organization. One in 3 African children are permanently stunted by hunger, reducing the region’s present GDP per capita by 10 percent. Hunger is growing in other regions, as well.

Political stability

Conflict and global hunger are deeply linked. As U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres noted in a 2020 report, income inequality is creating a vicious cycle of discontent, leading to mass protests in both developed and developing countries. Roughly 70 percent of the world’s most malnourished people live in countries with an active conflict, which disrupts harvests, hampers aid delivery, and creates a burgeoning population of displaced people. This can contribute to even greater instability, often in already fragile regions.

Permission to operate

The epochal shift from shareholder capitalism to stakeholder capitalism comes as a growing number of millennial and Gen Z adults — now a majority of the U.S. workforce and a growing share of the electorate — hold a negative view of capitalism itself. Public willingness to subsidize, tax and regulate business can, quite literally, hinge on bread-and-butter issues.

The bottom line: The untapped potential of investing to fight global hunger

Although addressing global hunger is a wise investment, it’s one that isn’t being made. Countries with “crisis” levels of hunger face a 53 percent gap in hunger funding. Corporate giving to health and social services dropped 5 percent in 2022, and median international community investments decreased by 15 percent, according to CECP. Among the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals, companies consistently report providing the least support for the objective to eradicate global hunger.

Inaction is particularly unwise in an era when economic anxieties and the mass-class divide are eroding trust. The effect is sharply pronounced among those with lower incomes: In the U.S., for example, there is a 23-point gap in the levels of institutional trust among lower-income and higher-income groups. Lack of trust has a corrosive effect on society, dimming long-term economic prospects.

In other words, chronic inequality — a major driver of global hunger — is bad for business. Ending hunger is no longer about charity or even being “woke.” It is now essential to foster the kind of operating environment that is essential to business value and long-term success.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/global-hunger-esg-issue/770221

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Action Against Hunger, CECP, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Global Hunger, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, Trust Barometer, US AID, World Health Organization
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG, reputation management, social responsibility

Top 10 responsible investment brands remain European

2 04 2023

The European Union Flag. Photo: FundsEurope

By Funds Europe • Reposted: April 2, 2023

The top 10 firms in the 2023 Responsible Investment Brand Index (RIBI) continue to be European asset managers, according to the fifth edition of the global survey.

The research said these brands have solidified their position as ‘avant gardists’ – those with above-average ranking.

The top-ranked firm for 2023 is Candriam, followed in order by DPAM, Axa Investment Managers and Mirova.

Impax Asset Management, Ecofi Investissements, Schroders, Amundi, Robeco, and CPR Asset Management make up the remaining spots, respectively.

European firms held the top 10 spots in last year’s research and their base has since grown. Last year, these top 10 firms represented 24% of the industry. This has crept up to 28%.

As a region, Europe ex UK firms have an average RIBI score of 2.12 which had also increased from 2022 when this was 1.84. The latest score is well above the world average score of just below 1.9.

As a region, the UK has lagged, with an average score of 2.11. This has also increased from 1.72 in 2022, closing the gap with Europe.

North America is the biggest laggard, as a region, with an average score of below 1.7.

“The main challenge the financial industry needs to address remains its reputation – the necessity to establish long-term, trusted and mutually profitable relationships with multiple stakeholders,” says Jean-François Hirschel, co-founder of RIBI.

“With times staying uncertain yet RIBI demonstrating progress within the industry, there has perhaps never been a better time for asset managers to focus on the genuine identity they convey through their brand.”

The RIBI survey is based on an analysis of close to 600 asset managers around the world assessed on commitment and brand.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.funds-europe.com/news/top-10-responsible-investment-brands-remain-european

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Funds Europe, responsible brands, Responsible Investing, RIBI score, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG, social responsibility

Corporate sustainability needs a gender lens

31 03 2023

Outside the Department of Labour in Dhaka last month workers demanded that their shuttered garment factory be reopened Photo: Mamunur Rashid / shutterstock.com

The draft EU directive on corporate sustainability remains gender-blind. And what you don’t see you can’t fix. by CAROLINA RUDNICKVIZCARRA, SYLVIA OBREGON QUIROZ and ANDRIANA LOREDAN from Social Europe: Reposted: March 31, 2023

When industrial agriculture and salmon production came to Chile, they brought new jobs to rural and indigenous women. But the work came with a hefty price tag.

It wiped out ancestral practices and shattered solidarity-based communities. Those working the graveyard shift in salmon-processing plants endured gruelling hours and saw their family bonds deteriorate.

The salaries were low—so low they couldn’t even be considered a living wage. When the pandemic hit and the food industry shuttered, unemployment grew in nearby communities. Going into debt became unavoidable for many, while others hung by a thread.

The situation was doubly difficult for women workers, because of gender norms and intersecting vulnerabilities. Still the main caregivers, their poverty wages and brutal working conditions also affected children and elderly family members dependent on them.

Especially insidious

Gender discrimination and inequality in global value chains have been widely documented but remain largely unaddressed by European companies and regulators. Abuses of women’s rights are especially insidious in the food-services, electronics and garment industries, where women make up most of the workforce.

Women in these export-oriented manufacturing sectors are vulnerable to wage theft, union-busting and other violations of labour rights—especially if they are young, migrant and/or poorly educated. Reckless business activities prey on and exacerbate inequitable gender roles, such that 71 per cent of those trapped in modern slavery are women.

All of this is hidden in plain sight. The long and winding value chains that stretch across the globe reinforce power imbalances and the maldistribution of costs and benefits. For instance, most brands don’t seem to care that it takes just four days for a chief executive from one of the top fashion labels to make what a Bangladeshi garment worker will earn in her lifetime.

Similarly, fossil-fuel companies have made record profit s from the energy crisis while fuelling climate collapse and pushing millions into starvation. Yet TotalEnergies is rewarding its chief executive with a scandalous bonus of nearly €6 million, despite standing accused of causing massive forced displacements in Uganda and Tanzania. What is often overlooked is how land-grabbing affects women, who comprise only 15 per cent of landholders globally but depend on the land to grow food and secure water.

Sexual violence is another endemic issue, festering in the deep underbelly of multinationals’ value chains. Recent investigations have uncovered abuses in tea plantations and wind parks. These will only be eradicated if we ensure corporate accountability.

Stumbling at the first hurdle

As the largest trading bloc in the world, the European Union must lead on this front. Civil society and trade unions have hailed the forthcoming corporate-sustainability directive as a huge opportunity to advance women’s rights and gender equality globally, while uprooting abuses of human and environmental rights along companies’ value chains and holding them liable for harm.

Yet despite the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, declaring that ‘gender equality is a core principle of the European Union’, the commission stumbled at the first hurdle in making this a reality for the women making our food, clothes and electronics. The draft directive completely ignored the enhanced risks of business for women, girls and other marginalised groups.

Then in December, the Council of the EU, representing the member states, scrapped the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women from the draft directive’s list of human-rights standards corporations must respect. This is a huge setback in the fight for women’s rights.

Do European citizens know how little their governments care about women? This gender-blind approach will simply fortify toxic gender dynamics and leave women further behind. It certainly will not protect women environmental and human-rights defenders from the misogynistic violence disproportionately used to silence and control them.

Changing course

The European Parliament and the council can still change course. Co-legislators must ensure rules extend across the entire value chain, because it is in the lower tiers where women are over-represented and invisible to corporates in head offices.

For women and those in situations of vulnerability, access to justice must also urgently be improved. Removing legal barriers to bringing transnational court cases against companies is essential. That includes reversing the disproportionate burden of proof borne by claimants, who usually have limited access to evidence such as internal documents.

European lawmakers must also oblige companies to carry out impact assessments that identify how corporate activities affect women specifically—and include provisions on gender equality and the protection of human-rights defenders erased from earlier drafts. To guarantee that women’s exploitation is no longer a source of profit, major brands must map their international value chains and collect gender-disaggregated data, to give women the information they need to alert companies about risks and ways to remedy abuses.

World of difference

For women working in salmon-processing plants in Chile, it would make a world of difference to be heard and taken into account. By carrying out due diligence and consulting women in a meaningful way, European buying companies would learn about the problems women face—how supervisors monitor their bathroom breaks or penalise their medical check-ups and maternity leaves. You cannot fix what you do not see.

With key votes in the European Parliament and the ‘trilogue’ negotiations on the directive approaching among commission, council and parliament, EU leaders need to get their act together to guarantee that the products we use are untainted by abuses.

On International Women’s Day, the commission said it stood ‘united with all women to build momentum for their rights across the globe’. The EU must now present a united stand to protect the millions of women who work in the factories, farms and packing houses supplying our essential needs.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.socialeurope.eu/corporate-sustainability-needs-a-gender-lens

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Gender Lens, International Women’s Day, responsible brands, Social Europe, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, the Council of the EU
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG

How Sustainability is Driving Consumer Purchases in Food and Grocery

31 03 2023

Image: Waste 360

Consumers are increasingly swapping brands for ones that are more sustainable, according to new research from Glow. The online consumer research platform contacted 33,000 respondents between April and December 2022, gathering insight into their food and grocery purchases. By Stefanie Valentic from Waste 360 – Reposted: March 31, 2023

Consumers are increasingly swapping brands for ones that are more sustainable, according to new research from Glow.

The online consumer research platform contacted 33,000 respondents between April and December 2022, gathering insight into their food and grocery purchases. Glow also leveraged data from NielsonIQ research studies to study the relationship between consumers and sustainability expectations.

Glow founder and CEO Tim Clover commented, “Investors, employees, customers and consumers want to see more progress in sustainability initiatives that support people, the environment and the planet. Brands are increasingly sharing their credentials, communicating their milestones and publishing performance against their ESG and sustainability goals.”

He noted the influx of information around sustainability from both “controlled and uncontrolled sources” as a direct driver of consumer purchasing decisions, with one out of 2 consumers switching brands based on their purpose-driven efforts.

The US Brand Sustainability Benchmark report showed behaviors shift across all sectors of the food and grocery (F&G) industry, with the highest occurrences in Health & Beauty, Meat & Seafood, Household, and Beverage.

Respondents indicated they are willing to pay more for brands with ESG goals that align with their values. Nine out of 10 consumers surveyed expressed the importance of brands demonstrating social and environmental responsibility. Furthermore, 64 percent are willing to pay more for these products.

The findings also showed the following economic issues are most important in purchasing F&G products: reducing emissions and climate change; respecting and protecting natural resources; protecting wildlife and ecosystems; and taking care of supplier welfare. Packaging and plastic reduction in Household products also were important to consumers.

“The largest opportunity gap for brands in the US F&G industry exists in the Environmental drivers,” the study found. “They are the most important but consumers are the least satisfied with the industry’s overall performance across them. More than 3 in 10 consumers are not satisfied with the industry’s performance on any of the four Environmental drivers – with reducing emissions & climate change both the most important AND the lowest scoring driver of satisfaction measured. Environmental drivers represent a significant opportunity for the Food and Grocery industry to raise their game to meet consumer expectations.”

Glow concluded that opportunities exist for F&G brands that align their ESG goals with consumer expectations. The industry ranked ahead of 20 others in the report, just behind supermarkets and convenience.

“The F&G industry is deemed to be one of the industries leading the way to a more sustainable future,” the study noted.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.waste360.com/sustainability/how-sustainability-driving-consumer-purchases-food-and-grocery

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, F&G Brands, Glow Research, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG

Responsible brands contributing to provide clean water for 5 million people

28 03 2023

Image: Water Equity

Among the contributors to the $140 million WaterEquity Global Access Fund IV are Ecolab, Starbucks, Gap, Reckitt and DuPont. The companies have contributed to a $140 million fund run by WaterEquity, whose co-founder is Matt Damon. By Patrick Kennedy from the Star Tribune • Reposted: March 28, 2023

Ecolab is investing $10 million to a new fund that hopes to bring clean drinking water to 5 million people around the world.

Among the other contributors to the $140 million WaterEquity Global Access Fund IV are Starbucks, Gap, Reckitt and DuPont.

The fund is being managed by WaterEquity, an impact investment asset manager whose co-founder is the actor Matt Damon. The announcement came last week as the United Nations Water Conference was set to start.

The companies are all part of the Water Resilience Coalition, a CEO-led initiative to bring attention to and take action against a growing global water crisis. Nearly 2 billion people today live in water stressed areas and, according to the coalition, that number may grow to half the world’s population by 2050.

“As a global water leader who helps customers manage 1.1 trillion gallons around the world, Ecolab believes that water stewardship and sustainable business growth must go hand in hand,” said Emilio Tenuta, Ecolab’s chief sustainability officer.

Starbucks’ contribution is $25 million. The fund also has a $100 million commitment from the U.S. International Development Finance Corp.

Tenuta said Ecolab not only believes the cause is the right thing to do but also boosts “the business case for sustainability by showing a positive return on investment and a positive impact,” he added.

The fund is part of a new investment portfolio by the Water Resilience Coalition. More investment will be needed to fund the nearly $1 billion in collective investment opportunities identified by the portfolio.

The portfolio may eventually include other funding vehicles including private equity investments, microloans and impact bonds.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.startribune.com/ecolab-contributes-10m-to-effort-to-provide-clean-water-for-5-million-people-waterequity-matt-damon/600262258/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, Matt Damon, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, Water Resilience Coalition, WaterEquirty
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG

Gearing Up for ESG Reporting: Insights from Public Company Executives

27 03 2023

Image credit: Andrea Piacquadio/Pexels

By Kristen Sullivan from triple pundit.com • Reposted: March 27, 2023

Committing to meet environmental, social, and governance (ESG) objectives and targets is one thing. Acting on them is quite another. What are businesses doing to prepare for high-quality sustainability and ESG reporting, and what challenges are they uncovering along the way? To find out, Deloitte surveyed 300 public company executives to get a pulse on current trends and sentiment. Here are five takeaways from the front lines of real-world change.

Embed ESG in the corporate strategy

Nearly 3 in 5 executives (57 percent) say their company has established a cross-functional working group to drive strategic attention to ESG, an increase of 21 percent since last year. Another 42 percent say they’re in the process of establishing one.

A typical ESG working group includes executives from finance, accounting, risk, legal, sustainability, operations, supply chain and other functional areas. Increasingly, accountability for ESG performance can be most effective with an integrated governance structure that brings together all business functions. A philosophy of ownership across the business, paired with a strategic approach to governance, can establish ESG as a strategic priority highly aligned to corporate strategy.

Assign roles and responsibilities

Only 3 percent of executives say their companies are prepared for potential increased ESG regulatory or other disclosure requirements, but many are getting ready. For instance, 81 percent of companies have created new roles or responsibilities, and 89 percent say they’ve enhanced internal goal-setting and accountability mechanisms to promote readiness.

Who has management responsibility over ESG disclosure? Today, in many cases, it’s the chief financial officer (CFO) or chief sustainability officer (CSO), but many respondents indicate that increasingly there is shared responsibility for ESG reporting across the executive leadership team, human resources, supply chain and other functions.

Of those executives surveyed, board-level oversight has been predominantly assigned to the nominating and governance committee, but we are seeing a trend of expanded oversight responsibility across all committees, aligned to respective remit, to drive greater integration and oversight of ESG risks and opportunities.

Increase focus on assurance

Nearly all (96 percent) surveyed executives plan to seek assurance for the next ESG reporting cycle. To prepare for a reasonable level of assurance, 37 percent of companies are starting to apply the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO)’s internal control guidelines, which can help companies measure, manage and validate ESG information with the same rigor typically applied to financial reporting.

Respondents shared that they use a range of different frameworks and standards for their disclosures. The most common is the Task Force for Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) (56 percent), closely followed by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) (55 percent). Around half of respondents also use standards from the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI).

For multinational firms, the rapid progress of the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) signals optimism for convergence of a number of leading sustainability reporting standards and frameworks and the creation of a global baseline for sustainability reporting to help meet the information needs of the capital markets, as well as serve as the basis upon which other jurisdictions can build.

Develop a workable solution for data gaps

When it comes to sustainability reporting, access to quality ESG data now appears to be a bigger challenge than data availability. Still, a majority (61 percent) of respondents indicate their companies are prepared to disclose details about the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions they directly produce, known as Scope 1. Even more (76 percent) say they’re ready to disclose details of their Scope 2 GHG emissions, or emissions generated by the electricity a company purchases, a substantial increase from the 47 percent who said so the previous year.

At the same time, Scope 3 emissions — which account for GHGs produced along a company’s entire value chain — appear to remain a challenge. Most respondents (86 percent) indicate they’ve run into challenges measuring them, and only 37 percent are prepared to disclose them in detail.

To close any gaps, companies may consider focusing on the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, which currently serves as the leading standard for measuring greenhouse gas emissions and provides for methodologies to promote consistency of measurement with due consideration to the level of measurement uncertainty and data availability.

Invest in technology for ESG reporting, disclosure and action

New technology is on the horizon for many companies as they embark on their ESG integration and disclosure journeys. Nearly all executives (99 percent) are somewhat likely or very likely to invest in new technology to prepare to meet stakeholder expectations and future regulatory requirements.

Technology solutions can assist in accelerating preparedness in moving from reporting in accordance with voluntary sustainability standards and frameworks to enhanced disclosure in accordance with authoritative ESG standards and new regulation.

No matter where a company is in their sustainability journey, strategic attention to ESG integration and disclosure today can help to deliver long term value to stakeholders into the future. By implementing the insights shared by public company executives, companies can gear up for ESG reporting and work to meet stakeholder expectations while also creating long-term value.

Kristen B. Sullivan is a partner with Deloitte & Touche LLP and leads Sustainability and ESG Services, working with clients to help address their sustainability and non-financial disclosure strategy needs.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/ceo-insights-esg-reporting/769591

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, CFO, corporate social responsibility, Corporate Strategy, CSO, Deloitte, ESG, GRI, International Integrated Reporting Council, marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, TCFD
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG

Stop the siloes: How a successful sustainability strategy involves the whole business

19 03 2023

For edie’s Business Leadership Month, Peter Bragg, EMEA sustainability & government affairs director at Canon, looks at how sustainability can be taken out of its silo to the benefit of the whole business. From edie’s.com • Reposted: March 19, 2023

It’s no longer news that sustainability is at the forefront of everyone’s minds. Consumers and companies alike are prioritising the planet by adopting more sustainable shopping habits and making more commitments to improve credentials, with 87% of business leaders planning to increase sustainability strategy investment over the next two years. While it’s great to see so many companies prioritising sustainability initiatives within their business model, there still remains a large number of business leaders who are struggling with the implementation of effective, large-scale sustainability strategies.

Many companies are establishing sustainability-focused departments, or specific roles, to help address these issues, however, by creating these silos, businesses are hindering the widespread adoption of sustainable practices that are needed to make a difference. Instead, businesses need to make sure every department, team and individual are taking an active part in delivering sustainability goals. Only then will sustainability strategies deliver the impactful and purposeful results needed.

Adopt a corporate philosophy

‘Sustainability’ in itself is an umbrella term that incorporates many different focus areas and methods for making the world a better place. For businesses setting a sustainability strategy, it can be easy to get lost in the generalisations, however every organisation should have a different idea of what sustainability means, because different businesses impact the planet in different ways.

Whether it’s working towards a greener supply chain or focusing also on social responsibility, it’s important for businesses to identify key areas they can improve to better the planet and establish clear goals to unify under. For Canon, we’ve adopted the corporate philosophy of Kyosei, meaning ‘living and working together for the common good’. This has provided a base from which we can launch specific initiatives aimed at both reducing our environmental impact and growing our social impact, while ensuring we are responsible and compliant with our products.

Expand efforts in-house

For better practices to be adopted by all departments in a business, it is key to both engage and educate the team. Building sustainability into the business model means ensuring all departments and business units are engaged and responsible for initiatives in their particular market. Aligning different people from across the business has been made easier with virtual communication, and setting up channels and regular check-ins is a great way to keep teams on track. It also proves incredibly useful to learn from teams in different markets, to understand what initiatives have worked, or haven’t, and use that feedback to inform strategies.

At Canon, we facilitate this open communication by working with our multidisciplinary steerco, where all functions of the business are connected and engaged. Setting up leadership working groups like this to apply practices and policies to individual departments ensures that everyone is aware of the role they have to play.

Partnerships broaden efforts

Just as many different areas of a business are needed to implement sustainability strategies, partnerships with other organisations can be a way of reaching all areas of the business. This can be by ensuring sustainability along a supply chain by only partnering with other responsible businesses, as well as broadening practices through proactive joint campaigns.

At Canon, we’ve developed a partnership with the UN SDG Action Team, and our Young People Programme (YPP) works with local NGOs including the Red Cross and Plan International to empower the next generation to make their voice heard on sustainability issues important to them. These particular partnerships have elevated our efforts in the social purpose side of sustainability, which works in addition to our focus on reducing our environmental impact.

Align with an existing framework

Thinking about the bigger picture in terms of sustainable goals can create difficulties for organisations wanting to coordinate approaches throughout the business – especially if they operate in different markets. Using existing framework is a good way to align teams and speed up the activation of these strategies.

The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a framework for coordinating action across a wide range of topics, keeping businesses in line to achieve goals by 2030. If these goals are included in sustainability and business strategies, they can unite different areas of the business and support a culture that recognises the importance of prioritising sustainability. The UN Global Compact published The SDG Compass to assist companies in aligning the Goals with their strategies.

Conclusion

Creating and implementing an effective sustainability strategy for your business, therefore, requires four key aspects: a clear and relevant sustainability goal, effective communication and engagement from across teams, appropriate partnerships to broaden sustainability practises and useful frameworks to align different teams under. The key theme here is collaboration, and by breaking down the silos, we can make sustainability a company-wide mission rather than a challenge reserved for business leaders alone. Only then can we start to make real change happen.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.edie.net/stop-the-siloes-how-a-successful-sustainability-strategy-involves-the-whole-business/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Canon, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG

Forbes: Purpose is the next digital

16 03 2023

The Stakeholder Model of Purpose. Graphic: CONSPIRACY OF LOVE

The Stakeholder Model Of Purpose: How Cause Marketing, CSR, Sustainability, DEI And ESG Can Operate Harmoniously In This New Age Of Purpose. By Afdhel Aziz, Contributor, Co-Founder, Conspiracy Of Love, And Good Is The New Cool via Forbes. Reposted: March 16, 2023

One of the biggest questions in the global movement of business as a force for good is how the different disciplines of CSR, ESG, sustainability, cause marketing, and diversity and inclusion all fit with the idea of Purpose.

I propose this simple model to show how they can all work in harmony.

Purpose is the Next Digital

A good analogy to start with comes from the quote ‘Purpose is the next Digital’ by Max Lenderman. In the same way that businesses had to transform themselves in every aspect (from the supply chains to their marketing) with the arrival of digital technology, the same evolution is happening with the advent of Purpose.

We see the emergence of the term ‘Purpose’ – the overarching umbrella term now increasingly being used to describe the idea of business as a force for good – in much the same way as we see the term ‘Digital.’ Just as ‘Digital’ now covers a myriad of different channels and technologies (from CRM, to supply chain management, to social media), so too does Purpose now encompass a wide range of different disciplines that preceded it (like CSR, ESG, DEI, etc).

Moving from Shareholder to Stakeholder Capitalism

The evolution of business we are seeing has also often been described as a move away from purely Shareholder-driven capitalism (where only the needs of investors were taken into account) towards a more Stakeholder-driven model (where the needs of multiple stakeholders including employees, consumers, investors, communities and the planet are also considered).

As such, mapping different manifestations of Purpose against these stakeholder groups provides a simple way to understand how they can all work in harmony, towards the higher order purpose.

Purpose at the core: The higher order reason for a company’s existence that inspires action to profitably solve the problems of the world. This exists as the core organizing principle of a truly Purpose-driven company, acting as a North Star around which to align all of the following.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusivity (DEI) is an Employee-focused manifestation of Purpose, ensuring that there are systems and processes in place in order to ensure a culture of belonging and opportunity, regardless of gender, ethnicity, sexuality, disability or neurodiversity. Inclusion should be baked into every aspect of the employee experience from recruitment to retention to Governance. If done right, it can not only lead to employee motivation and engagement but also innovation that leads to inclusive growth, through identifying new opportunities that less diverse cultures cannot envision.

Of course, DEI is only one manifestation of Purpose as it pertains to employees: there are so many more avenues (from inspiring personal purpose, to volunteering, giving, innovation and more generally, building it into the talent value proposition (TVP) and activating it at every stage from recruitment to onboarding to retention and career planning.

Cause marketing (or Purpose-driven marketing) is the legacy term for the manifestation of Purpose towards Consumers. This has now blossomed into many forms beyond its original basic models of the past.

This could take the form of initiatives that engage consumers via simply buying the product (eg TOM’s famous 1 for 1 model or Product (Red) which helped raise money for HIV/AIDS prevention.

At retail, this could manifest in a portion of revenue from products going to good causes (for instance, see Chips Ahoy raising money for the Boys and Girls Clubs of America).

Or indeed in digital or physical activations (for instance, Airbnb’s Open Homes initiative which invited hosts to donate their homes to refugees and victims of natural disasters).

Corporate Social Responsibility (or CSR) is the manifestation of Purpose towards the Communities a company serves – whether they be geographically contextual (like helping communities in the cities the company is based in) or issue focused (like The North Face funding non-profits that help make the outdoors more diverse via their Explore Fund grant).

This has always been a form of corporate philanthropy that a company has practiced in a more ‘defensive’ mode to deflect criticism of them not being a good corporate citizen. But in recent years, progressive companies have seen the benefit of treating CSR in a more enlightened way. By representing the voice of community to the company, and building deep relationships with non-profits and other partners, it can become a vital force helping drive authenticity, innovation and growth.

Sustainability is the manifestation of Purpose towards the Planet, pertaining to everything from how a company utilizes resources efficiently (like reducing their carbon footprint, stripping plastic out of their supply chain or managing waste) to how it obtains the resources (eg agricultural or mineral) with an ethical supply chain that is respectful not only to the Earth but the people who help them obtain it (eg farmers)

ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) is the manifestation of all of the above in a codified way towards Investors and Shareholders, in a transparent and measurable way, in a way that allows for comparison between companies. Despite attempts to politicize and demonize it, when done correctly it can become a useful tool to help articulate Commitments the company is making in service of environmental and social goals (people and planet) in an accountable and tangible way.

The key to success in this new world of Purpose is orchestration. When all these disparate disciplines are re-aligned around a powerful and inspiring Purpose, the effect is so much stronger than if they were focused on a myriad of different objectives and issues. They become parts of an orchestra playing a harmonious single theme rather than instruments operating on a discordant solo basis.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/afdhelaziz/2023/03/14/the-stakeholder-model-of-purpose-how-cause-marketing-csr-sustainability-dei-and-esg-can-operate-harmoniously-in-this-new-age-of-purpose/?sh=27616a3af777

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, cause marketing, Conspiracy of Love, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, DEI, ESG, green marketing, marketing, Purpose, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, ESG, responsible brands, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

What is ‘green hushing’? The new negative sustainability trend, explained

12 03 2023

Photo: Getty

Greenwashing has become part of our modern-day lexicon. Now there’s a new term, ‘green hushing,’ for when a company is too quiet about its accomplishments. By Talib Visram from Fast Company • Reposted: March 12, 21023

Greenwashing—the term referring to businesses exaggerating their commitment to sustainability—is now firmly rooted in our modern-day lexicon. Baseless green claims draw public scrutiny and sometimes outrage, not to mention lawsuits, such as ones filed against companies including Dasani, Kroger, and Whole Foods.

Faced with the threats of tarnished reputations and legal trouble, some companies are instead choosing not to communicate their climate goals at all, leaving them unpublicized and meaning other companies can’t emulate their success. A new term has sprouted to signify the practice: green hushing.

WHAT IS GREEN HUSHING?

Green hushing refers to companies purposely keeping quiet about their sustainability goals, even if they are well-intentioned or plausible, for fear of being labeled greenwashers.

Xavier Font, professor of sustainability marketing at the University of Surrey in the U.K., defines it as: “the deliberate downplaying of your sustainability practices for fear that it will make your company look less competent, or have a negative consequence for you.”

HOW LONG HAS THIS TERM BEEN AROUND, AND HOW COMMON IS IT?

Since at least 2017. Font had seen the term only once before studying the practice more closely that year. And for something many of us may not have heard of, the practice is pretty prevalent. “Greenwashing is very visible,” Font says. “Green hushing, by definition, is not. [But] I think green hushing happens a lot more than we realize.”

It gained more widespread coverage after October 2022, when Swiss carbon finance consultancy South Pole highlighted the trend of green hushing in a report. It noted that nearly a quarter of 1,200 companies with a sustainability head are not publicizing achievements “beyond the bare minimum.” (Belgium had the highest rate, with 41% of its companies with science-based climate targets not publicizing them.) The report called the trend “concerning,” because publishing green actions has the power to inspire others, shift mindsets, and encourage collaborative approaches.

WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE IN PRACTICE?

In his study, Font, who focuses on the tourism industry, found that companies were not communicating environmental successes to consumers, especially odd in an industry where there are many chances to do so, such as at hotels or on websites.

The study concentrated on 31 small rural tourism businesses in England’s Peak District National Park. Font found that companies communicated only 30% of their sustainability actions. He noted that companies feared that by broadcasting their sustainability practices, customers would believe their vacation experiences would be worse.

One issue, he says, is that many companies aren’t sure when to announce achievements. A hotel he worked with that procured sustainable seafood sourcing didn’t know whether to announce it when launching, or when half of its hotels used it, or when all of them did. “If 50% of my supply chain is doing something,” he was asked, “is that a message that is credible for me to communicate to the world?”

Similarly, Font mentions pushback over supermarkets labeling bananas as fair trade, because customers then asked why more goods weren’t fair trade. “Many companies are choosing to not talk about it, simply for fear that the customers will see the glass as being half empty, not half full,” he says.

For larger companies, there are legal motivations to not report extensively. In recent years, lawsuits have been filed against Dasani for claiming its water bottles were 100% recyclable, and Kroger for claiming its sunscreen was “reef-friendly.” Cracking down on these false claims—like the ubiquitous “locally sourced wherever possible”—is a good thing, Font says. “That’s a bit like me saying, ‘I’m a good husband whenever possible,’” he says. “It has no value.”

WHAT OTHER FORCES ARE AT PLAY?

Like in Europe, American companies are receiving pressure from environmental groups to stop greenwashing. But in the U.S., companies have to worry about the other political side, too, as there is an increased politicization of the climate crisis and environmental and social governance (ESG).

Several states, most notably Florida, are divesting billions of dollars from BlackRock because it has developed strong ESG portfolios. “We see attacks being more irrational and so fierce,” says Peter Seele, a professor of corporate social responsibility and business ethics at Università della Svizzera Italiana in Switzerland. This has created another reason for companies to stay silent, or else also be on the receiving end of “anti-woke” tirades.

That polarization is troubling, Font says, and seeps into customers’ beliefs, which requires businesses to be culturally sensitive in the markets they operate in. “If I was a company in the U.S., serving the full range of customers, I would downplay the ‘S word,’” he says, referring to sustainability. They may want to spin a sustainable practice as one that is beneficial to customers in some other way.

“In the U.S., we’re just more litigious,” says Anant Sundaram, professor of business and climate change at Dartmouth University. “You say something in your 10K, or you put out some document, [and] immediately it becomes the basis for a lawsuit.” So American companies “tend to prefer to stay under the radar, and are a little gun-shy.”

WHAT COULD REDUCE GREEN HUSHING?

Climate reporting is now prevalent across developed nations. And the disclosures on climate risks, mitigation, and sustainable strategies that companies submit to government agencies are publicly accessible. But mostly, they are voluntary—allowing businesses to green hush.

Companies are keeping relatively quiet about most of their climate data. In the U.S., a report found that while 71% of S&P 500 companies report their greenhouse gas emissions, only 28% of smaller companies do so. And only 15% of S&P 500 companies disclose information on biodiversity and deforestation, and 12% on water risks.

But public reporting is changing soon. In the EU, climate disclosures will become mandatory in 2025, and for a wider swath of companies than previously. In the U.S., the Securities and Exchange Commission aims to roll out stricter regulations for 2024 (which will initially be for larger, publicly traded companies, with market caps of at least $700 million). This stricter enforcement may give businesses less of a choice to practice green hushing.

WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF GREEN HUSHING?

It’s not ideal. As the Swiss report noted, companies discussing their climate actions can have positive knock-on effects and create change. But not if they’re silent.

Greenwashing crackdowns are valuable, but not if they are indiscriminate. Seele says there is a trend of attacking companies no matter how good their actions or intentions—which has brought about another phrase in the German media: “greenwashing truther,” for people who launch those kinds of accusations.

And in France, new greenwashing laws will place fines on companies for making misleading claims like being carbon neutral. While well-intended, such laws may serve to reduce greenwashing but heighten green hushing.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.fastcompany.com/90858144/what-is-green-hushing-the-new-negative-sustainability-trend-explained

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Fast Company, green marketing, Greenwashing, gren hushiing, marketing, responsible brands, SEC, sustainability, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility

Unilever: Influencers have greatest impact on consumer sustainability choices

11 03 2023

By Chris Kelly from marketing dive.com • Reposted: March 11, 2023

Influencers have the single largest impact on consumers’ sustainability choices, ahead of TV documentaries, news articles and government campaigns, according to a study shared with Marketing Dive conducted by Unilever with the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT).

Three-quarters of consumers surveyed said that social media content made them more likely to adopt sustainable behaviors, with 83% of consumers, and 86% of those 18-34, saying that TikTok and Instagram are helpful places to seek out advice on how to be greener at home.

The study, commissioned by Unilever brands Dove and Hellman’s alongside experts from across the business, demonstrates how brands can utilize social media and influencers to create content in line with larger sustainability efforts.

The results of the study conducted by Unilever and UK-based organization the Behavioural Insights Team — unofficially known as the “nudge unit” for how it attempts to influence action — demonstrates some of the strategies and tactics that brands use as part of sustainability efforts that seek to encourage consumers to change their behaviors, like using less plastic and wasting less food.

“People are finding it hard to make sustainable choices due to a lack of simple, immediate and trustworthy information,” said Conny Braams, Unilever’s chief digital and commercial officer, in a statement. “Our ambition is to continue to collaborate with our partners to improve the sustainability content produced by our brands and support the creators we work with.”

Influencers were rated as impactful by 78% of consumers, ahead of TV documentaries (48%), news articles (37%) and government campaigns (20%), reinforcing the power of influencers at a time when consumerdistrust of media and government institutions is increasing. The high marks for Instagram and TikTok as places consumers turn for information underscores the continued importance of the social media platforms.

The study measured the impact on 6,000 participants in the UK, US and Canada that were shown various pieces and styles of content on a simulated social platform crafted by the BIT. The content was either pragmatic, with a focus on the scale of environmental problems and a heavy use of data and statistics, or optimistic, with an emphasis on practical demonstrations of how to live sustainably, often with a humorous tone. Both types of content encouraged consumers to try to change their behaviors, with pragmatic (69%) slightly outperforming optimistic (61%).

The study focused on sustainability efforts from two Unilever brands, with 76% of consumers encouraged to act after watching Dove’s plastic reuse content and 82% encouraged after watching Hellmann’s content on food waste reduction — the focus of the latter brand’s recent Super Bowl ads.

Consumers largely support influencers’ focus on sustainability, with eight in 10 supporting creators encouraging their audience to act sustainably and seven in 10 supporting influencers selling products or services focused on sustainability.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.marketingdive.com/news/influencers-impact-sustainability-marketing-unilever/644478/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, green marketing, influencers, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, unilever
Categories : corporate social responsibility

KPMG Survey: Do consumers care about sustainability and responsibility?

10 03 2023

By Dan Berthiaume, Senior Editor, Technology from chainstoreage.com • Reposted: March 9, 2023

A new survey reveals how many consumers consider environmental sustainability and social responsibility in buying decisions.

According to the 2023 KPMG Winter Consumer Pulse Survey of 1,000 U.S. consumers, 37% of respondents consider environmental sustainability and 33% consider social responsibility when making a purchase. Following is a closer look at data from each set of respondents.

Environmental sustainability findings

Of respondents who consider environmental sustainability, more than 75% are looking for environmentally friendly products and/or packaging.

In addition, approximately 50% of these respondents determine a product’s environmental sustainability based on product labels, descriptions, images, or marketing. And 50% of respondents age 13-17 say that environmental sustainability is important to purchase decisions.

Overall, respondents are most likely to choose a product/service based on environmental sustainability features in the personal care products (48%), groceries (44%), restaurants (42%), and apparel (42%) categories.

Social responsibility findings

Of respondents who say a company’s social responsibility is important to their purchase decisions, over half (51%) determine a product’s social responsibility based on product labels. Respondents age 13-17 are more likely to say that social responsibility is important to their purchase decisions (41% vs. 33% overall).

The categories for which respondents are most likely to choose a product or service based on social responsibility features are restaurants, apparel, and personal care products. And over 75% of respondents are at least somewhat familiar with social responsibility, with more than 50% of them associating social responsibility with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); employee human rights; health and safety; and fair wages.

“When a sizeable segment of consumers considers environmental sustainability and social responsibility in their purchase decisions, consumer goods and retail companies are taking note,” said Julia Wilson, KPMG consumer and retail ESG leader. “As they consider both factors, companies will need to continue to innovate and push supply chains to deliver on increasing consumer expectations for their products.”

“The power of consumer purchase preferences to drive more socially responsible and sustainable practices from companies cannot be underestimated,” said Rob Fisher, KPMG US ESG leader. “Increasingly, consumers are aligning their purchase preferences with their values and priorities, incentivizing brands to publicly disclose what they are doing, why they are doing it, and where they are on their ESG journeys with their customers.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://chainstoreage.com/do-consumers-care-about-sustainability-and-responsibility

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, KPMG Winter Consumer Pulse Survey, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility

Values Driving Value: Reaping the Business Benefits of ESG

1 03 2023

By Mandi McReynolds, Head of Global ESG, Workiva • Republished: March 1, 2023

A recent Workiva survey has revealed that a majority of senior decision makers surveyed have noted a positive correlation between their ESG practices and tangible business value.

While the idea of building corporate value through ESG isn’t new, the path to success in this area isn’t always clear.

During a panel discussion organised by the Financial Times in partnership with Workiva titled ‘The Future of ESG and Sustainability Reporting’, I argued that “it all comes down to values translating to value.” But how does this work in practice?

Where ESG and value creation come together

When considering the link between ESG and value creation, the incentives and pressures brought in by governments and external stakeholders may be the first things to come to mind.

As expectations and regulations rise, the immediate benefits of keeping up soon become apparent—both in the form of ‘carrots’ like ESG-linked executive compensation schemes, and ‘sticks’ such as potential penalties from regulators or limited access to capital financial institutions or customers..

Although these considerations are crucial, focusing exclusively on external, shorter-term motivators and detractors fails to dive deeper into the true purpose and complexity of ESG, thereby limiting the potential for greater growth and value creation over a much longer period of time. The relationship between ESG and financial success is multi-layered, requiring a more holistic view in order to be fully harnessed.

If done correctly, ESG strategies can help companies increase their value in a number of key areas, including:

Top-line growth
Lower costs
Alignment with governmental initiatives
Talent retention
Return on company investments
Stronger risk management practices

While these are all potential areas for value creation through sound ESG practices, not each of these will be equally important for every company. To stand out, business leaders need to determine specific areas of focus that make sense for their company.

‘Values’: a question of materiality

This brings us to the idea of ‘values’.

It’s worth unpacking what is meant in this context. In a politically and socially divided world, the term—which carries with it implications of a shared moral code—can feel loaded.

To some extent, it’s undeniable that ESG initiatives on a global scale follow a particular ethical framework (regarding, for instance, human rights or environmental sustainability). But while companies are obliged to follow certain standards in how they operate and report, they are not being asked to single-handedly address and solve all of the world’s problems—a common misinterpretation of ESG that can lead to disjointed initiatives, a ‘scattergun’ approach of trying to address everything at once, or even accusations of greenwashing.

The purpose of ESG is to enable company stakeholders to make sound, informed decisions that take into account the wider environmental and social context within which the company is operating. The idea of ‘values’ in this context therefore relates more closely to a shared company mission and questions of materiality.

Of course, being seen to make a positive impact on the world is becoming a highly material question for many organisations. Consumers, stakeholders and governments are expecting more from corporations, and these expectations need to be taken into account. However, standalone ‘feel good’ initiatives which are divorced from the bread and butter of the organisation are more likely to be ineffective, or even do real damage, than to provide tangible benefits.

To build real value for the business, the focus of an ESG strategy needs to be closely tied to the company’s daily activities, taking into account its particular circumstances alongside its existing strengths and resources. While a multinational food distributor, for instance, may wish to leverage new technologies for tracking the journey and carbon footprint of individual items of food, a consultancy might choose to focus their efforts on adopting innovative solutions for measuring the happiness and wellbeing of their staff.

Determine your purpose, then tell your story

The final—and perhaps most crucial—piece of the puzzle is the ability to communicate the information in a transparent, consistent and reliable manner, underpinned by verified and verifiable data.

While the CSRD comes into play in Europe, the SEC begins to introduce new disclosure requirements and mandatory ESG reporting looms on the horizon throughout the world, this level of rigour and transparency will soon become a baseline requirement. Having ready access to reliable data is essential, but organisations also need to understand why they’re in the data and what story they’re telling. By having established a purpose and area of focus underpinned by shared organisational values, leaders will be able to tell a compelling ESG story that has clear meaning and direction in a way that both showcases and increases the value of the organisation.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/767456-values-driving-value-reaping-business-benefits-esg

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, Values, Workiva
Categories : corporate social responsibility

Investing in communities builds climate resilience

1 03 2023

How local leaders can partner with financial institutions to support frontline communities. By Erin Ceynar & Samantha Ender from Greenzbiz.com • Reposted: March 1, 2023

Image courtesy of Wells Fargo.

This article is sponsored by Wells Fargo and written by Erin Ceynar and Samantha Ender from the Tides Foundation — a Wells Fargo Climate and Social Justice Fund partner.

Climate change isn’t a problem for the future. It’s happening right now. In 2022 alone, the United States endured wildfires, hurricanes, extreme flooding and decreased crop production.

Despite this real and growing threat, the global community is not moving quickly enough to address climate change. The 2015 Paris Agreement aims to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius. However, a U.N. report released in October notes that without drastic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, the world is on track to warm by an average of 2.1 to 2.9 degrees Celsius over preindustrial levels by the end of the century.

Climate change affects every person on the planet, but frontline communities — those that inhabit areas that face the worst consequences of climate change — are more vulnerable than most. Small fractions of a degree can affect these communities, leading to infrastructure failures, food and water scarcity, and worsening health outcomes. Rather than addressing these imminent dangers to human lives, however, most climate change relief funding focuses on our relatively slow transition to a low-carbon future.

In 2021, the United States and Canada received $810 million in foundation funding for climate change mitigation. Most of those mitigation dollars were directed towards lowering emissions and improving carbon capture in sectors such as forest protection, overlooking the effects of climate change on American communities experiencing floods, landslides and drought.

In New Orleans, devastated by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, extreme rainfall is an ongoing threat. The challenging natural landscape, combined with disinvestment in infrastructure, leaves the community vulnerable to dangerous flooding. In particular, heavy rain in the city’s 7th Ward significantly affects low-income residents of color who live in low-lying areas where affordable housing is more accessible. The flooding also drives toxic contaminants into the soil, producing respiratory and gastrointestinal health concerns.

The Partnership for Resilient Communities (PRC), a project of the Institute for Sustainable Communities (ISC), supports community leaders of color in strengthening resilient communities. New Orleans community activist Angela Chalk, executive director of PRC partner Healthy Community Services, partnered with ISC to work alongside residents and install rain gardens at their homes to minimize flooding in their neighborhood. The gardens hold water, easing the burden on the city’s old drainage system. This attainable and impactful solution demonstrates how community-driven work can educate residents about climate change while also expanding resources that deliver results.

The rain gardens highlight what we can achieve when frontline communities have a seat at the decision-making table. They intimately understand the challenges they face, the resources they can bring to bear and the solutions that will be successful and durable. In other words, engaging with community leaders provides invaluable context, helping financial partners avoid pitfalls that would otherwise remain hidden.

These grassroots and community-led approaches present homegrown solutions to promote equitable development. Climate interventions that target community-identified problems and give communities decision-making power are more likely to be both successful and sustainable. The goal is to uplift community-driven efforts to create a more resilient, sustainable and vibrant future. However, a lack of access to capital and technical expertise can hamstring these efforts.

Frontline communities need genuine partners who can offer financial support while allowing the community to lead. Financial partners shouldn’t shy away from this approach, falsely assuming that it is slower, less efficient, and less impactful than the usual top-down model.

To achieve climate justice for disinvested communities, financial partners can adopt a cooperative playbook:

Partner with communities from the outset.
Work with community leaders to identify challenges, opportunities and resources.
Work with community leaders to co-develop solutions.
Support on-the-ground, community-designed programs.
Provide the expertise, training and technical resources needed to strengthen community organizations.
Remain committed and engaged for the long term.

Following these steps drastically increases a grant’s impact, strengthens civil society and ensures that the community’s perspective is respected and centered.

As climate change intensifies, the coming years will challenge us all. Resilience demands committed partnerships with funders who have a shared vision of a prosperous and just world. Enduring change is possible when we invest in our communities and find ways to offer support that goes beyond checkbooks. Through these partnerships, we can ensure a robust and lasting impact.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/investing-communities-builds-climate-resilience

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Climate Change, corporate social reponsibility, CSR, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility

How can brands bridge the sustainability-trust gap?

27 02 2023

How can brands truly earn trust through their sustainability efforts? / Image: Michal Matlon via Unsplash

By Lucy Usher | Sustainability Lead • The Drum Network article • February 27 2023

Lucy Usher of Oliver looks into research that suggests that few people really trust brands to follow through on their sustainability promises – and recommends how to bridge that gap.

No one likes making promises they can’t keep, least of all businesses in the public eye. Yet, right now, as the world heads deeper into financial instability, some fear that brands and businesses won’t be able to keep their sustainability promises.

Achieving net zero is, wrongly, seen as expensive, difficult and only for the fortunate few. But by slowing down on sustainable and net zero goals, businesses put themselves behind the transformation needed to succeed in a net zero world that continues to sprint ahead.

Promises matter now more than ever (just look at the state of politics). Delivering on the commitments we’ve made will not only deliver better brands and companies for this and future generations; it’ll also deliver trust, responsibility and accountability within boardrooms.

Here are the ways brands and businesses can become uncompromisable on their sustainability promises in 2023 (arguably one of the most challenging years for the climate on record).

The far-reaching financial benefits of being a trusted brand

Globally, we’re far from reaching the IPCC’s goal of keeping global warming within a 1.5°C temperature rise. Advertising emissions add an extra 32% to the annual carbon footprint of every person in the UK. That’s like running an extra nine coal-fired power plants every year (in the UK alone).

As a measurable framework for advertising emissions emerges, brands will no longer be able to ignore the tension between growth targets and net zero investment.

Alongside reputational benefits, there are clear financial benefits to being a trusted sustainable brand. Brands with a strong sustainability DNA outperform competitors by 21%, in both profitability and environmental and social impact. Businesses’ bottom lines and the planet can both benefit from effective and economical sustainability plans that cater to all, not just ‘ethical consumers’.

Bridging the sustainability-trust gap

According to data from market research company GWI, 62% of consumers are only a little trusting that brands will stick to their environmental claims or pledges. 22% don’t trust brands at all. With a significant rise in greenwashing, it’s no surprise that shoppers are skeptical.

How can brands bridge this sustainability-trust gap? Here are four considerations.

1. Start

Sustainability isn’t a destination. It’s a journey. Brands must enter this journey with a spirit of inquiry and a can-do attitude.

Define what you want your business to stand for and what you want its sustainability purpose to be. Then, talk to customers. Use feedback to prioritize areas of the business where people would most like change, whether that’s packaging, manufacturing processes, distribution methods, or recycling. This will open the conversation in the long run.

2. Collaborate

With evolving technologies and breakthroughs happening all the time, brands don’t have to reinvent the wheel when it comes to adopting sustainable ways of working. But nor do we have time to all work in silos on the same problems. Instead, we must collaborate on reaching common goals rapidly.

There’s a wealth of existing credible sustainability frameworks to choose from that offer help with structural, operational, and cultural change. From the Conscious Advertising Network and Purpose Disruptors’ Advertised Emissions Framework to the Change The Brief Alliance, there are many resources to tap into.

3. Upskill

Education and training are key to embedding sustainability into the core values and practices of any business. It is important that sustainability considerations become business-as-usual: from creative ideas to operational deliverables. This means providing staff (at all levels) with training and aligning them to the brand’s commitments.

The opposite of this is a workforce ignorant of the rapidly changing landscape. They will be forced to focus on risk avoidance only (like adhering to the Green Claims Code), rather than seizing the opportunities awaiting upskilled businesses who are able to act on the ‘system upgrades’ that sustainable thinking brings.

Small changes add up. In terms of building trust with customers, an upskilled workforce is the biggest advocate for your brand.

4. Shout

Tell everyone about your commitments – but only if you mean it. It should stem from a genuine desire to be a better brand, not just to win brownie points.

When goals are communicated and measured, they stand a better chance of being delivered. As a key trust-builder for customers (with their growing cynicism around authentic commitments to change), brands need to share transparent, data-backed sustainability progress.

Be, do, tell

Putting it even more simply, brands need to apply the ‘be, do, tell’methodology. Brands tend to shout about sustainability pledges before putting the work in, which leads to distrust when targets aren’t met.

Instead, they should be sustainable, do the things that make them authentically sustainable businesses, then tell consumers about it. Even more simply: be better, do better, then tell customers how you’ve made better.

Sustainability investments aren’t just about reaching net zero targets. They’re heavily focused on improving overall performance. It’s up to everyone to drive change, and those at the top will benefit faster in the future by keeping their promises now.

Be, do, tell – and enjoy being one of the few that actually deliver.

This content is produced by The Drum Network, a paid-for membership club for CEOs and their agencies who want to share their expertise and grow their business. Find out more

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.thedrum.com/opinion/2023/02/27/how-can-brands-bridge-the-sustainability-trust-gap

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, ESG, lack of trust, marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, The Drum Network
Categories : corporate social responsibility, lack of trust

7 Best Practices for Creating an Impactful CSR Strategy

26 02 2023

Photo: Submittable

From Submittable.com • Reposted: February 26, 2023

Once upon a time, businesses could focus on profitability above all else.

Not any more: modern companies are expected to care about making the world better. They’re expected to serve their communities, listen to their customers, take public stances (and action) on important issues, value and support employees, work for sustainability, and respond to current events.

CSR (corporate social responsibility) programs are one way businesses are meeting this mandate. And standout programs addressing social and environmental issues are most often the result of thoughtful CSR strategies.

Whether you’re new to CSR or looking to refine existing initiatives, understanding the ins and outs of CSR strategy is a prerequisite for creating successful programs with lasting impacts. The new “business as usual” demands smart social responsibility-are you ready to meet the challenge?

What is CSR strategy?

CSR strategy is the comprehensive plan companies and funders use to design, execute, and analyze their corporate social responsibility initiatives. It includes specific focus areas, program design, promotion and communication approaches, and evaluation procedures.

Most companies with thriving CSR initiatives use strategy to build and monitor their programs; a few of these companies also share their strategy publicly. Nestle is a great example, offering detailed insight into their brand’s approach (called “Creating Shared Value”) that includes long-term goals for serving individuals, families, communities, and the planet, as well as measurement procedures and transparent performance and reporting.

Some companies also release an annual corporate responsibility report which is another useful way for you to see what a CSR strategy can look like. Google’s 2020 Environment Report includes priorities, company mission, performance targets, and detailed analysis in five key focus areas.

Why have a CSR strategy?

In the world of CSR, it’s especially prudent to look before you leap.

This is because successful CSR initiatives are intricate, complex, and require demonstrable impact. They’re also public-facing (and potentially brand-damaging when done poorly). And they offer a host of business benefits you might miss out on by failing to plan.

A well-crafted CSR strategy can help you:

Keep everything organized

Great CSR initiatives involve lots of people, multiple goals, tons of data, and countless responsibilities. Your CSR strategy is an opportunity to get everything in order and prepare to stay on top of all the details.

Improve impacts

According to Deloitte’s third annual global survey of more than 2,000 C-suite executives at companies with societal impact goals, the presence of comprehensive strategy directly correlated with greater success (measured by innovation, growth, and employee acquisition).

Protect your brand reputation

Launching a corporate responsibility initiative without proper foresight is a big risk-that’s because your CSR program will be a public-facing endeavor with multiple stakeholders and partners who expect follow-through. Strategic planning can reduce the possibility that your company will gain a reputation for big talk and no action, which can ultimately harm your bottom line.

Take full advantage of CSR program benefits

CSR has a host of potential benefits for your company. A successful corporate responsibility initiative will benefit your community and serve your employees. It will also improve your brand image, attracting new talent and increasing customer loyalty. Ultimately, these outcomes can contribute to revenue and drive your company’s growth.

In order to reap the full business benefits of CSR, you’ll want a strategy that’s brand-aligned, well-researched, responsive, partnership-driven (at all levels), and constantly evolving in pursuit of positive impacts everyone can feel good about.

Best practices for creating a CSR Strategy

Understanding the role and value of a CSR strategy is an important first step.

Now, how do you create and develop a CSR strategy that gets results? There are seven key tactics for strategic planning that will help improve the outcomes of your business’s CSR activities.

1. Link to company values

Whereas CSR was once seen as a peripheral approach to boosting business performance and legitimacy, today’s best CSR initiatives are squarely brand-aligned and central to operational strategy.

Connecting CSR to business strategy is increasingly a corporate best practice, as evidenced by the 181 CEO’s from brands like Amazon, Citigroup, and Ford who signed Business Roundtable’s latest Statement of Purpose, indicating a commitment to “to lead their companies for the benefit of all stakeholders-customers, employees, suppliers, communities, and shareholders.”

What it looks like to align your CSR strategy with your brand, core competencies, and operational strategy, will be different for every company.

WarnerMedia’s Access Writers Program is a great example of a CSR initiative that clearly links back to company values: WarnerMedia is a media corporation focused on diverse entertainment whose latest program seeks to improve the access marginalized community members have to professional opportunities in television.

2. Get insights from your various stakeholders

You’ll want to develop a strategic plan for CSR inspired by what your customers, employees, and community members care about. You might also seek inspiration from what’s worked for other brands already. Here’s how:

Poll your customers

The creation of a CSR strategy is a great excuse to connect with your customer base. Build a short, easy to access poll to collect the following information:

Which environmental and social issues matter most to your customers?

Design your poll in alignment with your brand. For example, if you sell custom T-shirts, are customers most interested in your sustainability, supply chain, dedication to labor and human rights, or donations to kids in need? Focused questions will lead to more actionable results.

What do customers know about your current giving and initiatives?

If you have run programs in the past or currently engage in CSR, how well did you communicate about them? Are your initiatives known for success?

What associations do customers have with your brand?

This is a great opportunity to collect data about your business’s image, which you can try to influence in your new CSR strategy.

To help boost participation, consider offering an incentive to customers who complete your poll, such as a discount or entry into a drawing.

Collect employee feedback

Your CSR strategy doesn’t move without your employees. Start by determining your employees’ preferences and using that information to help build your overall strategy.

A survey is a great tool to collect this important information, combining multiple-choice and open-ended questions.

It’s easy to build a responsive, employee-friendly survey in Submittable’s social impact software.

As an example, for your T-shirt company, you might have employees select between three brand-aligned volunteer opportunities followed by an opportunity for open feedback. This approach will you help you get the targeted data you need and also help employees feel heard and valued.

Assess community needs

What “community” looks like is unique for every business. Taking time to research and consider what your community needs is a great first step towards building the partnerships your CSR program will need to succeed.

Community Tool Box offers great suggestions for understanding community needs and resources, with methods that can be combined, depending on the extent of data you’re looking to connect.

3. Borrow great strategy

Your CSR strategy doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel. Spend time exploring where other businesses have succeeded in their sustainability, charitable giving, and employee engagement, for example. Don’t worry about being derivative: your strategy will necessarily be unique because your brand is unique and so are the people you care about and listen to.

One way to find brands doing the best CSR is via reports like “America’s Most Responsible Companies” from Newsweek and Statista-and congratulations to HP, Cisco, and Dell for top success in three focus areas: environment, social, and corporate governance.

Harvard Business School’s Baker Library offers a comprehensive list of social responsibility ratings and reports for companies. Of particular interest is Fortune’s “Change the World” list-you’ll find PayPal and Zoom in the top 10 for 2020.

Many companies have aligned their CSR activities in some way with the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that include issues like poverty, hunger, education, gender equality, and action around climate change. Chevron’s corporate sustainability program, for example, clearly lays out how the company is addressing every SDG, and Target includes an SDG index in their 2020 corporate social responsibility report.

4. Establish internal buy-in

You’ll need your team’s support, enthusiasm, and dedication to make your social responsibility program thrive. Engage employees early in the strategy process by being responsive and inclusive.

Respond to team values

Once you’ve assessed what your employees care about most and where they want the company to focus, put this data to work.

It probably won’t be possible to incorporate everyone’s feedback in your strategy, but at the very least, share your findings with the group. Your team will enjoy learning about what their colleagues value.

Use the information you’ve collected to identify top areas of interest and common suggestions for your CSR strategy. Try to actively pursue at least one employee-sourced initiative every quarter or fiscal year, with formal plans for addressing additional issues in the future.

Involve employees in strategy-building

Research shows that shared leadership and employee-empowerment have a number of benefits, including increased team effectiveness, a stronger sense of community, improved employee perceptions of management, higher levels of employee satisfaction, and less burnout.

That data combined with evidence that corporate social responsibility boosts employee motivation and increases employee engagement makes sharing the planning of your program with staff a natural win-win.

Whether you establish an employee-led committee or include employee representatives in planning sessions, be sure employees are actively engaged and aligned with your CSR visions and values, missions and goals, and on-the-ground initiatives.

5. Build external partnerships

There’s already good work going on in the communities you’re looking to empower. Seek out the organizations and individuals doing this work early in your CSR strategy development process.

Many businesses are already reaping the value of partnership-driven CSR. This list from Donorbox offers examples of 14 major brands, including Adidas, IKEA, Apple, and BMW, that have partnered with community nonprofit organizations to better meet their CSR goals.

Community organizations will have the knowledge and experience to put your brand’s funding, sponsorship, or employee volunteerism, for example, to the best use. As philanthropic leader Edgar Viallanueva recently advised, “You shouldn’t feel that you need to recreate what’s already in place. Find organizations that have established relationships with grassroots communities and trust them to get the money to the right people. These bridge organizations often have the relationships and trust, but lack sufficient capital.”

Approach community partnerships with humility and take a learning stance-what do partner organizations need most and how can your business help? In addition to deep listening, be sure you’re establishing authentic relationships with partners. Sustainable and equitable partnerships (as opposed to shallow partnerships for the sake of PR) require that community members hold actual decision-making power, especially regarding campaigns that will directly affect them.

6. Be clear and transparent

Once you’ve tackled brand-alignment, stakeholders’ concerns (including customers, employees, and community members), and partner-driven strategy, it’s time to distill this wealth of information into a clear communication plan.

Get specific about goals and outcomes

Your CSR strategy should be as clear and specific as possible for a few reasons:

A clear strategy helps keep everyone on the same page
The more focused your goals are, the easier it will be to assess if you’ve met them
Clarity reflects positively on your brand’s commitment to corporate social responsibility, demonstrating rigor and care

Aim for precise language, numbered goals (each communicated in a single sentence if possible), key strategies and initiatives for meeting each goal, and measurement tactics for assessing progress towards each goal. Be sure to include your mission, vision, and partners.

Campbell’s Soup provides a great example of clarity and synthesis in its corporate responsibility strategy-especially this goals chart which lists target objectives alongside current progress displayed numerically and graphically.

Make a communications plan

Your CSR strategy shouldn’t be a secret. Think through how you’ll share this information internally and externally to foster enthusiasm, boost stakeholder engagement, and enhance accountability.

Your CSR strategy should include your plan for regularly and publicly discussing your CSR initiatives-via your website, social media, newsletters, email updates, reports, and even press releases.

Sharing high-level corporate strategy publicly can help generate interest in your CSR programs. It also indicates transparency and accountability-you’re sharing your plan because you intend to follow through and be accountable.

Use the same principles for sharing your strategy that you will to talk about your active and completed CSR campaigns, including these considerations adapted from the EMG group:

Objectives: What do you want to accomplish with your CSR communication plan?
Audience: Who will you communicate with?
Subjects and key messages: What will you tell your audience about?
Timescales: When will you communicate about CSR?
Channels: Where will you communicate with your audience?
Feedback: How will your audience be able to engage with you?

7. Learn, respond, and improve

In the world of CSR, there is always room for improvement, because CSR is about people and people are dynamic. Our needs change and so does the world we live in.

Accordingly, your CSR strategy won’t be complete without a plan for learning, adjustment, and growth-or as Global Giving puts it, the opportunity to “Listen, Act, Learn. Repeat.”

Plan for reporting and feedback

Data and feedback collection should be an essential part of your CSR strategy. Don’t wait for an initiative to finish to consider how you’ll assess outcomes-planning ahead will help ensure your whole strategy is aligned with what you hope to achieve and how you’ll demonstrate progress.

You also shouldn’t wait until the end of a campaign to begin your learning process. Establish a timeline for collecting information at regular intervals throughout your initiative.

There are plenty of ways to collect data and feedback, including interviews, surveys and questionnaires, observational data, focus groups, public forums, oral histories, or some combination of these. Plan to use the tools that make the most sense for your CSR initiative.

Whichever method you choose, be sure your strategy involves connecting with all relevant groups and stakeholders. What results did you achieve among community members and where could you improve? How did employees feel about your CSR program and what suggestions do they have going forward? Were customers interested in your campaign?

Your plan for measuring CSR performance should include how you’ll collect information and from whom, how you’ll assess the data, how you’ll share your findings, and how you’ll incorporate suggestions for improvement.

Be responsive to learning and to the moment

Your CSR strategy shouldn’t be iron-clad. It should evolve in response to new insight and data. Think of your strategy as a working, living document that can and should continue to improve, even mid-campaign, as necessary.

As an example, the events of 2020 forced businesses to reconsider their existing CSR programs. Many companies chose to pivot in response to COVID-19 and movements for racial justice. The publicity around these shifts, including critiques of hollow brand statements, underscored the importance for socially responsible companies of clearly linking action (via CSR) to rhetoric.

According to Mark Horowitz, CEO of Moving Worlds, global events have resulted in a tipping point for CSR, wherein business leaders are making bigger promises without changing operations to support their proposals. More than ever, he argues, companies must respond to the moment and take real action: “The next 10 months will define the CSR space for the next 10 years … CSR leaders within companies have the opportunity to right the position of corporations in society.”

While it’s vital to stay responsive, be wary of altering key goals and measurement tactics before you’ve had time to accurately assess them. Not only do you open your company up to critique for empty promises, but change doesn’t happen overnight and long-term objectives require longer-term measurement.

As Neil Buddy Shah, Managing Director at GiveWell, shared in a recent panel on impact data, you risk good ideas failing when organizations run an impact evaluation that is too rigorous too early.

Time for action: Bring your CSR strategy to life

A thoughtful CSR strategy requires time, thought, and teamwork to build. Make the best use of your efforts with tools that help transform your vision into action and results, faster.

Submittable’s CSR solution can connect your business to important causes while dramatically reducing the time it takes to oversee your corporate giving program. Manage corporate grants and scholarships, coordinate employee volunteers and giving programs, facilitate community sponsorships, and much more. We’d love to walk you through the platform-sign up for a free demo today.

View additional multimedia and more ESG storytelling from Submittable on 3blmedia.com.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/7-best-practices-creating-impactful-150000906.html?guccounter=1

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, marketing, responsible brands, Societal impact, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility

At What Point Are Companies Doing Enough To Protect The Planet?

22 02 2023

By Jane Marsh from The Environmental Magazine • Reposted: February 22, 2023

Throughout the decades, the global economy has shown little regard for its environmental impact. However, businesses across all industries are now facing a reckoning. Amid increasing climate change, the calls for greater economic sustainability are coming in loud and clear — about 85% of consumers have modified their buying habits, opting for greener purchases. Another 34% are willing to pay a premium for eco-friendly goods and services.

To meet demand, brands have had to modify their operations and manufacturing processes to protect the planet. For some, the transition has been a struggle. Nevertheless, ignoring consumer pressures is a terrible business practice — adhering to eco-friendliness is essential if they hope to survive.

Of course, whether companies will ever do enough to protect the planet is the question. Here’s a closer look at how our economy has wasted our most precious resources and what companies can do to improve their sustainability.

How Companies Impact the Environment

Researchers have theorized and observed that when people gain access to a public resource — such as water, air and habitable land — they consume it based on personal needs, regardless of how its depletion hurts the planet.

This short-term overconsumption of resources can have dire impacts on the public and the environment. Here are four examples.

1. Aquifer Depletion From Agriculture

Humans require clean groundwater for safe drinking to survive. However, human activities have contaminated and depleted groundwater resources at a rapid pace. In 2015, over half of the 30% of groundwater withdrawals were used and overconsumed for irrigation in the agricultural sector.

2. Food Insecurity From Environmental Degradation

Over 1.7 million acres of arable land were used for crops in 2016. However, poor farming operations — such as overuse of chemical fertilizers and monocropping — amid a steady rise in food demand have rendered fields unusable for future yields. This places our food system and the ability to feed the world at risk. Not even the 15,000 food pantries across the country will be able to resolve the food crisis if we can no longer grow food.

3. Endangered Wildlife From Coffee Consumption

Is it impossible to get through the day without three cups of coffee in the morning? Our overconsumption of goods has degraded habitats for much of the planet’s wildlife. For example, the international trade of coffee, tea and tobacco accounts for 70% of the extinction risk for endangered species.

4. Reduced Air Quality From Traffic

Commerce, traffic congestion and human activities have also affected air quality — one of the common natural resources shared by everyone. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), about 7 million people die prematurely from air pollution annually.

Holding Companies Accountable

In 2017, the CDP released the Carbon Majors Report, indicating that only 100 fossil fuel companies were responsible for 71% of the total global emissions since 1988.

Since then, many companies have begun analyzing their environmental degradation in the name of manufacturing and revenue, from making net-zero pledges to transitioning toward recyclable packaging alternatives to reduce waste.

However, 58% of companies admit they’ve overstated their progress. Despite their pledges, a recent NewClimate Institute report found that 25 major corporations were meeting only 40% of net-zero emissions — only three companies were genuinely committed to reducing 90% of their emissions by the target year.

Are companies doing enough to protect the planet? Not quite, but there is room for improvement. For instance, companies can implement the following measures:

Create a carbon footprint assessment to understand where they generate the most emissions.
Reduce waste by creating an end-use protocol and ramping up recycling.
Improve energy efficiency throughout operations and within office buildings.
Encourage employees and supply chain vendors to adopt eco-friendly behaviors.
Invest in carbon offsetting programs that address degraded land, water contamination and air pollution.

These measurable initiatives enable a clearer picture of a business’s sustainability. Of course, transparency is critical and companies should avoid greenwashing their efforts at all costs.

Corporate Responsibility the Key to Protecting the Planet

Businesses have come to understand the value of sustainability for their bottom line. In addition to consumer demand, companies more frequently face mandatory emissions disclosures, subsequent fees and arrests for pollution. At the end of the day, protecting the planet and our common goods are in companies’ best interest.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://emagazine.com/at-what-point-are-companies-doing-enough-to-protect-the-planet/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Carbon Majors Report, CDP, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility

ISSB to launch first two sustainability standards by June

22 02 2023

Photo: ISSB.

The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) has confirmed that it will issue its first two finalised frameworks by the end of June, with an expectation that the first corporate reports aligned with these frameworks will be issued in 2025. From edie.net • Reposted: February 22, 2023

Members of the ISSB gathered in Montreal, Canada, last week, to agree on the technical content of its initial standards following consultations in 2022. The Board is focusing on climate-related reporting in the first instance but its first two standards – IFRS S1 and S2 – will also cover other sustainability-related risks and opportunities.

IFRS S1 is designed to apply globally, to corporates in all sectors. It has been described as the “core baseline” of sustainability reporting, attempting to better unify disclosures on factors such as waste and emissions. It also sets out how companies can integrate reporting, linking sustainability-related and financial information.

IFRS S1 also sets out plans for companies to disclose all material sustainability-related risks and opportunities.

IFRS S2, meanwhile, is more detaied in regard to specific topics – particularly climate mitigation and climate adaptation. It is designed to build on existing disclosure frameworks in this field, chiefly the Taskforce on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).

While the EU is proposing mandatory “double materiality” impact reporting for big businesses – imploring them to report on their impacts on people and the environment, plus the risks and opportunities that external changes could bring – the ISSB is taking a different approach. Its chief focus at present is enterprise value, which entails getting a deeper understanding of the link between sustainability and company valuation.

“We responded to capital market and G20 demand for a common language of investor-focussed, sustainability-related disclosure, working diligently to deliver standards that fulfil the global baseline,” said ISSB chair Emmanuel Faber.

The ISSB is expected to issue IFRS S1 and S1 by the end of the second quarter, making June the likely issuance date. It is intending to make the standards effective from January 2024, meaning that we will likely see the first corporate reports aligned with the standards in 2025.

Voluntary adoption will be likely in the first case, and some nations and regions may opt for mandatory disclosures in time.

“Given [that] sustainability disclosure is new for many companies globally, the ISSB will introduce programmes that support those applying its Standards as market infrastructure and capacity is built,” the Board said in a statement. But it acknowledged that, in some markets like the EU, disclosure is less new – so there is a need to align with and streamline existing standards.

Commenting on the news, KPMG’s global head of audit Larry Bradley said: “The proposed effective date of 1 January 2024 is ambitious, but – importantly – it’s aligned with the EU timetable, so some companies may adopt on this date regardless of local requirements. It still remains for jurisdictions to decide whether to enforce this date. But the transition provisions, such as not requiring Scope 3 GHG emissions reporting in the first year of adoption, should smooth the path for companies.

“The good news is that companies are going to be explicitly allowed (but not required) to use metrics from GRI and ESRSs where they are useful to investors and there is no equivalent IFRS sustainability standard. This demonstrates a level of pragmatism and a keen awareness of the need to balance cost and benefit for as many companies as possible. However, companies already reporting under GRI won’t be able to simply cut and paste swathes of disclosures, because they will need to apply the ISSB’s investor-focused materiality lens. For companies reporting under multiple frameworks, this will make reporting less challenging.”

The ISSB was first proposed by the not-for-profit International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation (IFRS Foundation) in early 2021, and launched later that year. Its aim is to unify disclosures from corporates, helping investors and other stakeholders to properly compare their sustainability performance and related risks. One year on from its formal launch, in November 2022, CDP confirmed that it will incorporate IFRS S2 into its platform.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.edie.net/issb-to-launch-first-two-sustainability-standards-by-june/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Climate Disclosures, Corporate Reporting, corporate social responsibility, ESG, EU, IFRS s2, IFRS SI, ISSB, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Apparel Industry Is Unprepared For New Sustainability Laws

18 02 2023

Apparel Industry Is Unprepared For New Sustainability Laws. Image: GETTY

By Greg Petro, Contributor to forbes.com • Reposted: February 18, 2023

One of the hot topics among fashion execs these days is what’s shaping up to be the industry’s next crisis — government regulation of sustainability. In the US, Europe, and elsewhere, new laws are in the pipeline or on the books that, for the first time, require leading brands to come clean about pollution and waste.

It’s a crisis because the apparel industry, as we’ve come to expect it, is stubbornly unsustainable. There have been numerous examples in recent years of the cost of speed and convenience, including the decision by marquee fashion labels to burn or otherwise destroy overstock merchandise and the annual tsunami of returns that end up in African landfills.

The cost of trying to make the business less harmful to the environment and less wasteful has been, in the short run, a lose-lose proposition — awkward, expensive, and often dismissed by critics as greenwashing. At the executive level, sustainability has been a blip on the radar screen. As a senior exec at one company told me recently, “Right now, I just need to figure out our pricing strategy given inflation.”

As the ideal of sustainability becomes hard law, kicking the can down the road isn’t work anymore, especially with tough new transparency and reporting requirements like those recently enacted in France. “It’s the first time a regulation has required so much disclosure in the entire industry,” says Baptiste Carriere-Pradal of the Amsterdam-based Sustainable Apparel Coalition. In a recent interview with BusinessofFashion.com, he warned, “The industry is not prepared at all.”

In the US, New York and California now ban certain chemicals used in waterproofed outerwear. But the New York State Legislature is putting the final touches on a major new piece of legislation — the New York Fashion Act — that is even tougher than France’s. If enacted, it would be a back-office headache for any company in any industry, let alone one that lives on such thin margins.

As currently written, the proposed New York law requires fashion retailers with more than $100 million in global revenue to produce maps of their supply chains, “… identifying, preventing, mitigating, accounting for, and taking remedial action to address actual and potential adverse impacts to human rights and the environment in their own operations and in their supply chain.” That’s a tall order, and the final legislation may be less burdensome. Either way, the trend toward regulation is gathering steam.

Addressing apparel sustainability is challenging because most retail executives have missed the boat regarding what consumers care most about. A First Insight survey from last year found that two-thirds of retailers believe consumers are not willing to spend more for sustainable brands, but two-thirds of consumers said they would…the key is that it has to be the right stuff.

The survey found that nearly all retailers — 94 % — believe that brand name is more important to consumers than sustainability, but three-quarters of consumers said the opposite. Retail executives ranked brand-operated resale/recommerce programs lowest when asked what type of sustainable shopping formats consumers would most utilize. But 41 % of consumers reported they already shop at brand resale/recommerce programs, such as those offered by Patagonia, Lululemon, or Levi’s.

It’s easy to understand how — after dealing with the pandemic, supply chain, and inventory glut crises — apparel companies have been busy just trying to keep the lights on. But it’s hard to figure out how they could be so poorly informed about what their customers want.

Check out my website.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregpetro/2023/02/16/apparel-industry-is-unprepared-for-new-sustainability-laws/?sh=1004742e78d7

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Apparel Industry, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, First Insight, green marketing, responsible brands, retail industry, sustainability, Sustainable Apparel Coalition, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility

5 Ways to Thank a Caregiver on National Caregivers Day

17 02 2023

Photo: AARP

Show appreciation to those who give so much. By Amy Goyer from AARP – February 17, 2023

Family caregivers spend a great deal of time caring for family, neighbors and friends — an average of 24 hours of care per week, studies show. For some, it’s a full-time job. Although it may truly be a labor of love, the truth is family caregivers often feel invisible, alone and unappreciated. That’s where you come in. You can make a real difference for your family members, friends and coworkers who are caring for others. On National Caregivers Day, Feb. 17 this year, let them know you get it: You see what they are doing, and you honor and value them.

I’ve been a family caregiver my entire adult life for various loved ones, and I can tell you that even the smallest gesture means so very much. Here are some ways you can demonstrate your support and appreciation.

1. Be with them.

Melanie Mitchell, who cared for her mother, expressed it so well: “Sit with me. Don’t just tell me how great I’m doing. Spend some time with me.”

What that looks like:

Ask them how they are doing. Be clear that their physical, mental and emotional health and quality of life are just as important as their loved ones’.
Listen nonjudgmentally. Let them share their feelings, tell stories, laugh, cry, vent and process their caregiving experiences. You don’t need to fix anything; you just need to care and to validate their perspectives. Let them know you see they are having a rough time and you understand. Tell them it’s OK to sometimes feel resentment, anger and frustration, along with joy.
Do things with them on a regular basis. Walk with them once a week, schedule a weekly check-in call, or take them out for a meal or a cup of coffee or tea. Plan ahead so they have something to look forward to. Be flexible if their caregiving duties mean a last-minute change.
Stop by for a visit with them (and their loved ones). Even short visits can change the course of their day. If they are providing hands-on care for loved ones try to avoid their busiest times.

2. Make it possible for them to take a break.

Don’t just encourage them to take a break, plan for it. Help them find the time to exercise, get a haircut, travel, go to the post office, go shopping or keep up with their own health care. Offer and follow up — don’t wait to be asked.

What that looks like:

Pay for some respite care. It can be through an agency or other paid caregivers.
Provide care yourself. Spend some time with their care recipients. Even if they are there, too, it’s a real help for their loved ones to have someone else to interact with. Play games, watch a movie, look at photograph albums and listen to music together.
Arrange for family members to help out. See if an aunt, cousin, nephew or other close relation will step up.
Research other respite care options. Check out state or local respite programs or a short-term respite stay at an assisted living facility or skilled nursing facility. Talk it over with them and do as much as you can to follow up and make it happen.

3. Actively demonstrate your support.

Hands-on help is always needed in so many areas.

What that looks like:

Cook or order a meal for delivery for a caregiver and/or those they care for. Let them know it’s coming so they are aware they don’t have to cook that day. (Be sure to follow special diets.)
Do online research for them. Help find health care providers, gather information about health conditions, locate medical equipment, or find just the right gadget to meet a special need.
Do housework and yard work (or hire someone to do it) at their home or their loved one’s home. Cleaning, mowing the grass, handling holiday decorations and other tasks on top of caregiving can be overwhelming. Fix things or pay for a handyperson to do so.
Help them get organized. Ease their stress by tackling that messy closet or cabinet, organizing medical supplies, cleaning out the refrigerator or clearing clutter in the home. You can even hire a professional organizer to guide and/or do the organizing.
Run errands. Pick up groceries, care supplies, household items or dry cleaning, or arrange and pay for delivery.

4. Tell them how great they are.

Be specific. Point out the many ways in which they are making a real difference in their loved ones’ lives. Celebrate the victories, small and large. Tell them you see their skills and resilience in even the most difficult of circumstances.

What that looks like:

Mail greeting cards. We don’t often get “good mail” these days, so it’s an extra special surprise when we do. Be sure to say thank you for all they do for their loved ones. When I was in the throes of caring for both of my parents and my sister, my best friend sent me a card that said, “She who never gives up!” I posted it in the house, and it frequently gave me a lift and encouraged me to press on (it still does). It gave me confidence.
Send edible treats, such as a fruit bouquet, cookies or wine-of-the-month club. My aunt loves bread pudding, so I found a place that ships it. My sister once surprised me with a package of chocolate-covered strawberries when I was in the thick of caregiving. Her enclosed note said, “Thank you for all you do for Mom and Dad.” It meant the world to me.
Bring them fresh flowers — or have them delivered. Fresh flowers bring joy and beauty to our existence and make us feel special.
Write a letter. Tell them they are incredible and explain how important they are and how much you admire them.
Nominate them for an award. Find out if local, state or national organizations give awards to recognize outstanding caregivers or people who are making a difference in their communities. If you can’t find one — create an award for them yourself, complete with a certificate!

5. Encourage their self-care.

Remind them it’s not selfish to care for themselves; it’s practical. They need to “fill up” so they have the internal fuel to keep on caregiving. And they will be better caregivers.

What that looks like:

Give a gift certificate. Treat them to a massage, facial, manicure/pedicure or another pampering treatment. But don’t stop there. Help schedule the appointment, provide transportation and arrange backup care — or maybe have fun getting treated together.
Sign them up or buy tickets. Go with them to a class, movie, art exhibit, festival, exercise session or another local community event.
Help them schedule their wellness checkups. Offer to drive them there and have lunch or coffee afterward.

I moderate AARP’s Family Caregivers Discussion Group on Facebook and giving and receiving thanks is a frequent topic of discussion. As group member Jaclyn Strauss said in a comment recently: “A simple moment to pause and say thank you can go a really long way!”

So, I urge you to take a moment to thank a caregiver in your life today.

Amy Goyer is AARP’s family and caregiving expert and author of Juggling Life, Work and Caregiving. Connect with Amy on Facebook, Twitter, in AARP’s Online Community and in the AARP Facebook Family Caregivers Group.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.aarp.org/caregiving/basics/info-2023/ways-to-celebrate-national-caregivers-day.html

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, care giving, CSR, National Caregivers Day, responsible brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility

Consumer Product Brands Embrace Responsible Forestry

17 02 2023

When it comes to forest products, Bio Pappel, HP, Melissa & Doug, REI and Amazon are all leaders in responsible sourcing. What does this commitment look like in practice?

From the Forest Stewardship Council • Posted: February 17, 2023

More and more consumers are demanding sustainable attributes in the products they buy — encouraging retailers and consumer packaged goods companies to reap the benefits of this opportunity by providing products with tangible, credible environmental and social benefits.

When it comes to forest products, Bio Pappel, HP, Melissa & Doug, REI and Amazon are all leaders in responsible sourcing — a fact that earned them Forest Stewardship Council Leadership Awards for their deep commitment to responsible forestry and for making thousands of FSC-certified products available to businesses and consumers. What does this commitment look like in practice?

Bio Pappel is one of the largest recycled-paper manufacturers in North and South America, and the first Mexican company that is FSC certified for use of 100 percent recycled raw material in paper production. While Bio Pappel may not be a household name, it supplies some of the biggest brands — including Amazon and Titan packaging, Samsungpackaging, Xerox paper, Scribe and pen+Gear notebooks, LALA Yomi milk and yogurt packaging, and Kirkland Signature food items. Its products can be found in Walmart, Costco and other major retailers.

“At Bio Pappel, we like to say that we are generating shared value,” says Israel Martinez, auditor at Bio Pappel. “In this sense, FSC certification gives us the guarantee of sustainable management of raw material coming from forests or recycled material used to produce paper — which consequently encourages more responsible consumption and allows end consumers to be more aware of their footprint on the planet.”

For more than a decade, HP and World Wildlife Fund have worked together to achieve HP’s responsible sourcing goals— including zero deforestation for its HP-brand paper and paper-based packaging. This collaboration has included the development of HP’s industry-leading responsible fiber-sourcing policy; By 2020, HP met this commitment with FSC-certified or recycled fiber sourced for over 95 percent of HP brand paper and paper-based packaging.

HP continues to expand on its commitment to responsible sourcing with additional efforts rooted in protecting, restoring and improving the management of forests. One example is HP and WWF’s work to increase the area of FSC-certified forest in China to 219,830 acres by 2025. As of July 2022, over 33,000 hectares (81,000 acres) of forest have been FSC certified in China.

Over the next decade, HP and WWF’s efforts will include collaborating with local communities and forest managers to increase FSC-certified forest areas in key landscapes, as well as identifying and addressing obstacles to obtaining FSC certification and improving forest-management practices. Ultimately, HP has committed $80 million to restoring, protecting and improving the management of nearly a million acres of forest — an area approximately five times the size of New York City.

As the #1 preschool brand for wooden toys, Melissa & Doug has a longstanding commitment to “making timeless, sustainable toys for a thriving and inclusive world.” The brand formalized its commitments with an initiative called “Project Restore,” to more deeply integrate sustainability culture and practices across the organization.

After obtaining FSC Chain of Custody certification in 2020, the purpose-driven toy manufacturer became the first major US toy brand to earn FSC certification for its new stationery line, which was independently certified by SCS Global Services. Melissa & Doug is on track to achieve its commitment to ensure 100 percent of paper products and more than half of its wood products sold are FSC certified by 2025.

Healthy forests are essential for people to enjoy the outdoors; they’re also essential to REI’s business. REI uses fiber and the resulting paper products throughout its operations — in the form of flyers, cardboard, shopping bags, hangtags and more. As a co-op that inspires its members to spend more time outside, sustainable forestry is a natural focus.

REI prioritizes paper-based packaging for its own products that are FSC certified or made from certified post-consumer waste, and prioritizes paper products with the same attributes. With the assistance of the Outdoor Industry Association and the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, REI published sustainable packaging guidelines to encourage and educate its vendors, including FSC as a preferred attribute. These guidelines support not only REI Co-op and Co-op Cycles, but also the brands they sell within their stores and the greater outdoor and cycling industries.

REI’s Product Impact Standards are designed to help its partner brands create more sustainable and inclusive products. Its paper and paper products purchasing policy is designed to positively influence paper supply chains well beyond the company’s immediate sphere and to support sustainable forestry.

FSC is one of many third-party certifications in Amazon’s Climate Pledge Friendly (CPF) program — which currently encompasses over 350,000 products, 20,000+ brands and counting. CPF was created to help customers discover and choose more sustainable products on Amazon.

At SB’22 San Diego, Zac Ludington — CPF’s Principal Program Manager — shared data from surveys on consumer trends and trust in sustainability certifications, noting:

75 percent of consumers surveyed consider the use of sustainable materials to be an important purchasing factor. (McKinsey, EU)
53 percent of Millennials say they are willing to forgo a brand in order to buy products that are environmentally friendly. (Nielsen, Global)
49 percent of respondents are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly options. (Mintel, US)
26 percent of consumers surveyed said they have started, or stopped, purchasing a product due to its environmental impact. (Shelton Group, US)

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/supply-chain/consumer-product-brands-embrace-responsible-forestry

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Forest Stewardship Council, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility

Campaigns With Heart Honored As 2023 Halo Award Finalists

16 02 2023

Corporate Social Impact Winners Will Be Revealed At The May 2023 Engage For Good Conference in Atlanta, GA. From Engage for Good • February 16, 2023

In the spirit of Valentine’s Day, Engage for Good celebrates companies and causes that truly ‘get it’ – companies with heart – with the announcement of this year’s Halo Award finalists.

Now in its 21st year, the Halo Awards are North America’s highest honor for corporate social impact initiatives that showcase outstanding consumer and/or employee engagement efforts.

“At a time of such societal and political division and countless natural and manmade calamities, it is refreshing to see so many companies and causes partnering to build a better world,” said Engage for Good President David Hessekiel. “The Halo Awards is once again a celebration of outstanding efforts to sustainably create positive corporate social impact.”

Thirty-six campaigns were announced today as finalists in nine Halo Award categories. Gold and Silver Halo Award winners will be announced in each category at the Engage for Good Conference in Atlanta on May 17. Please join us in congratulating these finalists:

Consumer-Activated Corporate Donation
Bounty #PicksItUp – Bounty & Best Friends Animal Society
Bringing Communities Together In Nature – Sun Outdoors & National Park Foundation
Chance & Friends Holiday Philanthropic Collection – PetSmart & PetSmart Charities
Iced Coffee Day – Dunkin & Dunkin’ Joy In Childhood Foundation

Consumer Donation
2022 Macy’s Holiday Campaign – Macy’s & Big Brothers Big Sisters Of America
Integrated Partnership To Drive Point-Of-Sale Donations – JOANN & Susan G. Komen
Pin Pad Donation – PetSmart & PetSmart Charities
Wendy’s Frosty Treats Warm Hearts – The Wendy’s Company & The Dave Thomas Foundation For Adoption

Education
John Hancock MLK Scholars Program – John Hancock
STEM Careers All YEAR – General Motors & First Book
Subaru Loves Learning – Subaru Of America & AdoptAClassroom.org
Teacher Academy: Transforming STEM Professional Development To Spark Teachers’ Knowledge, Self-Efficacy, And Practice – Samsung Electronics America & MindSpark Learning

Emergency/Crisis Initiative
UPS Global Vaccine Equity Initiative – UPS
Moves That Matter – Total Quality Logistics
PayPal’s Response To The Humanitarian Crisis In Ukraine – PayPal & Multiple Nonprofits
Stand With Ukraine All-for-Charity Initiative – Humble Bundle, Razom For Ukraine, International Rescue Committee, International Medical Corps & Direct Relief

Employee Engagement
Clayton Impact: Team Member Volunteer Program – Clayton
Coast 2 Coast 4 Cancer – Bristol-Myers Squibb & V Foundation For Cancer Research
Employee Empowerment Thru Volunteering – FedEx & Operation Warm
Using Tech For Good: How Northwestern Mutual Leverages The Passions Of Its Employees To Make A Positive Impact In Their Communities Through STEM-based Projects – Northwestern Mutual

Health (Physical or Mental Health)
Advancing Equity In Maternal Health – Elevance Health, Creating Healthier Communities, March Of Dimes & 23 Local Nonprofit Organizations
Bloom: Growing Kids Mental Well-Being – Nationwide, Nationwide Children’s Hospital & On Our Sleeves
iHeart National Recovery Month – iHeart & The Voices Project
Mosquitoes Don’t Deserve a Drop – Orkin & American Red Cross

JEDI (Justice, Equity, Diversity And/Or Inclusion)
Fast Break For Small Business – LegalZoom & Accion Opportunity Fund
Leveling The Playing Field: Engaging Fans And Players For Financial Equity And Inclusion – U.S. Women’s National Team Players Association & Kiva Microfunds
Nespresso x Ali Forney Center – Nespresso USA x Accompany Creative & The Ali Forney Center
Justice For Change – Relativity

Social Impact Video
Peace Builders – Microsoft & Nobel Peace Center
Styles Of Pride Initiative – Macy’s & The Trevor Project
Teen Tech Center “Mentor Moments” – Best Buy & Best Buy Foundation
The Big Wait PSA – Arby’s & Big Brothers Big Sisters of America

Social Service
#MomsUnite4Milk To Support Families Impacted By The Formula & Human Milk Shortages – Medela
Lowe’s Hometowns – Lowe’s & Points of Light
HelloFresh Meals With Meaning Program – HelloFresh & Partners
Project DASH – DoorDash

About Engage for Good
Engage for Good is a professional development organization that helps social impact leaders at businesses and nonprofits access the resources and community they need in order to build a better world and the bottom line. While best known for its annual conference and the Halo Awards, Engage for Good provides year-round resources, trainings and events to help corporate social impact professionals advance their careers, campaigns and organizations. Learn more at http://www.engageforgood.com/.

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Engage for Good, Halo Awards
Categories : corporate social responsibility, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding

Want to Be More Environmentally Friendly? Here Are 3 Sustainability Tips for Every Company in 2023

16 02 2023

Graphic: Getty Images

One in three consumers prefer shopping with the planet in mind, even if it means paying a little more. By Alyssa Khan, Editorial Intern • Inc.com – Posted: February 16, 2023

Knowing your customer is one of the first rules for running a successful business, and customers today care about sustainability.

One in three consumers prefer shopping with the planet in mind, even if it means paying a little more, according to a SurveyMonkey study. Sales of products marketed as sustainable also grew 2.7x faster than those that didn’t, according to a study from New York University’s Stern Center for Sustainable Business. While making your company more environmentally friendly will likely require an upfront investment, it could pay dividends in the long term, and you don’t have to reinvent your entire business plan.

Here are three sustainability tips for every business owner in 2023.

Ericka Rodriguez founded her vegan lipstick brand, Axiology, in 2014 in New York City. Though her lipsticks were originally packaged in recyclable aluminum, Rodriguez learned that their plastic components meant they often couldn’t be recycled. So she and her team of four employees began testing ways to make their packaging more environmentally friendly. They settled on a compostable, food-grade paper free of animal-sourced waxes and glue that wraps around the lipstick like paper on a crayon. While it took a year and a half and thousands of dollars to make the switch, the final production cost is now less than that of the aluminum packaging, enabling Rodriguez to lower the retail price of her flagship lipstick from $28 to $24. The new packaging also helps differentiate her brand from the competition.

1. Rethink your packaging.

“I don’t think the world needs another plastic packaging lipstick brand,” Rodriguez says. “There are already so many.”

2. Consider responsible sourcing.

Nadya Okamoto and Nick Jain founded the direct-to-consumer period care brand August in 2021. The main material for their products, cotton, is the most profitable nonfood crop in the world, but farming with pesticides, fertilizers, and other chemicals can contaminate waterways and soil, creating havoc in ecosystems. So, August’s founders were committed from the start to use only sustainably farmed, organic cotton versus the popular industry alternative viscose, a type of rayon that is less sustainable and the subject of various health concerns. That means the cotton crops used for their products create fewer greenhouse gas emissions and don’t contaminate surrounding ecosystems. The average price of a 28-pack of regular tampons retails for between $10 and $11, while a 24-pack of August’s tampons is priced between $14 and $15. For Okamoto, the difference in price is worth it for her customers and her business.

“Supply chains are being challenged to be as ethical as possible,” says Okamoto. “Our deepened commitment to making sure that we stand by those values has helped us cultivate a beautiful community.”

3. Beware of greenwashing.

It’s no secret that companies overstate how environmentally friendly their products are. “For me, greenwashing is overclaiming in a significant way or lying about what you’re doing,” says Tensie Whelan, director of the Center for Sustainable Business at New York University. “Some of it is a lack of competence. This is a whole new area. We’re all learning all the time.”

While misleading claims about products being environmentally friendly are common, companies that exaggerate details about sustainability risk significant reputational damage. Greenwashing has been at the center of controversy over the past five years as companies like Tide, Coca-Cola, and Banana Boat sunscreens have faced inquiries and even lawsuits challenging various claims related to sustainability.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.inc.com/aflac/attracting-americas-top-female-talent.html

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility

Gen-Z Job Candidates Want To See Real Sustainability Plans: Why You Shouldn’t Ignore Them

15 02 2023

Graphic: Forbes

By Ted Dhillon, Forbes Councils Member from fore’s.com • February 15, 2023

ESG (environmental, social and governance) is often viewed as a way for the financial markets to measure the social and environmental performance of a business. But it’s a lot more than that. Increasingly, prospective employees are using it as a measuring stick to decide where their next job will be.

ESG represents a set of principles that many prospective employees hold all over the world—the idea that businesses need to operate with sustainability at the forefront, doing as little harm to the environment as possible and promoting social responsibility and community building inside and outside the enterprise.

Generation-Z—the group many companies will draw their fresh talent from in the next two decades—already believes in these principles more than previous generations do.

My company draws talent from all corners, but especially from groups that have either studied or worked in environmental science. That’s because their values already align with our mission. It’s a natural fit for someone who wants to contribute to a climate change solution to gravitate toward companies that empower them to do just that.

But the Great Resignation that started with the pandemic is still taking a toll. Even companies outside the ESG industry that want to recruit and retain top talent don’t have the luxury of ignoring the class of climate change warriors. Enterprise leadership must think carefully about how they can align their values and practices with these prospects. It’s not enough to say you are pro-environment, diverse and inclusive—you have to show it and “pitch it” in the interview process.

Communicate an authentic message.

No one comes through the door supporting an environmental mission for exactly the same reasons, so messaging has to be strategic and, most importantly, can’t be seen as greenwashing. Greenwashing, in this context, means putting forward misleading claims to prospective employees to boost a company’s environmental credentials.

So how do you convince a top recruit that your company takes sustainability seriously? In short, communicate, demonstrate and engage:

1. You can communicate a pledge to sustainability through a clear impact statement on every job posting. It should answer some key questions:

What impact can an individual have at this particular company? How does the individual job role contribute to the positive impact the company wants to have on the environment?

If an employee is choosing between you and another company, the “50-50” decision could come down to how well you answer those questions.

2. You can demonstrate sustainable practices by proactively sharing a fact sheet or webpage with every job candidate, whether they ask for it or not. Using social media channels to amplify those messages especially works well to reach out to ultra-connected Gen-Zers. This signals that ESG concerns are not an afterthought but a priority.

In the interview process, make environmentally friendly benefits—even if they are as small as reimbursements for taking greener modes of transportation to work—a part of the standard benefits run-through.

3. Keep current employees engaged in sustainable practice discussions by initiating employee-led committees that have the power to push new sustainability policies. Mention to prospectives (or better yet, let other employees mention it in conversation) that there are internal structures in place to give them a voice on sustainable practices. Prospects will quickly see that there is no greenwashing going on in that shop.

Consider tracking and reporting.

There’s a panoply of green certifications that companies use for bragging rights (the LEED standard for green buildings might be the best known). But ESG rating systems, those firms that take reported data and create rankings of companies, can be confusing because they all use different methodologies that may not be fully transparent.

There are better ways to demonstrate true ESG impact. Job candidates are looking less for a list of green badges and more for evidence that the company can track its own impacts through clear and transparent ESG reporting. If your company already tracks impacts, which can range from emissions to water usage to social impacts, then package the most recent year (or five years) reporting in an easy-to-understand format for anyone interested in working for the company.

If you are not yet tracking impacts, developing a plan to do so and being transparent about it to prospective employees at least makes a definitive statement about where the company is headed.

Gen-Z Swedish activist Greta Thunberg is famous for calling out older generations who are fumbling the ball on climate change today. “My message is that we’ll be watching you,” she told a U.N. climate summit audience in 2019. She meant that there would be accountability for the world’s most existential problem, and decades from now, business leaders may be judged by what they do today to be part of the solution.

Forward-looking companies will strive to track ESG impacts, form action plans that meet specific emissions (and other) goals and then ask young climate change warriors to jump on board.

Ted Dhillon is the CEO and cofounder of FigBytes, an ESG insight platform.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2023/02/13/gen-z-candidates-want-to-see-real-sustainability-plans-why-you-shouldnt-ignore-them/?sh=1856b8af290a

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, Employees, ESG, Gen-Z, marketing, Recruitment, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility

3 Steps to Ensure Your Corporate Strategy Delivers Both Growth and Sustainability

10 02 2023

By Andreas von Buchwaldt, Grant Mitchell, Seth Reynolds, and Steve Varley from Harvard Business Review • Reposted: February 10, 2023

CEOs could once focus almost single-mindedly on their businesses and value chains. Now, along with driving a strategy that generates competitive advantage and enhanced value, they face another core task: satisfying a broad base of stakeholders with diverse interests who all demand sustainability policies and practices in different variations.

Delivering on both (often apparently conflicting) fronts is essential. Investors will only support a firm’s long-term strategic initiatives if they yield an above-market return and address the future needs of investors themselves, customers, regulators, and employees.

Like digital before it, sustainability has become an overarching strategic concern today. Judgments about a company’s sustainability performance affect talent acquisition and retention, access to capital, and consumer choices. And new regulations, such as the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act, are translating sustainability imperatives into economic shocks, notably in the energy sector. CEOs also see competitors growing and increasing customer loyalty through sustainability-linked products and services.

As a result, CEOs have largely accepted the need to embed sustainability in their strategies to create competitive advantage. But while existing frameworks describe the elements of a sustainable business, they rarely show how to get there.

At the intersection of sustainability and strategy, many companies adopt an environmental, social, and governance (ESG) strategy. In doing so, they can be strongly influenced by the external focus on third-party ESG metrics, which are framed as a way of measuring a company’s performance in ESG.

ESG strategies, which often aim to improve key metrics in a way that a firm finds acceptable or manageable, have given many businesses a pragmatic start toward becoming more sustainable. However, as a path to a better strategy, they have drawbacks.

https://0d515e8af6a31c1f54db845abb0fc18c.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-40/html/container.html

Managing to metrics isn’t the best way to deploy sustainability as a driver of competitive advantage and value, or to hasten meaningful improvements in environmental and social outcomes. Being still immature, metrics are far from comparable, rigorous, or transparent. And the evidence for a link between economic value and ESG ratings is modest. Investors support genuine gains in sustainability, but they won’t tolerate strategies that don’t deliver economic value. While stakeholders closely observe ESG metrics, financial performance remains much more important in corporate valuations.

Rather than focusing on ESG metrics, a more effective path to improving both financial value and sustainability performance is to integrate sustainability into the development and implementation of corporate strategy. In doing so, CEOs can ensure their strategy makes the most of the market, technology, customer, and regulatory trends created by sustainability imperatives.

CEOs can unite strategy with sustainability in three ways:

1. Adapt classic, CEO-level strategy questions by viewing them through a sustainability lens: “Is my purpose the best possible fit with competing stakeholder demands?” “As sustainability plays out in my industry, how should I position my strategy and portfolio for maximum advantage?” The collated responses should be tailored for individual business units or portfolio sectors.

2. Ensure strategic choices include sustainability imperatives by applying top-down and bottom-up analysis.

From the top down, ask, “How will increased sustainability modify or create new strategic drivers?” To test existing strategic themes, use such means as moving from climate scenarios that capture climate risk to embedding climate elements in strategy scenarios and tailoring customer research to test hypotheses about critical sustainability issues. Insights gained can indicate how industry ecosystems will evolve as sustainability grows in influence.
From the bottom up, ask, “Which specific sustainability concerns will our strategy need to accommodate?” To identify such concerns, CEOs could consider which issues are most significant for stakeholders—and so, how likely they are to create competitive advantage. Three interrelated qualifiers can help identify these: the future prominence for stakeholders; uniqueness of contribution; and size of business value, net investment. Careful analysis helps rank these issues.

3. Use common methods to assess investments in sustainability and commercial initiatives. Investments with negative value miss the opportunity to increase meaningful impact. While some investments with unclear links to value may be pragmatic to avoid reputational risk, they should phase out over time. Most organizations can do more to use data such as that on stakeholder attitudes and future economic impacts, and connections to estimate the business consequences of investment.

Organizations need to execute sustainability initiatives with the same rigor as traditional strategic activity. They need to anchor these initiatives in the ambition, resourcing plans, and incentives of all key decision makers—not isolate them within a sustainability team. CEOs will need to identify early the new internal business and impact data they need to measure the progress of key sustainability initiatives, as legacy systems may not capture such data.

https://0d515e8af6a31c1f54db845abb0fc18c.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-40/html/container.html

EY-Parthenon research shows that taking these steps can give meaningful sustainability actions greater prominence in a CEO’s long-term agenda and may lead to better outcomes—helping a business achieve both the financial means and investor support to create a more sustainable future. Read more about how corporate strategy can deliver both growth and sustainability here.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://hbr.org/sponsored/2023/02/3-steps-to-ensure-your-corporate-strategy-delivers-both-growth-and-sustainability

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, CEOs, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, Corporate Strategy, CSR, ESG, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, reputation management

Are More Carbon Footprint Labels Coming to the Grocery Store?

8 02 2023

Image: Oatly

By Riya Anne Polcastro from triple pundit.com • Reposted: February 8, 2023

The dairy alternative brand Oatly is using its newly reformulated oat milk yogurt line to introduce U.S. consumers to its climate footprint label — which the company has featured on products in European markets since 2021. Seeing more carbon footprint labels on food products could signal an important shift toward more informed and responsible consumption, as Americans report a willingness to make changes for the sake of the planet.

Such labeling could be a boon for producers with small carbon footprints while perhaps encouraging carbon-heavy producers in sectors like such as beef to find ways to lighten the load. But widespread use and standardization across the food industry will be necessary for it to be effective.

“Transforming the food industry is necessary to meet the current climate challenge, and we believe providing consumers with information to understand the impact of their food choices is one way we as a company can contribute to that effort,” Julie Kunen, director of sustainability for Oatly North America, said in a statement.

There’s good reason to believe that a significant number of consumers will adjust their choices accordingly. A joint study by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, the University of Michigan and Harvard University found that climate impact labels on food menus did influence respondents to choose a chicken, fish or vegetarian meal over a beef one. Warning labels were more effective in deterring people from choosing beef than low-impact labels were at encouraging people to eat an alternative. While it was a small study with a limited scope, the research does point to the potential for carbon footprint labels to inform people’s diets.

The global food system accounts for between a quarter and a third of annual greenhouse gas emissions, depending on methodology, leaving plenty of room for improvement — and impact.

For its part, Oatly compares its climate footprint labeling — which will list the product’s climate impact from “grower to grocer” in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) — to the nutritional information that is already required on packaging. The CO2e measurements include not just carbon emissions, but also other greenhouse gases such as nitrous oxide and methane which have been converted into interchangeable units in order to incorporate them in the total footprint.

However, the brand is clear that carbon footprint labels are neither required nor standardized, and they’re of little recourse to consumers until they become so. Thus the brand is hoping to inspire other producers in the industry to follow suit while encouraging consumers to eat more plant-based and low-carbon alternatives.

“The products we make at Oatly aim to make it easy for people to make the switch to non-dairy alternatives, and great taste is one of the most essential components of driving that conversion,” Leah Hoxie, the brand’s senior vice president of innovation in North America, explained further in a statement.

Taste has been a barrier for the plant-based movement, with major strides made in the latest generation of plant-based meats and dairy products that have hit the market. Indeed, more people are willing to make the leap to eating lower on the food chain as the taste, texture and price of alternatives become more palatable.

Fostering a sense of responsibility for the climate in their business practices and labeling should work in Oatly’s favor, especially among Gen Z.

Consumers have long been burdened with a status quo that makes doing the right thing more difficult, so it’s no wonder we have fallen into a food system that pollutes and destroys ecosystems at a rate far higher than it should. But by providing climate impact information on product packaging, brands can gain consumer trust and demonstrate that they also trust the consumer to make the right choice.

As the balance of information shifts and becomes more equitable, consumers could be empowered not just to lower their own gastronomic impact on the climate, but to expect better from the food industry as well. Naturally this would require a more intricate labeling system — perhaps including warnings on high-impact items — but Oatly is off to a promising start.

Fellow plant-based brand Quorn also includes carbon footprint labels on product packaging, and CPG giant Unilever has committed to roll such labeling out to its entire product portfolio. Other sectors, from beauty to tech, are also looking toward climate labels in a trend that seems to be just heating up.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/carbon-footprint-labels-food/765696

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Carbon Footprint, Carbon Footprint Labels, Climate Labels, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, ESG, green marketing, marketing, Oatly, responsible brands, responsible econsumption, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility

A New Year and New Approach to DEI at Agencies

7 02 2023

By Ashish Prashar from Triplepundit.com • Reposted: February 7, 2023

We in the advertising industry talk a lot about equity and inclusion. We design a lovely showroom that celebrates our apparent commitment to diversity in all its forms. Sadly, this is all superficial. Peel back the curtain and we see … nothing. We continue to ignore blatant racism and injustice and fail to take even the most basic steps that can drive real change.

For all the pledges we saw from agencies in 2020 to finally address systemic racism, over two years later we’ve seen little real action. Even while they complain of a “war for talent,” agencies aren’t doing enough to change how they recruit and promote talent and are struggling to make a meaningful cultural impact.

Racism and exclusion persist in the workplace, with higher turnover rates and lower promotion rates among people of color. For years, we’ve known there’s a clear business case for prioritizing diversity, equity and inclusion at work beyond lip service. A McKinsey study found that the most diverse companies were 36 percent more profitable in 2019 than their least diverse counterparts.

While companies may sometimes have good intentions in coming forward with commitments after a big cultural moment, the impact falls short every time. After George Floyd’s death in 2020, company after company promised to recruit and retain more diverse talent and pledged to put cash toward DEI. But there was little accountability. Companies often don’t report their demographics, and it’s even more rare that they disclose information about spending.

A number of agencies are recruiting more diverse talent, and some are willing to share their data, with varying degrees of detail and frequency, but there is a lot more work to be done — particularly when it comes to instigating change at the top. This is where agencies can move beyond anti-bias and anti-racism training to provide things like committed executive sponsorship and mentorship of young diverse talent.

It can be difficult to hold organizations accountable when it comes to all aspects of DEI, particularly when looking beyond financial commitments and assessing what data is important when considering DEI progress.

We need to think bigger If we’re going to make meaningful change. The best DEI strategies target all parts of companies, and that starts by going beyond recruiting. Recruiting a diverse workforce is one part of DEI, but it should be viewed as a first step, not a comprehensive solution. It takes holding leaders accountable for change, something agencies haven’t seemed willing to take on. This may include difficult decisions around current leadership and has to encompass taking the impact on talent and agency culture into account when filling new leadership roles. Managers who create or enable a workplace environment that makes people of color uncomfortable should never be shoo-ins for new leadership roles.

It also means asking questions about who we work with, the kind of work we want to create, and the stories we want to share with the world. Companies often make the biggest difference when they change something within their spheres of influence. In this industry, our sphere of influence is narrative.

The creative industry has served as an arbiter of ideas and a reflection of a society’s failing or burgeoning health. Creatives have had a powerful hand in building either massive propaganda machines or culture-changing art and movements. The question about which side we’ll fall in this dichotomy can be answered by choosing to be conscious of our resources and of our responsibilities.

It is our responsibility in the creative industry to question what ideas and values we are disseminating, what stereotypes or biases we are introducing, and to whom we are giving platforms through our work. But it’s not enough just to avoid making the mistakes of the past. This industry has a responsibility to create new narratives that help tear down the biases and stereotypes it has previously helped perpetuate.

If agencies really want to make a difference in connecting with people of color, they can start by working on the issues and causes that impact and shape our lives. There is no shortage of partners in need of help addressing issues like justice reform, education and healthcare equity. Find out who you can work with to make an impact, and get to work. Talent (and prospective talent) will notice.

Make 2023 the year that your agency was truly an ally in the fight for diversity.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/dei-agencies/765591

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, advertising, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, DEI, diversity, equity, inclusion, responsible brands, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, reputation management, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Why don’t we talk about acid rain and the ozone hole anymore? Scientists debunk misinformation

29 01 2023

How a ‘blizzard of false information’ undermines the threat of climate change

Atmospheric chemist Susan Solomon, shown here at a research station in the Antarctic in the mid-1980s, remembers being laughed at by colleagues when she first presented her research on the cause of the thinning ozone layer. Photo: Submitted by Susan Solomon

By Jaela Bernstien · CBC News · Posted: January 28, 2023

If you’re over 30, you likely remember a time when there was a lot of hand-wringing and furrowed brows over the ozone hole and skin cancer, as well as the threat of acid rain destroying ecosystems.

In the 1980s and ’90s, those global environmental crises created buzz and grabbed headlines, but in the decades that followed, the world turned its attention to another threat: climate change.

Yet the success stories of how those threats were tackled — through the co-operation of scientists, policy-makers and the public — are often overlooked, if not outright denied.

A barrage of misinformation on social media, including various tweets and videos, claims those issues were never real in the first place. It’s a conspiracy theory that takes on various shapes, but the underlying common thread is the false claim that climate change is just the latest in a series of hoaxes invented by governments to control the public.

One TikTok video (reminder: this is misinformation) with more than three million views dismisses several global threats as “politics,” listing off a series of examples: “In the ’80s, it was acid rain will destroy all the crops in 10 yrs; in the ’90s it was the ozone layer will be destroyed in 10 years; in the 2000s it was the glaciers will all melt in 10 years …,” the TikTok poster says.

The video claims it was all “fear-mongering nonsense” that never came true.

Watching the video during an interview with CBC News, atmospheric chemist Susan Solomon nods knowingly. It’s not the first time she’s confronted that attitude.

“I’ve heard that kind of — I don’t want to even call it a line of argument — I’ve heard that kind of assertion in the past,” said Solomon, who is a professor in the department of Earth, atmospheric and planetary sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“It’s a little bit like saying, ‘I had a heart attack and my doctor put a stent in. They told me I had to exercise and now I feel great. So I think that was all just nonsense to make money for the medical establishment.”

An image circulating misinformation reads as follows: 1970s - the New Ice Age. 1980s - Acid Rain. 1990s - Ozone Depletion. 2000s - Global Warming. Then they had to switch to climate change since the globe was no longer warming. That's 40 years of shameless and baseless fear-mongering to siphon off billions of dollars from taxpayers, expand government power, and advance the left's agenda. #ClimateHoax — This image, circulated on social media, is an example of a popular conspiracy theory that falsely claims climate change is a hoax, along with acid rain and ozone depletion. (Climate Knight/Facebook)

Scientists set the record straight

It was Solomon’s research in the 1980s that helped establish the cause of the thinning ozone: refrigerants called chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs.

She recalls a particular meeting where colleagues were discussing ozone depletion. Solomon, 30 at the time, said she presented her paper identifying how refrigerants were breaking apart in the stratosphere.

“People just laughed,” she said.

But Solomon knew she was on to something, and her work contributed to the growing body of evidence that ultimately led to the signing of the Montreal Protocol in 1987, phasing out the harmful refrigerants.

That treaty is working, according to a recent international report, which said the ozone is expected to recover by 2066.

“The fact that we have actually done the right things and fixed certain problems is a cause for celebration. It’s not a cause for pretending that those problems never existed,” Solomon said.

The reason acid rain doesn’t grab headlines anymore is similar — it wasn’t a hoax, it’s another case of governments responding to the scientific community’s alarm bells with regulations, which worked.

“The acid rain story [and] the ozone story show that we are capable of dealing with environmental problems and that we can make significant progress,” said Mike Paterson, a senior research scientist at the International Institute for Sustainable Development’s Experimental Lakes Area in northwestern Ontario.

Paterson wrote his master’s thesis on acid rain in the 1980s, and he recalls the very real impacts at the time, such as declining fish populations in North America and northern Europe.

Scientists established the cause — sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides produced by burning fossil fuels — and North America eventually took action with a series of policy reforms in the 1990s that successfully curbed emissions and reduced the acidity of rain.

A man wearing glasses and a T-shirt sits outside with his arms crossed. — Mike Paterson, a senior research scientist at the International Institute for Sustainable Development’s Experimental Lakes Area in northwestern Ontario, wrote his master’s thesis on acid rain in the 1980s, and he recalls the very real impacts at the time. Photo: Bartley Kives/CBC

How misinformation threatens climate action

The fact that the global threat of climate change is happening in a digital age rampant with misinformation adds a novel layer of complexity to solving the crisis, with its severity constantly being undermined.

A government-funded report published this week by the Council of Canadian Academies — a non-profit organization that gathers experts to examine evidence on scientific topics — states that “targeted misinformation campaigns have played a documented role in creating opposition to policies addressing climate change.”

The report, called Fault Lines, used modelling to estimate that COVID-19 misinformation and its impacts on vaccine hesitancy likely contributed to 2,800 deaths and 13,000 hospitalizations in Canada over a nine-month span in 2021.

The study highlights how misinformation can cause real harm — and warns of the threat that it poses to dealing with future crises by eroding trust in science and making people more susceptible to falling down the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories.

Cognitive scientist Stephan Lewandowsky, who contributed to the report, studies misinformation and public opinion around climate change.

“Exposure to misinformation about climate change leads people to take it less seriously and to be less willing to support policy actions,” Lewandowsky, who is the chair of cognitive psychology at the University of Bristol in England, said in an interview with CBC News.

Women carry belongings salvaged from their homes after flooding caused by unusually heavy monsoon rains displaced millions of people in Pakistan in 2022. Attribution analysis has found that human-caused climate change likely contributed to the disaster. Photo: Fareed Khan/The Associated Press

Society is “drenched” in misinformation, he said, and the solution must go beyond teaching individuals how to debunk conspiracy theories and include shifts on a broader scale.

“We also have to look at the structures that are in place right now and that are assisting people with nefarious intentions to spread misinformation,” Lewandowsky said.

“We’re living in an environment where outrage or anger or fear — anything that evokes attention or captures attention — is being favoured by the algorithms of social media.”

Even if there is a strong scientific consensus on global warming, a steady stream of misinformation makes it difficult for people to sift through it all and sort fact from fiction, he said.

“If people are exposed to this blizzard of false information about climate change, then their right to be informed about risks is being undermined.”

If misinformation isn’t addressed, Lewandowsky said, it will make it all the more difficult for the public to realize and react to how serious climate change truly is, as it increasingly contributes to deadly disasters around the world.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/misinformation-climate-crisis-ozone-scientists-1.6729005

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Climate Change, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, Fault Lines, Misinformation, responsible brands, sustainability
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility

Cone: 76% of Millennials would take a pay cut to for work for a responsible company.

3 11 2016

Three-quarters (76%) of Millennials consider a company’s social and environmental commitments when deciding where to work and nearly two-thirds (64%) won’t take a job if a potential employer doesn’t have strong corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices, according to the 2016 Cone Communications Millennial Employee Engagement Study.

The study reveals that meaningful engagement around CSR is a business – and bottom line – imperative, impacting a company’s ability to appeal to, retain and inspire Millennial talent. More than any other generation, Millennials see a company’s commitment to responsible business practices as a key factor to their employment decisions:

75% say they would take a pay cut to work for a responsible company (vs. 55% U.S. average)
83% would be more loyal to a company that helps them contribute to social and environmental issues (vs. 70% U.S. average)
88% say their job is more ful lling when they are provided opportunities to make a positive impact on social and environmental issues (vs. 74% U.S. average)
76% consider a company’s social and environmental commitments when deciding where to work (vs. 58% U.S. average)
64% won’t take a job from a company that doesn’t have strong CSR practices (vs. 51% U.S. average)“Millennials will soon make up 50 percent of the workforce and companies will have to radically evolve their value proposition to attract and retain this socially conscious group,” says Alison DaSilva, executive vice president, CSR Research & Insights, Cone Communications. “Integrating a deeper sense of purpose and responsibility into the work experience will have a clear bottom line return for companies.”

Cone will allow you to download the report here if you register.

http://www.conecomm.com/research-blog/2016-millennial-employee-engagement-study

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, CSR, employee engagement, millennials, reputation management, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, responsible brands, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Cause Marketing Halo Awards: Social Impact To Build A Better World And Bottom Line

17 02 2016

The 2016 Cause Marketing Halo Awards announced its 42 finalists of programs designed to yield both social and financial dividends. The Gold and Service winners in each of ten categories will be announced at the at the 2016 Cause Marketing Forum Annual Conference in Chicago June 1-2, 2016.

More than 100 entries were received in the Cause Marketing Forum’s competition for North American programs designed to yield social and financial dividends.

Programs named finalists in multiple categories include

Bank of America’s “Pass the Flame” campaign with Special Olympics promoting inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities in sports and in life;
‘Think it Up’ Staples/DonorsChoose.org partnership supporting student-powered, teacher-led projects in classrooms across the country;
‘Gateways and Getaways’, a bird- and flight-centric education program for New York families from JetBlue and the Wildlife Conservation Society;
‘Dementia-Friendly Massachusetts’ which Senior Living Residences developed to help people better understand the challenges of living with dementia;
‘#Unlimited’ a tween-targeted back to school program from Old Navy and Boys & Girls Clubs of America to support summer programming for kids.

The Halo Awards will highlight many of the most innovative programs that companies and causes took at the intersection of profit and purpose last year. Some examples include:

A video game marathon that raised funds to put veterans back to work.
An app that helps autistic children make social and emotional connections.
Canvas shoes turned into artwork to support high school arts programs.
“Thumb Socks” that help persuade teens from texting and

With the proliferation of cause campaigns reaching consumers each day, the Cause Marketing Halo Awards are designed to bring clarity, innovation and best practices to light.

About the Cause Marketing Forum

Now in their fourteenth year, the Cause Marketing Halo Awards are North America’s highest honor in the field of cause marketing. They are presented to US and Canadian companies by the Cause Marketing Forum, a company dedicated to providing business and nonprofit executives with the practical information and connections they need to succeed.

All Halo finalists can be seen online at: http://www.CauseMarketingForum.com/halo2016

original post http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/38699-These-Corporate-Social-Impact-Programs-Build-a-Better-World-and-the-Bottom-Line

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, cause marketing, Cause Marketing Forum, Cause Marketing Halo Awards, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, marketing, marketing and communications, reputation management, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, reputation management, responsible brands, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

New Survey: Only 10% of Americans trust business to behave ethically.

17 09 2015

96 percent of Americans believe it is important for companies to ensure their employees behave ethically but only 10 percent have trust and confidence in major companies to do what is right.

Pharmaceuticals and health insurance were viewed to be the least trustworthy industries. The most trustworthy were thought to be manufacturing, technology and large retailing.

Princeton Survey Research Associates International’s 2015 Public Affairs Pulse survey polled 1,600 Americans on their attitudes about corporate behavior, big business and small business, the trustworthiness of companies and industries, levels of regulation, and lobbying and politics. The study found the vast majority of the public expects the business sector to think beyond profits and be valuable components of society.

Other interesting findings include:

More than nine in 10 Americans say businesses need to protect the environment, including 76 percent who feel it is very important that businesses limit their environmental damage.
88 percent believe companies should contribute to charities
85 percent believe they should take a leadership role in helping society in ways that go beyond their business operations
39 percent believe it is very important that businesses take more responsibility in helping the government solve problems.

How can companies communicate what they’re doing for these causes? Social media is reportedly the best way that companies can communicate what they are doing for social causes, with 45 percent calling it very effective and 38 percent calling it somewhat effective. Not surprisingly, those under 50 years old were more strongly in favor of social media communication than those over 50.

Only 15 percent say social media has a significant influence on their opinions, while almost 40 percent say it does not influence their opinion at all. Personal experiences as a customer or employee of a major company were the top factors influencing people’s opinions of a business.

Access more of the Princeton Survey here. http://pac.org/pulse/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, branding, consumers, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, customer expectations, customer research, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, reputation management, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

TetraPak: Most U.S. Consumers Would Choose Renewable Packaging to Help Mitigate Climate Change

17 08 2015

A new survey suggests U.S. consumers are largely unaware of the severity of global resource scarcity, but their choice of packaging would be impacted if they had readily available information on how renewable materials mitigate climate change.

Tetra Pak and the Global Footprint Network conducted a survey of 1,000 U.S. consumers about their grocery spending habits. An overwhelming 86 percent agreed that if they knew the use of renewable packaging contributed to reducing carbon emissions, it would impact their choice of packaging. Women were particularly motivated to choose renewable packaging options based on this knowledge: 90 percent of females said they would modify their purchasing habits while 77 percent of men did.

According to TetraPak, consumers indicated that they are ready to be held as accountable as government and industry for climate change, and they are ready to support actions to mitigate its harmful effects. While 81 percent of respondents said that no one group is responsible for addressing natural resource constraints, the majority also believes that no single group is doing enough.

“Our survey confirms our belief that with information and education, consumers will respond favorably to the need to pay closer attention to resource challenges and change their individual actions, including making more environmentally responsible decisions around packaging,” said Elizabeth Comere, Director of Environment & Government Affairs for Tetra Pak US and Canada.

The survey also asked respondents about specific actions they would be willing to take to conserve natural resources. The top three responses were:

buying local grown food as much as possible (75 percent)
only buying as much food as a household was going to consume (72 percent)
seeking out food or beverage products that come in renewable packaging (69 percent).

Daily purchasing choices can make a difference, said Mathis Wackernagel, president and co-founder of Global Footprint Network.

“How we meet our basic needs — including food — is a powerful way to shape sustainability. Eating food from local sources and less emphasis on animal-based diets can lower the Ecological Footprint,” he said. “When we buy packaged foods, opting for packaging made from renewable materials also contributes to a lower Ecological Footprint.”

These findings coincide with Earth Overshoot Day, an indicator of when humanity has used up nature’s ‘budget’ for the entire year. Global Footprint Network announced Wednesdaythat we have overshot faster than ever: Overshoot Day moved from early October in 2000 to August 13^th this year.

This survey follows Tetra Pak’s launch of the first carton made entirely from renewable packaging materials last year, and is the latest evidence that consumers desire more sustainable packaging options.

Original article from Sustainable Brands

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Climate Change, corporate social reponsibility, customer expectations, customer research, Global Footprint Network, green marketing, green retailing, recycling, renewable packaging, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, T, TetraPak
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding

Contact Us

Inspiring Experiences

Our Partners

Reliable Resources

Holistic manufacturing

Two departments with shared goals

A framework for sustainable development

An industrial revolution in quality

Environmental awareness

Innovative thinking

Sustainability as a business function

New opportunities

3 KEY INSIGHTS TO SUPPORT CARBON-LABELING AMBITIONS

The skyrocketing price tag of anti-ESG policies

ESG is good for business

The SEC responds to investor trends, not partisan ideology

Pushback against new SEC climate rules

Another look at the SEC climate rules

The SEC has some changes in store

CMO or CFO?

The importance of water stewardship

A business risk and opportunity

Examples of scarcity and pollution

Stewardship avoids “greenwashing”

Long-term workforce development

Socio-economic growth

Political stability

Permission to operate

The bottom line: The untapped potential of investing to fight global hunger

Especially insidious

Stumbling at the first hurdle

Changing course

World of difference

Embed ESG in the corporate strategy

Assign roles and responsibilities

Increase focus on assurance

Develop a workable solution for data gaps

Invest in technology for ESG reporting, disclosure and action

WHAT IS GREEN HUSHING?

HOW LONG HAS THIS TERM BEEN AROUND, AND HOW COMMON IS IT?

WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE IN PRACTICE?

WHAT OTHER FORCES ARE AT PLAY?

WHAT COULD REDUCE GREEN HUSHING?

WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF GREEN HUSHING?

Environmental sustainability findings

Social responsibility findings

How can brands truly earn trust through their sustainability efforts? / Image: Michal Matlon via Unsplash

By Lucy Usher | Sustainability Lead • The Drum Network article • February 27 2023

The far-reaching financial benefits of being a trusted brand

Bridging the sustainability-trust gap

1. Start

2. Collaborate

3. Upskill

4. Shout

Be, do, tell

How Companies Impact the Environment

1. Aquifer Depletion From Agriculture

2. Food Insecurity From Environmental Degradation

3. Endangered Wildlife From Coffee Consumption

4. Reduced Air Quality From Traffic

Holding Companies Accountable

Corporate Responsibility the Key to Protecting the Planet

1. Be with them.

2. Make it possible for them to take a break.

3. Actively demonstrate your support.

4. Tell them how great they are.

5. Encourage their self-care.

Graphic: Getty Images

One in three consumers prefer shopping with the planet in mind, even if it means paying a little more. By Alyssa Khan, Editorial Intern • Inc.com – Posted: February 16, 2023

2. Consider responsible sourcing.

3. Beware of greenwashing.

Communicate an authentic message.

Consider tracking and reporting.

How a ‘blizzard of false information’ undermines the threat of climate change

Scientists set the record straight

How misinformation threatens climate action

Search

Links

Contact Us

Inspiring Experiences

Our Partners

Reliable Resources