Photo (L to R) – Garrett Bond (Senior Director of Analytics, Ringer Sciences), Dr Lucy Walton (CEO, Connected Impact) and Taylor Schott (Senior Manager – Analytics, Ringer Sciences), who conducted the report research. Photo: Business Wire
From Business Wire • Reposted: July 11, 2024
New research suggests that almost six in ten (58%) of the top 100 largest public and private US companies are responding to greenwashing concerns by keeping quiet on genuine ESG progress.
With global ESG assets surpassing $30 trillion in 2022 and 85% of investors reporting that ESG assets lead to better returns1, companies that remain quiet may be missing out on potential investment opportunities and consumer demand2.
The Transparency Index 2024 report, published by data insights company Connected Impact, and data science consultancy Ringer Sciences, reviewed over 600,000 corporate communications from 200 companies to identify the “transparency gaps” between what businesses communicate on social media about ESG topics, and what they factually disclose about their targets and performance in annual reports, websites and other corporate documents.
The findings reveal only 2% of US companies “over promoted” their ESG progress, with 58% “under promoting” and disclosing more factual data on ESG than promoted. In a climate of stringent regulatory scrutiny, where mistakes can result in fines and reputational damage, companies may be hesitant to promote their legitimate ESG credentials due to fears of greenwashing accusations. This puts them at risk of “greenhushing” – where organizations choose not to publicize details of their climate targets, or their plan to reach their targets, to avoid scrutiny and allegations of greenwashing.
Dr. Lucy Walton, CEO of Connected Impact, said: “Businesses are under increasing pressure to avoid greenwashing – with increasing regulations and potential fines for those who misrepresent their legitimate ESG efforts.
“But businesses must also take action to avoid ‘greenhushing’. Our data reveals that businesses are more likely to under-promote than over-promote their ESG initiatives. This cautious approach can deter investment and undermine credibility.”
Only four in ten (40%) of companies offered a “balanced” picture, with a minimal transparency gap. The report argues that businesses with a small gap are more trustworthy than their peers. The report examined emissions, ethics, diversity and inclusion topics to represent E, S and G criteria. Emission disclosures had the largest gap, with 67% of companies disclosing more on emissions than they communicated. While governance had the smallest gap, with 40% of companies having a gap between their ethics discloses and communications.
Dr. Walton added, “ESG transparency is currently a missed opportunity for the top 200 businesses in the UK and US. We know most consumers favor responsible brands and transparent businesses. We know a well-governed transparent business attracts more investment and top talent3. This report equips businesses to identify – and close – transparency gaps so we can all make better decisions about where to invest our money, time and attention.”
By Cristina Martinez Gonzalez, SSG Market Leader Iberia, Lenovo from CSR Newswire • Reposted: June 21, 2024
It’s vital that we look after the planet for future generations, but that’s not the only reason to implement a sustainability strategy within your organisation. Cutting emissions, embracing the circular economy, and helping to keep already efficient devices running for longer makes sense from a financial point of view as well, and can even help your organisation to attract the best employees.
Of course, putting people and planet first should top your considerations, and an effective sustainability strategy can help towards limiting our impact on climate change, reducing waste, conserving resources, and protecting delicate eco-systems.
How legislation is helping to drive change
Legislation around ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) and sustainability is beginning to shape industries around the world, with governments adopting increasingly stringent targets.
EU rules[1] already require large and listed companies in the European Union to publish regular reports on the social and environmental risks member state’s face, and on how their activities impact people and the environment. The regulations facing all organisations are only likely to become stricter.
According to Deloitte[2], the transition to a lower carbon and more sustainable society is reshaping the economy in Europe, creating new opportunities, and altering the cost of doing business. The implications are stark, the organisation explains. “Failing to become more sustainable will make companies vulnerable to the loss of revenue and reputation, as well as to litigation and regulatory penalties.”
It’s clear that simply ignoring sustainability is not an option for organisations in the long run, but there are also opportunities and benefits for businesses that implement a sustainability strategy sooner than later.
An effective sustainability strategy could also help you be more cost-effective
For starters, there’s potential to be more cost-effective. Scalable as-a-Service solutions such as Lenovo TruScale can help your business to simplify the procurement, deployment and management of reliable IT equipment, taking a flexible and cost-efficient approach to new levels of demand.
Embracing the latest energy-efficient devices can help your business to manage CO2 emissions and power consumption, potentially saving on operating costs, while also helping you to tackle challenges such as growing your business, simplifying security, and general maintenance.
There’s also scope to offset emissions when you do purchase new IT equipment, thanks to solutions such as Lenovo’s CO2 Offset Services. This service estimates the carbon emissions across the average lifecycle of the device from manufacturing to shipping, typical use, and end-of-life, and supports a variety of climate action projects.
Just because you buy new devices doesn’t necessarily mean your old equipment will end up in landfill. We do everything we can at Lenovo to ensure older devices get a second lease of life, and our Asset Recovery Service(ARS) is designed to maximise the reuse, recycling, and/or environmental disposal of replaced and end-of-life products, parts, and waste. And with Lenovo’s recently launched Certified Refurbished PCs, you have the option to buy quality refurbished IT equipment and support the circular economy.
Keep older energy-efficient technology running for longer
Naturally, there are plenty of organisations that don’t need to overhaul their tech stack. If your equipment is already energy efficient and performs well, your tech provider can also help you to keep your devices running for longer, doing your bit when it comes to reducing waste and conserving resources.
Solutions such as Lenovo Premier Support Plus come with Accidental Damage Protection (ADP)[3] as standard, which can make a big difference when it comes to device longevity and saving money. Compared to the cost of most common repairs or system replacements, for example, you could save between 50%-93%[4] with ADP, which could be the difference between keeping an old laptop for another couple of years or having to replace immediately.
Attracting top talent
Social and regulatory requirements aside, embracing sustainability can also enhance your company’s reputation. This can play a key role in helping you to attract and retain the best talent.
According to a survey from IBM[5], 71% of employees and employment seekers say that environmentally sustainable companies are more attractive employers. More than two-thirds of the full potential workforce* are more likely to apply for and accept jobs with environmentally and socially responsible organisations, and nearly half surveyed would accept a lower salary to work for such organisations.
The potential to grow your business
An effective sustainability strategy isn’t just appealing to potential employees – it’s becoming increasingly important to society at large. Consumers also care about sustainability, and your strategy could be the difference between customers picking your business or opting for a competitor.
Deloitte explains[6] a third (34%) of consumers stated their trust in brands would be improved if the brand was recognised as an ethical/sustainable provider by an independent third party. A similar proportion (32%) claimed that their trust in brands would be improved if the company had a transparent, accountable, and socially and environmentally responsible supply chain.
All of these factors add weight to the already critical importance of a sustainability strategy, not only because it makes sense to limit our impact on the planet, but because it also makes justifiable business sense.
It’s inevitable that you’ll need to embrace sustainability at some point if you want your business to thrive in the long term, so why not look at ways you can get ahead of your competition as part of the journey?
By Mary Foley, Contributor from Forbes • Reposted: June 19, 2024
Photo: Getty
Sustainability is a huge factor for the modern workforce.
Now more than ever, corporations are combing the ends of the Earth to find skilled workers. Unfortunately, they’re coming up short, and it may not just be prospects holding out for better benefits or more flexible hours.
According to a recent analysis, by 2030, it’s likely that more than 85 million jobs could go unfilled globally because there aren’t enough skilled people to take them. In critical industries – like cybersecurity for example, where the explosion of generative AI (GenAI) has created a massive need for talent – the gap between the number of skilled staffers needed and the number available has risen 12.6% year over year worldwide, according to another analysis. And now, there is a whole new level of complexity to add to the equation: sustainability.
More than 40% of Generation Z and Millennial workers plan to change jobs due to climate concerns, as stated in a new survey from Deloitte. That’s a stark contrast for a culture that’s only a few decades removed from worshipping the power tie-wearing, greed-is-good, Gordon Gecko-style antihero. But that is the new reality in which corporations must operate, and it’s just the latest in a laundry list of sustainability-related vulnerabilities that they’ll have to account for.
An Employee Evolution
This trend has already started to take root as Millennials begin to unseat Baby Boomers and Gen Xers as the dominant presence in the global workforce. Over three-quarters (76%) of Millennials said back in 2016 that they consider environmental, sustainability, and governance (ESG) commitments when deciding where to work, a number that likely has and will continue to increase as more corporations put sustainability strategies front and center in their recruiting practices.
Meanwhile, changing social norms have also caused an evolution within the pool of available workers. Gen Z – whose entrance into the workplace was interrupted and permanently disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic – says the workplace is a critical environment for their social interaction. This group, who only know the era of Zoom calls and Teams meetings, also report lower levels of emotional and social well-being compared with other age groups. Mental health and wellbeing are key components of the S (Social) element of ESG and in addition to the global legal compliance obligations associated with employers’ duty of care, there is also the consideration that lower well-being usually correlates with worse performance at work.
Considering that Millennials and Gen Z will account for over half of the global workforce by 2030, these factors represent a huge departure from how companies have grown accustomed to recruiting. And now, as longtime employees with decades of institutional knowledge are retiring, workers who are starting to assume critical roles in the corporate hierarchy, have very different priorities and skill sets. That creates a perfect storm of challenges for companies looking to not only hire good talent and retain the acquired knowledge of the departing talent, but also define their sustainability objectives and initiatives.
Overcoming the Vulnerability
That’s not to say that corporations can’t navigate their way through this new era. For years, experts and analysts have been warning about the high stakes that are riding on corporate sustainability strategies. This is no different. Those companies that fall short on compliance run the risk of fines, reputational harm, and delays in their supply chains. However, those that can prove their leadership in taking a proactive stance on sustainability have a huge opportunity to not only manage these risks but also to become the employers of choice for the growing crop of talent that’s putting their values at the center of their career journeys.
Throughout that process, clear, quantifiable data will be the critical ingredient that separates the leaders from the laggards. Increasingly, corporate reputations for sustainability will be determined not by advertising campaigns or bold pronouncements about emissions targets, but by a detailed set of performance metrics that will be reported in accordance with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and new global sustainability standards developed by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB).
The new world order of corporate sustainability is one where so-called “green” credentials are being treated like finance and accounting data instead of aspirational ideals. To get to a place where companies can clearly and efficiently report this data and communicate it to key stakeholders – including employees – companies will need excellent reporting, monitoring and – importantly – subject matter experts with enough institutional memory and domain knowledge to understand how all the pieces fit together.
With new legislation cropping up seemingly every day, maintaining that level of commitment to embedding sustainability isn’t easy, but it is well worth the investment. Don’t believe me? Ask the next interview candidate yourself.
By The Forbes Business Council from Forbes • Reposted: June 14, 2024
In recent years, sustainability has become a key topic amongst individuals and businesses. As the public becomes increasingly aware of climate change and their role in reducing unnecessary waste, more and more people are choosing to support organizations that espouse sustainability and business practices that minimize environmental impact. In addition to the reputational benefits, implementing sustainable initiatives has far-reaching advantages.
As experts, the members of Forbes Business Council have experience navigating a more sustainability-minded business landscape. Below, 18 of them share reasons why focusing on sustainability can be a strategic business advantage and the benefits of taking an eco-friendly stance.
1. It Can Set Your Business Apart
Focusing on sustainability can differentiate a business by appealing to environmentally conscious consumers and investors. One major advantage is the potential for cost savings through efficient resource use and waste reduction, which also minimizes environmental impact. This eco-friendly approach can enhance brand reputation, customer loyalty and long-term profitability. – Deyman Doolittle, ShipSigma
2. It Indicates Long-Term Viability
Sustainability is a core tenant of future-forward businesses—not only is it important to customers and employees but stakeholders and shareholders recognize sustainability as an indicator of a business’s long-term viability. As we look ahead toward an uncertain future, sustainability is one of the key ways a business can maintain resilience in the marketplace. – Jamie Houston, Aurora Sustainable Lands
3. It Enables Proactive Responses To Industry Changes
Adopting sustainability in the long term helps enterprises move ahead of the market shifts and laws while also offering a way to become more innovative and efficient. It also improves the brand image by attracting consumers, talent and investors. A major advantage of the exercise is developing a culture of long-term sustainability and sector leadership by embracing uncertainty and setting standards. – Chris Kille, EO Staff
4. It Provides A Competitive Edge
In government contracting, focusing on sustainability can provide a competitive edge, as it aligns with increasing federal mandates for eco-friendly practices. A significant pro is enhanced reputation; businesses that prioritize sustainability often gain favor with the public and governmental organizations, potentially leading to more opportunities and partnerships. – Dr. Malcolm Adams, Avid Solutions Intl
5. It Expands The Target Audience
The focus on sustainability expands the company’s target audience, including people looking for companies that support sustainability. Focusing on sustainability also gives employees a purpose and the opportunity to do good in the world, uniting people around a cause. – Gaidar Magdanurov, Acronis
6. It Can Narrow The Divide Between Large And Small Businesses
While sustainability to some advocates is our moral compass and strategic beacon, given the increasing strengthening of high-quality carbon projects, it has also provided a new context of monetizing with carbon credits gained. Sustainable financing syndicating with blended government grants will now narrow the financial chasm between large and smaller enterprises. – Victor Tay, Global Catalyst Advisory
7. It Enables The Surrounding Ecosystem To Thrive
If the surrounding environment and society aren’t flourishing along with a company’s growth, such imbalances can eventually tower over your business sustainability in multiple ways, even threatening operational existence. Businesses thrive when the surrounding ecosystem feeds their growth and creates a positive loop of cause and effect, opening up new opportunities and synergies. – Sabeer Nelliparamban, Tyler Petroleum Inc / ZilBank
8. It Brings The Business In Alignment With Clients’ Values
We’re seeing a lot of clients asking us to meet sustainability standards that fit within their value system. Additionally, we have a lot of job candidates asking about them. Internal sustainability standards not only help the environment but they can be used to show potential clients or employees that your company stands for more than just the product you create or the service you provide; it shows your values. – Scott Wassmer, Appnovation
9. It Demonstrates Care For More Than Profits
It’s encouraging to see more businesses incorporate sustainability in various ways—from making building systems and operations more efficient to reducing corporate travel requirements. Sustainability as a core business value saves on costs and supports employee growth and retention. It shows you care about more than just profits and are creating a lasting, positive legacy. – Jeff Sprau, Legence
10. It Enhances Business Efficiency
One major benefit is that it can help companies reduce costs and waste by finding more efficient ways to operate. For example, businesses can implement circular economy practices like renting or repairing products instead of throwing them away. This can lead to significant cost savings over time. – Allison Ballard, CORT Furniture Rental
11. It Can Facilitate Cost Savings
There’s a marketing advantage but it will not apply to every customer. However, if you concentrate on the cost savings, such as energy costs, that’s a real advantage. Sustainability practices can cut down your electricity and fuel costs significantly. That kind of efficient thinking can also be applied to making your operations simpler and more logical. – Zain Jaffer, Zain Ventures
12. It Enhances Brand Reputation
Focusing on sustainability enhances brand reputation, attracting loyal customers and like-minded employees, as well as creating compelling PR content. It also opens the door to press contacts and articles, which can promote the brand effectively. A major pro is cost efficiency through resource management and positioning your company as a sustainability leader, which will appeal to investors and strategic partners. – Kolja Brand, Aurum Future
13. It Provides Long-Term Financial Benefits
Embracing sustainability isn’t just good ethics—it’s smart economics. Businesses that prioritize eco-friendly practices often see enhanced brand loyalty and attract eco-conscious consumers and investors alike. One major pro is the long-term cost savings; sustainable operations reduce waste and energy usage, leading to significant financial benefits over time. Green is the new gold standard. – Aleesha Webb, Pioneer Bank
14. It Can Drive Operational Efficiency
At AstraZeneca, sustainability is a core part of our strategy that gives us an edge by driving operational efficiency, allowing us to minimize our environmental impact while achieving cost savings. It also helps us mitigate risks to ensure the resilience and longevity of our business by aligning with the values of our stakeholders who prefer companies with strong environmental credentials. – Mohit Manrao, AstraZeneca
15. It Enables Risk Mitigation
Focusing on sustainability can be a strategic advantage because it aligns with increasing consumer demand for ethical practices, potentially boosting brand loyalty and market share. A major pro is risk mitigation—sustainable businesses often pre-empt and adapt to regulations, reducing long-term operational costs and protecting against the volatility of resource scarcity. – Mohammad Bahareth, MBI
16. It Centers Future Buyers
A 2022 Deloitte study found that 89% of Gen Z believe the world is at a tipping point in responding to climate change, which remains their top concern. Gen Z is our future generation of buyers. Brands like Levi’s and Patagonia understand this market segment well and are already capitalizing on that insight with their practices. Sustainability is also backed by the genuine ethos of what’s good for people is good for business. – Josh Jebathilak, Fruition
17. It Grants Access To Innovative Tech
Focusing on sustainability in business can be a strategic advantage, especially as technology evolves towards green solutions. One pro of adopting an eco-friendly stance is access to innovative sustainable technologies. Early adoption can position a company as a leader in harnessing these advancements to improve efficiency and offer cutting-edge solutions to customers. – Ran Ronen, Equally AI
18. It Strengthens The Company’s Reputation
Sustainability boosts brand image, cuts costs via efficiency, attracts eco-conscious consumers and ensures resource availability. This appeals to investors, employees and customers who prioritize ethics. Eco-friendly firms meet society’s expectations for a cleaner planet. Sustainability strengthens reputation and stakeholder support through forward-thinking approaches. – Vikrant Shaurya, Authors On Mission
Sixty-nine percent of CEOs view sustainability as a leading business growth opportunity in 2024, according to a recent survey of CEOs and senior executives by Gartner, Inc.
“As CEOs reset their long-term strategies, environmental sustainability remains one of the leading factors that will frame competition,” said Kristin Moyer, Distinguished VP Analyst at Gartner. “Despite much corporate greenwash, recent economic conditions could have triggered a reversion to environmental, social and governance (ESG) cynicism and a refocus on profit at all costs. However, the overall commitment of CEOs appears unwavering.”
The 2024 Gartner CEO and Senior Business Executive Survey was conducted from July to December 2023 among over 400 CEOs and other senior business executives in North America, Europe, Asia/Pacific, Latin America, the Middle East and South Africa, across different industries, revenue and company sizes.
“Sustainability consistently remains a top 10 business priority, surpassing even productivity and efficiency this year,” said Moyer. “Leaders and investors know environmentally cavalier corporate behavior is a mid- to long-term risk to business results, with a big price to be paid when environmental factors are ignored as externalities. However, smart CEOs realize big sustainability challenges create new areas of business opportunity.”
Achieving Sustainable Business Growth According to Gartner’s annual survey, the leading ways CEOs are using sustainability to drive business growth are through sustainable products and services (33%); sustainable business practices (18%); stakeholder engagement (18%); and decarbonization (18%). Digital investments and innovation is ranked ninth at 8% (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Environmental Sustainability to Drive Business Growth
Source: Gartner (June 2024)
“Digital technology can accelerate progress toward sustainability goals, going beyond compliance to help enterprises reach targets, enable new business models and unleash revenue streams,” said Moyer.
According to Gartner, digital technology plays an important role in driving both financial and sustainability outcomes. For example, the Internet of Things (IoT), data and analytics can optimize wind turbines, which reduces costs and greenhouse gas emissions. AI and IoT can reduce food loss costs and waste; whereas a circular economy marketplace can create new revenue and reduce waste.
Climate Change Driving Agenda The Gartner survey revealed 54% of CEOs say their businesses are affected by changing weather patterns, at least moderately. Over half (51%) acknowledge changing weather patterns are causing them to plan changes to the way they operate or have already done so.
“CEOs see that climate change is causing weather pattern shifts that are directly impacting their business operations already,” said Moyer. “Those operations must be adapted, with technology playing a vital role in driving these changes, especially in the dynamics of supply chains.”
The Gartner survey revealed the biggest impact of changing weather patterns cited by CEOs is operating dynamics (30%), particularly changes to logistics, such as warehousing, timing and routing of deliveries. Relocations (including nearshoring) comes in second (14%), followed by automation, technology and data (13%).
Additional leadership trends will be presented during Gartner IT Symposium/Xpo, the world’s most important conferences for CIOs and other IT executives. Gartner analysts and attendees will explore the technology, insights and trends shaping the future of IT and business, including how to unleash the possibility of generative AI, business transformation, cybersecurity, customer experience, data analytics, executive leadership and more. Follow news and updates from the conferences on X using #GartnerSYM.
New survey of Gen Zs in the US and Canada suggest a growing distrust of influencers; and while sustainability is still a consideration when purchasing, budget, price and brand authenticity are paramount.
AI-powered conversational-research firm Rival Technologies and market-research consultancy Reach3 Insights have released a new report revealing Gen Z’s shifting attitudes on social media, influencer marketing, online shopping, sustainability and brand loyalty.
Based on a mobile-first, conversational survey of 750 Gen Zs (aged 18-27) in the US and Canada in April 2024, the 2024 Gen Z Marketing & Engagement Report found that social media’s role in purchase discovery is increasing — but it is only one step in a long and complex buying journey. Among Gen Z consumers who shop online, only 18.4 percent complete the purchase directly through social channels. In contrast, 88.2 percent buy via online marketplaces (Amazon, Etsy, etc) and 74.6 percent through brand websites.
When asked which social media platforms they use to discover new brands, Gen Zs highlight Instagram (70.3 percent), TikTok (34.3 percent), and YouTube (33.1 percent) as top channels.
The research also suggests that the buzz around influencer marketing may be fizzling out: Contrary to studies even from last year, in which a majority of younger consumers credited influencers with having a major impact on their sustainable purchasing and lifestyle habits, 47.5 percent of Gen Zs now say they are “not very likely” or “not likely at all” to buy something recommended by influencers. Many respondents described paid influencer partnerships as “very insincere” or “annoying,” with some respondents asserting a preference instead for “normal people with normal incomes and lives” to be the voices promoting the products. The report points out that influencer marketing can still work; but authenticity is key, as these shoppers are showing a new preference for substance over style — emphasizing the importance of ensuring that any influencer used is a good fit for the product and can create relatable content.
“Influencer marketing is at risk of facing a serious reckoning,” says Paula Catoira, Chief Marketing Officer at Rival Group — parent company of Rival Tech and Reach3. “To ensure ROI from influencer partnerships, brand marketers need to understand their Gen Z customers and align their marketing strategy with the need of this audience.”
Gen Z attitudes on sustainability itself also seem to be shifting. The report found that 42.9 percent of Gen Zs prefer sustainable products when available, but it’s not the only consideration. Budget and price are big factors in buying decisions. This helps explain why fast fashion, for example, continues to grow despite its impact on the environment — a phenomenon that was recently parodied in the season finale of “Saturday Night Live.”
And as always, authenticity is key — as Gen Zs are one of several consumer segments that are increasingly savvy about identifying greenwashing. Influencers themselves are well aware of this; and a 2023 study found more and more content creators are steering clear of sustainability-related content due to a lack of insight and clarity around company and product sustainability claims.
The report points out that for many brands that cater to Gen Zs, sustainability can still be a huge competitive advantage as long as product prices remains competitive. And being transparent about brand claims is paramount: The research suggests that brand websites (59.9 percent) and packaging (43.5 percent) play a key role in communicating details about brand sustainability efforts; when it comes to this, Gen Zs say they are much more likely to believe third-party websites (42 percent) than influencers (12 percent).
“Our research highlights how the attitudes and behaviors of Gen Zs can shift significantly as they go through different life stages and as socio-economic factors evolve,” said Andrew Reid, CEO and founder of Rival Technologies. “To get accurate and nuanced insights on Gen Zs and win their loyalty, brands need to engage with these young consumers on an ongoing basis and do it in a way that’s aligned with their expectations and behaviors.”
One of the study’s key takeaways for marketers is that Gen Zs want to feel they can build an authentic and personal connection with brands; and while they still prioritize sustainability, socio-economic factors such as inflation have very real impact on how this group views and prioritizes sustainability-related issues.
As Jennifer Reid, Co-CEO and Chief Methodologist at Rival Group, points out: “Among a generation fueled by skepticism, trust is paramount for both engagement and loyalty. And since authenticity, honesty and transparency are critical in building that trust, they should be the goals of every marketer with young consumers in their sightlines.”
Sustainability has become crucial for companies around the globe, yet many struggle to incorporate … Image: GETTY
By Mike Rosenberg (IESE Business School) via Forbes.com • Reposted: May 28, 2024
With the world at an environmental tipping point, sustainability has become a vital strategic consideration for companies around the globe.
Catastrophic weather events are more frequent and more prolongued. A generation of young people is demanding solutions to the planet’s problems. And the financial community has awakened to the reality that climate and other sustainability-related issues will have real impact on their businesses.
Yet many companies still struggle to come to terms with what environmental and social sustainability means for them and for their strategy and operations. Here, I explore how senior managers might choose to address the sustainability challenge, offering six strategic options that I’ve seen companies take.
Weighing the strategic options
Each company must decide how much to do along the different aspects of environmental and social sustainability, assuming that the baseline is compliance with legal requirements and regulations. There are many factors that go in to determining this, from location and sector to corporate values and consumer demands.
1. Take the Low Road
This approach involves doing the minimum required to comply with the laws in each of the countries and territories where your company operates. It implies taking a reactive stance to changes in legislation, societal norms or new industry developments.
While there is nothing wrong with this approach from a legal standpoint, one might question its wisdom from a dynamic perspective since, over time, laws and regulations will inevitably change. Adapting late to evolving trends might be more costly than being an early mover. Another danger is that if senior management tells employees that minimal compliance is sufficient, they may interpret this as tacit approval to test the limits of regulation.
2. Wait and See
Some companies will want not only to comply with the basic legal requirements in force today but also to actively monitor the situation in terms of the evolving attitudes of employees, consumers and the general public, and track leglislation in the pipeline.
This approach requires a somewhat higher degree of sensibility to these issues than Take the Low Road as it will make sense to begin gathering data on your firm’s current environmental and social performance, in order to have the information you’ll need for future actions.
3. Show and Tell
This strategy involves making important progress on sustainability and then making it a key part of your firm’s communications strategy. Itshould not be confused with greenwashing, which is about showcasing token sustainable activities to give a false impression. Show and Tell, on the contrary, is about telling an authentic and coherent story.
The risk of Show and Tell is that if sustainability is central to communications, your firm needs to show consistent commitment in all of its activities and in all countries and territories. Evidence of a double standard between environmental practices in developed and developing countries, for example, can be seized upon to challenge a firm’s social license to operate.
A related problem is what Helle Bank Jorgenson, founder and CEO of Competent Boards, calls “greenwishing,” which is about making bold claims for the future without having detailed plans or initiatives to actually bring them about.
4. Keep Quiet
An interesting counterpoint to Show and Tell is what I call Keep Quiet. There are a number of companies that do amazing work on both the environmental and social side of sustainability but that do not, for a variety of reasons, make it the center piece of their communications. Such companies will publish their sustainability report and participate in initiatives such as the Carbon Disclosure Project and Science Based Targets but they keep a relatively low public profile.
Recently I have seen a trend for companies to move from Keep Quiet to more of a Show and Tell stance, sharing with stakeholders their sustainability efforts.
5. Pay for Principle
This is what I call companies in which the founder or lead shareholders choose to take the firm in a sustainable direction based on their own ethical convictions. The fundamental rationale is not a medium-term business case but rather deeply held beliefs that reducing air and water pollution, protecting the natural landscape, becoming carbon neutral and/or supporting the community should form part of the corporate agenda.
What sometimes happens in these cases is that the company then uncovers a market segment which values what it is doing sufficiently to pay more for its products and services.
6. Think Ahead
The final approach requires going beyond what’s needed today, based not so much on principle but on hard business logic. Here, the senior management team is convinced that the world is changing in specific ways and has an asset base which requires a medium- or long-term approach to transforming it.
If, for example, your company has 30 manufacturing facilities, 300 aircraft or 30,000 trucks and believes that it will have to transform those assets over the next 10-20 years, then following a Think Ahead strategy would begin today with pilot projects. The asset base would be gradually transformed as each element reaches the end of its natural life.
Think Ahead is the opposite of greenwishing: it means crafting a detailed plan for the next five to 15 years to transform your operations to a more sustainable model.
Which of these six approaches should your company take? My recommendation is for your leadership team to honestly assess where the company is today and agree where it should be someday in the future. Next, define when “someday” is, and work out a real plan on how to get there.
By Mark Segal from ESGtoday.com • Reposted: May 23, 2024
The vast majority of companies view sustainability as a value creation opportunity, with more than three quarters anticipating potential benefits ranging from higher revenues and profitability to lower cost of capital, although many also expect increased sustainability-related costs and a need for significant investment, according to a new survey released by Morgan Stanley.
For the study, “Sustainable Signals: Understanding Corporates’ Sustainability Priorities and Challenges,” Morgan Stanley surveyed more than 300 public and private companies with revenues greater than $100 million, across North America, Europe and Asia Pacific, and representing a broad range of industries.
The survey indicated that nearly all companies now recognize the impact of sustainability on their long-term corporate strategies, with 85% of respondents reporting that they see sustainability as a value creation opportunity, including 53% who view it primarily as value creation and 32% as both value creation and risk management, while 15% view sustainability primarily as risk management. Only 1% responded that sustainability is not material to long-term corporate strategy.
Sustainability as a value creation opportunity topped the list of “very significant” reasons reported by companies for pursuing sustainability strategies, cited by 50% of respondents, followed closely by compliance with government regulation at 48%, and a moral obligation at 47%.
According to the survey, more than 80% of companies see potential financial opportunities from their sustainability strategies over the next five years, including 81% who see sustainability as somewhat (41%) or very (40%) likely to drive higher profitability, 79% to drive higher revenue (35% very likely, 44% somewhat likely), and 82% to improve cash generation capabilities (38% and 44%). Another key benefit highlighted by the study was improved access to capital, with 77% of respondents reporting that sustainability could drive lower costs of equity or debt over the next five years.
While respondents saw opportunities to benefit from sustainability, the survey found that companies are also aware of the potential challenges and costs associated with their sustainability strategies, including 69% anticipating very (28%) or somewhat likely (41%) costs from changing processes, 72% seeing higher costs or legal risks from sustainability regulation, and 73% seeing higher costs or scarcity of raw materials over the next five years. The most cited challenge reported by respondents was restructuring supply chains to meet human rights obligations, viewed as somewhat or very likely by 74% of companies.
Accordingly, respondents reported the high level of investment required as a very significant barrier to delivering or establishing a sustainability strategy, cited by 31% of companies, in addition to 28% citing conflicts with the financial goals of the company, while 22% said that it is hard to justify the near term negative financial impact, even with the long-term benefits.
The study also found nearly all companies, 92% expect climate change to impact their business models by 2050, while 23% report that it is already a risk to their business model today, similar to risks including technological change (25%), competitor actions (25%) and supply chain instability (23%).
The survey also highlighted a perceived need by the companies for sustainability expertise at the board level, with 57% of respondents reporting that board members could benefit from more knowledge regarding sustainability regulations, 43% in sustainability-labelled financial instruments, and 40% in sustainability disclosure. Overall, only 37% of respondents agreed that their company’s board has sustainability expertise.
Jessica Alsford, Chief Sustainability Officer at Morgan Stanley and CEO of the Institute for Sustainable Investing, said: “Sustainability strategies and core business strategies are converging, with companies increasingly seeing sustainability factors as integral to the company’s long-term value creation. There may yet be challenges in developing expertise and financing models, but corporate leaders view sustainable business practices as fueling the creation of value as well as the mitigation of risk.”
Sustainability might have seemed like a passing fad at first, but today, I believe it’s a must-have for any business. In fact, 78% of consumers believe sustainability is important, according to a report by Nielsen. And, almost half of respondents to a PWC survey said they often or always recommend a brand with good environmental practices.
Many businesses might avoid investing in sustainability because they feel it doesn’t add value to their bottom line. But in my years as a consumer packaged goods business owner, I’ve learned that going green can be a great way to preserve customer trust and keep your business in the black. Adopting a more sustainable approach to business can help with costs, differentiate you from competitorsand make the world a better place. It’s a true win-win-win.
Sustainability doesn’t have to be expensive, time-consuming or difficult. In my experience, a few minor, common-sense adjustments can improve multiple aspects of your business. Whether you’re new to sustainability or looking for ways to embrace it across your enterprise, follow these five approaches to begin building a more sustainable brand.
1. Sustainable Packaging
Plastic waste and pollution is a global crisis. Single-use plastics and non-recyclable materials found in most packaging contribute to landfills and a high carbon footprint. Shifting from traditional, plastic-laden packaging to sustainable alternatives isn’t just an environmental statement but also a strategic business move.
Sustainable packaging uses environmentally friendly, renewable and low-waste alternatives to traditional plastic. Opting for sustainable materials is a good start, but it’s better to rethink the entire lifecycle of your packaging. You can consider working with a packaging designer to take a more sustainable approach to packaging. I suggest these tips to help make the switch:
• Assess your current packaging to see how you can reduce material use or switch to recyclable or biodegradable options.
• Think about the packaging’s lifecycle. Go for packaging that’s easy to recycle, compost or reuse.
2. Eco-Friendly Branding
Committing to sustainability isn’t something you should do quietly. Consumers want to support sustainable companies, so shout about it. Eco-friendly branding unites your sustainable practices with consumers’ perception of you as a green company, so rethink how you present yourself to shoppers.
You don’t have to change your color palette to green, white and brown, either. Eco-friendly branding can include:
• Adding eco-labels and certifications that your company is qualified for, such as Fair Trade, to your products and website.
• Designing products with the environment in mind. For example, opt for reusable products instead of disposable ones.
• Asking employees to advocate for your sustainability initiatives.
• Highlighting sustainability in your marketing campaigns.
3. Top-Down Sustainability Initiatives
Many CEOs give lip service to the idea of sustainability, but not all of them actually support it. Consumers are leery of greenwashing, so CEOs need to genuinely and enthusiastically support environmental efforts so customers take them seriously.
To reap the benefits of sustainability, CEOs have to walk the walk. That means supporting sustainability goals with both time and funding. As a leader, it’s also your duty to engage stakeholders, from managers to employees, to build a culture that values sustainability. My company, for instance, works with third-party certifying bodies to help with this initiative. It is easy to get lost in what we should be doing regarding sustainability. Our certifications help us stay aligned with the trends and demands of consumers and our industry.
4. Green Business Operations
Your products and brand might look green, but what’s happening under the hood? As CEOs, it’s our job to run an ethical business that’s a good steward of our resources. In practice, that means embracing green business operations whenever possible. Fortunately, I’ve found there are easy changes you can make. A few steps you can take to “go green” include:
• Switching to low-water toilets and water fixtures at the office;
• Opting for LED lightbulbs;
• Introducing recycling programs to the office;
• Encouraging everyone to go paperless;
• Allowing work-from-home days to reduce carbon footprints;
• Installing solar panels.
5. Sustainability Metrics And Reporting
Consumers want to support sustainable brands, but greenwashing has made them increasingly jaded. I believe the best way to rebuild that trust is with transparency. If you’re trying to become more sustainable, it’s crucial to measure how successful you actually are. After all, you put in a lot of hard work; don’t you want to know if it’s worked out?
Consider leveraging eco-tracking tools to monitor your company’s plastic waste, water usage and carbon footprint. Ideally, you want to see a reduction all around, but you’ll never know how you’re doing if you don’t track your progress. Plus, progress tracking boosts customer confidence and shows you take sustainability seriously.
Who says businesses have to choose between profits and the environment? You are running a business to make a profit. But, you can strike a balance between economic success and environmental responsibility by embracing sustainability at every level of your company. Change is daunting at first, but maybe it doesn’t have to feel like a change but more so an added step to take. I believe that if we as leaders can operate our businesses while considering these sustainability trends, then we are on the right track.
By Nick Leighton, Forbes Councils Member via Forbes • Reposted: May 10, 2024
There’s no doubt that we live in an extremely competitive economic environment. With the costs of living rapidly increasing, consumers are more hesitant to let go of their hard-earned money. This shift is forcing marketing and public relations (PR) professionals to rethink the way they are promoting their brands, products and services. The unfortunate consequence of added pressure is the temptation to implement marketing strategies that can be deceptive, unethical and sometimes illegal. These unethical practices can include exaggerating the consumers’ expected results, using tricky terminology or designing intentionally confusing terms and conditions.
Marketing and PR professionals who engage in these activities and behaviors risk destroying their brand’s reputation in the marketplace. The reality is that consumers are becoming more aware of these unethical practices. In fact, “one study by the American Association of Advertising Agencies found that 96% of people believe advertising and marketing professionals don’t practice integrity.” This is important to note since over 70% of consumers believe trust is essential when making purchasing decisions. For this reason, it’s critical that marketing and PR professionals carefully balance implementing new and innovative ways of marketing without crossing ethical boundaries.
Equip your team with an ethics toolbox.
Marketing and PR is typically a team sport since there are usually a handful of individuals or departments that are involved in crafting the consumer’s experience and messaging. Since the actions of each group or individual are direct reflections of the brand, firms should start by establishing clear, ethical guidelines for the team to follow.
These guidelines should outline expected ethical behavior, actions that are not acceptable, compliance with any government regulations and a commitment to keep communication honest and transparent. This guide should also provide the team with instructions on how to report unethical behavior to management.
In addition to policy documents, the company should also prioritize continuous education on ethical standards by offering regular training sessions, workshops and other resources. This can help the team better spot unethical trends and conflicts of interest and avoid any legal implications.
Embrace transparent and open communication.
Transparency is the key to building trust with consumers. Marketing and PR firms can embrace transparency by being open about their practices, disclosing potential conflicts of interest and clarifying product outcomes. No brand is perfect. Mistakes can and will happen. However, you can still maintain transparency by quickly acknowledging any mistakes publicly and letting the consumer know how you are correcting the situation.
By adopting transparent communication strategies, consumers will quickly recognize your brand as a trusted source of information. This is a win-win. For the consumer, this removes barriers of skepticism and provides confidence that they are getting the service or product they want. Brands benefit by differentiating themselves from competitors in the marketplace and ultimately don’t have to work as hard to convince consumers to trust them.
Adopt responsible technology practices.
Technology is quickly changing the way brands create and market products and services. This can create a slippery slope when it comes to ethical practices. Incorporating responsible technology practices is essential for marketing and PR firms leveraging consumer data and artificial intelligence (AI) to shape strategies. Brands can foster responsible technology practices by having processes in place to protect consumer privacy, disclose the use of AI-generated products and content and provide a level of human oversight to maintain authenticity.
Conduct thorough research.
All it takes is one half-truth or incorrect statement to destroy a marketing firm’s reputation and credibility with consumers. It’s critical that marketing and PR professionals take the time to carefully conduct proper research and due diligence to avoid inadvertently spreading misinformation or using misleading statistics and instead ensure accurate representation of their brand. By investing time and resources in robust research practices, firms can uphold ethical standards and maintain their credibility.
Form ethical partnerships.
Marketing and PR firms can strengthen their ethical initiatives by collaborating with like-minded organizations and engaging in cause-focused marketing. Partnering with industry associations and advocacy groups amplifies ethical advocacy and the sharing of best practices. Cause-focused marketing initiatives demonstrate commitment to social responsibility by appealing to socially conscious consumers.
This mindset can also extend to scrutinizing the clients you choose to work with by carefully evaluating any potential clients, as associating your brand with an unethical partner can indirectly influence the reputation of your firm.
Track and monitor consumer feedback and sentiment.
Understanding consumer sentiment is crucial for marketing and PR professionals to avoid potential ethical concerns in their campaigns. By regularly tracking sentiment indicators and soliciting feedback, firms can work to adjust and align their practices with ethical standards. This can help maintain trust and credibility with the audience while fostering transparency and accountability.
As businesses adapt to the changing landscape of marketing and PR, embracing ethics is crucial for building trust and success in a socially conscious marketplace. Having a business coach in your corner can provide invaluable guidance in establishing ethical practices, navigating evolving expectations and holding your brand accountable. By leveraging the expertise of a business coach, firms can drive long-term success while making a positive impact on society.
By Hendri Yulius Wijaya,PhD Student in Political Science (Joint Supervision with Business School), The University of Melbourne and Kate Macdonald,Associate Professor, Political Science, The University of Melbourne via The Conversation • Reposted: April 30, 2024
Around the world, more and more companies are publishing sustainability reports – public scorecards detailing their impacts on society and the environment.
Environmental, social and governance (ESG) reports outline the positive and negative effects of a company’s activities, and the steps they’re taking in response.
Companies publish these reports as their own documents. But often, externally hired consultants play an invisible role in gathering data and framing it in a positive narrative the public will find easy to digest.
And getting these reports independently evaluated – “external assurance” – is still not required by many regulators around the world. As a result, they can allow companies to “greenwash”.
This could be by only disclosing information that makes a company look “sustainable” to the public. Or by only reporting on categories that paint them in a good light, and excluding the less flattering ones.
The problems inherent in this process create a blind spot for society. We urgently need to shine a light on consultants’ unseen involvement in sustainability reporting.
The business of polishing ‘facts’
It’s increasingly becoming mandatory for large publicly traded companies to disclose their social and environmental performance, particularly across Europe and the Asia-Pacific region.
In Australia, such reporting is voluntary, but widespread. As many as 98% of top Australian companies published sustainability reports last year. Consulting firms have quickly expanded their existing lines of service to capture this growing market opportunity.
Consultancies legitimise their expertise by offering businesses a range of frameworks and discourses. These convey the benefits of implementing sustainability measures and show how they could boost profitability.
But use of the firms has attracted heavy criticism.
Consulting firms conducting ESG work for major polluters have attracted harsh criticism. Vincenzo Lullo/Shutterstock
One argument is that consulting firms actually undermine their own sustainability services by continuing to do work for major companies in polluting industries, such as the oil and gas sector.
Another is that consulting firms’ contributions to sustainability are largely superficial. It’s too easy for companies to engage them just to tick boxes – perhaps to meet certain global standards or frameworks in bad faith, or create the impression they are responsible companies in other ways.
Problems with the process
Drawing on the lead author’s previous experience as a sustainability reporting professional in Indonesia, we wanted to take a closer look at these criticisms.
To examine the issue properly, we need to recognise that a power imbalance can arise between external consultants and the companies that hire them when sustainability reports are treated as an end in themselves or “time-bound projects”.
This attitude stands in stark contrast to the continuous strategy of measurement and disclosure that is required to create meaningful change at a company.
First, with such a narrow view of reporting, consultants are treated as simply a service provider – they are hired to complete a report within a given timeframe. But this limits their exposure to a company’s overall operations. Consultants have to rely on information passed on to them by employees, or they distribute oversimplified, generic forms for the organisation’s members to quickly fill in.
Who they get to speak with to gather this information is also completely at the whim of their client. Under these constraints and tight deadlines, it’s difficult for them to perform meaningful data analysis.
Second, in practice, “reporting” often actually means “selecting which information shall and shall not be presented to the public”.
Using external consultants to prepare a report might seem like it would offer an unbiased or independent perspective. But the reports are heavily scrutinised by company management, who ultimately make the final decision about what to include.
And third, pressure to comply with certain regulations and standards can make companies shortsighted. Consultants are tasked with ensuring a company “ticks the box” and fulfils its reporting requirements. But if this is the primary incentive, the information presented can be superficial and lack context.
A deeper contextual analysis is necessary to describe what lies behind the raw numbers, including a company’s challenges, improvement targets and the path forward.
What needs to change?
Consultants can still play a key role in the global move to ESG reporting. But the industry’s approach needs to change.
For one, sustainability reports cover a wide range of ESG topics – from climate to social inclusion. It is impossible for a single consultant to tackle all of them simultaneously. Companies should ensure there is a diverse range of experts in the teams they hire.
More countries could also pass laws requiring “external assurance” – independent, standardised cross checking of companies’ sustainability reports.
Meanwhile, companies and consultants need to return to the underlying principle of sustainability reporting: it’s not just about producing marketing material. Faced with a very real global crisis, it’s a key way to measure the impacts, risks and challenges of doing business, and present a company’s action plan to address them.
It’s important to be sceptical when the information in a sustainability report only shows good performance. Nobody is perfect. Neither is any business.
By Emma Lewis from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: April 10, 2024
s we work to find a balance between greenwashing and greenhushing sustainability claims, here are several tips for brands to keep authentically guiding consumers toward better purchases.
Easter. A time for fun and family time, or a case of excessive consumerism? It’s no secret that Easter candies, chocolates and gifts often come in plastic, non-recyclable or multi-material packaging. Consumers can find themselves caving to the pressure of the yearly egg- and treat-buying ritual, and in an ethical conundrum where the build-up of waste is almost inevitable. But are brands doing enough to encourage sustainable behaviour in the frenzy?
Only last year, the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) began stamping down ongreenwashing — introducing new guidelines and issued a record-breaking 29 formal rulings on sustainability issues, notably banning adverts by airlines including Air France, Lufthansaand Etihad for portraying a misleading picture of their environmental impacts. This year, the ASA is focusing on the food and beverage industry and has introduced new AI tools to help identify and evaluate claims from brands making sustainability assertions.
Yet, these greenwashing countermeasures may have inadvertently swung the pendulum towards ‘greenhushing‘ — with some companies not actively promoting their sustainability progress to avoid criticism. This may create the unintended knock-on effect of limiting sustainability action and instituting a vicious cycle where such activities are deprioritised.
Sustainability and shopping — a dichotomy?
Shopping sustainably should be a seamless and stress-free experience. But complexity can burden shoppers with a myriad of products, promotions and promises — particularly during holiday seasons. Confusing consumers around the meanings of terms including ‘carbon neutral’, ‘compostable’ or ‘recyclable’; or by over-egging their sustainable offer and listing an overwhelming number of sustainable practices intensify the complexity.
By applying a philosophy of simplicity when integrating sustainable claims, brands can make it intuitive and easy to engage with. This is a win for the consumer — which, in turn, is a win for the brand; and ultimately, a win for the planet.
Simplifying your sustainability claims
Brands ought to consider how to authentically embed sustainability credentials into their business strategy, product offering, portfolio approach and manufacturing in a way that is simple and standardised. They should then communicate these successes clearly — when they have the power to influence other brands as well as the sustainability footprint of millions of consumers, getting it right matters. Take IKEA — its ‘People & Planet Positive’ sustainability strategy is embedded into all of its business practices; and the brand clearly outlines itsambitions and commitments.
The below considerations should be key for any brand looking to become a beacon for sustainable business and attract like-minded partners and consumers.
Design
On-pack sustainability credentials should be direct, provable and to the point. Don’t bombard the pack with too much information, as this will only increase shopping stress. Streamline product packaging and eliminate unnecessary layers and components that will contribute to waste. In terms of the actual product, consider using minimal, eco-friendly packaging materials and durable, high-quality items. There are alternative materials out there which are both sustainable and innovative — think seaweed plastic or shrimp-shell polystyrene!
Digital transparency
Incorporating QR codes into packaging and marketing materials provides easy access to more detailed information about sustainability terms, sustainable practices and the supply chain. Link these codes to a dedicated webpage or digital platform to enable customers to learn about environmental initiatives, product lifecycle, and tips for reducing waste.
Local & domestic sources
Domestically or locally source products and materials to secure and simplify your supply chain, reduce your carbon footprint and support the community. This enables companies to build an authentic story into the brand — after all, people don’t buy products; they buy stories.Patagonia is a key example of a brand built around locally sourced materials and fair labour practices, working directly with farmers wherever possible.
Forge partnerships
The above point also rings true when developing brand partnerships. Actively participate in initiatives that contribute to reforestation, renewable-energy projects, or other sustainable practices.
By simplifying your brand offer, consumers are less likely to be overwhelmed by decision paralysis and be more thoughtful about purchases. Instead, consideration is made towards important sustainability factors — such as the supply chain, manufacturing processes, materials used and impact on local communities.
Empower consumers
While brands should make every effort to embed sustainability initiatives, consumers should also be making a conscious effort to join up with brands — the brand sets the target and consumers finish the race.
For example, if a brand communicates its involvement in a closed-loop recycling system, it should also provide recommendations for how consumers can do their own due diligence and participate. This could be through recycling collection programs, reusing or repurposing packaging materials, or supporting brand take-back programs that accept products back for recycling or refurbishment.
Brands, this Easter and throughout the year … while it’s tempting to cave to pressures to enhance your sustainability credentials, you must consider the authentic reasons you are evolving for the future. Take meaningful steps to tangibly simplify the customer experience and your own practices at the same time.
By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: March 30, 2024
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published its long-awaited climate disclosure rule earlier this month, compelling public companies to make data on their greenhouse gas emissions available to investors. Public officials allied with fossil energy interests have already filed at least two lawsuits to block it. But the Joe Biden administration is forging ahead with a $6 billion program to decarbonize cement, steel and other energy-intensive industries, regardless of what happens in court.
Here come the lawsuits
The new SEC rules build on existing requirements for climate-related disclosures made by public companies.
“The final rules reflect the commission’s efforts to respond to investors’ demand for more consistent, comparable, and reliable information about the financial effects of climate-related risks on a registrant’s operations and how it manages those risks while balancing concerns about mitigating the associated costs of the rules,” according to the SEC.
Some environmental organizations were critical of the final rulemaking, and fossil energy stakeholders also weighed in. That includes a petition for review joined by 10 Republican-led states, filed in the U.S. Court of the Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which handles cases from Florida, Alabama and Georgia.
The lawsuit is somewhat vague as to details, though Utility Dive is among the news organizations noting that opponents argue the SEC overstepped its authority.
“Petitioners will show that the final rule exceeds the agency’s statutory authority and otherwise is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law,” the lawsuit reads. “Petitioners thus ask that this court declare unlawful and vacate the commission’s final action.”
The 11th Circuit took no immediate action, but the 5th Circuit, which handles cases from Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, issued an administrative stay in response to a request filed by the firms Liberty Energy and Nomad Proppant Services. Administrative stays halt further legal proceedings until a ruling is made on the request.
The Republican-led states of Louisiana and Mississippi were also a part of a 5th Circuit lawsuit that was filed along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Longview Chamber of Commerce and two Texas-based stakeholder organizations, the Texas Association of Business and the Texas Alliance of Energy.
Fossil energy stakeholders are not the only ones unhappy with the new rules. The environmental organization Sierra Club and the Sierra Club Foundation filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals accusing the SEC of not going far enough to protect investors.
“Through legal recourse, we aim to hold the SEC accountable to its mission: protect and empower the rights of every single investor,” Dan Chu, executive director of the Sierra Club Foundation, said in a statement, noting that the Foundation is itself an investor.
A $6 billion boost for decarbonization
The new rule was not scheduled to go into effect until 60 days after it was announced on March 6, so the 5th Circuit administrative stay will not have an immediate impact on the timeline. Still, the clock is ticking, and public companies in the U.S. are already being advised to prepare for implementation.
“Companies need to continue to evolve governance and disclosure of climate-related risks and performance not only to prepare for SEC requirements, but also to find new sources of competitive advantage and to realize opportunities while meeting evolving stakeholder expectations in a rapidly changing world,” Joe Sczurko, president of earth and environment at the leading consultancy WSP USA, wrote for TriplePundit.
That chore just got a little easier for the dozens of leading U.S. companies that qualified for funding through a new $6 billion decarbonization program organized under the U.S. Department of Energy. The funds are allocated from the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
The sprawling 20-state, 33-project program is aimed at applying a broad slate of carbon-reducing technologies to industries that are difficult to decarbonize through ordinary electrification alone.
“The projects will focus on the highest emitting industries where decarbonization technologies will have the greatest impact, including aluminum and other metals, cement and concrete, chemicals and refining, iron and steel, and more,” according to a statement from the department.
The program is also expected to create tens of thousands of new jobs, with a focus on community benefits and labor rights. “Nearly 80 percent of the projects are located in a disadvantaged community,” according to the Department of Energy.
Food and beverage firms can lead the way
The funding program showcases new technologies, with the expectation that the qualifying projects will model best practices for adoption throughout their industries.
Three of the top food and beverage brands in the U.S. are represented in the Department of Energy’s list of highest-emitting industries. They were selected based partly on their ability to showcase technologies that lend themselves to widespread adoption and high consumer visibility.
“These projects can increase consumer awareness around embodied emissions by decarbonizing products that Americans consume every day like ice cream, ketchup and BBQ sauce,” according to the department.
One of the awardees is the consumer goods company Unilever, which plans to deploy up to $20.9 million in federal funding to replace gas boilers at several locations with electric boilers and heat pumps. The system also involves recovering waste heat.
“Along with reduced emissions, this project has an extremely high replicability potential and will create a model that could lead to further decarbonization throughout the food and beverage sector where approximately 50 percent of processing emissions are from low temperature heating,” according to the Department of Energy.
Similarly, the food company Kraft Heinz was awarded up to $170.9 million for a multi-state project that includes renewable energy and energy storage elements integrated with heat pumps, electric heaters, electric boilers and biogas boilers.
The U.S. branch of the beverage company Diageo won the third award in the food and beverage category. It was awarded up to $75 million to demonstrate how on-site renewable energy can be paired with new large-scale, long-duration energy storage technology to replace gas-fired heating systems. The battery, developed by the firm Rondo Energy, is designed to provide continuous energy from wind and solar resources — even when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining.
As for the new SEC rule, it will be difficult to stuff the genie back in the bottle. The Department of Energy program is all but certain to foster climate-based competition throughout the U.S. food and beverage industry. Once the new systems are up and running, household brands under the Unilever, Kraft Heinz, and Diageo umbrellas are going to set a high bar for others to meet, regardless of what happens in court.
As climate awareness has become imperative, promoting sustainable marketing is more than a pattern; it’s an impression of evolving consumer values and environmental consciousness. Brands presently face the crucial need to deliver products as well as to exemplify sustainability in their identity and messaging. Sustainability in branding, offering actionable insights and navigating the landscape of eco-conscious marketing. The transformative power of sustainable branding in shaping consumer perceptions and driving brand loyalty.
The Era of Sustainable Marketing
The rise of words such as “sustainable,” “eco-friendly” and “green” demonstrates a profound shift in consumer preferences toward ethical and environmentally responsible brands. Customers today invest not just in products but in values and sustainability as well. A recent report by Metricstream revealed that 35% of customers are willing to pay up to 25% more for sustainable products. And 76% of consumers intend to switch from one company to another if sustainability practices are not performed. This surge highlights the necessity for brands to perform sustainable marketing and align with eco-friendly practices as soon as possible. Moreover, it has also been observed that 86% of employees are willing to work with companies that care about sustainability.
Advantages of Sustainable Marketing
An Increase in Reputation: Brands who embrace sustainable marketing techniques often benefit from an enhanced brand perception with environmentally-minded consumers, who appreciate these initiatives.
Greater Consumer Loyalty: Environmental initiatives foster strong ties with customers, leading to more loyalty from clients and increased support from them.
Cost Savings: Engaging in sustainable practices may bring long-term cost reductions through energy-saving operations or waste-reduction strategies.
Administrative Compliance: Companies that implement eco-friendly processes position themselves well for compliance with any future environmental regulations.
Strategies for Sustainable Branding
As businesses embark on their sustainability journeys, adopting strategies that resonate with eco-minded customers is critical to growth and differentiation.
Authenticity in Sustainability Efforts- A key principle of sustainable branding lies in authenticity. Brands must not simply claim they practice sustainability; rather, they should embody it at every operational level. From eco-friendly packaging to carbon-neutral shipping shipments, their actions should speak louder than words when it comes to sustainability marketing efforts.
Educational and Informative Campaigns – Today’s consumers increasingly expect to be informed rather than sold on products or services. Effective green marketing strategies involve sharing a sustainable story through storytelling, engaging consumers in your brand journey, and informing them of its positive environmental impacts through purchasing decisions.
Integration of Sustainability into Brand Identity – Sustainable branding goes beyond product promotion; it involves developing a brand identity rooted in environmental and social responsibility. Aligning values with eco-friendly practices enables brands to attract conscious consumers while making an impactful statement about themselves to society at large.
Integrating Sustainability Through Different Marketing Channels
Integrating sustainability into various marketing channels offers brands unique opportunities to connect with eco-conscious consumers while building brand loyalty and standing out in the marketplace.
Incorporating Sustainability Into Content Marketing
Businesses looking for sustainable strategies have numerous options at their disposal when it comes to engaging their eco-conscious consumers, building loyalty, and standing out in an overcrowded marketplace. Content marketing for sustainability provides one such avenue – it plays an essential role in driving sustainable practices while raising consumer awareness of them.
Infographics: Infographics provide consumers with digestible sustainability data.
Case Studies: Companies can highlight environmental initiatives and carbon reduction efforts through case studies.
Video Content: Provide updates regarding sustainable production practices or conservation initiatives.
Social Media for Sustainable Practices
Social media platforms provide powerful platforms for building brand loyalty and advocating sustainability, providing immense potential to engage customers in eco-friendly activities or challenges. Consider:
Campaigns & Challenges: Engaging customers in eco-friendly activities or challenges.
User-Generated Content: Encouraging customers to post about sustainable initiatives they support as well as company updates in social media posts or through blogging platforms such as Medium.
Sustainable Email Marketing
To implement effective and sustainable email marketing strategies, consider:
Opt-In Approach: Build a database of subscribers who actively opt-in for your emails.
Eco-Friendly Email Service Providers: When selecting email service providers, prioritize those that emphasize sustainability and renewable energy as a priority.
Optimize Email Contents: To promote sustainability through education, develop useful, educational emails.
The role of influencers and social media in promoting sustainable brands
Besides the various channels of marketing, social media influencers play an integral part in spreading sustainable practices by spreading information and shaping norms about green living. Non-green influencers have the power to reach a wide audience and promote sustainable consumption; however, they may face credibility challenges when discussing eco-conscious practices. Research indicates that adopting credibility-enhancing strategies such as citing expert opinions and showing passion for sustainability can increase influencers’ perceived credibility when posting about sustainability. Moreover, study participants delved into the effect of various credibility-boosting strategies on social media posts by fitness/lifestyle influencers advocating the reduction of single-use plastics like PET bottles. Results highlighted the significance of credibility-building tactics as an effective means for non-green influencers to promote sustainability by engaging their audiences in eco-friendly practices and increasing credibility with viewers.
Shining Examples of Sustainable Marketing Success
To demonstrate the effectiveness of sustainability in marketing, take a look at some inspiring case studies of renowned companies that have successfully incorporated sustainable marketing into their strategies.
1. Patagonia
The outdoor clothing brand Patagonia is renowned for its sustainability philosophy, which is at the forefront of every aspect of its business. The most memorable campaigns, such as “Don’t Buy This Jacket,” emphasize the brand’s dedication to sustainability while connecting with the public, presenting sustainability as a financially profitable and beneficial option.
2. IKEA
The brand is recognised for its commitment to climate change IKEA’s advertising campaigns promote a circular economy and sustainable living principles. Initiatives such as those in the “Fortune Favours the Frugal” campaign demonstrate the brand’s commitment to sustainability and are a great way of attracting customers and building brand loyalty.
Sustainable Branding and Consumer Awareness
Consumer awareness plays an integral influence on a brand’s reputation and positioning in the market. With the rising demands for sustainable and ethical products from consumers, companies should incorporate sustainability into their brand’s identity and messages to remain up-to-date as well as competitive. By aligning marketing efforts with sustainability concepts, companies can boost positive perceptions of their brands and also create long-term value.
Sustainable marketing has become an essential aspect of modern society’s climate-conscious mindset. Integrating sustainability into branding improves a company’s image and customer loyalty, but it can also shape a greener future. However, authenticity, transparency, and innovation must remain core components of sustainable branding practices for their success.
By Tina Casey via Triple Pundit • Reposted: March 22, 2024
Business leaders who support voting rights face a difficult challenge. Aside from overcoming new partisan laws that make voting more difficult, they need to overcome a chronic undercurrent of voter apathy in the U.S. However, now that communities in many parts of the country are feeling the impacts of climate change firsthand, voting rights supporters have a new opportunity to engage voters and encourage them to choose leadership on climate action.
On climate action, who’s elected matters
“It makes no difference who is elected president,” is the reason cited by 53 percent of voting-age adults who decided not to cast a ballot in 2020.
In terms of the climate crisis, though, the differences are all too real. Former U.S. President Donald Trump changed the game with one stroke of the pen shortly after taking office when he summarily pulled the U.S. out of the landmark Paris Agreement on climate change.
Still, without strong White House support for climate action, the U.S. lost a key opportunity to provide global leadership at a time of looming crisis.
“While the US now represents around 15 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, it remains the world’s biggest and most powerful economy,” BBC environment correspondent Matt McGrath observed in November of 2020. “So, when it becomes the only country to withdraw from a global solution to a global problem, it raises questions of trust.”
The leadership pendulum swings both ways
That trust cannot be restored in a single election cycle, but the current administration took a giant step in the right direction. Newly elected President Joe Biden took office in 2021 with a focus on leveraging government resources and private-sector investment to accelerate decarbonization.
In the analysis dated March 6, Carbon Brief notes that the Joe Biden administration has brought the country “close to meeting its 2030 target range.” If Biden is reelected in 2024, “emissions would fall to around 43 percent below 2005 levels” by 2030, Carbon Brief projects, though existing policies fall short of where the country needs to be to reach net-zero two decades later.
Conversely, the alternative — a second term in office for Trump — would once again turn back the clock: “In total, the analysis suggests that U.S. greenhouse gas emissions would fall to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 if Trump secures a second term and rolls back Biden’s policies — far short of the 50 to 52 percent target.”
By way of visualizing the difference, Carbon Brief projects that Trump’s second term in office would wipe “all of the [emissions] savings from deploying wind, solar and other clean technologies around the world over the past five years” off the books, twice over.
Rolling back the Inflation Reduction Act would have catastrophic consequences
Though advising that other variables may impact the actual results, Carbon Brief anticipates a negative outcome for a second Trump term based largely on his pledge to roll back the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
“The IRA accounts for the most significant part of the emissions reductions expected as a result of Biden’s climate policies to date,” Carbon Brief authors led by deputy and policy editor Simon Evans explained. “This has been called the largest package of domestic climate measures in U.S. history.”
“It offers incentives covering a broad swathe of the economy from low-carbon manufacturing to clean energy, electric vehicles, ‘climate-smart’ agriculture and low-carbon hydrogen,” they added. “Regardless of the precise impact, a second Trump term that successfully dismantles Biden’s climate legacy would likely end any global hopes of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.”
The shield of apathy may be cracking
A newly published study from the University of Colorado at Boulder indicates that climate change already impacts voter behavior, providing some basis to believe that the Inflation Reduction Act — and President Biden — will prevail for another four years.
“We find that climate change opinion has had a significant and growing effect on voting that favors the Democrats and is large enough to be pivotal to the outcomes of close elections,” the researchers concluded. “We project that climate change opinion probably cost Republicans the 2020 presidential election, all else being equal.”
Signs of growing voter engagement emerged in the 2022 midterm elections as well. Business leaders who value both the environmental and the bottom-line benefits of the IRA can help make sure that it survives into 2025 and beyond by seizing the momentum, building on their voter registration programs, and keeping climate action front and center in the national conversation as Election Day comes closer.
By Tom Idle from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: March 20, 2024
With Ecoflix — a nonprofit streaming platform on a mission to be the ‘Netflix for nature’ — brands can produce compelling sustainability content that also helps protect nature and wildlife.
In 2016, filmmaker Mark Downes was in the South of France for the annual Cannes Lions Festival. As a seasoned ad-video producer, he had been to the event many times before — but that year, something happened that changed his life.
“I had my ‘purpose turn,’” he tells Sustainable Brands®. “I happened to be in the room when Ban Ki-moon came on stage to deliver a keynote about something called the Sustainable Development Goals — and my mind was just blown, totally blown.”
Downes’ chance encounter with the South Korean diplomat, who was the UN Secretary-General at the time, encouraged him to quit his job and pursue a career dedicated to using brand communications to turn the dial on sustainability. Since then, he has graduated from the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, conceived an animated series to help teach children about sustainability, and picked up a regular gig tutoring for AdGreen — helping his peers understand climate science and what it takes to create commercial films in alow-carbon-impact way.
Then, 18 months ago, he joined the team at Ecoflix — a nonprofit streaming platform on a mission to be the Netflix for nature-, wildlife- and environment-themed movies and documentaries. Backed by philanthropist and retired litigator David B. Casselman, it was borne out of his frustration at the difficulty in distributing documentaries about nature — a subject close to his heart; Casselman has dedicated much of his life to animal-welfare causes, with pro bono legal work to help protect wildlife.
With Ecoflix, he has created a subscription platform giving people access to “science-based, positive storytelling to try and inspire people,” as Downes puts it.
“The main mission is saving animals and the planet,” he explains. “We have around 70 NGOs on board as our partners. While they are amazing, they’re also underfunded and understaffed. But they have great access to incredible content. They’ve got hard drives of great stuff, but they don’t know how to craft a film. So, we’re using our skillset to help craft their stories.”
On sign-up, subscribers can choose which NGOs or charities to support: “If you’re crazy about elephants, you can support Tusk. And we will make sure they get your subscription money each month.”
The content featured on the self-described “Netflix for nature” is not intended to be binged as with most streaming services. And the films are not designed to highlight environmental doom and gloom — there are no shots of animals in distress, for example. And the filmmakers ask themselves whether a five-year-old would be frightened if they saw their film: “If the answer is yes, we edit it accordingly.”
But Ecoflix is keen to tell stories beyond its own online platform. It’s new ‘thing’ is Ecoflix Media — a new commercial arm to the organisation that is designed to make films for brands that will not only realise the benefits of working with great filmmakers, but also be encouraged knowing their investment is flowing back into nature and wildlife conservation.
“We want to work with sustainable brands, but we don’t want to sell their products,” Downes asserts. “We’re not interested in creating adverts; we want to tell the story about who they are, what they do, their essence, their positivity, and how they celebrate that internally or externally. Ultimately, we want to tell inspiring stories. And the brands can choose which NGOs they want to support. Most already have charities they work with, anyway.”
In the face of threatening greenwash (“we need to be careful we’re not a magnet for people who want to use us to greenwash their claims, because we’re squeaky clean”), Downes is keen to tell the stories of not only the leaders, but also the companies who might be at the very start of their sustainability journey to “turn the ocean liner around.”
“A lot of people are afraid to start talking about [sustainability] out loud until they’ve figured it all out. They’ve locked in how they’re going to do it, and then they will shout about it. But, actually, the initial stage of that journey is really fascinating and inspiring — because nobody’s doing it perfectly. You’re more likely to inspire other people to start that journey by watching a film like that, rather than somebody who’s doing it perfectly and winning awards. You know what I mean?”
Right now, there are more than 16,000 production companies in the UK alone. It is a crowded market, but Downes — Ecoflix’s Head of Sustainability — is confident the organisation can stand out. Alongside him is COO Aimée Anderson (“a powerhouse of ideas and energy”), Head of Content Peter von Puttkamer (“a three-time Emmy judge”) and Head of Conservation Ian Redmond OBE (“an amazing character who’s currently in Kazakhstan at an animal migratory conference”).
Downes is infinitely inspired to keep things positive in his storytelling because of his young children. Whenever he takes them to the supermarket, they always pick up products to check the labels for things such as palm oil, he says. It’s not something he’s ever mentioned to them; they’ve just picked it up from school.
“They’re militant. We’re doing this for the right reasons — not for my kids or their kids. It’s for seven generations down the line.”
It is this ethos that drives the filmmaker’s passion to find new narratives and cinematic techniques to drive awareness and education.
“That’s the thing that really bugs me about sustainability. If we didn’t have solutions, we’d be in a right pickle. But the fact that there are solutions, means it’s just an awareness and education thing. That’s where my positivity comes from.”
By Gregory C. Unruh from the Harvard Business Reviews • Reposted: March 16, 2024
When I became the sustainability guest editor for the MIT Sloan Management Review a decade ago, I joined a research project sponsored by the Boston Consulting Group to track the evolution of corporate sustainability management. Over the course of nine years, our annual global surveys reached more than 60,000 respondents in 118 countries.
While there were many insights, a persistent managerial challenge was how to account for the intangible value generated from sustainability initiatives. Executives recognize the impacts these efforts engender with key stakeholders. Socially minded millennial employees, for example, want to work for responsible companies, and our surveys have shown that they’ll reward their employers with loyalty, lower absenteeism, and engagement. Similarly, customers want to feel good about their purchases, so they give their business to companies that care for communities and the environment. Comparable arguments can be made for other stakeholders, such as investors, partners, politicians, and the like. The challenge is that these important stakeholder impacts are difficult to see or measure.
Think of it like this: I can show you two eggs and tell you one is sustainable — but you can’t tell which by looking at them. The egg’s sustainability depends on things like how the chickens were raised, what they were fed, how the farmers were treated and compensated and so on. Holding an egg in the grocery store aisle, you can’t see any of that. It’s an intangible attribute for the typical buyer.
How do you overcome this? One option is to “tangibilize,” that is make the intangible benefits more clear, for stakeholders.
At one end of the spectrum is marketing. An egg crate can be plastered with logos, pictures of happy hens, and statements like “organic,” “cage free,” “no antibiotics,” “free range,” and so on. Of course, the customer can’t confirm any of this. They have to take the company’s word for it. Any perceived sustainability value is contingent on the customer trusting the brand’s claims.
Another option is to make claims more tangible is through third-party certifications. Labels like “Certified Humane” or “Fair Trade” are more tangible than marketing because they’re backed by verifiable standards. It’s analogous to having a company’s financial statements audited and certified by accountants.
These approaches work when there is a tangible product and process in place that can be evaluated for its sustainability performance. But what if the product or process is not yet available, but business success depends upon stakeholders believing that there will be tangible benefits in the future?
“Tangibilizing” an Uncertain Future
For highly intangible sustainability impacts, the communication challenge increases. Take sustainable agriculture, for example. Advocates claim the practice can engender resilient food systems, conserve cultural heritage, and mitigate climate change, and more. These benefits are not only intangible to consumers, some will only materialize in the future. Is there a way to demonstrate these intangible benefits in ways that can influence consumers shopping for eggs today?
Over the last few years, I’ve been studying how Intel has dealt with this intangibility challenge. In the late 2010s, the company was positioning itself in the rapidly growing artificial intelligence business, investing billions in optimized AI chip capabilities and integrated AI applications.
Realizing value from these investments depended on business leaders, government officials, and the general public embracing the AI revolution. However, this was years before ChatGPT demonstrated the potential of artificial intelligence to the world. At the time, the only impressions people had of AI came from science-fiction movies and pundits.
As they surveyed stakeholders, Intel’s public affairs team detected competing narratives arising about AI. On the negative side were anxieties about AI’s potential to eliminate jobs, exacerbating global economic inequality. The positive AI story was about human-machine collaboration to solve problems, where people do the creative work that AI can’t, leaving the rote work to machines. The competing narratives were based on an imagined future that was unmanifest, thus intangible, to the public.
The intangible narratives began having tangible implications in 2016 when several countries began developing national AI strategy plans. If the negative narrative took hold, risk-averse government policy could slow the technology’s uptake. What was needed was to demonstrate the sustainability benefits of AI — and in doing so, to tangibilize a positive AI future.
To help manifest this future, Intel launched AI4Y, a cross-sectoral collaboration with governments and national school systems to deliver AI training for K-12 students in an array of global markets. Students learned the technical aspects of AI applications, and were also trained in a humanistic approach that emphasized ethical deployment of AI to solve real-world sustainability problems in their communities. The goal was to demystify AI for policy makers and the public while democratizing AI and get it in the hands of users around the world.
By 2019, tens of thousands of students across nine countries had engaged in AI4Y programs. As part of the program design, pupils applied what they’d learn to solve real challenges in their communities, creating AI applications to address social and environmental issues such as bullying, computer energy use, and depression screening. In one case, a group of students at Busan Computer Science High School, in South Korea, used their AI skills to predict prices of kimchi, the Korean staple food made from fermented cabbage. Called Project VEGITA (derived from “vegetable” and “data”), they confronted the problem of cabbage price fluctuations that were hurting kimchi preparation and consumption. The team used machine learning to analyze 3,000 temperature and precipitation data points collected by the Korea Meteorological Administration and Ministry of Agriculture and then built a predictive analytics interface that could estimate cabbage prices based on seasonal forecasts. The results could then be used by producers to help them time the buying of cabbage for kimchi production.
AI4Y provided a powerful response to the concerns in the negative narrative about the future of artificial intelligence. If AI could be used by children to solve real sustainability problems in their schools and communities, how else could it be applied for good?
As of July 2021, AI4Y was available in more than 15 countries and Intel is planning to roll it out to 30 countries. It’s one of Intel’s five “digital readiness programs,” each targeting a different stakeholder group, from citizens to leaders. These programs make many of the potential benefits of AI real and tangible to students, workers, and decision makers around the world. By partnering with governments, Intel’s programs help prepare the country’s workforce to participate in and create a positive AI future.
Tangible Value Capture
For sustainability to be sustained it must be profitable for a company. If it is not profitable, it’s a subsidy and, almost by definition, subsidies are temporary. If markets shift, leadership changes, or economies collapse, subsidies can disappear. But if profitable, meaning that it creates value in excess of cost, it will be sustained because it’s just good business. By tangibilizing sustainability value for stakeholders, companies position themselves to capture more business value and help ensure that their sustainability efforts will be sustained.
By Demitri Fierro via Sustainablebrands.com • Reposted: March 13, 2024
Good Energy helps writers and other entertainment professionals address the climate crisis with confidence and make climate storytelling a mainstream narrative for all audiences.
Nonprofit storytelling consultancy Good Energy — which believes that Hollywood is uniquely positioned to shift the conversation on climate change — serves as a hub for entertainment professionals and climate experts looking to meaningfully represent the climate crisis on-screen across all genres and mediums.
A glaring question
“Why is the climate crisis largely absent from our screen?” Good Energy founder and CEO Anna Jane Joyner pondered as she noticed the pattern within the entertainment industry, in which mentions of climate change have been largely nonexistent in scripted entertainment. The industry itself has been responsible for pivotal societal changes — from popularizing the now common term “designated driver” to significantly increasing diversity, equity and inclusion practices both on and off-screen.
Joyner explained to Sustainable Brands® that while storytelling centered around our environment had been done before, it was mostly in the form of documentaries such as An Inconvenient Truth (2006); or apocalyptic narratives, such as The Day After Tomorrow (2004) or Snowpiercer (2013). This led to a long, deep-listening tour throughout Hollywood, during which Joyner heard that many creatives — including producers, directors and executives — were eager to discuss and convey the reality of the climate crisis, but understandably feared polarization or backlash if the subject was not presented with complete scientific accuracy.
Joyner founded Good Energy in 2019 to help writers and other entertainment professionals address the climate crisis with confidence and make climate storytelling a mainstream narrative for all audiences. The agency believes climate change is a generative lens (it coined the term, “Climate Lens”) through which to imagine any aspect of a story.
Bringing Good Energy for good storytelling
In 2022, Good Energy and the USC Norman Lear Center’s Media Impact Project released Glaring Absence: The Climate Crisis Is Virtually Nonexistent in Scripted Entertainment — a first-of-its-kind analysis of 37,453 TV and movie scripts from 2016-2020 — which found that less than 3 percent of scripted TV and film acknowledges climate change. In the survey of 2,000 US adults, more than three in four (77 percent) reported learning about social issues from fictional TV or film, at least occasionally; however, only 25 percent say they hear about the climate crisis from fictional TV or films.
Joyner says the study helped Good Energy develop resources to facilitate the integration of ethical and accurate climate representation in media narratives. It now offers workshops, consulting and its principal resource, The Playbook for Storytelling in the Age of Climate Change — a comprehensive, open-source, digital tool launched in April 2022 that helps creative teams develop climate narratives — which is now being used by industry partners, screenwriters and students.
Good Energy has worked with clients including Apple TV+, CBC, CBS, Showtime and Spotify; and been featured on nearly 50 media outlets within the last two years.
Climate narratives in society
To quote Dorothy Fortenberry, the acclaimed writer and producer behind the dystopian Apple TV series, “Extrapolations”: “If climate isn’t in your story, it’s science fiction.” The effects of climate change are occurring more frequently and severely every day — from record-breaking heat waves to catastrophic wildfires and storms, to dwindling glaciers and ice caps, the relevancy of climate change grows every day. Good Energy identifies that everyone on Earth has a climate story now — and seeing characters that reflect our reality on screen can help viewers may feel less alone and even inspired; rather than anxious or hopeless.
Stories have been used to change society in the past; and when it comes to climate, society is in desperate need of a unifying guide for addressing the problem. Every living being and every corner of the earth will be impacted by climate change; so, climate isn’t just “another” issue — it’s a universal backdrop to our lives. This backdrop provides fodder for countless stories that reflect society as it is today — stories with the power to change the world for the better.
By Tom Idle from Sustainablebrands.com • Reposted: March 13, 2024
While the new mandate was scaled back from what was originally proposed, US companies must now prepare to join many markets around the world in the climate-risk disclosure game.
Finally, we have a decision from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on mandatory climate-risk disclosure for businesses — described in many quarters as a “landmark decision.”
The final ruling means that all public companies will have to include information in their annual reports setting out the climate-related risks to their business, and what they are doing to manage those risks — including material climate targets and goals and governance processes. The mandatory rules kick in for all annual report issued for the year ending next Decembers.
The final SEC decision — which the organization’s Chair Gary Genslersaid would give investors “consistent, comparable, decision-useful information” — has been scaled back from what was originally proposed after receiving “record levels” of feedback. The biggest shift is the fact that companies will not be forced to disclose their difficult-to-assess Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at all.
Companies are also being given a bit more time to get themselves prepared and organized for compliance. Large companies have almost two years to provide most disclosures, three years to organise their GHG emissions information, and six years to obtain assurance over their GHGs.
So, what does all of this mean to brands? Well, there are lots of complex components to the requirements that company executives will need to read up on, understand and prepare for when it comes to disclosing certain information. Much of the information being asked for will be familiar to large businesses (separately reporting Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHGs, for instance), and some of it will be new. For example, firms will need to understand how severe weather might impact their income — providing details of investments being made to protect facilities and assets against, for example, hurricanes, sea level rises and flooding; and what sort of losses might be incurred should the company be negatively impacted. Companies will also need to show how their Board of directors and management team is structured and able to oversee the management of climate-related risks.
According to Deloitte, 97 percent of Fortune 500 companies mentioned climate change in their latest annual report. So, firms are much more aware of their relation to the climate crisis — but, by and large, current reporting focuses solely on risk factors such as increased regulation and reputational risk. The new SEC rule will demand much more expansive reporting and many companies will need to up their game and invest in their reporting teams and capabilities.
Of course, new reporting demands are good news for investors. In a statement, the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR), which represents 300 investors with more than $4 trillion under management, celebrated the SEC ruling. It also applauded the “sustained commitment” of the Commission, which has spent two years bringing “standardization of climate reporting to financial filings,” as CEO Josh Zinner put it.
Elsewhere, others lamented a missed opportunity for companies to start addressing their Scope 3 emissions — which account for the vast majority of a firm’s carbon footprint. Including supply chain emissions reporting in the rule would have increased data availability and highlighted the importance of tackling Scope 3, said William Theisen, CEO of EcoAct North America — a consultancy that helps brands with their GHG reporting: “Scope 3 emissions are a pivotal aspect of understanding a company’s environmental impact. Despite concerns about the consistency of Scope 3, this would have led to accelerated improvement in greenhouse has accounting.”
The move to drop Scope 3 reporting requirements was “not ideal; but not surprising, given the politically charged atmosphere at the moment,” according to Scope 3 collaboration guru Oliver Hurrey. But there are plenty of ways companies can begin to tackle Scope 3, regardless, he says: “There has been a big push emerging in the last few weeks by business and procurement leaders to co-develop a methodology for adding carbon pricing into the commercial evaluation criteria for tenders and supplier selection. This will create a significant competitive-advantage incentive for suppliers to baseline and decarbonize.”
As with many new pieces of regulation, the business world must brace itself for potential legal challenges to the final rule. As with most ESG-related policy, the SEC decision has become something of a political hot potato across the US — with some arguing it is simply another example of progressive politics interfering with business.
However, many commentators have said that this new rule is not significant at all, considering policy development in other parts of the world.
US companies operating overseas (or in the state of California) will be familiar with the numerous voluntary and mandatory climate and ESG disclosure schemes that have come about in the last two years. The IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards, and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and related European Sustainability Reporting Standards have had the most airtime. The SEC’s final rule has taken much of what already exists in disclosure frameworks such as the GHG Protocol and the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) as its foundation. Having said that, the SEC’s requirements only relate to climate-related reporting, as opposed to wider ESG issues.
“The ruling, more or less, is pointless — because, regardless, disclosure is coming,” says Ed Gabbitas, founder of ESG consultancy EVORA Global. “Regardless of the SEC’s ruling, firms shouldn’t hesitate to draw up an action plan around sustainability reporting — especially amid growing global mandates from the EU and Asia. More and more investors are expecting to see climate disclosures; and the US rule will now raise the bar for entry.”
So, it’s time to prepare for enhanced climate-risk disclosure in the US — something that, Gabbitas adds, will require a “multi-fold strategy that may take months of preparation to establish.”
A light display created using drones is performed before the city skyline and United Nations headquarters as part of a campaign to raise awareness about the Amazon rainforest and the global climate crisis ahead of the 78th United Nations General Assembly and Climate Ambition Summit, in New York City on September 15, 2023. Newsweek has analyzed the top publicly traded U.S. and global companies based on their overall environmental performance. Image: ED JONES/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES
Newsweek Green Rankings, one of the world’s foremost corporate environmental listings, rank the top publicly traded U.S. and global companies based on their overall environmental performance. The project is driven by an environmental focus across Newsweek‘s regular rankings features, in particular the 2024 ranking of America’s Greenest Companies and America’s Most Responsible Companies, the latter of which has a large focus on sustainability.
Here’s how those rankings weigh companies’ moves to help the environment.
For America’s Greenest Companies 2024, Newsweek partnered with data analysts Plant-A and GIST Impact to identify the top 300 U.S. companies based on environmental sustainability. The candidates, which all had publicly disclosed sustainability data, needed a minimum market capitalization of $5 billion to be considered.
The Greenest Companies were scored on more than 25 parameters in four categories: greenhouse gas emissions, water usage, waste generation and sustainability data disclosures and commitments. Some of the 25 individual parameters included things like percentage of energy use that is from renewable sources, efforts to reduce waste generation and frequency of disclosures.
Sixty-two companies of the 300 achieved a perfect five-star rating. Household names like Apple, Mastercard and Pfizer were all ranked with the the top score.
Apple was also the largest company featured in the ranking, based on revenue, followed by UnitedHealth, which achieved four and a half stars, and CVS, which received five stars. IT services—which includes things like cloud technology—was the most represented industry on the list.
In her introduction to the Greenest Companies ranking, Newsweek Editor-in-Chief Nancy Cooper highlighted how it complemented the recent launch of Better Planet, a Newsweek platform “where we highlight innovators and innovations making the world healthier and safer.”
Better Planet’s mission is to highlight the ways that individual actions can help the environment, because, as its homepage says,”the first step in making a difference is recognizing that we can make a difference.” That point-of-view that could also, arguably, be attributed to many of the companies featured on Newsweek‘s Most Responsible Companies ranking.
The ranking of America’s Most Responsible Companies 2024, done in partnership with data-gathering specialist Statista, focuses on a holistic view of corporate responsibility that considered, among other criteria, the three pillars of ESG: environment, social and corporate governance.
For the ranking, several dimensions of environmental data were analyzed, including waste, emissions, energy use, water use and long-term performance.
Within those categories, various KPIs were examined. These included things like a company’s amount of recycled waste versus its total waste, its Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions versus its revenue, and the amount of renewable energy it uses versus its total energy usage.
The overall highest-ranked company was pharmaceutical manufacturer Merck, which achieved a score of 91.98 out of 100, which was a combination of an environmental score, a “social concerns” score that considered factors like leadership diversity and employee safety, and a governance score that incorporated disclosure and transparency. “For every metric ton of product we put out,” she said, “we seek to take a metric ton back.”
By Jia Rizvi, Contributor & Entrepreneur And Documentary Filmmakervia Forbes • Reposted March 11, 2024
In recent years, sustainability has emerged as a central theme across various industries, transcending boundaries and becoming a key focus for businesses globally. In 2022, 75% of organizations had increased their investment in sustainability, according to Deloitte. As the world grapples with environmental challenges and social responsibilities, industries are recognizing the need to adopt sustainable practices.
Companies in industries such as retail, food, fashion, and tech are finding innovative ways to push sustainable practices that benefit the environment and provide a better experience for their end customers.
Eco-Friendly Supply Chains In Retail
Consumers are becoming more mindful of where their goods come from. Restaurants, grocery stores, and food manufacturers are responding by sourcing ethically and locally whenever possible. This reduces transportation emissions, promotes fair labor practices, and supports local farmers. “As the global population continues to grow, the need for sustainable food systems has never been more pressing. Aquaculture offers a promising solution to impending food shortages, while also creating opportunities for economic growth and innovation across the industry. Our goal is to provide the world with healthy and nutritious food from the ocean, all while ensuring the well-being of our planet and communities,” says Ivan Vandheim, CEO of Mowi, supplier of farm-raised salmon and sustainable protein producer.
Transparency is equally crucial, allowing stakeholders to trace product origins and assess environmental and social impacts. By integrating sustainability into supply chains, businesses mitigate risks and contribute to a more resilient and responsible world. “We need to reimagine supply chains for transparency, efficiency, and less waste,” says Ola Brattvoll, COO of Mowi. “Vertical integration helps in offering pre-packed solutions directly to retailers and online. Additionally, innovative logistics reduce spoilage and environmental impact.
The Circular Economy And Fashion
The idea of a circular economy is gaining traction in retail. Instead of the traditional linear model (produce, use, discard), retailers are exploring ways to extend product lifecycles. This includes repair services, recycling programs, and encouraging customers to resell or donate items.
For example, fashion enthusiasts are turning to upcycled and vintage clothing. Upcycling involves transforming old garments into new designs, reducing waste. Vintage pieces not only add uniqueness but also extend the lifecycle of clothing. “The most sustainable garment is the one you already own,” explains Orosla de Castro, co-founder of Fashion Revolution, a nonprofit organization promoting a sustainable fashion industry. Fashion brands are increasingly embracing other ethical practices. They prioritize fair wages, safe working conditions, and transparency in their supply chains. “Ethical fashion is the recognition that there are human beings behind the clothes that we wear,” says Elizabeth Joy, founder of Conscious Life & Style, a digital media company focusing on fashion sustainability. Companies like Stella McCartney and Eileen Fisher champion sustainable fashion using organic fabrics, recycled materials, and cruelty-free production methods.
Energy Efficiency In Tech
As digital services expand, data centers consume vast amounts of energy. Tech giants like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft are investing in green data centers powered by renewable energy. They are also exploring cooling solutions that use less water.
Tech companies are also investing in building sustainable cities. Smart grids, efficient transportation systems, and IoT-enabled waste management help reduce energy consumption and enhance urban living. “Tech companies could be key drivers in advancing clean technology and sustainable practices. However, their actions can also be detrimental to the energy transition and Net Zero objectives, depending on how they invest the vast technology, skills, and resources at their disposal,” says C.J. Obikile from Duke FUQUA School of Business.
Sustainability Is The Standard
Sustainability is not an optional choice for businesses anymore – it’s a strategic imperative, shaping the practices and priorities of industries worldwide. Consumers, now more environmentally conscious, are demanding sustainable products and rewarding brands that prioritize eco-friendly practices. From retail and food to technology and fashion, businesses understand the significance of adopting sustainable strategies to ensure long-term success and a long-lasting environment.
By Joe Sczurko via Triple Pundit • Reposted: March 8, 2024
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has finalized its long-awaited ruling that will require thousands of companies to disclose climate risks and data. Some stakeholders see the SEC ruling as going too far, while others say it has not gone far enough to address pressing climate issues. Whatever your view, now is the time to solidify plans for compliance. Here are five steps you can take to prepare now.
1. Refine climate governance
With climate disclosure now the purview of the SEC, companies should review current governance approaches and identify opportunities to strengthen them. This may include increasing corporate board oversight as well as board competency in climate-related matters.
It also could be helpful to review the role and composition of the committees tasked with climate governance, ideally ensuring C-suite representation and active subject matter experts who can provide practical insights into corporate targets, progress and potential exposure.
Companies will also benefit from engaging with external experts who can share best practices and provide a candid third-party perspective on how corporate commitments, plans, timelines and actions may be perceived externally.
2. Build agility in tracking, reporting and assurance for greenhouse gas data
It’s all about the data! Companies should take steps to minimize potential unknowns, gaps, and vulnerabilities around their tracking and reporting. Review what you are tracking and how you are tracking it. Consider questions such as: Who is on point for ensuring data quality? Do they have the experience to deliver against rising expectations for data quality and integrity? What is the basis for our company’s climate-related calculations?
Coming requirements for enhanced levels of third-party data assurance — shifting from limited to reasonable assurance — means companies should plan now for the additional time and budget involved with data compilation and management. It’s also a good time to explore what it would take to implement use of a climate disclosure framework, such as the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), or how to level up initial efforts to align to external standards. Doing so can strengthen your overall reporting efforts and reliability of disclosures.
3. Review your emissions reduction plans
Tracking and reporting are at the heart of the SEC requirements, and stakeholders will invariably measure and compare climate performance among corporations. To prepare for likely peer comparisons by external stakeholders, companies need to proactively conduct (or refresh) peer benchmarking of this fast-moving space.
An audit of the climate-related questions or expectations in requests for proposals and competitive tenders is a relatively basic first step. Along with other information, this audit can provide context to help the corporate climate governance committee re-evaluate current goals and progress. Progress reviews will likely become a regular practice, as climate considerations are increasingly incorporated into standard business planning and budgeting processes.
To minimize potential accusations of greenwashing, consider submitting corporate emissions goals for approval by the Science Based Targets initiative. Whichever emissions reduction goals and targets you set for your company, provide transparency in the efforts to achieve the goals, as well as provide timely, accurate updates on progress and barriers to achievement.
4. Evolve your approach to risk
With this ruling, the SEC is confirming what some prominent investors have been saying for years: climate risk is business risk. While climate risk management and disclosure are akin to longstanding financial disclosure requirements, in many ways, climate action is more challenging and subject to interpretation.
Companies familiar with preparing TCFD-aligned reporting have already begun to see how the business community is expected to address climate-related issues as both material and ongoing business concerns and investment concerns. By now, companies need to be working to integrate climate risk assessment and mitigation efforts into their overall enterprise risk management process. Participating in relevant industry, corporate, and/or location-based groups can also help to provide perspective and illuminate emerging risk issues.
A unified approach to alignment with multiple regulations can reduce risks and compliance costs. More strategically, companies must look ahead at their business — including their customer expectations, growth strategy, geographic footprint, value chain, production model and vulnerabilities, investments, supply chain, and other factors that need to be considered with the SEC ruling.
The SEC ruling affirms that business strategy and climate strategy engage similar stakeholders — including shareholders and the broader investment community, regulators, top management, current and prospective employees and customers, and the media, among others. Those audiences are watching closely.
Today, effective climate management and disclosure must be a part of overall corporate strategy. Companies need to continue to evolve governance and disclosure of climate-related risks and performance not only to prepare for SEC requirements, but also to find new sources of competitive advantage and to realize opportunities while meeting evolving stakeholder expectations in a rapidly changing world.
Social sustainability is good for business. It can help to unlock new markets, attract and retain customers, build trust and credibility, and spark innovation. And companies are taking it seriously: a recent NTT reportfound that more than 40 percent of executives surveyed said social sustainability is a top imperative for their C-suite and Board of Directors.
The United Nations defines social sustainability as, “Identifying and managing business impacts, both positive and negative, on people.”
Directly or indirectly, companies affect what happens to employees, workers in the value chain, customers and local communities and it is important to manage impacts proactively.
NTT’s report, based on a ThoughtLab survey of 250 senior executives with a combined revenue of $2.2 trillion, underscores the financial advantages of prioritizing social sustainability. These firms collectively unlocked more than $177 billion in additional revenue due to their social sustainability endeavors. That’s an average of $710 million in revenue per company.
Benefits of social sustainability
Businesses are investing to build momentum in their social sustainability efforts. Those companies defined as beginners (about 22 percent of those surveyed) reported spending about $5.3 million on average on social sustainability, while those considered leaders (also about 22 percent of those surveyed) invest nearly four times as much, at $19.5 million on average.
More than 60 percent of firms surveyed said they plan to increase their spending over the next two years.
The benefits are clear. Companies reported financial, strategic, and operational improvements, which only grow as they move further along in their social sustainability journeys.
Businesses that invest the most in social sustainability reported an increase in revenue of up to 9.6 percent and a boost in employee productivity of up to 11.4 percent, showcasing the transformative power of sustainability initiatives on workforce efficiency.
Issues around social sustainability – such as lack of opportunity and deep-seated inequalities – can have a substantial impact on local economies.
For instance, the World Bank estimates a $160.2 trillion loss in human capital wealth from gender inequality. That is why it is important that the NTT report found social sustainability initiatives not only bolstered individual firm revenues but also contributed significantly to the broader local economy.
The study estimated that social sustainability unlocked nearly $675 billion in GDP across eight regions (U.S., Canada, Mexico, Germany, UK, Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore) and five industries (Manufacturing, Telecoms & Tech, Retail & CPG, Financial Services, Healthcare & Life Sciences). A strategic shift towards further sustainability leadership could unlock a further $115 billion in GDP.
Social sustainability and the future of business
NTT’s report shows that companies are making progress towards their social sustainability goals, and approximately one-quarter are integrating those goals into their products, services and business models. More than 50 percent of those surveyed said over the next two years they expect their social sustainability endeavors to improve productivity and support economic growth, boost jobs in local economies, and lead to higher quality education.
By aligning social and business values, these companies at the forefront of social sustainability drive top-line and bottom-line growth, enhance reputation, and bolster shareholder value while also contributing to long-term sustainability for the wellbeing and prosperity of all.
Brand Finance finds the world’s biggest brands are missing out on billions of dollars of potential value by failing to properly communicate their sustainability achievements and progress.
The latest edition of the Sustainability Perceptions Index — produced by London-based brand-valuation consultancy Brand Finance, in association with the International Advertising Association (IAA) — indicates that the world’s biggest brands are missing out on billions of dollars of potential value by failing to properly communicate their sustainability achievements and progress.
As sustainability claims are more widely scrutinized, by both the public and regulators, companies may be tempted to stop talking about their efforts altogether, for fear of greenwashing accusations. But the risks of brands avoiding the topic to protect their reputation have much farther-reaching implications than they may think.
“We see this as an incredibly potent tool to incentivize action that aligns with the UN SDGs and wider aims of the UN Global Compact,” says Dagmara Szulce, Managing Director at IAA Global, says of the Sustainability Perceptions Index. “By highlighting the financial value that is contingent on sustainability perceptions, we hope to harness businesses’ profit motive — moving them past the point where they see sustainability as a ‘hygiene factor’ to a point of rapid, concerted action.”
Last summer, Brand Finance released its Sustainability Gap Index — which exposed whether public perceptions of a brand’s sustainability performance align with its actual performance, and the substantial financial risks associated with any gap. Now, the latest Sustainability Perceptions Index — based on a study of over 150,000 respondents across 40 countries — digs further into these risks. Key findings include:
the brands that global consumers believe are most committed to sustainability
the financial value of a reputation for sustainability
the value at risk, or value to be gained, arising from a gap between sustainability perceptions and performance.
Standout brands
According to the report, Apple has the highest sustainability perceptions value of any brand — at US$33.3 billion. This huge sum is driven by a combination of Apple’s financial scale and supportive consumer perception. Actual sustainability performance aside, the research shows that consumers have clear confidence that Apple is committed enough to minimizing its negative impacts for them continue buying and paying a premium for its products.
Microsoft has the second highest total value (US$22.7billion) — along with the highest “gap value” of any brand in the index at US$3.2 billion. The tech giant has engaged extensively in sustainability initiatives — including committing to becoming carbon neutral, water positive, and zero waste by 2030; and erasing its 45 years’ worth of carbon emissions by 2050. Yet its communication of its commitment and progress has been somewhat muted. According to Brand Finance’s calculations, with concerted effort to communicate its sustainability achievements more effectively, Microsoft could add over US$3 billion of value for shareholders.
Microsoft is not alone in leaving value on the table in this way: According to the Index, 85 brands have a positive gap value of over US$100 million, totalling US$25 billion.
At the other end of the spectrum is Tesla — well known as a pioneer of the electric vehicles and battery technology aiding in the transition to a lower-carbon economy. This image has carried across into the sustainability perceptions held by global consumers. In several countries, including Mexico and the UK, Tesla is regarded as the brand with the greatest commitment to environmental sustainability. However, the strength of this perception creates its own risk; whilst Tesla performs fairly well on perceived sustainability, it falls significantly short of peer average on sustainability performance. As a result, Tesla has US$1.54 billion of value at risk.
“Brands have to strike a fine balance when communicating about sustainability,” explains Brand Finance’s Strategy & Sustainability Director Robert Haigh. “Consumers are now rightly attuned to potential greenwashing; in response, brands are becoming too precautionary and restrictive in their approach to sustainability communications. This greenhushing could reduce the incentive for competitors to improve their performance, slowing progress industry-wide. Just as importantly, these brands are letting financial go to waste — short-changing shareholders and other stakeholders in the process.”
Check out the full report for the full ranking, additional insights, charts, and more information about the methodology.
By Mark Segal from ESG Today • Reposted: February 29, 2024
Companies that embed sustainability into their operations are likely to experience significant benefits over their peers in areas including revenue growth, profitability and talent attraction, even without spending more on their sustainability efforts, according to a new global survey of senior executives released by IBM.
For the new study, IBM’s Institute for Business Value (IBV), in collaboration with Oxford Economics, surveyed 5,000 C-suite executives across 22 countries and 22 industries, examining the progress, investments, outcomes and key challenges facing organizations in their sustainability efforts.
The survey results indicated that senior executives globally anticipate deriving significant value from their sustainability initiatives, with 75% agreeing that sustainability drives better business results, and 72% saying that it can be a revenue enabler rather than a cost center. Similarly, 76% reported that sustainability is central to their business strategy, and 69% said that sustainability needs to be a higher priority in their organizations.
Despite the consensus view on the business benefits of sustainability, however, the study found that nearly half (47%) of executives surveyed reported that they struggle to fund sustainability investments, and only 30% said that they have made significant progress in executing their sustainability strategies – although this is up significantly from only 10% in a prior year survey.
One of the key insights from the study highlighting the difficulties companies are facing in their sustainability efforts and investments is a focus on compliance over strategy, with IBM’s research finding that companies’ spending on sustainability reporting exceeds spending on sustainability innovation by 43%.
Along these lines, the survey indicated that one of the greatest factors influencing the impact of sustainability on business performance was the extent to which companies embedded sustainability across their organizations. Companies identified by the study as “embedders,” meaning that sustainability had been integrated across business units in core functions and workflows rather than treating it as a functional silo or compliance requirement, were likely to see significant business value, including a 16% higher rate of revenue growth, and 75% who were more likely to attribute revenue growth to their sustainability improvements. Similarly, embedders were 52% more likely to outperform their peers on profitability, and 56% more likely to outperform on talent attraction.
Interestingly, “embedders” were more likely to demand better financial outcomes from their sustainability initiatives, with 53% of these companies reporting that business benefits are essential to justifying sustainability investments, and only 17% saying that meeting sustainability objectives alone justified investment. Similarly, these organizations were not found to be spending more on sustainability than their peers, and did not pursue larger sustainability programs, but rather benefited from the incorporation of sustainability into their core operations, according to the study.
The study also examined some of the key challenges facing businesses to embedding sustainability, with “data usability” emerging as one of the top barriers. While a large majority (82%) of respondents agreed that high-quality data and transparency are necessary to achieve sustainability outcomes, only around 40% reported that their organizations can automatically source sustainability data from core systems such as ERP, enterprise asset management, CRM, Energy Management Systems, or Facilities Management systems. According to the report, however, generative AI may be a ”game changer” for sustainability, with 64% of executives saying that generative AI will be important for their sustainability efforts, and 73% planning to increase investment in generative AI for sustainability.
Other key challenges included skill-building, with nearly 40% of executives reporting a lack of requisite skills as the top barrier to sustainability progress, and the limited integration of sustainability into core business functions, although respondents reported that they expect significant increases in the level of sustainability integration in several areas over the next few year, with the greatest improvements anticipated in areas including finance, energy management and enterprise asset management.
Oday Abbosh, Global Managing Partner, Sustainability Services, IBM Consulting, said:
“An organization’s approach to sustainability may be holding it back. There is no quick fix. Sustainability requires intentionality and a shared corporate vision. Sustainability needs to be part of the day-to-day operations, not viewed only as a compliance task or reporting exercise. By embedding sustainability across their business, organizations are more likely to drive internal innovation, attract and retain skilled talent, and be better positioned to deliver both positive environmental impact and financial outcomes.”
Farmers protest outside the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Feb. 6. A wave of farmer protest has erupted across Europe, demanding an easing of the EU’s environmental policies. Photo: FREDERICK FLORIN – AFP – GETTY IMAGES
By Camille Fumard from Fortune • Republished: February 24, 2024
A wave of discontent over sustainability policies is sweeping across the Atlantic, making green growth harder and putting the leaders and financiers who are fighting to implement environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies under pressure. And the upcoming U.S. election will not make life any easier for the companies that are navigating the powerful currents of anti-ESG lobbies.
In Europe, the ardor for ESG regulations has somewhat cooled. The strong polarization around ESG criteria has not waited for the result of the U.S. election. It is lurking in the undertones of financial and standardization talks. The dynamism of U.S. President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act is still having ripple effects and unforeseen consequences as the IRA compels Brussels to adapt. This trend can be seen in the significant changes in July to the last draft of the new European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). One of the major changes made by the EU Commission to the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group’s (EFRAG) proposals was to align the ESRS standards with the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) to ensure international interoperability. The die is close to being cast in the European battle over accounting standards–in favor of the ISSB’s softer financial philosophy.
The prospect that truly sustainable finance may be unable to preserve itself looms large over 2024. The idea of a comprehensive fair transition of the economy seems to be morphing into a niche approach to sustainable finance.
Poorly devised communications around ESG investing have contributed to weakening the movement toward a responsible and forward-looking economy. Faced with angry farmer protests, the EU has given up on its goal of halving pesticide use by 2040. Financially illiterate environmental activism is also having a chilling effect on companies. For example, a parliamentary inquiry in France is scrutinizing the environmental commitments of energy giant TotalEnergies. With accusations of “greenhushing,” “greenwashing,” and “woke capitalism,” the three letters “ESG” have become synonymous with backlash.
The rhetoric is simple if one wishes to undermine economic decisions that encourage ethical behavior as a primary concern. It plays upon the fears of Western democratic public opinion amidst growing disquiet in the face of deepening inequality and the fragmentation of the world. Essentially, this rhetoric benefits from the misfortunes of the population. For example, in France and Germany, the far right is cynically capitalizing on the anger of the farmers who have to contend with European Green Deal policies as well as the increase in energy prices. All of this is happening because farmers are being caught up in the middle of the geopolitical reality of an exporting industry with a short-term high exposure to the green transition.
In the long term, however, Europe’s companies, economy, and people will be the ones paying a high price for the policies of cynicism that have no set agendas or tangible projects for the future.
Nevertheless, the green breeze is still blowing gently across Europe. At Davos, French President Emmanuel Macron used his trump card: “at the same time.” It’s a reference to the Paris Agreement formula, “for people and planet,” and the IRA’s philosophy. Indeed, a united Europe can achieve growth and decarbonization “at the same time.” By providing renewed hope for the middle classes and with the help of a sustainability agenda that encourages investments in Europe, Brussels can bolster its mandate.
As the hustle and bustle of the upcoming U.S. elections continues to captivate and sway the opinions of European political leaders, companies in Europe that have always remained neutral in the past, following the customs of the Old Continent, might have to change their way of doing business. They must be more vocal–or 2024 may be the year in which they find themselves trapped by the politics of cynicism.
Demonstrators gather for a Black Lives Matter rally in the summer of 2020. (Image credit: Ying Ge/Unsplash)
By Harriet Gardner from Triple Pundit • Reposted: February 23, 2024
Only a few years ago, companies and organizations were scrambling to build diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programming, hiring new staff and implementing programs. Fast-forward to 2024 and many of these same companies are pulling their efforts back publicly. Some because of increased attacks by politicians and the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action, some because they believe this is a cost center that can be cut.
Yet the work is as important as ever. As leaders, we must continue to invest in DEI and social impact efforts and reaffirm that it not only is legally sound to do so, but also imperative to combat misinformation. In fact, employees and customers expect brands to make meaningful investments in advancing social justice.
Put simply, now is not the time for companies to back down, but rather stand out by strengthening their commitment to social justice and by leveraging their time, money and influence. This may not be easy to do, but these strategies can move us forward, increase employee and customer engagement, and strengthen business practices.
Connect social impact work to core business efforts
Social impact work should not stand alone. It must be integrated into every aspect of a company’s core business. This way it is not seen as an “add-on,” but instead is a key piece of success.
For example, Google.org launched its Cybersecurity Clinics Fund in 2023 to support colleges and universities by increasing access and opportunities for hands-on, real-world training for students interested in pursuing careers in cybersecurity. Through this opportunity, Google is not only providing support through grantmaking, but it is also offering free access codes to its Google Cybersecurity Certificate courses, in-kind products, and mentorship from Google employees. This commitment addresses a need to invest in the future cybersecurity workforce and offer affordable cybersecurity services to under-resourced community organizations, while also aligning with Google’s business and technical strengths.
By closely connecting social impact strategies to their business, companies create a business case where sustained philanthropic support makes operational sense since, in addition to funding, for-profit companies may have products and expertise to directly support social impact projects.
Engage employees and customers
Social impact programs are a critical component of attracting and retaining top talent. These programs reflect the values of the company and of many of its employees. A recent poll by Benevity found that 80 percent of U.S. employees believe “it is the responsibility of company leaders to take action in addressing racial justice and equity issues.”
In this area, Sephora models what a consistent, cross-organizational commitment to progress on racial equity can look like. The beauty retailer took the 15 Percent Pledge to ensure at least 15 percent of the products on its shelves come from Black-owned brands — a move that doubled the number of Black-owned brands available at Sephora stores.
Meanwhile, the company has been building a diverse workforce that more accurately reflects its diverse consumers. Black leadership increased by 7 percent across Sephora since 2021, while Latinx leadership grew by 10 percent, according to its latest DEI report. The company also says it trains store employees to better serve diverse clients and their beauty needs.
Invest in community-led organizations
Investing in organizations with proximate leaders — that is, leaders who share the identity, lived experience, and/or geography of the community they serve — is a highly effective way to drive impact and improve relationships with the communities that a company seeks to support. Communities and their leaders know what they need to thrive, and there is growing evidence that nonprofits led by and for people closest to a community or issue are more innovative and better problem solvers.
However, only 4 percent of U.S. philanthropic dollars go to organizations led by people of color who are most impacted by systemic inequity. For companies, this means that there is an opportunity and an obligation to stand out by supporting under-resourced and highly effective grassroots organizations. Tides’ approach to supporting companies with their philanthropic strategy is rooted in the belief that this work must be connected to the lived experience of the communities they seek to benefit, as our partner Kate Spade New York demonstrates with its On Purpose Fund.
Practice trust-based approaches
Trust-based philanthropy addresses inequality by shifting power from donors to those doing the work on the ground. By reducing reporting requirements, giving unrestricted funds, and reducing barriers to resources, companies can alleviate the burden on grantees and community organizations. Simply put, trusting your grantees to deliver impact benefits both organizations and the shared impact that you seek to create.
For example, the software development company Unity engages in trust-based philanthropy by offering grants to projects and organizations that align with its mission of empowering creators. Unity’s grantmaking approach emphasizes collaboration and innovation, supporting initiatives that leverage technology and creativity for social impact. For example, the Unity for Humanitycreator program provides mentorship and community to creators using their skills for good. Unity partners closely with Tides by fostering a community-centric model that seeks to build long-term relationships with grantees and that emphasizes mutual trust and flexibility through general operating support grants.
The bottom line: Supporting social justice is good for business
Corporate giving is a powerful way for companies to demonstrate their purpose and commitment to the people who have invested in them: their employees, their customers, and the communities they serve.
By staying the course during these challenging times and supporting diverse communities, companies can join a movement to advance social justice while seeing a real impact on their own business goals. And that’s just good business.
Sad unhappy girl. Depression, apathy and bad mood concept. Dark clouds and rain above the woman head. Vector illustration, cartoon flat style. Image: Getty
By Robert G. Eccles, Contributor, Tenured Harvard Business School Professor, Now At Oxford University via Forbes • Reposted: February 12, 2024
Our article was based on interviews with 29 leading CSOs and 31 investors. We noted that “Historically CSOs have acted like stealth PR executives—their primary task was to tell an appealing story about corporate sustainability initiatives to the company’s many stakeholders, and their implicit goal was to deflect reputational risk.” In the companies we studied this was changing rapidly over the past two to three years. Interestingly enough, this was especially apparent for companies in challenged industries such as athletic wear (e.g., Nike), food and consumer goods (e.g., Unilever), electric utilities (e.g., AEP), mining (e.g., Vale) oil and gas (e.g., ConocoPhillips), packaging (e.g., Greif), retailing (e.g., Groupe Casino), and tobacco (e.g., Philip Morris International).
In the best companies when it comes to really integrating material environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues into strategy and capital allocation the CSO has a much more strategic role and is closely integrated with other functions, such as finance, operations, product development, and technology. Sustainability professionals no longer simply reside in the function itself but throughout the organization. CSOs are joining meetings with investor meetings, and with both the ESG/stewardship teams and portfolio managers. At the same time, investors are seeing more integration between these two roles. People in the CSO role have also changed. Instead of coming up through the sustainability function (still called corporate social responsibility in some companies), CSOs are coming from functions more core to the company such as finance, investor relations, operations, product development, and research and development.
Alison and I were well aware of the fact that we had chosen a selected sample of companies since we were looking to find the leading edge of practice. This obviously begged the question of what’s going on in the more general population of CSOs. Towards that end we teamed up with GlobeScan, where the team was led by CEO Chris Coulter, and Salesforce, whose team was led by Brian Komar, Vice President Global Sustainability Solutions. In November and December of 2023 we conducted a global survey that resulted in 234 responses (mostly from the sustainability function but also others, such as finance and technology) in a wide range of industries. The results showed that the rest are a long way from being the best. Here is the full report, “Sustainable Value Creation: Closing the gap between commitments and operational realities.” You can also watch a webinar hosted by GreenBizand moderated by Grant Harrison, Director Sustainable Finance & ESG, where Chris, Suzanne DiBianca, EVP & Chief Impact Officer at Salesforce, Alison, and I discuss the results of the survey.
The hope and good intention are there. Ninety-three percent of respondents felt that sustainability was very important or fairly important to commercial success. From there it unravels, showing a serious lack of real commitment which demonstrates the sorry state of sustainability for many, if not most, companies today. Only 37% of respondents saw sustainability as very integrated into the core of the business. Only half of senior management teams (SMTs) are focused on sustainability risks, opportunities, and impacts. Only quarter of companies are devoting sufficient capital to sustainability initiatives. One result of this is that the lack of high quality data on sustainability performance is enormous. While 95% believe that high quality data is very or fairly important only 29% report having it. One reason is that lack of integration with the finance and technology functions, although that is improving.
The consequences of these gaps between intent and execution are telling but not surprising. The areas where sustainability is perceived as having the highest value are the usual hard to quantify ones—enhancing brand and reputation, stronger stakeholder and community relations, employee attraction and retention, and facilitating partnerships and collaborations. This is not to belittle their role in shareholder value creation. But ranked much lower are more well-defined economic benefits such as growing sales, attracting more investment, and increasing efficiencies to reduce costs. It is one thing to issue the mantra “Sustainability is key to value creation!” It is quite another to show it. The respondents don’t see it themselves and there is a lack of data to help make the case.
Perhaps even worse is the low levels of belief of what kinds of sustainability actions can unlock more value. The one with the highest score, at only 42%, is with R&D and product innovation. It goes downhill from there. About one-third cite engagement with customers and employees and defining clear goals and targets for sustainability. Imagine if only one-third of CFOs thought clear financial goals and targets would unlock more value.
It gets worse. In dramatic comparison to the best, only 29% cite improved sustainability metrics (so I guess the data gap isn’t all that important), 24% cite identifying which topics are most material to the business (no wonder there is a lack of integration with the core business), 20% cite engagement with investors (one of the most defining features of the best), and 16% percent cite improving the reporting process (how can you effectively engage with investors if you’re not reporting high quality data on sustainability performance and showing its impact on financial performance?).
Actions for Delivering More Value from Sustainability GLOBESCAN AND SALESFORCE
Given that the EU is seen as being more receptive to sustainability than polarized America around all things ESG, it’s fair to ask if things are better there. Not really. For the most part, the results are the same. European companies have a slight edge on SMT focus on sustainability risks (65% vs. 40%)—although no difference on opportunities and impact—and attribute more importance to managing climate risk (70% vs. 46%). And that’s it. These results aren’t surprising. Both can be explained by the “EuropeanGreenDeal,” the “EU taxonomy for sustainable activities,” and various regulations such as the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR).
The most recent proposed regulation is the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) “which aims to enhance the protection of the environment and human rights in the EU and globally. The due diligence directive will set obligations for large companies regarding actual and potential adverse impacts on human rights and the environment, with respect to their own operations, those of their subsidiaries, and those carried out by their business partners.” The CSDDD has proven to be very controversial with pushback from both the business community and some countries. As I write, its fate sits on a knife’s edge, likely to be decided by a final vote in a week or so. Although I appreciate the good intent of this directive I have also written about some of my concerns about it.
Here’s another one. Our survey raises the question of whether companies have the necessary capabilities and resources in place to effectively implement this directive should it be passed. And explain to their investors how it is value enhancing for shareholders, as many of its supporter claim it to be. I’m not saying it can’t be. I’m just saying that this needs to shown, not asserted. Most companies seem poorly equipped to do so.
Putting the CSDDD aside, advocates for sustainability (and I include myself among them) have a lot of work to do to make reality match the rhetoric. Adoption of the standards of the International Sustainability Standards Board can be helpful in showing the link to value creation because they are focused on financial materiality. Standards developed by the European Financial Advisory Group’s Sustainability Reporting Board and the Global Reporting Initiative can be helpful in showing impact materiality. While reporting standards are very useful, they are not a silver bullet. Alone they do not ensure good performance. Our survey provides some suggestions for what else must be done. Doing this hard work will finally make sustainability a key contribution to value creation.
By David Placek via Sustainable Brands • Reposted: February 6, 2024
The names that resonate with consumers and shop optimism in an industry hoping to fix a host of complicated, global problems will help form a foundation for many years of success.
Over the last decade, the renewable-energy and sustainability industries have experienced huge growth and demand. Environmental concerns regarding fossil fuels, urbanization, and responsible, equitable economic growth have contributed to the rise — coupled with increased legislation and consumer demand for brands committed to making positive social and environment impacts. As this demand continues, we will continue to see an influx of new brands starting out and securing venture capital that are focused on sustainability and clean energy.
New brands in this space should take the time to develop one of their most important brand assets — their name. After all, nothing will be used longer or more often than your brand or product name. Brand names must capture your audience’s attention, communicate your brand story, reflect your values, and transcend global boundaries. Not only that — it must also be able to clear the necessary legal hurdles, which are more difficult now than ever, to get a trademarked name. Sustainability-focused brands are also in the unique position of not only highlighting what they currently do but also conveying a future promise of a sustainable world ahead. The brand name needs to convey optimism and longevity — and most importantly, help build trust with potentially skeptical consumers.
Many brands in this space have launched or branded themselves to include nature-centric names or include terms such as “eco” or “green” in their identity. While you can easily imply sustainability by putting “eco” or “carbon” next to a name, that will be tired and outdated within the next year and does little to differentiate or become memorable.
Think of the name as a vessel that can carry your brand story into the marketplace. Truly iconic brand names are those that stick in our head and make you think. This is why we counsel brands to think of their naming process as more of a strategic exercise coupled with creativity and rooted in linguistics.
DECODING EFFECTIVE METHODS OF DRIVING CONSUMER BEHAVIOR CHANGE
Join us for a transformational experience at SB Brand-Led Culture Change — May 8-10 in Minneapolis. This event brings together hundreds of brand leaders eager to delve into radical lifestyle shifts and sustainable consumer behavior change at scale. The trends driving cultural acceleration are already underway, and you can be at the forefront of this transformative movement.
Sometimes, the result is a name that has some risk and challenges you. For example, take Impossible Foods: The company, initially called Maraxi, had the goal of producing great-tasting, vegan alternatives to meat products. It needed a name that spoke to this lofty goal, caught your attention and had an element of surprise. Impossible Foods checked all these boxes — it’s patently false, since the product proves that it is in fact possible; and it acknowledges that the consumer will be skeptical (“this can’t possibly taste like meat!”). With this novel approach, the name has generated unsurpassed interest in a disruptive category in sustainable food.
Another approach is to find a name that allows your audience to think and imagine what the company stands for. While it’s helpful to flat out describe what a company does, give your audience space to come to their own conclusion and allow them to be curious. Enverus is an energy data and analytics company. Initially named DrillingInfo, it needed a new name and identity that spoke to its goal of collaboration in the energy space. The name Enverus was developed through the combination of three word parts that together captured the company’s past, present, future and mission: ‘En’ signaled the energy industry, while ‘ver’ connoted clarity and truth, and ‘us’ communicated their partnership and collaboration with both its customers and partners across the entirety of the energy sector.
Lastly, be original but approachable. Sustainability has many facets and nuances that can be considered high tech or complicated to understand. Instead of going with a high-tech, jargony name, keep it simple but relatable. Luxury electric carmaker Lucid is an example of an original idea in the EV space. “Lucid” is a real English word that conveys intelligence and awareness, so the name’s sound indirectly conveys efficiency and the quiet sanctuary of the driver’s experience. Another example is Lunar Energy — a renewable-energy startup with the mission to make it easy for every home in the world to be powered by the sun with an integrated solar energy system. The brand needed to convey reliability and power, while also maintaining a degree of optimism and positivity. The company landed on Lunar Energy — an unexpected name that takes inspiration from the way that the moon captures the sun’s light to illuminate itself. The use of lunar instead of solar was a surprising yet memorable word for the startup brand.
For startups in the sustainability space or for brands looking to reinvent themselves, look for a name that stands out, and is surprising and aspirational. The names that resonate with consumers and shop optimism in an industry hoping to fix a host of complicated, global problems will help form a foundation for many years of success. Regardless, companies should make a commitment to sustainability branding as a strategic brand-building opportunity.
By Noel Asmar, Forbes Councils Member via Forbes • Reposted: February 2, 2024
Noel Asmar is the Founder and Creative Director of Noel Asmar Group of Companies, which services spa, healthcare, hospitality & equestrian.
The last decade has brought a seismic shift in public awareness around the climate crisis we face. Consumers are increasingly demanding businesses become more accountable, but often, the path to building a sustainable business is far from convenient. If I’ve learned one thing working in busy industries like spa, hospitality and healthcare, it’s for meaningful change to happen, solutions have to be simplified.
As we enter 2024, here are three steps any leader can take to lessen their company’s environmental footprint, regardless of their organization’s size or resources:
Gather data on your operations.
When it comes to measuring your environmental impact as a business, the simplest way to get started is to collect data on your operations. Start by taking stock of what your business purchases and disposes of both in quantity and nature, then assess what end-of-life options you have.
Often when businesses make purchasing decisions, we’re focused on aesthetic or performance—while those qualities are important, considering whether or not a product can be easily upcycled, recycled or degraded in the landfill is one of the most effective ways to lessen your environmental impact.
For example, in our business certain polyester fabrics can be used to make insulation for homes. By talking to your manufacturers and suppliers, you can become more educated on the circularity of your products.
The average small business spends $40K annually and product costs are largely a business’s greatest expense. Fortune 500s, on the other hand, can easily exceed $100 billion in annual spending. When we start to gather concrete data and calculate our environmental impact into our purchasing decisions, we can create a ripple effect that benefits all stakeholders.
Invest in quality upfront.
What set our company apart from competitors when we first entered the market in 2002 was our unwavering focus on quality. For our uniforms, we intentionally selected commercial-grade fabrics that withstood heavy washing, were fade-resistant and repelled materials like oil, which practitioners came into regular contact with. This decision was controversial because it set our price point higher than the industry norm.
Investing in high-quality products may throw off the balance sheet for businesses initially, but the long-term economic benefits often outweigh the short-term strain on budgets.
For example during the economic downturn between ’09 and ’11, many hotel properties were forced to cut spending. During this time, I recall getting a call from the spa director of a major resort in Scottsdale, Arizona. He mentioned how grateful he was that the property had invested in our uniforms; while their competitors were struggling to replace faded and damaged uniforms monthly, their staff was still well clad in uniforms that had maintained their color and condition.
Investing in quality upfront, isn’t just an economic play, it also greatly reduces the amount of waste businesses contribute to the landfill. According to the UN, consumers purchase 60% more clothing now than we did 15 years ago, and each item is kept only half as long.
This “throw away” mentality is the reason 134 million tonnes of textiles are expected to be discarded annually by 2030. Considering nearly 85% of all textiles thrown away in the U.S. end up in the landfill or burned, reducing how often your business has to replace goods is a win for the environment and your bottom line.
Find like-minded partners.
One of the greatest challenges businesses face when it comes to responsibly disposing of their waste is navigating logistics. Becoming a sustainable business is highly interdependent on the systems around us. Often recycling requirements are complex and businesses don’t have the resources to fulfill them. For this reason, establishing cross-beneficial partnerships can make a big difference.
A few years ago, my company started a sustainability initiative in an effort to break down the barriers spas and hotels were facing in responsibly disposing of their textiles. In doing so, it became clear recycling stations wanted products to be perfectly segregated down to the yarn, and the big ones had minimum volume requirements. These specific requirements weren’t realistic for spas and hotels because they disrupted the flow of operations, acting as a barrier to doing the right thing.
So we started to explore partnerships in the areas we serviced. We teamed up with a like-minded waste management company and carved out a solution that allowed us to utilize their recycling factories for our spa and hotel partners in the U.S., regardless of their volume.
When you use sustainability as a lens to filter partnerships, you’d be surprised at what becomes possible. For us, it’s even resulted in working with fabric mills to create products from recycled water bottles that naturally degrade if our uniforms do end up in the landfill.
The journey toward sustainability is not without challenge, but it doesn’t have to be overwhelming. By getting a clear picture of your company’s footprint, considering end-of-life strategies and partnering with like-minded suppliers, it is possible to implement practical solutions that are both accessible and scalable. Real change takes time, but there’s never a better time to start than right now.
For decades, environmental advocates have been pushing back against “greenwashing,” when polluting companies misleadingly present themselves as environmentally friendly. Governments are finally starting to tackle the problem with stricter regulations: The European Union agreed to ban deceptive environmental ads in September, and the U.S. Fair Trade Commission is in the process of updating its guidelines around green advertising.
But as new rules go into effect, they’re contributing to a different problem: Many companies, even honest ones, are afraid to talk about their work on climate change at all.
The practice of “greenhushing” is now widespread, according to a new report released last week by South Pole, a Switzerland-based climate consultancy and carbon offset developer. Some 70 percent of sustainability-minded companies around the world are deliberately hiding their climate goals to comply with new regulations and avoid public scrutiny. That’s in contrast to just a few years ago, when headlines were full of splashy corporate promises on climate change and even oil companies were pledging to zero out their emissions. The report suggests that this newfound silence could impede genuine progress on climate change and decrease pressure on the big emitters that are already lagging behind.
South Pole found that climate-conscious companies in fashion, consumer goods, tech, oil, and even environmental services are “greenhushing.” Nearly half of sustainability representatives reported that communicating about their climate targets has become harder in just the past year. But companies aren’t giving up on going net-zero — just the opposite. Of the 1,400 companies surveyed, three-quarters said they were pouring more money than before into efforts to cut carbon emissions. They just didn’t want to talk much about it.
“We really just cannot afford to not learn from each other,” said Nadia Kähkönen, a deputy director at South Pole and the report’s lead author. Companies should be sharing the lessons they’ve learned from trying to cut their emissions, engaging one another in hard conversations about “what is working and what is not, and how we can improve it,” she said.
Greenhushing was the most common, unexpectedly, among the greenest companies. Some 88 percent of those in environmental services, a category that includes renewables and recycling, said they were decreasing their messaging about their climate targets, even though 93 percent said they were on track to meet their goals. Consumer goods companies, like those that sell food, beverages, and household goods, were the next likely to be greenhushing (86 percent), more than the oil and gas industry (72 percent).
The survey, conducted anonymously, is the first to offer insight from companies as to whythey’re keeping quiet. Environmental service companies had one of the same top reasons as oil companies: heightened scrutiny from investors, customers, and the media. Among all the companies that admitted to greenhushing, well over half listed changing regulations as a reason why they’re not talking about their climate pledges. Some companies also cited a lack of sufficient data or clear industry guidance around how to communicate their green claims.
Their hesitation has real consequences, researchers from South Pole said. For one, it cuts down on the sense of competition and pressure that can drive companies to be more ambitious with their environmental targets. “If you’re hiding what you’re doing, or not talking about it in a prominent way, it can hold back others,” said George Favaloro, South Pole’s head of climate solutions for North America. The trend also could also cut down on sharing tips and tricks for decarbonizing that could help others trim their carbon emissions.
The report found that greenhushing isn’t unfolding equally across the 12 countries surveyed. American companies aren’t as quiet — likely because the United States has less regulation around environmental claims. U.S. companies were the second least likely to be greenhushing, behind Japan. European companies were on the opposite end of the scale. France, which has laws that explicitly limit greenwashing, led the pack with 82 percent of companies staying mum.
“They’re really up against it in Europe now, and in the U.S., it’s still a bit off in the future,” Favaloro said. “It’s coming, but it’s not quite here yet.” One of the first anti-greenwashing laws in the U.S. went into effect in California earlier this month, mandating that large companies disclose their emissions to back up climate-friendly claims. Lawsuits are also a growing threat: Last year, Nike and Delta Air Lines were sued for making questionable claims about their environmental impacts.
It might be surprising that U.S. companies are unafraid of communicating their climate goals considering the conservative backlash against ESG, short for “environmental, social and governance,” a set of standards investors use to assess companies. But the ESG drama has more serious consequences for asset managers like Vanguard and BlackRock, which removed references to sustainability goals on their websites last year, than for corporations.
The 1,400 companies surveyed in the South Pole report are some of the furthest along when it comes to corporate climate action. Overall, however, most companies haven’t even started yet. Only 8 percent of a broad group of 77,000 corporations, which includes global Fortune 500 companies, have set a net-zero target, the report found. “The more that even the leaders don’t talk about what they’re doing, it’s going to provide less motivation to get that group in the game,” Favaloro said.
This article originally appeared in Grist. Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org
Sustainable CX transformation: both possible and essential, says Raymond Manookian of Zone / Image: Melanfolia via Unsplash
Raymond Manookian of agency Zone says that technological advancement and sustainability can go hand-in-hand, and brands can build meaningful relationships with consumers while building a better future.By Raymond Manookian | Design Director, Zone via The Drum • Reposted: January 31, 2024
The 28th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, better known as Cop28, finished last month. It was a melting pot of ideas. Among them were unique insights and inspirations from the intersection of innovation and sustainability, which are particularly pertinent to those of us in the customer experience (CX) and digital transformation sectors.
It was clear at this meeting of global minds and ideas that environmental sustainability must be central to our future digital transformation endeavors. The conference crystallized the role of (and responsibilities within) the CX industry, providing fresh clarity on how we can move forward responsibly and sustainably.
Stakeholder and partner engagement are imperative in driving any such transformation. Inspiring a fundamental shift in mindset, where ecological sustainability is seen as just as crucial as economic growth, is critical.
Cop28 underscored that sustainability strategies must be implemented in context-specific ways, taking into consideration local cultural and environmental specifics. Companies need to adopt a flexible, adaptable approach, recognizing that solutions that work in one region may not be effective in another. To successfully navigate this variability, they should seek out diverse perspectives, engage local stakeholders, and strive to create inclusive, equitable solutions. By embracing a dynamic and context-sensitive approach, companies can develop compelling, relatable sustainability initiatives that are effective across global contexts.
Patagonia, a company renowned for its commitment to sustainability, is a prime example of how integrating sustainability into a brand can enhance its value and deepen customer loyalty. Patagonia and its peers have shown how embracing sustainability can enhance brand value and deepen customer loyalty, but this move towards sustainability is about more than just meeting consumer demand. It’s also about creating a more environmentally responsible and resilient future for all stakeholders – and a better world for future generations.
Technological advancements that benefit the environment
Better data analytics and insights have a crucial role to play in helping us to understand consumer behavior and to measure the impact of sustainability initiatives. Data is the foundation on which companies can build strategies to balance profitability with positive environmental impact. By using data to inform decision-making, companies can align their business objectives with environmental goals, creating a win-win situation for both the planet and their bottom line.
Artificial Intelligence is transitioning, too – from a mere business efficiency tool to an aid for sustainable development. While there may be concerns about the environmental costs of running AI, it’s also important to recognize its potential benefits to the environment. For example, IBM’s AI-driven weather technology assists farmers in making environmentally conscious decisions, while AI broadly has vast potential for resource management and environmental care. By leveraging AI’s capabilities responsibly and sustainably, we can harness its power to create a better future for businesses and the planet.
Building better business and a brighter future
The shift toward sustainability presents companies with an opportunity to drive positive change with CX. By embracing sustainable practices and integrating them into customer engagement strategies, companies can differentiate themselves in the marketplace and cultivate loyalty that extends beyond traditional marketing approaches.
Consumers increasingly seek brands that reflect their values. Sustainability can play a crucial role here. By demonstrating a commitment to sustainability and actively engaging customers in this journey, companies can build trust, foster a community of like-minded people, and drive long-term loyalty.
In CX and digital transformation, we’re continually evolving to reflect a deeper purpose. We’re not just creating and implementing digital solutions; we have an integral role to play in making sure technology and sustainability can harmoniously coexist. Each strategy we develop and every experience we design provides an opportunity to blend technical expertise with environmental commitment.
The insights from Cop28 underscore the importance of integrating sustainability into the foundations of our industry. We must incorporate sustainable solutions into existing practices while building a future where business success and environmental responsibility are inseparable. This requires a delicate balance between strategic foresight and practical action, with the decisions and innovations we make today laying the groundwork for a harmonious and sustainable future.
By treating sustainability as a value rather than a trend, and incorporating it into our decision-making processes and actions, the industry can demonstrate our commitment to responsible and forward-looking practices. However, the need for sustainable transformation is urgent, and the window of opportunity is narrowing. Businesses must embrace sustainability as a core value and work with stakeholders and partners to drive positive change. The time is now.
Firms that check environmental, social and governance claims made by companies will be asked to follow a proposed new ethics code to help combat greenwashing, the chief of a global standards body told Reuters.
Trillions of dollars have flowed into investment funds touting green credentials, but these can be misleading, a practice known as greenwashing. As a result, companies are increasingly being asked to disclose more about their actions on climate change and other issues such as board diversity.
Companies in the European Union and globally from this year will have to use new, mandatory disclosures on ESG and climate-related factors in their annual reports for 2024 and onwards.
These disclosures will need checking by external auditors as a safeguard against greenwashing.
Gabriela Figueiredo Dias, chair of the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants (IESBA), said it was proposing revisions and additions to its ethics standards for auditing sustainability information from companies.
The IESBA is an independent global body that sets ethics standards for business and other organisations.
The standards spell out best practice for verifying a company’s sustainability claims by offering detailed instructions in areas such as accounting for the impact of corporate actions on emissions, relying on outside experts, and identifying and tackling conflicts of interest.
“There is nothing more central to sustainable finance than the information that is provided to those who decide to invest or fund projects and businesses.”
Dias said the proposed standards, which will be open for public consultation until May, would complement the development of new technical assurance standards from the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board.
“Ethics is the baseline for the whole infrastructure. If you think about… greenwashing and misinformation, (it) always has behavioural issues at its root and not technical reporting reasons.”
“It’s not because preparers and providers don’t know what they have to report and assure, it’s because there are ethical or independence issues such as conflicts of interest,” she said, for example, financial interests, pressure from client companies or their management, inducements or a lack of competence.
Global securities watchdog IOSCO has encouraged the moves by IESBA to update its standards as climate related disclosures under mandatory rules, rather than private sector guidance, are rolled out, making enforcement against greenwashing easier.
IOSCO board Chair Jean-Paul Servais said he welcomed IESBA’s action to call on issuers, investors and assurance providers to participate in the consultation.
“Trust in such disclosures will be enhanced when they receive external assurance based upon globally accepted standards regarding ethical behaviour and independence.”
IESBA said the proposed new standards could also be used by firms other than professional accountants for auditing sustainability disclosures, such as consultants, engineers or lawyers, responsible for more than half of sustainability reports.
EU rules allows non-accounting firms to audit sustainability disclosures – which will be checked to a lower standard than financial statements – to provide competition for KPMG, EY, Deloitte and PwC, dubbed the Big Four who dominate corporate auditing.
It’s time for more collaboration, more excellence, and a reframing of what conscious consumerism can mean. By Heath Shackleford vcvic Fast Company • Reposted: January 14, 2024
If you are a longtime supporter of the conscious consumerism movement, this may be the moment you’ve been waiting for. Despite growing pessimism about the state of the world, Americans are engaging socially responsible brands at an unprecedented level. It seems we are approaching critical mass, and we are on the precipice of a tipping point for “good” business.
These assertions are based on findings from the 11th annual Conscious Consumer Spending Index (#CCSIndex), a benchmarking study our agency fields each year to gauge momentum for conscious consumerism, charitable giving, and earth-friendly practices. Using a proprietary algorithm, we generate the Index score based on the importance consumers place on purchasing from socially responsible brands, the actions they’ve taken to support such brands, and whether they plan to buy more from good brands in the future. Specific questions that influence the Index score include:
How important is it for you to support socially responsible products and services?
Have you purchased products or services from socially responsible brands in the past year?
Do you plan to increase the amount you spend with socially responsible brands in the coming year?
In light of the economic, political, environmental, societal, and humanitarian crises we face as a world, it should not come as a surprise that Americans continue to feel worse about our collective future. In this year’s study, almost half (48%) of respondents said the world is getting worse. The first year we asked this question was in 2019. Only 38% had a pessimistic view at that point. (Read about last year’s results here.)
Yet in the face of this declining outlook, the ideology of supporting brands who promise to make the world better is clicking at a quickening rate. The latest #CCSIndex score is 57, up from 48 the previous year. In the inaugural year of the Index (which was 2013), the score was 45. The index is based on a 100-point scale and is fine-tuned so that even a 1-point shift indicates real movement. With that context in mind, seeing a 17% increase year over year is significant.
Here are a few things to consider for companies that are looking to capitalize on this moment:
COLLABORATION OVER COMPETITION
We’ve reached an opportunity for scale within the community of B Corporations as well as other organizations such as Conscious Capitalism and the Social Enterprise Alliance. We need to collaborate more consistently and effectively within the social responsibility space and resist the capitalistic temptation to compete with one another. Now is the time to fuel the consumer fire. We need to do that together.
COMMIT TO EXCELLENCE
We must continue to live up to our promises and deliver exceptional experiences for our customers. It should always feel different when someone engages with a socially responsible brand. Every interaction, every experience—without exception. This goes for product quality, customer service, and every point along a customer’s journey. In our data, individuals have consistently shown us that purpose alone is not enough. Brands have to first meet their needs as consumers. What if we set the expectation that the definition of a purposeful brand extends not only to the company’s mission but also to its commitment to excellence and doing all the right things for customers along the way? That’s how we build long-term loyalty with consumers and keep this train moving.
ENCOURAGE THE INTRAPRENEURS
We need to continuously apply more pressure to big brands to be part of the solution. We can do that by making conscious organizations more and more attractive for talent and for customers. We can also do that through intrapreneurs. Too often, we determine the only two paths that lead to a purposeful career are either working for a socially responsible organization or starting a new social enterprise.
There is a third, and very important, path though. We need mission-minded people climbing ladders within major corporations as well. Some big brands may eventually crumble if they don’t respond to the conscious consumer movement, but many will continue to operate, and they will always have an outsize impact on society and the environment. It is important to have changemakers embedded in these companies to help steer them toward a better future.
DEFINE THE JOURNEY
We have to position social responsibility as a journey, not a destination. This would be beneficial on a few different levels. For one, it would help consumers who are new to this to not be overwhelmed. We can reinforce that every step counts, and that every little bit helps. Not everyone is going to transform the entirety of their consumer behavior overnight. We should create a safe space where we positively reinforce progress. At the same time, positioning this as a journey also helps prevent more experienced conscious consumers from becoming complacent and feeling like they’ve reached the peak of social responsibility.
After all, being socially responsible is not just about buying the right product. It’s also about supporting nonprofits. About reducing consumption. About protecting the environment. About being an advocate for the do-good movement and recruiting others to join.
As conscious consumerism has ascended over the past decade, we’ve seen a decline in the number of Americans who are financially supporting charities. We also have seen a reduction in the percentage of individuals who are committed to earth-friendly practices such as recycling and reducing consumption. We need to continue to educate consumers and nudge them to delve deeper into this journey. There is always another step every consumer can take.
By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: January 24. 2024
Critics have raised plenty of fire and brimstone in their opposition to investments made through the lens of environmental, social and governance (ESG) principles, but most of that energy has gone to waste. The ESG movement continues to gain momentum globally, and research shows that anti-ESG laws passed in the U.S. had a limited impact. In fact, the only clear losers appear to be the very people that anti-ESG legislation ostensibly aims to protect.
ESG investing gains global momentum while facing headwinds in the U.S. in 2023
The firm Russell Investment has surveyed how the investment management industry integrates ESG principles for the past nine years. Its 2023 survey, released in October, observed “the United States remains mired in a contentious debate” over ESG. That presents a sharp contrast with global jurisdictions that have strengthened their ESG reporting mandates, most notably Canada, Europe and Australia.
The contrast is also reflected in the adoption of the Net-Zero Investment Framework, a set of guidelines to help investors align their holdings with the global push to cap temperature rise at 1.5 degrees Celsius this century. Russell found that 80 percent of the managers surveyed in Europe had already signed on, with the U.S. lagging far behind at just 20 percent.
Others including the sustainable investing asset manager Robeco also noted a growing “ESG backlash in the U.S.” in 2023.
The big question is how financial firms are handling the oppositional environment in the U.S. Some have simply decided not to use the acronym “ESG,” without actually changing how they use ESG principles. Those taking this approach include the world’s largest asset manger, BlackRock, CEO Larry Fink said at the Aspen Ideas Festival in June.
Marjella Lecourt-Alma, CEO and co-founder of the ESG and risk management platform Datamaran, has noticed a similar shift in the way clients talk about ESG. “Some of them say we watch our words a little bit. They are bringing back things like ‘corporate sustainability,’” she told TriplePundit in December.
Kris Tomasovic Nelson, senior director and head of ESG investment management for Russell Investments, agreed. “ESG factors are increasingly driving investment decisions,” he told Pensions & Investments reporter Hazel Bradford earlier this month, but “the door is open to using different terminology.”
He hastened to note that strategies at many U.S. financial firms still include ESG principles, even if companies are more careful in talking about them, and said he doesn’t see the U.S. situation impacting the global landscape. “Outside of the U.S., I don’t see any slowing of momentum,” he added.
Taking the anti-ESG bull by the horns heading into 2024
As of last year, 22 U.S. states adopted some form of “anti-ESG” legislation that seeks to limit how ESG principles can be used in investment decision-making or minimize investment in specific funds and firms, according to the law firm K&L Gates. Republican legislators in 12 different states enacted such legislation in 2023 alone, according to an S&P Global analysis. Many were “revised and weakened as they moved through the legislative process,” S&P reported, though they still have had a “chilling effect.”
In another strategy for navigating this complex landscape, some U.S. investors are taking advantage of vague language in these laws to forge ahead.
Earlier this week, for example, Financial Times reporter Will Schmitt highlighted the case of the Texas Permanent School Fund, which deployed an opening in the state’s strict anti-ESG law to put $300 million into an energy transition fund under the Macquarie Green Investment Group. The investment occurred in 2022, shortly after the Texas state comptroller published a “blacklist” of forbidden firms that included Macquarie’s energy transition solutions fund.
“The investment highlights how fiduciaries are finding ways to navigate gaps in rules designed by conservative officials to keep environmental, social and governance considerations out of public investment portfolios,” Schmitt observed.
In other states, fiduciaries are taking matters even further into their own hands. The Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System, for example, avoided a potential loss of $10 million when its board voted to retain BlackRock and State Street as investment advisors, even though the two firms were on an anti-ESG blacklist compiled by the state treasurer, S&P reporter Karin Rives observed in an analysis published last week.
“If we thought that we could have abided by the law without hurting the pension fund, we would have done that in a heartbeat. But we have a fiduciary responsibility,” Oklahoma’s insurance commissioner, Glen Mulready, told Rives.
Some U.S. firms have also lobbied their representatives in state government for changes to proposed legislation, in hopes of preventing the worst damage.
U.S. public funds face outsized risk under anti-ESG legislation, new analyses show
Despite these workarounds, anti-ESG legislation is impacting public funds, and not in a good way. The supporters of anti-ESG legislation claim the laws are needed to protect the financial interests of pensioners and other members of the general public. However, they neglect to mention that financial firms can simply pack up and take their business out of state.
One such example occurred in Texas, where legislators passed an anti-ESG law in 2021. The new law immediately reduced competition in the municipal bond market, costing the small city of Anna an estimated $277,334 on its bond sale.
That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Texas cities could pay up to $532 million in additional intereston their bonds in less than a year under the legislation, according to an analysis from the University of Pennsylvania and the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
“In Indiana, a bill to limit ESG investing could cut state pension returns by $6.7 billion over the next 10 years,” former Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and former Maryland State Treasurer Nancy Kopp wrote in Bloomberg last year, while the Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System risks losing $30 million to $40 million annually.
Karin Rives of S&P Global also cited an analysis by Econsult Solutions Inc., which estimates that six U.S. states could be hit with $708 million in higher borrowing costs due to anti-ESG laws impacting municipal bonds.
In the face of these swift and damaging results, it is fair to ask how legislators and other public servants could miscalculate the impact of anti-ESG laws so badly, especially when they were warned of the risk. They’re poised to lose more ground in 2024, as analysts including Thompson Reuters predict ESG will have a transformational impact on business models as more companies focus on reducing their Scope 3 supply chain emissions.
And investors will follow the money, as they always have.
Tina Casey writes frequently for TriplePundit and other websites, with a focus on military, government and corporate sustainability, clean tech research and emerging energy technologies. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2024/esg-investing-good-year/793256
By Kristen Tetrick via Sustainable Brands • Reposted: January 23, 2024
Building a culture of sustainable living can only be achieved when brands and consumers align their efforts and take action together on the most impactful behaviors.
As we discuss often here at Sustainable Brands® (SB), brands are uniquely equipped to align business and society on the path to a flourishing future. With the rising popularity of sustainable living, demand for innovative sustainable products and services continues to increase. This reality provides brands with the opportunity to explore new business avenues and boost growth while playing an active role in shaping the future of society and our planet. By developing brand-led solutions that encourage sustainable shifts, brands can not only gain a competitive edge but also enhance their relevance, strengthen brand trust, and generate increased consumer engagement and brand love. This approach positions them at the forefront of harnessing the power of brand influence for positive change.
SB Socio-Cultural Trends Research™ shows that sustainability has become mainstream: Three years of data consistently show that 96 percent of US citizens try to behave in ways that protect the planet, its people, and its resources. This research, conducted in partnership with Ipsos, focuses on the changing drivers and behaviors of mainstream consumers at the intersection of brands and sustainable living. Consumer actions and intentions are analyzed through a selection of previously researched, defined sustainable behaviors — as well as the persistent intention-action gap. To spark brand-led cultural shifts in consumer behavior, brands must bridge the gap between what customers are already doing and brand-purpose initiatives. This means aligning their efforts more explicitly with existing intentions.
To better understand where brands can have the most impact on driving consumer behavior change, qualitative and quantitative research was conducted to consider the behaviors that brands could influence — and consumers could meaningfully act upon — to have the strongest impact on people, planet and society; these actions became the basis for the SB Nine Sustainable Behaviors™ framework. The behaviors are written to be as consumer-friendly, approachable and accessible as possible, grouped within three broad categories. They are applicable to any brand, in any industry along with any consumer, in any segment. All brands can align their sustainability and marketing strategies with at least one of these behaviors.
By demonstrating leadership around the SB Nine Sustainable Behaviors, brands can set themselves on a path that not only deepens their relevance and recognition, but also begins to transform the cultural stories shaping our shared future. Those who do it well will shine and win in the marketplace. SB research shows that US citizens view climate change as the second most critical issue to address — with 8 in 10 saying they want to take action to reduce their carbon footprint. Moreover, they want brands to support their efforts — with 85 percent saying they are loyal to brands that help them achieve a better and more balanced life. However, when it comes to measuring brand trust, consumers say that brands acting to benefit society and the planet is a stronger driver than a brand helping consumersto make environmentally conscious or socially responsible choices — they want to see companies taking responsibility: 78 percent say they support companies that act sustainably by purchasing their products or services.
The most successful brand leaders in this space understand that brand action and consumer action are two sides of the same coin. Consumers are looking to brands for sustainable solutions; and brands have the ability to lead society toward a reality where sustainable products and services are the norm in the marketplace. Building a culture of sustainable living can only be achieved when brands and consumers align their efforts and take action together on the most impactful behaviors.
Learn more with industry peers and leaders
Dive further into this nuanced topic while discovering more insights on how today’s brands can enlist consumers in building a better tomorrow at the SB Brand-led Culture Change conference — May 8-10, 2024 in Minneapolis. Unpack consumer trends; understand strategies and tactics that drive behavior change; and craft culture-changing communications through live sessions, workshops and industry forums presented by the leading brand marketers and experts from around the world.
Integrating a sustainability strategy throughout the company can put your ESG goals on the fast track. By Shannon Houde from Greenbiz.com • Reposted: January 23, 2024
We all know that it’s not enough for sustainability teams to act in a silo. To achieve real change, an organization must embed ESG commitments across all products and teams, and draw on the efforts and engagement of everyone from the CEO to frontline staff.
As Niki King, vice president and head of sustainability at The Clorox Co., and formerly head of sustainability at Unilever North America, points out, “To embed sustainability there are no trade-offs, there’s not a separate stand-alone sustainability strategy. It’s all-encompassing. There has to be accountability at all levels of the organization. There need to be incentives tied to sustainability performance and all of your employees need to understand how they can play a part in helping to achieve the goals.”
In short, there are no half measures. So, for those currently working to better embed sustainability into their organizations, make sure you put the following four building blocks in place first.
1. Employee buy-in
This starts at the board level. Without buy-in from at the highest level of an organization, any effort to embed sustainability elsewhere will almost certainly fall flat, and sustainability leaders will find themselves spinning their wheels. Ultimately though, a sense of ownership over a sustainability strategy needs to come from all levels of an organization, with each employee made to feel empowered by leadership to share their ideas, provide feedback and get involved in sustainability programs. This may be achieved by way of financial incentives tied to either teams or individuals achieving ESG targets, says King.
According to research by Harvard Business Review, this sense of ownership is the most important element in embedding sustainability. It found that organizations that transformed employees from bystanders into active participants in achieving ESG goals not only ensured their teams felt empowered but also stood a far better chance of integrating those commitments successfully. At financial services company Old Mutual, for example, the sustainability chief organized a workshop for midlevel managers to demonstrate their direct impact on customers. Participants noted that they felt empowered to do far more than crunch numbers after attending, laying the foundations for wider discussions about ESG.
2. Governance
Next, ensure the right governance structures are in place to integrate accountability at all levels of the organization. At larger organizations, creating this framework may be one of the primary roles of the board, working in collaboration with a chief sustainability officer (CSO). At small and medium enterprises, ensuring the right questions are being asked regarding the management of ESG programs may fall under the remit of a sustainability leader. If so, it’s a critical part of the role. Without the right scrutiny in place, it’s too easy for sustainability strategies to fall through the cracks.
3. Strong leadership
CEOs can’t simply add sustainability to their long list of responsibilities and expect ESG programs to look after themselves. In fact, although 98 percent of CEOs say sustainability is core to their role, just 2 percent of the same organizations say their sustainability strategies succeed. That’s because CEOs need to be highly engaged with policies but also — need to delegate primary responsibility to a CSO who has the right combination of skills. These include resilience, both technical and business skills and — perhaps most important — the soft skills needed to inspire and encourage others to join them in making transformative change. Or as King puts it, leaders that know “building relationships has to be your superpower.”
4. Awareness of local context
Finally, ensure that sustainability strategies are developed with an appreciation for the local context. Often a sustainability strategy is developed by a small sustainability team at global headquarters without seeking input from the local markets. Then when the global team tries to tell the local market to adopt the strategy that it came up with, it doesn’t always resonate. Instead, organizations need to be as inclusive as possible, seeking input from local markets to ensure there’s buy-in at every level. At international consumer goods company Danone, for example, the team included country-specific roadmaps in its Climate Transition Plan, each one adapted to local market features.
The path to embedding sustainability across an organization isn’t always a straightforward one. It takes time, patience and, most likely, frustrating pushbacks. But it’s a critical component of achieving scalable change on ESG issues and — by implementing these four elements — the practitioner will see progress faster and with more support.
From Sustainable Brands Media • Reposted: January 20, 2024
We caught up with TrusTrace co-founder and CEO Shameek Ghosh to discuss companies’ tendency to ‘greenhush’ to avoid scrutiny around sustainability and his advice for overwhelmed retailers.
With the constant noise of brands claiming to pursue carbon neutrality and other sustainability goals, many well-meaning retailers are left scrambling to define their own goals. Hearing such broad statements can leave brands feeling overwhelmed and frankly, inferior — and has fueled a new form of corporate miscommunication.
According to Shameek Ghosh, co-founder and CEO of supply chain traceability platform TrusTrace, “greenhushing” — disguising or downplaying sustainability efforts, in an attempt to draw attention away from a company’s sustainability failures — has become an increasingly common response to this overwhelming scenario; attempting to overhaul an entire company’s sustainability strategy all at once can lead to executives believing that it might be easier to simply not have a strategy at all.
We caught up with Ghosh to learn more about the tendency to ‘greenhush’ and his advice for overwhelmed retailers.
Can you briefly describe what ‘greenhushing’ is? How is it different from greenwashing?
Shameek Ghosh: When organizations deliberately do not talk about their ESG credentials and the things they’re doing to drive positive change, that is called “greenhushing.” Greenwashing, on the other hand, is when organizations intentionally exaggerate their ESG credentials to give an impression of having better environmental policies and impact than what is actually the case.
Why are companies and retailers turning to this strategy?
SG: In the wake of governments cracking down on greenwashing, and facing the reputational risk involved, organizations are becoming more cautious. To avoid risks of greenwashing under increased scrutiny, it is necessary to be able to back up your claims with evidence — and as this can be difficult without the right data and tracking in place, it becomes easier and safer to communicate less.
How can retailers begin defining their ESG goals?
SG: Most major retailers already have quite well-defined ESG goals, so the focus is more on ensuring that you have the data and insights to be able to deliver or — even better — overdeliver on these sustainability and responsibility promises. However, for those that have not yet started, a good place to begin is to look at the parts of the business and portfolio that have the biggest presumed impact — e.g. due to size and the social and environmental risk tied to geographies, materials, processes, etc. Once you understand size and assumed impact, it becomes easier to prioritize data collection and target setting.
What are some of the first steps that retailers can take to implement sustainable business practices once they’ve defined their goals?
SG: In order to successfully implement defined goals for sustainable business practices, retailers must first validate the assumptions that follow the goals they’ve set — this can be done by leveraging primary data. From there, they must next determine what kind of data is necessary in order to meaningfully track and improve progress. It’s crucial for both internal and external stakeholders to understand the targets they’re setting inside in order to deliver upon them. Finally, stakeholders need to have the necessary tools to empower them to deliver on targets — which can include data, tools, insights, budget and internal alignment.
What makes supply chain visibility a tangible and realistic solution for retailers?
SG: As regulations continue to make it mandatory for retailers to have detailed information about how, where, under which conditions, and with what environmental impact (i.e carbon footprint) products have been made, supply chain visibility becomes an increasingly important and realistic solution for retailers to remain compliant with mounting government mandates.
Supply chain traceability will only become more simple, tangible and impactful as more brands adopt the solution — including this as a regular business practice strengthens relationships with suppliers as well, creating an adept network across the industry. Knowledge is power, and you can’t change what you cannot measure — so, a solution that provides insights and evidence into supply chain practices is a must-have. Having granular data on what’s happening within their brand’s supply chain at your fingertips has the potential to help retailers make informed decisions about their business from all angles — not only in regards to regulatory compliance.
What should retailers know about the journey to implementing sustainable business practices?
SG: Retailers must remember that carrying out sustainable business practices is a transformational journey from start to finish. It’s going to take time and resources — and most importantly, true commitment to change. With this in mind, it’s critical that there is endorsement and prioritization from the executive level — ensuring organizational alignment, commitment and resource allocation.
When sustainable practices are properly implemented, the benefits are well worth the effort. Not only are these practices good for business and profits, but they are motivating for employees. Traceability is becoming so ubiquitous in businesses and essential sustainability efforts that people are beginning to choose roles based on whether or not the organization has a traceability program in place. Traceability is no longer a nice-to-have — it’s a must-have.
By Steve Haskew via betanews.com • Reposted: January 20, 2024
A sense of urgency to address climate change has led many businesses to commit to carbon neutrality or net-zero emissions by 2030, and many more by 2050, yet just 5 percent of the UK’s biggest companies have said how they plan to get there.
This disconnect between ambition and action is something my firm is out to solve through IT infrastructure. These are five of the biggest sustainability trends I believe businesses must pay attention to in 2024.
Trend 1: Stress-testing Sustainability Plans Sustainability was high on the corporate agenda in 2023, but with heightened consumer and social pressure, new reporting standards, government regulation, and better measurement, CEOs are under immense pressure to turn their sustainability pledges into action. EY analysis recently found that while 78 percent of the UK’s largest firms have published partially developed net zero plans, just 5 percent have disclosed sufficiently detailed transition plans to become net zero. This year, businesses will need to answer key questions on strategy and execution, translating long term-thinking on sustainability into action that begins to move the dial today. That requires more robust net-zero plans, but also increasing pressure on all parts of the business to sniff out efficiencies and take risks on innovations that could have meaningful impact.
Trend 2: Embracing the Circular Economy In a circular economy, products and materials are kept in circulation through processes like maintenance, reuse, refurbishment, remanufacture, recycling, and composting. Two-thirds of companies were employing at least one circular economy principle in 2023, and that number is expected to grow significantly this year as companies face up to the reality of their climate pledges. There are many ways a business might choose to introduce circular principles, and these will vary greatly between sectors, but IT infrastructure, and remanufacturing in particular, is one area that almost every business in the UK should be thinking about in 2024. Remanufacturing is an industrial process that converts a computer to a like-new quality in both appearance and performance by testing and replacing individual components through a rigorous process. When accredited by a third party, it provides technical certainty that the device will perform as well (if not better) than a new machine. The environmental benefits of taking this circular route are overwhelming. Lifecycle analysis of Circular Computing laptops conducted by Cranfield University found that remanufactured laptops produce over 15 times less CO2 compared to the average new laptop. In fact, every one of its laptops entering active use, be that in the public or private sector, prevents approximately 316kg (700lb) of CO2 emissions from entering the atmosphere, 1,200kg of the Earth’s resources from being mined, and saves over 50,000 gallons of water from the industrial processes involved in making a new laptop. Sustainability is often seen as a zero-sum game by executives, but this is one area where the benefits are seen in both cost and climate, with no impact on performance.
Trend 3: Supply Chain Management and Transparency Companies are used to facing criticism if they are seen to exploit people or natural resources, but now with greater focus on Scope 3 emissions, they are finding they need to pay just as much attention to where, and from whom, they source their products and services. Scope 3 emissions refer to any greenhouse gasses that an organisation is indirectly responsible for, up and down its value chain, such as in products it buys from suppliers, or those released by customers when using products or services. As awareness of this web of interrelated climate accounting grows, scrutiny on supply chains is growing too. From media and investors to whistle-blowers and activists, calls for transparency in supply chains is encouraging businesses to be more discerning when choosing business partners, and more selective when running tenders.
Trend 4: AI for sustainability AI may have been the tech buzzword for 2023, but its impact on the world is plain to see, especially in the sustainability space where it holds a huge amount of promise. From improving efficiencies in energy use and supply chains, to refining the way we collect and analyse sustainability data, this is an area where we expect to see a huge amount of innovation in 2024. Some of the best examples for businesses include helping to develop materials that are lighter and stronger, so aircraft, delivery vans, and wind turbines consume less energy. AI is also making agriculture more sustainable by predicting weather patterns, or analysing images of crops for signs of pest, disease, or nutrition problems. Google is even using AI to make its data centres more energy efficient by predicting how small changes in process impact energy consumption in its data centres on a grand scale. But for all the promise, there are still hurdles for AI to overcome before it is seen as a net positive for our planet. A recent study found that OpenAI’s GPT-3 produced 500 metric tons of carbon dioxide during training, and Sam Altman himself has inferred that a single request in ChatGPT can consume 100 times more energy than one Google search.
Trend 5: Green skills training We’ve witnessed a boom in the number of job adverts for sustainability-related roles as business leaders come to terms with the climate crisis and look for ways to be part of the solution. This trend will continue in 2024, with an increased focus on upskilling staff across a wide range of job functions. While this is great to see, only 17 percent of companies currently offer training for green skills, and almost a third of employers admit that their staff have asked for more training. It should come as no surprise to see a new generation, marked by heightened environmental awareness, urge employers to adopt more robust and responsible sustainability practices. Businesses are far more likely to achieve their net-zero goals if the ambition comes from the top down, but the desire for change must be understood and acted on by the whole workforce to truly succeed. Image credit: Olivier26/depositphotos.com
From ManpowerGroup via PR Newswire Reposted: January 20, 2024
The accelerating pace of the global green transition is intensifying the competition for talent, according to new research from ManpowerGroup (NYSE: MAN). “Building Competitive Advantage with A People-First Green Business Transformation,” reveals demand for green skills significantly outstripping supply as employers work to recruit and retain qualified talent critical to achieving ambitious sustainability targets.
Based on surveys of nearly 39,000 employers and over 5,000 workers worldwide, the findings spotlight an unprecedented convergence of talent scarcity, climate urgency, and technological disruption hindering sustainability progress. With 2023 now the hottest year ever recorded, this report underscores the urgency for organizations to deliver on their environmental goals and commitments.
“As companies accelerate their sustainability efforts, it’s critical we bring people along on the journey,” said Riccardo Barberis, President, ManpowerGroup Northern Europe Region. “Investments in green technology will only get us halfway if employers fail to properly skill and reskill workers to operate in a greener future. Prioritizing workforce development must be a core pillar of net-zero strategies.”
Key findings:
Unprecedented Demand: 70% of employers are urgently recruiting or planning to recruit green talent and people with sustainability skills, with the highest demand in renewable energy, manufacturing, operations, and IT.
Widening Global Skills Gap: Despite demand, only 1 in 8 workers currently have more than one green skill, sparking an exponential shortage as companies compete for limited talent.
High Industry Demand: Energy & Utilities (81%), Information Technology (77%), Financials & Real Estate (75%), Industrials & Materials (74%), and Transport, Logistics & Automotive (73%) top the leaderboard with the highest intentions to hire green talent to meet sustainability targets.
Roadblocks Slowing Progress: Talent leaders cited finding qualified candidates (44%), creating effective reskilling programs (39%), and identifying transferable skills (36%) as the top barriers to execute green transitions.
Workforce Skepticism: While 70% of white-collar workers say they are ready to embrace the green transition, only 57% of their blue-collar peers say the same.
Gen Z Calls for Accountability: Three-quarters (75%) of Gen Z candidates research a prospective employer’s green reputation and nearly half (46%) say it will impact their likelihood of choosing a particular employer.
Generational Divide: 66% of Gen Z and 64% of Millennials believe sustainability efforts will enhance their work, compared to just 44% of Baby Boomers.
Given these results, creating a roadmap for workers to transition into high-demand green roles remains a pressing priority.
For more details on the green jobs landscape, workforce readiness perceptions, and recommendations for planning for the greening world of work, download the complete report here.
![[Image Alt Text for SEO]](https://emt.gartnerweb.com/ngw/globalassets/en/newsroom/images/graphs/2024-environmental-sustainability-ceo-survey.png)
Eric Block On Responsible Branding 
You must be logged in to post a comment.