It’s been a bad year for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). Budget cuts and layoffs hit corporate and academic DEI departments hard in 2022. The trend backward comes on the heels of rapid growth in the years prior. And while cuts may be one way for companies to tighten their belts as post-pandemic sales drop, future repercussions will likely bring regret.
Short-term gains, long-term losses
Cuts to DEI may lower overhead in the short term, said Ritu Bhasin, a DEI and leadership expert and the author of “We’ve Got This,” a book about finding belonging. “The problem is that the price tag is greater in the long term.”
Companies face a number of consequences when they focus on immediate cuts to the bottom line instead of valuing diversity and creating environments that are inclusive and supportive of all people. “Creativity and innovation will suffer,” she said. “And they’ll be less able to capture market share.”
Bhasin breaks this down to a matter of talent, explaining that the companies making cuts to their DEI programs will be less able to attract and retain skilled workers. With employees feeling less psychological safety in these spaces, attrition will increase, and those that remain may be more cautious about sharing creative solutions.
Diversity’s positive effects on profitability are well-established. And yet, in addition to slashing DEI departments and programming, quite a few companies are unsurprisingly showing a reduction in new hire diversity since the middle of last year.
Bucking the trend
Fortunately, not all businesses forget the importance of recruiting people from a variety of backgrounds and aligning workplaces accordingly. In particular, consumer-facing businesses are less likely to cut DEI programming, Bhasin said, because they recognize the need to reflect the diversity of their customers.
“Banking isn’t seeing the elimination of DEI either, or it is minimal [in comparison],” she said. This also makes sense, considering that financial institutions serve consumers directly and may have a better understanding of the need to reflect their customer base.
But for industries making the biggest cuts, choosing short-term monetary profit over long-term effects “reflects an overarching underestimate of the importance of DEI,” Bhasin said. “And it demonstrates that it was a performative commitment to begin with.”
What are the solutions to widespread cuts in DEI?
So, what can be done about it? “It’s a tricky, challenging problem,” she said. “The DEI leaders who helped to grow understanding of the need are being cut. Those who raised awareness are being let go.”
DEI and leadership expert, Ritu Bhasin. Images courtesy of Ritu Bhasin
Bhasin doubts employers can be counted on to see the light. “They’re the decision-makers. Who is going to convince them?” she said, noting that perhaps the DEI team or other executives can try. Additionally, employees could choose to leave or become increasingly vocal. “But that’s deeply problematic,” Bhasin said. “It puts the responsibility for change on the community that is being affected.”
She recommends a multi-pronged approach, in which shareholders, clients and consumers hold companies accountable. Depending on the type of business, some groups may have more power than others. With companies that don’t deal directly with the public, it may be up to shareholders, clients and contractors to speak up.
For those that provide consumer products and services, “we can vote by where we spend our money,” Bhasin said. “Stop consuming.” One example of this is Twitter, which has notoriously lost both users and advertisers since billionaire Elon Musk took over at the end of October 2022.
Twitter’s DEI team was decimated upon Musk’s acquisition — reportedly shrinking from 30 positions to just two. And while that is not the only reason for the drastic drop in Twitter advertising, it certainly has a huge impact. The social media site lost nearly half of its marketing revenue as it became a bastion for brazen biases and vehement hatred.
But for all the talk of waning sales and falling profits, overall, corporations are still raking in the dough. While corporate windfalls have not continued at the rate they did in 2021, they remain astronomical when taken into long-term historical context. As such, cuts to DEI program budgets and staff are not only unnecessary, but they are also incredibly unwise. It will ultimately take all of us to set things right.
By Yusuf Amdani, Forbes Books Author via Forbes.com • Reposted: August 12, 2023
While 90% of executives state that sustainability is important, not as many are acting on green policies, according to the report “Investing For a Sustainable Future” which appeared in the MIT Sloan Management Review. Only 60% of companies have sustainability strategies in place. Without a green vision at the top, operational levels run the risk of using more resources than needed in everyday practices.
It may be a question of time: the world’s population grew from 2.3 billion in 1937 to 7.8 billion in 2020, per the Green Business Bureau. With more people, the carbon in the atmosphere has increased from 280 parts per million to 415 parts per million during that same timeframe. Globally, organizations are recognizing the need and searching for a solution to become more earth conscious.
Those interested in funding businesses are just as interested in sustainable solutions, with 85% of investors considering environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) factors as they make decisions, according to Gartner research. Among banks, 91% monitor ESG performance of investments. These groups see that consumers are asking for green strategies and that sustainability can lead to long-term profitability and performance.
Setting the tone for both current and future generations begins with effective, ongoing efforts that coincide with the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals. These outline actions for all countries—both developed and developing—to carry out in a global partnership. When businesses step up and implement changes, others will take notice and be ready to join in.
Here are some of the proven sustainable practices that can generate business:
1. Opting for Renewable Energy
In developing countries, the infrastructure may not support 24/7 electricity in every town and village. For companies that depend on uninterrupted processes and timely deliveries, putting in a solar-powered system could be the answer. Drawing from the sun’s rays to produce and circulate energy, operations can continue while simultaneously lowering electricity costs. Companies that lean into renewable energy will also benefit from the opportunity to show shareholders and customers that they are actively working to reduce their carbon emissions.
2. Sourcing Recycled Materials
Switching from ready-made supplies to recycled fibers in a textile plant can have a significant impact. Waste is reduced, products are manufactured with repurposed materials, and customers can join the cause by purchasing finished items. Among Gen Z shoppers, the up-and-coming consumer demographic, 73% are willing to pay more for sustainable products, per a report from FirstInsight. Looking for ways to recycle materials within a plant can lower manufacturing expenses and enable companies to prepare for upcoming regulations.
3. Promoting Plants and Nutrients
By 2030, the Amazon rainforest is predicted to be downsized to such an extent that it will not provide enough water to support its plant life, as reported by the Green Business Bureau. While companies can certainly fund reforestation campaigns, they can also start their own—right in their backyard. Industrial parks may have spaces where they can plant new trees and house a nursery. New flowers and trees could be distributed among the community. Organizations can also look for an area to carry out composting efforts like the Bocashi method, which yields organic fertilizers that can be used on plants.
Sustainable practices that deliver results, including reduced costs, greater efficiencies, and higher levels of well-being among workers, will be the drivers of tomorrow’s companies. To be prepared for heightened awareness and regulations surrounding ESG, organizations will do well to start today. Looking at what can be done and taking small steps can lead to long-term results and a lasting presence.
By Kirstie McDermott from Nature World News • Reposted: August 5, 2023
In an inspiring initiative to protect the environment and promote sustainable practices, leading brands have teamed up to make a significant difference in nature protection. This collaborative effort, named Bravo for Oceans, aims to hire local fishermen to clean up local bodies of water from debris and waste, and consumers can actively support this cause simply by making a purchase from one of the participating brands. Through this innovative approach, these brands are demonstrating their commitment to corporate social responsibility and fostering positive change in their communities.
Empowering local fishermen for cleaner waters
As concerns about environmental pollution and its impact on ecosystems continue to rise, businesses are increasingly recognizing their role in making a positive impact on nature protection. In a joint effort, several brands have come together to support local fishermen in their mission to clean up water bodies, such as lakes, rivers and coastal areas, from accumulated debris and waste.
By collaborating with local fishermen, who possess a deep understanding of their surrounding ecosystems, the initiative harnesses their expertise and knowledge to restore the health of these vital water sources. The fishermen are empowered to carry out clean-up activities in a responsible and sustainable manner, ensuring that aquatic life and habitats are protected throughout the process.
Consumer support through responsible purchasing
Consumers now have a unique opportunity to contribute to this meaningful initiative simply by making a purchase from the brands participating in this nature protection project. Each transaction made with these brands will directly support the hiring of local fishermen and enable them to take effective action in cleaning up water bodies, preserving natural beauty and conserving marine life.
By choosing to support these brands, conscious consumers can actively play a role in environmental conservation and invest in a greener future. Each purchase becomes a powerful statement in favor of sustainable practices and the protection of our planet’s invaluable water resources.
Bravodeal.com’s role in the initiative
Among the prominent brands actively participating in this noble initiative is Bravodeal.com. Founded in 2018, Bravodeal.com is a renowned coupon site that specializes in providing discount codes for users looking to save money on online purchases. The platform offers a wide selection of coupon codes, deals and promotions that can be used across major online retailers.
With an extensive network of partner brands, Bravodeal.com is committed to supporting sustainable initiatives and driving positive change. By initiating the idea and partnering up with an organization to carry out the hiring and cleaning, they are leveraging their platform to encourage responsible shopping choices that positively impact the environment.
It’s no secret that the past few years have created seismic changes in the retail industry.
Economic and supply chain issues have made it harder for consumers to shop. In fact, 88% of global consumers experienced availability, pricing and shipping issues. Retailers have responded by adding serious muscle to their e-commerce capabilities and expanding their BOPIS (buy online, pick up in store) capabilities.
To boost the productivity of associates and make their jobs easier, retailers have turned to handheld digital devices. This technology changes everything, from how employees conduct inventory and re-stock to having more information available.
Even with this additional technology, the retail industry continues to suffer from a chronic worker shortage. Retailers have far more unfilled job openings than the availability of unemployed workers with retail experience.
Unfortunately, 2.6 million tons of e-commerce returns end up in landfills since it is cheaper to dump returns than process and resell them. In the U.S. in 2020 alone, shipping returns from online orders pumped 16 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions into the atmosphere—equivalent to the emissions generated by powering 2 million homes for a year.
Moreover, the handheld devices retailers rely on are prematurely ending up in landfills, too. According to the Global E-Waste Monitor 2020, the U.S. produced roughly 6.9 million metric tons of e-waste in 2019. A U.K. government report says, “New software updates are often not supported on older hardware, meaning it becomes necessary to replace the hardware despite the physical product still working.”
Our research report found that enterprises are aggressively chasing new upgrades and fresh hardware rather than maintaining, updating, diagnosing and fixing devices they already have. For example, 60% of IT decision makers said their ruggedized devices, tablets, laptops and wearables are being discarded unnecessarily.
How To Get To A More Sustainable Retail Future
Retailers can encourage their IT departments to use an enterprise mobility management (EMM) solution that can extend the lifecycle of handheld devices. So, instead of investing in new hardware prematurely, an investment in an EMM solution will allow the IT department to remotely monitor, diagnose and repair devices to expand their lifecycles.
Modern retailers leverage rugged devices that enable smarter supply chains, logistics, warehousing, distribution and inventory management. But handheld devices are powered by batteries, and batteries can begin to fail after a number of charging and discharging cycles. As a result, IT teams routinely discard entire sets of batteries to avoid the downtime that unexpected battery failures can cause.
Monitoring of battery life needs to be a core component of the e-waste conversation. Retailers need to predict battery failures before they occur and replace only those batteries that are predicted to fail. With an EMM that provides intelligent battery analytics, the lifespan of batteries can be prolonged, keeping them out of landfill sites as well as reducing costs by avoiding unnecessary battery replacement.
A more sustainable approach is vital, especially as retailers augment their capabilities with drones and autonomous vehicles. A reduce-reuse-and-recycle mentality will enable retailers to make better, more sustainable choices that make the most out of every investment.
Retailers have the potential to shrink their overall carbon footprint and provide better real-time data to consumers—but getting the best results will require changes.
Sustainability is what consumers want, and investors are taking note, too. As BlackRock CEO Larry Fink put it in a recent letter to CEOs, “Sustainable investments have now reached $4 trillion. Actions and ambitions toward decarbonization have also increased. This is just the beginning—the tectonic shift towards sustainable investing is still accelerating.”
Getting to a more sustainable future means thinking more about the long term. Retailers should whiteboard out their use cases and think about where they can gain efficiency. With the right technology in place, retailers can easily manage their fleet of mobile devices across multiple locations and employees under a single pane of glass.
Retailers need to begin thinking about their businesses as a set of data flows. They need to optimize how they use data all the way from the retail floor back into the extended supply chain, considering how and where data is collected and making sure all those connections are rock-solid.
An estimated 7.6 million young people have taken part in Fridays for Future protests in support of climate action, like this 2019 demonstration in Zürich, Switzerland. But protesting isn’t the only way for people to make their voices heard. Photo: Tom Seger – Upsplash
By Mary Mazzoni from Triple Pundit • Reposted: August 4, 2023
The anti-ESG movement, led primarily by a small set of right-wing politicians and pundits, continues to target the use of environmental, social and governance factors in investing. The pushback against ESG and “woke capitalism” is set to be central in the next U.S. presidential election cycle, with critics ramping up the discourse in advance.
Still, the public appears uninspired by the far-right’s latest bogeyman, with only about 35 percent of U.S. voters viewing “woke ideologies as a ‘major threat’ or a ‘very important’ issue when thinking about their 2024 vote,” according to July polling from Morning Consult.
Those growing tired of the anti-ESG discourse don’t have to resign to simply tuning it out. We spoke with Andrew Behar, CEO of As You Sow, a nonprofit foundation that promotes shareholder advocacy, about powerful ways everyday people can voice what they really think about ESG and the shift toward more sustainable and socially responsible ways of doing business.
Take action: Counter anti-ESG narratives by learning and sharing
The much ado about anti-ESG may not have the effect critics intended. While the majority of the public remains ambivalent, anti-ESG criticism has also sparked new conversations where there were none before. “The good news is there are tens of millions of people who’d never heard of ESG who now have heard of it. They’d never heard of sustainable investing — they didn’t know you could invest sustainably,” Behar said. “Now they’re aware their investing has an impact. And actually a lot more people are coming to ESG investing because of it. I think it’s really backfiring.”
Still, anti-ESG narratives can create confusion about what ESG criteria are actually meant to do. Last year, As You Sow launched the AmplifyESG content library to counter the misinformation about ESG online. It’s curated by an editorial review board that includes representatives from business and both U.S. political parties, Behar said.
Hosted on Hootsuite, the library is updated at least a few times a week with articles, quotes, videos and other resources about ESG, which users can easily share across their social media platforms as they choose. Shares from AmplifyESG have reached nearly 3 million people over the past year, and anyone can get involved in driving more evidence-based conversations about ESG in business.
Take action: Leverage your right to vote
No, we don’t mean at the ballot box. Of course that’s important, too, but in this case we’re talking about the proxy voting rights afforded to everyone who owns shares in a publicly-traded company. “If you’re an individual who has bought shares on E-Trade or Schwab or Robinhood or whatever, you have the right to vote — even if you own just one share,” Behar said. “And that vote is very, very important.”
An estimated 25 percent of all shareholders do not exercise their proxy votes, he explained. “If those 25 percent decided to get off the bleachers and get on the playing field, that makes a big difference. That makes the difference between a majority vote or one that’s just under the majority line.”
But exercising the right to vote by proxy is traditionally not a user-friendly process for individual shareholders. “It’s always been difficult,” Behar said. “Generally you get an email that says, ‘Time to vote.’ But when you look at the ballot, there’s 20 or 30 decisions to make. Who’s on the board? How much do the executives get paid? Who’s the auditor? What about all these shareholder resolutions? It’s very complex.”
As You Sow has published annual proxy guidelines for decades, outlining votes they deem to be aligned with ESG principles. Three years ago, it automated the process by embedding its guidelines into Broadridge Financial Solutions’ ProxyEdge platform for institutional investors. The paid service allows institutions like asset managers, endowments and foundations to vote in an ESG-aligned way in only a few clicks. They can also customize their votes from As You Sow’s defaults as they choose.
This year, As You Sow went a step further with a free service for individual investors at AsYouVote.org. “You can now redirect that email so we will automatically fill in the ballot,” Behar said. “It’ll all be filled out in an ESG-aligned way, and you can make adjustments.”
This simple shift allows individual shareholders to move from being overwhelmed by proxy voting emails to automating the process of voting with their values, with the option to customize if they’d like. “I think a lot of people feel guilty. They see all these proxy statements piling up in their inbox and they think, ‘I just can’t deal with it.’ What you’ll get instead is, ‘Thanks for voting.’ You’ll feel great about yourself, and it takes literally two minutes to set up.”
Take action: How mutual fund and 401(k) investors can make their voices heard
Traditionally, people who invest in funds rather than individual stocks have a much harder time making their voices heard come proxy season, but this is beginning to change thanks to new technology.
“If you own shares in a mutual fund, you have the right to vote. Right now, you have abdicated that right to Vanguard or BlackRock or State Street or whoever, and they’re voting on your behalf. They’re probably not voting the way you like,” Behar said. “You might want to vote for a livable planet. You can demand that. You can say, ‘I want that vote,’ and they will give it to you. It’s very new. The technology is just unfolding.”
Technology advancements mean that individual mutual fund investors can vote their own proxies, with the fund manager voting in alignment with the aggregated results at a company’s annual shareholders meeting. This is known as pass-through voting.
In April, As You Sow linked up with the cloud management company Iconik to make this option available to investors in an S&P 500 mutual fund. Hundreds of investors have already taken advantage of it, Behar said, with more funds on the horizon. “We’re now in conversations with every other proxy voting service,” he said. Broadridge Financial Solutions, a major tech provider for institutional investors, is among those working with fund managers to make this option available to their customers. Get in touch with your fund manager to see what options you have.
Similarly, those who invest in 401(k) plans through their employers also have the right to vote by proxy, but they need to reclaim it from the fund managers associated with their plans. “If you’re in a 401(k) plan — where you probably own a target date fund, which is a fund of funds — you’re going to need to go to your plan administrator and say, ‘I want to vote.'”
If employees band together to ask for their vote, the employer can decide to work with the fund manager to make the option available. As You Sow is in talks with employee-organized groups at companies including Google and Microsoft, who want to leverage the voting power associated with their 401(k)s.
The bottom line: You have more power than you think
Counter to the anti-ESG narrative, most people want to see business operate sustainably, with 99 percent of millennial investors, 82 percent of women and 72 percent of people overall saying they would choose to vote their proxies with sustainability in mind, according to polling from As You Sow.
“We know we’ve got this vast majority of folks who actually want to vote to get corporations to provide a livable planet,” Behar said. “It’s a matter now of just getting people to talk about it and say, ‘Okay, I’ll do that. I’ll click that.'”
Where market forces are already driving business closer to ESG principles, everyday people realizing and claiming the power they hold could open the floodgates.
“People abdicate their power. The way people give away their private personal information to Facebook, they abdicate the power of their money to Vanguard, State Street and BlackRock. It’s amazing. People give away all their power and all their information for nothing,” Behar said. “We have a culture where people look at things like climate change and think, ‘There’s nothing I can do.’ No. You have so much power. You just choose not to use it.”
We take a look at the top 10 startups demonstrating dedicated action to mitigate their climate impact, including Aurora Solar, AMP Robotics, and more. By Lucy Buchholz from Sustainability Magazine • Reposted: August 4, 2023
The path to sustainable operations is a tricky one, laden with unexpected pitfalls, significant sacrifices and lacking a unifying expectation of what ‘sustainable’ actually looks like in practice. Yet, getting a grip on emissions, waste and renewable resources among other elements – not to mention all the associated policy and process changes – is of vital importance in the coming years.
Enter the startup world. Often renowned for their ingenuity, scalability and passionate problem-solving, startups are perfectly poised to take on the mantle of sustainable practice and generate innovative solutions. Uninhibited by legacy tech and embedded processes, startups are free to assess sustainability in more efficient, effective ways.
Here, we take a look at the top 10 sustainable startups of 2023 to see which are prioritising the planet over personal gain and devising sustainable solutions.
Headquarters: California, US – CEO: Christie Obiaya – Total funding: US$332.6m
Renewable energy technology company Heliogen is focused on eliminating the need for fossil fuels in heavy industry and powering a sustainable future. The company’s AI-enabled, modular concentrated solar technology aims to cost-effectively deliver near 24/7 carbon-free energy in the form of heat, power or green hydrogen fuel at scale – for the first time in history.
The company’s HelioHeat technology was recognised by TIME on its prestigious Best Inventions of 2020 list and Fast Company honoured Heliogen with a 2020 World Changing Ideas Award.
Headquarters: San Francisco, US –CEO: Stuart Landesberg – Total funding: US$606.5m
Certified B Corp, Grove Collaborative, is a one-stop shop for brands that love the planet. Offering over 200 brands, from cleaning products to wellness items, each item has been carefully selected having undergone thorough evaluation to meet stringent criteria for guaranteed sustainability.
The company also proudly holds the distinction of being the world’s first plastic-neutral retailer. When consumers buy plastic packaging from the business, it takes responsibility by collecting an equivalent amount of nature-bound plastic pollution through our partnership with rePurpose Global.
Headquarters: Paris, France –CEO: Guillaume Fourdinier – Total funding: US$40.6m
In 35 m2, Agricool can produce the same amount of food as 4,000 m2, with no pesticides, no transportation and with 100% renewable energy. To achieve this, the business has created a paradise for fruits and vegetables in recycled shipping containers, to provide the best lighting, temperature, irrigation and air quality. Through these innovative containers, usually seasonal fruit and vegetables can be grown all year round, while water use and carbon emissions are reduced.
Headquarters: London, UK – CEO: Mauro Cozzi – Total funding: US$16.6m
Emitwise takes the creativity out of carbon accountancy by providing an easy-to-use platform that accurately measures, tracks, reports targets and reduces emissions across the supply chain.
The journey to reduce a company’s carbon emissions begins within its owned operations – but extends much further beyond. Emitwise’s platform ensures that clients have access to the same level of detail, accuracy and insights throughout your entire supply chain. In fact, 1 in 4 Emitwise customers have set a net-zero target and 85% of the emissions the business tracks are Scope 3.
Headquarters: New South Wales, Australia – CEO: Guy Hudson – Total funding: US$105m
To help solve the climate crisis, Loam works with 4.5bn years of evolution. As microbes have changed the composition of the Earth’s atmosphere, Loam is ensuring they can do it again. By gaining a better understanding of how microbes influence the carbon cycle, Loam is creating new planetary-scale opportunities for carbon sequestration and improving agricultural productivity.
The business delivers high-quality CO2 removal with environmental co-benefits, by providing growers with unique tools and connecting them to business leaders who are driving the global path to net-zero.
Headquarters: Colorado, US – CEO: Dr. Matanya Horowitz – Number of employees: X – Total funding: US$324mn
By applying AI and automation, AMP Robotics is modernising and scaling the world’s recycling infrastructure to increase rates and recover recyclables reclaimed as raw materials for the global supply chain.
AMP’s technology is widely deployed across North America, Asia and Europe to recover various valuable materials from different sources. This includes the retrieval of plastics, paper and metals from municipal waste, precious commodities from electronic scrap, high-value materials from construction and demolition debris and valuable feedstocks from organic materials.
Headquarters: Boston, Massachusetts – CEO: Bob Mumgaard –Total funding: US$2bn
With the fastest, lowest cost paths to commercial fusion energy, Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS) is collaborating with MIT to utilise decades of research combined with new groundbreaking high-temperature superconducting (HTS) magnet technology.
CFS is also constructing SPARC, the world’s first commercially relevant, net energy fusion demonstration device – a significant stepping stone towards ARC, the first fusion power plant that will provide power on the grid. Ultimately, CFS’s mission is to deploy fusion power plants to meet global decarbonisation goals as fast as possible.
Headquarters: California, US – CEO: Adrián Ferrero –Total funding: US$25m
Silicon Valley-based Biome Makers has become a global AgTech leader, setting a high standard in soil health with BeCrop® technology – the largest global taxonomic database of 14mn microorganisms.
Built on industry-leading AgTech expertise and driven by data and science, Biome Makers connect soil biology to agricultural decision-making to optimise farming practices and reverse the degradation of arable soils.
With a global team passion about preserving, restoring, and improving soil health, Biome Makers have impacted over one million acres of land across the globe.
Pure Harvest Smart Farms is a pioneering, technology-enabled agribusiness headquartered in the United Arab Emirates, focused on sustainable year-round production of premium-quality fresh fruits and vegetables. The business is committed to delivering on their mission of farming extraordinarily flavourful, affordable and fresh produce. They achieve this by innovating across the full value chain of controlled-environment agriculture (CEA), including technology design, procurement, construction and farm operations.
Pure Harvest Smart Farms’ world-leading yields are the result of their inventive approach to farming. They introduced the Middle East’s first semi-automated, high-tech hybrid growing system and incorporated horticultural best practices to address significant regional challenges, such as food security, water conservation, economic diversification and sustainability demands.
Pure Harvest Smart Farms has secured over US$334.4m in capital commitments from a global investor base that spans from California, USA to Seoul, Korea. These investors recognise the value of the company’s mission and their unwavering commitment to sustainable agriculture.
Headquarters: California, US – CEO: Christopher Hopper –Total funding: US$523.5mn
Aurora’s cloud-based software revolutionises solar design, sales and delivery. By simply providing an address and electric bill, Aurora enables individuals to generate comprehensive, precise and customisable designs for each client – ultimately, securing immediate agreements.
The company contributes to the advancement of renewable energy by supporting numerous solar projects every week, aiming to make solar power accessible to all. Aurora calls for a departure from outdated power grids and the adoption of the solar future, simplifying tasks, discarding obsolete technology and accelerating business growth.
Now, more than 7,000 of the industry’s top organisations rely on Aurora and over ten million solar projects have been designed with the platform globally. The San Francisco-based company was the only climate tech business named to the 2022 Forbes AI 50 and was voted the best solar software by Solar Power World in 2021.
Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard captured headlines and received accolades last year when he announced that the outdoor retailer would begin donating nearly the entirety of its profits to fighting climate change. In that same vein, an October 2022 IBM study found that 73% of respondents considered sustainability when shopping.
Both of these speak to broader trends in the way consumers are viewing corporate responsibility, particularly when it comes to environmental concerns.
How can companies respond to shifting consumer values to get ahead of both competitors and economic headwinds? Based on the 3 P’s of sustainable businesses(planet, people and profit), brands need to demonstrate transparency around ongoing sustainability efforts, engage customers in genuine conversations about what matters to them and craft engagement-based loyalty programs that recognize and reward shared social values. Here are three ways brands can accomplish this.
Communicate Tangible Impact On The Planet
Consumers don’t just want to hear “sustainability” as a buzzword. They want to see the concrete actions companies are taking to achieve it.
Brands like Cotopaxi provide a template to follow. Rather than hiding behind the vague “greenwashing” language media-savvy consumers know all too well, the company provides transparency into its sourcing partners and factories globally as well as the sustainability efforts at these factories and carbon offsetting for bulk shipping.
Brands still in the midst of their own sustainable transformation can also highlight the actions they’re taking to achieve the environmental objectives consumers value. Athletic wear brand Allbirds, for example, notes on its website the sustainability goals the company aims to meet by 2025, how Allbirds falls short of them now and the steps the brand is taking to meet them by its own self-imposed deadline.
Much like many companies themselves, consumers are going through their own green transformations and understand that such efforts take time. Rather than penalizing brands with less-than-ideal carbon footprints, consumers will likely reward transparent companies making an earnest effort to attain sustainability—even if they’re not there just yet.
Engage Customers In Sustainability Conversations
Rather than waiting for consumers to come to them, brands should attract the sustainably minded with content that speaks to their needs and goals.
Proactive sustainability brands can create informative and entertaining content that educates and engages consumers by leveraging the full power of their digital marketing channels. Patagonia uses an interactive webpage to illustrate the negative impact the clothing industry has on the environment and showcase the actions it’s taking to remedy it—including recycling materials, growing its own organic cotton and selling used gear at a discount to keep it out of landfills. As a result, consumers gain a clear understanding of how the company aligns with their values and what Patagonia is doing to achieve its sustainability goals.
Brands that engage their customers in conversations about sustainability are able to clarify the ecological topics consumers care about while also proactively guiding them toward products that align with their values. By taking an active role in their sustainability education, companies can establish trust with consumers and reinforce their own sustainable value proposition as they work to change old purchasing habits for good.
Reward Customers For Shared Values
As consumers set their sights on companies and products that share their environmental values, brands that reward them for their sustainable purchases have the chance to attract—and retain—both new and old customers.
One of our customers, Back Market, has developed a business model that not only drives sustainability and circular economy but also drives profits with the Gen Z audience that cares about reuse.
With the constant emergence of new technologies and the consumer desire to always have the latest and greatest device comes many gadgets that end up in a landfill. Back Market was created to help reduce all this e-waste. Sellers can quickly and easily get rid of the “old” gadgets they don’t want anymore, and buyers can grab gently used, high-quality gadgets for a great price.
Loyalty programs tied to sustainable purchases encourage consumers to make the shift toward eco-friendly products and provide an incentive to keep doing so in the future. Customers also develop a greater sense of commitment to the brand, which they see as a reliable vehicle for attaining their own sustainability goals. By rewarding customers for making purchases that align with their shared values today, companies become trusted partners they’ll turn to when making more in the future.
Through marketing efforts that reflect consumers’ identities and reward them for acting on their values, brands can form meaningful bonds with customers and turn them into lifelong patrons. As consumers continue to positively interact with the brand, they encourage others in their network to do so as well and foster new customer relationships—creating a virtuous cycle.
Through targeted rewards programs, brands can ensure the health of not only their bottom line but the planet as well.
According to Forrester, most U.S. consumers place the responsibility of protecting the environment on companies. Two-thirds want more transparency on business practices. And study after study shows that consumers want to be more environmentally responsiblein their buying habits.
Why, then do most e-commerce sustainability efforts fail to put a dent in the problem?
Decades of rapid e-commerce growth have taught us that consumers want to consume, and merchants are more than happy to feed them goods for revenue and profit. There’s a lot of lip service around sustainability, but at the end of the day, the desire to get more things faster often overcomes many of the best sustainability intentions of both shoppers and merchants.
Why? Because e-commerce sustainability is impossible unless it is commercially viable.
For sustainability to work, it must be good for the business, desired by the consumer and good for the planet. Here are some practical—and commercially viable—ways for e-commerce brands to improve their environmental footprint.
That said, research shows that most consumers are misinformed about what is actually recyclable and misunderstand recycling practices. Merchants need to educate consumers on how to recycle or compost packaging to make sure it happens. There’s also an opportunity to promote programs and practices with branding and clever marketing on the packaging itself.
Improve data analytics to stop overproducing.
According to the United Nations, the fashion industry alone accounts for 2% to 8% of global carbon emissions, and textile dyeing is the second largest polluter of water. Tastes and desires are fickle, and so much of what is produced (clothing, food, etc.) is ultimately wasted or sold for pennies on the dollar. Industries like fashion have long over-produced in efforts to have “everything they might need” to meet this fickle demand.
The fashion industry is just one example of how quick it is to manufacture goods but how hard it is to understand and meet demand. With more advanced AI, analytics and personalization technologies, however, it’s possible to better understand consumption. Accurate demand forecasting is one of the best things you can do to improve every aspect of your business (scale, cost, lower returns, etc.) and reduce environmental waste.
Ensure the price is right.
For years, data has shown that consumers are “willing” to pay more for sustainable products. But dig a little deeper, and you’ll see just how powerful decades-old commercial forces can be in hindering sustainability.
With the arrival of the recession, the number of consumers willing to pay more for sustainable products shrunk by 16%. Quality and price still lead consumers’ considerationswhen making purchasing decisions in good times and bad. Both are twice as influential as sustainability in making purchases. The price has to be right for the quality of the goods provided, regardless of operational practices.
Elevate the product with sustainability.
If price and quality are more than twice as influential as sustainability in buying decisions, then use your sustainability practices to elevate the quality of your goods and the brand behind them.
Outstanding goods capture a premium price, attract new shoppers and build brand loyalty. Patagonia is a great example here. It’s a “gold standard” in outdoor clothing and quality and also happens to be environmentally sound.
Tesla is another great example, with a premium-priced electric car that has excellent range, has better performance than the average gas vehicle and is supported by a great charging network. Remember that Tesla launched a luxury sports car, which set the tone for the brand. Consumers expect Teslas to provide a superior driving experience that they can feel good about.
Share your sustainability story.
Online searches for sustainable goods have increased by 71% between 2016 and 2021, and influencer mentions of sustainable fashion have boomed in recent years. Sustainability is now a critical ingredient of a good brand story, especially for younger buyers. Integrate this into your marketing and build it into your brand story.
But if you’re not actually doing some of the things I’ve outlined above, then you’re just greenwashing, and that storytelling goes from a strategic advantage to a liability. Buyers won’t hesitate to post your bad practices across their channels.
Create a personal and frictionless experience for shoppers.
Far too often, companies dedicate a lot of resources to sustainable practices, only to mess up the last mile. Getting traffic and buyers is the first step, but you have to make it easy for consumers to find what they’re looking for, especially with a younger, more environmentally aware audience.
I’ve written about removing friction from e-commerce in the past, and that applies to all aspects of buyer intent, including sustainability. Promote the products clearly. More importantly, incorporate sustainability with all the other data points (geography, referral site, device, time, weather, etc.) for a full, accurate and personalized journey.
So many environmental efforts come to the table with the best intentions, only to be tripped up by the realities of commercial operations. By adding a commercial lens to your sustainability endeavors, you do what’s good for the planet and what’s good for your pocket. And that’s good for everyone.
By Dylan Siegler, SVP, Sustainability via Green Buzz Weekly • Reposted: July 31, 2023
State and federal policymakers on the right were not targeting corporate sustainability programs when they began lobbing anti-ESG rhetoric and proposed laws into state and national legislatures.
But what began as a campaign against making environmental, social and governance risks and opportunities part of investment decisions predictably spread, just as high-profile battles over drag shows and critical race theory took over the news cycle. Bans against banks and financial services companies that “boycott” fossil fuels, as in Texas Government Code Chapter 809, became a pressure on companies to back away from social impact as well as environmental measures.
This spring, there were increased reports of ESG backlash from shareholders (and their partisan advisers) when they voted on investor proposals at public company annual meetings. About a third of anti-ESG shareholder proposalsfocused on pressuring companies to stand down on DEI initiatives. Climate also took a hit (although it’s important to note that the data is more complex in that area, where pro-ESG shareholder engagement is advanced). Many of these proposals failed; passing didn’t seem to be the point.
Meanwhile, anecdotal evidence indicates that more companies are “greenhushing,” or taking a quieter approach to sustainability communication. A sustainability head for a Fortune 500 red-state-based company, who spoke to me only if I didn’t identify him or his company in this newsletter, confirmed that anti-ESG rhetoric has caused his employer to communicate to the public less often and less comprehensively about sustainability efforts, and we hear similar accounts from members of our GreenBiz Executive Network, a peer learning forum for sustainability executives from large companies.
Another continuing issue potentially abetting the anti-ESG movement is that despite bold public climate goals and other commitments, many of the same companies hold back from advocating for progressive policy, and sometimes actively lobby against those interests. Specifically, some fund PACs that support political candidates who may espouse rhetoric in conflict with a company’s own ESG strategy. Even unintentional firewalls between government affairs and sustainability can cause companies to talk out of both sides of their mouths.
What to do about anti-ESG rhetoric
I asked Deborah McNamara, co-executive director of ClimateVoice, a nonprofit focused on helping climate-positive companies influence policy, what actions a sustainability professional should take to counteract the ESG backlash. In an email, she said anti-ESG rhetoric is “a new form of climate denialism” and exhorted companies with sustainability commitments to, effectively, stay the course and focus on impact. “Employees and sustainability professionals should talk about how ESG investments help them build a better and more profitable business,” she said. Companies should “remain focused on aligning all levels of business operations and advocacy with achieving meaningful climate goals, and continue to advocate forcefully and consistently for climate policy progress on all fronts.”
The Fortune 500 sustainability head who told me he sees more greenhushing gave an important and reassuring caveat: While his company may not be shouting from the rooftops about ESG, the company’s real-world actions in sustainability have not markedly changed in response to the shift in political tone.
It would be satisfying to raise a fist and advise sustainability professionals to speak out brashly against the backlash and encourage their companies to do the same in the face of political pressure. But not every company has a sustainability head with high company-wide social capital, a mature sustainability program with a proven business case or the executive support to withstand ever stronger political headwinds. Almost 70 percent of the top five earning executives in U.S. S&P 1500 firms are affiliated with the Republican party, which has made opposing ESG one of its calling cards in the current election cycle. Some professionals — and their companies — will simply need to choose between being brave and being safe.
Here are three straightforward ways you can push back against the anti-ESG campaign:
Low lift If your company is in a greenhushing phase, use it to your advantage. When you say less, my Fortune 500 source points out, it’s more straightforward to prioritize accuracy and assess any risk that might be associated with your disclosures. Less can be more — especially if you’ve historically not seen eye to eye with your comms colleagues.
Medium lift Get to know your government affairs department. Do they understand your motivations, and vice versa? What risks are they focused on? If you don’t have a dialogue, start one.
Heavy lift Sign your company on to the Ceres / We Mean Business Coalition-led initiative Freedom to Invest. The campaign mobilizes business and investor interests “around a unified message to policymakers: Protect the Freedom to Invest Responsibly.”
Big ambitions? Do all three. But whatever you do, do something.
“It can either be that all of us decide, ‘I have a lot of other work to do to sell my product or service. I don’t want to stick my head up. I don’t want to [have] what Disney has [experienced] happen to me. I’ll let somebody else fight this.’ That’s one example,” said Steven Rothstein, managing director of the Sustainable Markets Accelerator at Ceres on the main stage at last month’s GreenFin 23 event.
“The other one is that we all decide to get involved. The future of this industry is up to literally the people in this room … so I hope all of us reach out to people — Democrats, Republicans — all kinds of folks. If everyone here writes a letter to the editor, or does social media or an op-ed, or signs a petition or whatever you want to do — what GreenFin in ’25 will be like will be determined by what each of us do in the coming months.”
Tips to launch a purpose-driven business that can thrive in any economy. BY BRYAN JANECZKO, CEO, NUNBELIEVABLE via INC. • Reposted: July 31, 2023
Once the must-have shoe made of sustainable materials, Allbirds is now flapping its wings against the winds of change – its stock is down 96% since its initial IPO. And though fashion is historically fleeting, tech giant Salesforce, which pioneered giving 1% of their time, product, and equity to charitable causes, has seen thousands of layoffs in just a few months. It’s now pledging to be “lean and mean” in efforts to hit 30% profit margins. Though their giving model currently remains, employees have been warned to not let “culture” get in the way of their leaner marching orders.
These stories may tempt you to jump to the conclusion that today’s world is more jaded and less concerned about for-purpose missions, especially with talks of recession in the air. However, I would argue the opposite is true.
Launching a business when so much economic uncertainty looms may feel particularly risky. Launching a purpose-driven business probably feels even riskier – some might say downright inadvisable. Their skepticism is not entirely unwarranted. It’s hard to feel like the for-purpose model is thriving when its former giants are falling.
Once the must-have shoe made of sustainable materials, Allbirds is now flapping its wings against the winds of change – its stock is down 96% since its initial IPO. And though fashion is historically fleeting, tech giant Salesforce, which pioneered giving 1% of their time, product, and equity to charitable causes, has seen thousands of layoffs in just a few months. It’s now pledging to be “lean and mean” in efforts to hit 30% profit margins. Though their giving model currently remains, employees have been warned to not let “culture” get in the way of their leaner marching orders.
These stories may tempt you to jump to the conclusion that today’s world is more jaded and less concerned about for-purpose missions, especially with talks of recession in the air. However, I would argue the opposite is true.
Consumers today are seeking more meaningful, genuine approaches to mission-driven business than ever before. 72% of US consumers want to buy from companies that reflect their values and 71% of millennials will pay more for brands they believe in. Even with inflation at 40-year highs, 57% of Americans reported they purchased goods from socially responsible brands in 2022. Moreover, talent today wants to work for brands that align with their values. Over half of employees in the US won’t consider jobs that aren’t in line with their values.
So now is actually the perfect time to launch a purpose-driven brand. In my experience, mission-driven businesses attract talent, open doors to unexpected opportunities and connections, and provide a north star for both employees and consumers to get behind.
Here’s how to launch a for-purpose brand that doesn’t just survive, but thrives.
Don’t create a product, create a community
For-purpose brands take a stand for something. Whether it be sustainably sourced materials, fair wages, donated proceeds, donated time, or any number of mission-driven initiatives, there are added costs associated with working towards social good that tend to increase product prices. That can be intimidating, but the first thing to know about a for-purpose brand is that it thrives within a community, and that community is its greatest asset.
I think Bombas is an incredible example of the power of community for for-purpose brands. At its inception, Bombas sold expensive socks. Nice socks, but expensive. From a strictly business perspective, it’s easy to dismiss. But of course, the power of Bombas was in their mission: for every pair bought, a pair would be donated to someone experiencing homelessness. This type of model obviously adds costs to the business, but after just three years they were profitable.
That was because of the power of their community. The right talent got on board because they believed in a larger vision. They then physically took that mission to the streets: hand delivering goods to shelters and transitional housing across New York City. Building those kinds of relationships brings more people in because they see the authenticity behind the brand. The DNA of the brand itself increases the sales pipeline of customers who want to put their money behind the purpose. In fact, 82% of today’s consumers agree that how a brand treats customers, employees and the community is important to their purchasing decision.
As an emerging for-purpose brand, engage with your community in a way that aligns with your mission. Volunteer with a local organization, organize a food drive, highlight your customers on social media, and get creative with it!
The mission is also going to open doors to opportunities that might not be there otherwise. For example, in my experience, a large retailer like Walmart or Kroger is more willing to take a meeting with a for-purpose brand, than just another CPG company with something to sell.
Find your path to enduring success through simplicity
Whether for-purpose or not, every business has to hit profitability, ideally sooner than later. This is particularly relevant today with funding dollars significantly less availablethan they were two years ago. Gaining traction and growing support within your immediate community is a proof point that investors will consider, but you’ve got to keep that momentum going.
In pursuit of that movement, a lot of new entrepreneurs make the mistake of rapidly expanding into new product lines or tackling new initiatives to further their for-purpose mission. In reality, when working towards that path to profitability, simplicity can be your secret weapon. There are three areas to simplify in order to maximize margins and growth: your mission, your packaging, and your business model.
Simplifying your mission doesn’t mean shrinking, it just means getting really clear on what your north star looks like. A great example is Beyond Good chocolate products. There are many brands putting out chocolate bars with environmental missions, and rightly so. Beyond Good focused its role within that niche by working directly with local farmers and producing their chocolate in Madagascar- and paying a living wage. In a crowded space like the chocolate aisle in Whole Foods, having a unique, clear mission can be the difference between a sale and being left on the shelf.
The same can be said for your packaging. In the case of CPG products, you’ve got to catch the consumer’s eye and communicate your mission clearly. RX Bar is doing this well. Without prior knowledge of the brand, you can take one look at its packaging and know exactly what you’re getting, which is a mission statement in itself. Their mission to make wellness an easier choice is represented in those easy-to-see and read ingredients.
Lastly, simplify your business by right-sizing your model to increase margins. Justin’s is a great case study on doing this well. Before the pandemic, they sold 40 different nut-based products, but the supply chain crisis meant changes were necessary, so they reduced their product SKUs to focus on what was really selling. Evaluating your SKU mix to optimize profitable SKUs and eliminate those that are not or don’t contribute to the bottom line is crucial to making sure you can keep your business successful while continuing to work towards your mission for good.
Harness the power of PR to amplify your voice
We’ve already talked about how the power of for-purpose brands lies in their ability to build and actively engage with their communities. The flip side of that is the way today’s consumers can mobilize to turn against brands they see as behaving irresponsibly. Nearly a third of Americans reported boycotting brands last year for this reason.
The current economic climate has consumers making tough choices regarding how they spend their money, but even with 46% saying the cost of for-purpose brands prevented them from buying their products, 70% said a company’s purpose or mission was an important determinant for support.
Public relations is a great tool to share the stories that make your product and larger mission unique. Even though budgets are often tight for emerging businesses, it’s a worthwhile investment to consider working with a PR professional or agency that can help you propagate your stories to a larger audience through the media.
This is a much longer-term strategy than something like optimizing SKUs, but the payoff can be tremendous. Just look at a company like Airbnb. They’ve recently reported their most profitable fourth quarter ever and a profitable first quarter for the first time ever. Their CEO credits PR as their “most important channel” for success.
Though starting a for-purpose venture right now may seem risky, I think it’s the ideal time to launch a business. When things get tough, which they always do, you have a larger mission to remind you – and your community – why you started this journey to begin with. The movement has gained so much momentum over the years and it’s only going to continue to grow.
Parking consumes 20% or more of prime locations in many U.S. downtowns. Photo: George Rose/Getty Images By Chris McCahill, Managing Director, State Smart Transportation Initiative, University of Wisconsin-Madison via The Conversation • Reposted: July 29, 2023
The U.S. has a car-centric culture that is inseparable from the way its communities are built. One striking example is the presence of parking lots and garages. Across the country, parking takes up an estimated 30% of space in cities. Nationwide, there are eight parking spots for every car.
The dominance of parking has devastated once-vibrant downtowns by turning large areas into uninviting paved spaces that contribute to urban heating and stormwater runoff. It has driven up housing costs, since developers pass on the cost of providing parking to tenants and homebuyers. And it has perpetuated people’s reliance on driving by making walking, biking and public transit far less attractive, even for the shortest trips.
Why, then, does the U.S. have so much of it?
For decades, cities have required developers to provide a set number of parking spaces for their tenants or customers. And while many people still rely on parking, the amount required is typically far more than most buildings need.
Columbus, Ohio, pioneered this strategy 100 years ago, and by the middle of the 20th century minimum parking requirements were the norm nationwide. The thinking was straightforward: As driving became more common, buildings without enough parking would clog up the streets and wreak havoc on surrounding communities.
Today, however, more urban planners and policymakers acknowledge that this policy is narrowly focused and shortsighted. As a data scientist who studies urban transportation, I focused my earliest research on this topic, and it shaped how I think about cities and towns today.
It’s encouraging to see cities rethinking minimum parking requirements – but while this is an important reform, urban leaders can do even more to loosen parking’s grip on our downtowns.
In 2017, Buffalo, New York, became the first large U.S. city to eliminate its minimum parking requirement as part of its first major overhaul of zoning laws in more than 60 years. This shift has breathed new life into downtown Buffalo by spurring redevelopment of vacant lots and storefronts. Researchers estimate that more than two-thirds of newly built homes there would have been illegal before the policy change because they would not have met the earlier standards.
In Tampa, Fla., 30% of the city’s central business district is devoted to parking (shown in red). As of July 2023, the city had not implemented parking reforms. Graphic: Parking Reform Network, CC BY-ND
Reducing reliance on cars
Parking mandates aren’t the only lever that city officials can use to make their downtowns less car-centric. Some local governments are now asking developers to help reduce overall traffic levels by investing in improvements like sidewalks, bike storage and transit passes.
This approach is typically called transportation demand management, or modern mitigation. It still leverages private investment to serve the public good but without a singular focus on parking.
And unlike parking requirements, this strategy helps connect buildings to their surrounding communities. As urban planning scholar Kristina Currans explained to me in an interview, traditional parking requirements ask developers to fend for themselves. In contrast, transportation demand management policies require them to consider the surrounding context, integrate their projects into it and help cities function more efficiently.
Traditional development leads to more parking and more traffic, which consumes more space, while transportation demand management encourages less traffic and has a smaller footprint. Graphic: City of Madison, adapted by Chris McCahill, CC BY-ND
This approach dates back at least to 1998, when Cambridge, Massachusetts, introduced a policy requiring developers to produce a transportation demand management plan whenever they add new parking. That policy has now outlived the city’s minimum parking requirements, which Cambridge eliminated for all residential uses in 2022.
Newer policies tend to incorporate point systems or calculators that link different strategies directly to their potential impact on car use. These tools are common in cities across California, where state law now requires city planners to evaluate how much new car use each new development will generate and take steps to limit the impact. Policies such as charging users directly for parking spots or offering employees cash in exchange for giving up their spot are among the most effective.
Denver offers 10 Bike-n-Ride shelters where commuters can store bikes and connect to the city’s mass transit system. Users access the shelters with key cards. Photo: Denver Regional Transportation District
This program initially faced some pushback from developers, but their input ultimately made it better. It passed the city’s Common Council unanimously in December 2022.
For their projects to be approved, developers now must earn a certain number of traffic mitigation points based on how large their project is and how many parking stalls they propose to include with it. For example, providing information to visitors and tenants about different travel options earns one point; providing secure bike storage earns two points; offering on-site child care earns four points; and charging market-rate parking fees is worth 10 points. Scaling back planned parking can reduce the number of points they need to earn in the first place.
While parking is no longer required in many parts of Madison, this new policy adds a layer of accountability to ensure that developers provide access to multiple transportation options in environmentally responsible ways. As urban leaders look for meaningful opportunities to reduce their cities’ contributions to climate change, we may soon see other cities following suit.
The U.S. has had a child hunger problem for decades. The COVID-19 pandemic turned that problem into a crisis.
Before the pandemic, 1 in 7 American children experienced food insecurity. The pandemic narrowed that ratio to 1 in 4 by the end of 2020, and nearly 1 in 6 families with children have struggled with food insecurity in the past year.
Hunger, clearly, is not just a U.S. problem. The U.N. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) call for an accelerated response to end hunger in all its forms by 2030. But the pandemic’s impact on economies and supply chains led to global hunger increasing for the first time in nearly a decade.
While many people are back to work and the economy is slowly growing again, agencies that support at-risk families are still trying to make up ground.
“Though we’ve seen improvement since the pandemic, too many are still struggling to keep food on the table as inflation wreaks havoc on families who are most vulnerable,” said Travis Arnold, president and CEO of Feed the Children, a 40-year-old anti-hunger organization that provides aid to children in the U.S. and abroad. In 2022, the agency distributed about 92.6 million pounds of food and essential items worldwide, benefiting more than 11.5 million people globally.
Corporate partnerships can help nonprofits and communities fight hunger
Nearly 10 percent of the global population, up to 811 million people, faced hunger, food insecurity and malnourishment in 2020, according to the Food and Agriculture Association of the United Nations.
More corporations have had to step up with supplies, service and partnerships. One successful pairing is the ongoing collaboration between Feed the Children, Herbalife and the Herbalife Nutrition Foundation. These organizations have partnered since 2019 through Herbalife’s global health and wellness initiative. According to Feed the Children, this collaboration focuses on expanding access to healthy food, identifying sustainable food resources and improving nutrition education, as well as raising awareness about the global hunger crisis.
Worldwide, Herbalife provides nutritional supplements to support thousands of children and families in the countries where Feed the Children works, Arnold said. “In the U.S., we have partnered for multiple community events, most recently in the Los Angeles area,” he told us. “Through our partnership, we have been able to provide both food and resources to thousands of families without life’s essentials across the country. These products help to supplement meals to thousands of families who are struggling to make ends meet.”
As important as the money and supplies Herbalife contributes is the educational material it produces and presents. “Herbalife not only provides a generous means for Feed the Children to scale our impact, but also meaningful ways to talk about the power of our work with new audiences,” Arnold said. The company’s registered dietitians and nutrition experts regularly provide educational materials, including meal and snack recipes, to pack into food donation boxes. The company has printed and delivered 48,000 recipe cards for Feed the Children food boxes.
In preparing recipes, Herbalife experts focus on creating meals that are accessible, affordable, nutritious and can be fun to prepare, according to the company. Recipes adhere to guidelines including the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s low-cost ingredients index and utilize foods often found in boxes that Feed the Children distributes. Bilingual recipe cards, in English and Spanish, also are available.
Scaling nutrition education worldwide
Herbalife and Feed the Children are looking to create additional joint education programs, including resources for teachers, teacher stores and nutrition education seminars for community partners.
In terms of Feed the Children’s own direct education efforts, it sponsors a support program for new mothers and pregnant women. Called Care Group, the program utilizes a peer-to-peer behavior change methodology: Facilitators work with pregnant women and new mothers directly to educate them about prenatal and postnatal nutrition, the benefits of breastfeeding exclusively for the baby’s first six months, and the types of supplemental foods to use until the child is 2 years old. “We help mothers learn how to select and prepare meals that provide the diversity of vitamins and nutrients growing bodies need,” Arnold explained.
Feed the Children also manages child-focused community development programs that focus on reducing hunger and malnutrition, teaching health, and promoting self-reliance in eight countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.
And thanks to increased monetary and product contributions from corporate partners, Feed the Children expects to reach even more families in the U.S. and around the world this year, Arnold said.
The extra aid from Herbalife alone will supplement 300,000 meals and beverages for families in the U.S. The company has also increased its financial commitment to Feed the Children’s international program by $500,000 over two years. Globally, Feed the Children expects to expand programs designed to improve the health and nutritional profile of women and children. These resources include supplementary feeding supplies, deworming medicine and vitamin A supplements for children.
Partnerships are key to success
Corporate collaborations and other pairings are critical to the ongoing mission and success of Feed the Children and its fellow aid organizations, Arnold said.
“Partnerships are vital to success in every aspect of our work. Whether here in the U.S. or in communities around the globe, we cannot do this work alone,” he told us. “We are providing access to food and reducing the stigma around food insecurity through community events and resource rooms across the country. We are engaging communities in developing countries with education and empowerment. Our work with Herbalife is one example of how companies can make a significant contribution to a global issue through collaboration and true partnership.”
This work is needed now more than ever. With the price of basic necessities including food, energy and housing continuing to rise, the number of families straining to meet expenses are expected to increase in the coming months, Arnold observed.
“During the pandemic, we learned to be innovative in order to get food and essentials to families in their own communities,” he continued. “Many of these efforts continue today through our network of community partners, as well as through the generosity of our donors and corporate supporters. It takes all of us working together in order for these efforts to be successful.”
By Mary K. Pratt from Techtarget.com • Reposted: July 28, 2023
Just as with any journey, a sustainability journey requires understanding some keys to success.
Many organizations are struggling to build sustainability programs and implement more environmentally friendly practices. Furthermore, some companies have exaggerated their sustainability records, a practice known as greenwashing.
“Sustainability maturity ranges quite a bit,” said Michelle Benavides, executive director of the International Society of Sustainability Professionals, a professional association of sustainability practitioners. “There are leaders who have been working on this for a long time. But many others are in the early stages of setting commitments and trying to figure out how to hit those commitments.”
More companies are starting on their journey toward environmental sustainability as top leadership prioritizes the issue.
Environmental sustainability ranked as the number eighth strategic issues for CEOs heading into 2023, according to the “2022 Gartner CEO and Senior Business Executive Survey.”
In addition, consumers have become more interested in the environmental records of those they buy from and engage with. Employees are seeking more action from their employers on this front. Many governments around the world have added environmental regulations and reporting requirements.
Organizations looking to meet those demands can consider 10 actions to help enable sustainability success.
1. Understand the environmental impact
Cutting greenhouse gas emissions to limit further global warming is at the core of ensuring a livable world, and business leaders can have major impact.
Working to understand the direct and indirect carbon footprint is key, both in terms of direct and indirect emissions.
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol, a widely used classification system for emissions reporting, has laid out three scopes of direct and indirect emissions:
Scope 1 includes direct greenhouse emissions.
Scope 2 includes indirect greenhouse gas emissions from energy a company purchases.
Scope 3 includes a wide range of indirect greenhouse emissions across the value chain, from sourcing through disposal.
Carbon emissions are not the only environmental impact a company has. Leaders should also understand their effect in other areas, from the physical waste they produce to their organization’s use of natural resources, and how their company’s actions affect water, air and land quality.
Moreover, sustainability includes environmental impacts besides climate change as well as broader social and business issues.
“The sustainability journey is so much more than taking emissions out of the business,” said Vinay Shandal, managing director and senior partner at Boston Consulting Group.
2. Create a sustainability roadmap
Once company leaders understand how and where the organization affects the environment, they can start to analyze and measure those impacts as well as benchmark themselves against other organizations — determining if they’re laggards or leaders in sustainability work.
That information helps each organization create a strategy for improving their sustainability, Benavides said. “It’s always critical to understand your baseline so you understand where you can go and can break down how to get there.”
Executives can start with areas that they can directly control — such as creating more energy efficient buildings and operations — and then focus on how to improve sustainability in other areas such as their supply chains, Benavides said.
Looking to the biggest potential wins can also be fruitful.
Executives should identify areas where changes could yield the biggest improvements in sustainability and prioritize those, Shandal said.
3. Go after easy sustainability wins
Some organizations have yet to implement the fundamentals of an environmental sustainability journey. In these cases, leaders can look to what can be achieved with little effort, Benavides said.
Lower energy consumption by powering down lights, devices and other electronics when not in use.
Install smart fixtures that automatically shut off and energy-efficient equipment, such as LED lighting.
Create sustainability awareness programs that encourage a reduce-reuse-recycle mentality in the workplace and support it through corporate actions by, for example, replacing bottled water vending machines with water dispensers designed to fill reusable water bottles.
Digitalizing business processes to reduce environmental impacts such as paper waste, excess business travel and commutes to the office.
Switching to renewable energy sources, where possible.
Executives should aim to encourage, empower and train their teams to do their part, Benavides said.
“This truly is a mission and commitment that everyone has to get involved in, so build foundational knowledge across the entirety of your staff,” she said. “You want to make sure staff across the board can deeply understand the commitments being made by the sustainability managers, why it’s so critical, how they fit into the puzzle and how they can act to meet those goals.” Communication about sustainability is key. “Make sure everyone is equipped and then go forward from there with a solid action plan.”
5. Get top-level buy-in
As with any important initiative, support from the top is key.
Creating a more sustainable organization requires support from senior leaders and the board, Benavides said. To build sustainability into the fabric of the company, top-level buy-in is necessary. When that buy-in is absent, the results are unlikely to be successful.
“[Sustainability] becomes a more siloed effort and it becomes harder to reach any sustainability commitments the company might have set,” she said.
6. Bring sustainability to the supply chain
Most organizations are part of complex networks. This means business and IT leaders need to consider the sustainability of their supply chain, their suppliers and their business partners. The criteria for evaluating these varies by industry as well as by each organization’s own objectives.
Many organizations consider the carbon footprints of those with whom they do business, said Abhijit Sunil, an analyst at Forrester Research whose research focuses on environmental reporting and sustainability strategies.
As part of that carbon footprint evaluation and as part of other sustainability considerations, organizations also may consider what materials their suppliers use, how they source those materials, how they produce their materials or products, and how they ship their products, he said.
Some organizations also consider their suppliers’ product designs and packaging and whether materials and products can be repaired, recycled or reused. These are key principles for reducing environmental impacts and cutting back on waste and encouraging a more environmentally friendly circular economy.
7. Measure and track
A slew of companies, nonprofit entities and government agencies have been announcing their plans to become carbon-neutral and less environmentally impactful. But many may lack the ability to measure their existing environmental impact, track progress toward their stated goals and accurately report their sustainability metrics.
Think about where value is shifting and, ‘How do I position my business to play and win in this new economy?’Vinay ShandalManaging director and senior partner, Boston Consulting Group
To address that, sustainability chiefs should work with their executive colleagues to create processes for quantifying their environmental impacts and tracking their improvements in those areas, Sunil said. Organizations also should create KPIs based on the objectives they have for their sustainability programs.
CIOs can play a leading role by helping select software for capturing, quantifying, analyzing and reporting sustainability-related metrics. For example, governance, risk and compliance software as well as environmental health and safety management software often have modules for carbon accounting, Sunil said.
CIOs could bring other technologies to bear here too, Sunil said. IoT, for example, can help companies track and analyze information and provide more visibility into their environmental impact.
8. Understand how technology impacts the environment
They should be evaluating their own department’s environmental impact as well as how and where they can bring improvements, Sunil said.
IT equipment consumes significant amounts of energy, with some technologies — such as generative AI — requiring more power than other types of digital solutions.
Data centers — whether on premise or with cloud providers — use not only large amounts of power but also use significant amounts of water for cooling and often require large tracks of land.
However, CIOs can opt to consider their technology suppliers’ sustainability records along with performance criteria when selecting vendors, Sunil said. They can also work with hardware providers to ensure they have solid take-back programs so end-of-life devices can be reused or recycled. They can promote the use of software designed for sustainability.
In the near future, CIOs may have no choice but to become more sustainability minded.
Seventy percent of leaders in the area of technology sourcing, procuring and vendor management will have performance objectives for their functions that focus on environmental sustainability, according to Gartner’s “Predicts 2023: Environmental Sustainability Is Now an IT Sourcing Imperative.”
9. Take a holistic approach
Enterprise executives should remember that environmental sustainability is one part of environmental, social and governance ESG efforts. They should consider their sustainability initiatives through the environmental lens as well as the social and governance lenses.
Leaders should think end to end, Shandal said. For example, electric vehicle makers should be considering how and where the materials to create the batteries are sourced; how they’re handled at end-of-life; the environmental and social impact of that work; and how all those pieces will be monitored and governed according to the policies, standards and objectives established by the vehicle maker.
10. Look for opportunities in a sustainability-focused economy
Going on a sustainability journey can unlock new sources of revenue.
Companies should identify what opportunities they may have as they and others increasingly embrace sustainable practices, Shandal said.
For example, as companies turn away from using chemicals that harm the environment, they’ll be looking for environmentally friendly alternatives — a shift that opens up a market opportunity for those ready to meet the changing market demands, Shandal said.
“Think about where value is shifting and, ‘How do I position my business to play and win in this new economy?'” he said.
What costs $1.2 TRILLION and continues to get more and more expensive? The answer: Americans’ summer travel. In line with the increasingly prominent green trends sweeping the nation, it’s important that we approach our summer adventures with a mindful consideration of their environmental impact. By EREF Staff • Reposted: July 27, 2023
What costs $1.2 TRILLION and continues to get more and more expensive? The answer: Americans’ summer travel[1]!
Now that it’s officially summer, many Americans are headed out of town. Whether weekends at the beach or months abroad, this summer is set to witness the strongest air travel since the pre-pandemic era, possibly making it the most robust ever. Over a quarter of Americans (26%), an increase from 19% in the first quarter, are preparing to embark on leisure travel in the coming three months[2]. This increase in travelers will translate into an approximate 12% growth in passengers for the three biggest U.S. airlines, expected to ferry 8.6 million people during the summer season[3]. While this mass mobilization symbolizes an exciting era of discovery and relaxation, it’s crucial to remember that our travel plans, while invigorating for us, can impose a heavy toll on the environment. In line with the increasingly prominent green trends sweeping the nation, it’s important that we approach our summer adventures with a mindful consideration of their environmental impact.
This summer’s surge in travel activity can unfortunately translate into increased waste production, with potential negative implications for our environment and lifestyle. Moreover, maintaining the allure and accessibility of our favorite scenic spots and lakes depends significantly on how well we protect them from pollution and trash accumulation. In a world where single-use plastic is commonplace, the path to sustainability can seem daunting. But a little planning can go a long way in fostering eco-friendly travel.
Unfortunately, it’s rare to see recycling bins at rest stops and gas stations, which makes it difficult for travelers to responsibly dispose of recyclables like plastic bottles or cans. As a result, these items often end up in general trash bins, destined for landfills. By including more visible and accessible recycling facilities at these high-traffic areas, we could make a substantial contribution to reducing travel-related waste.
As you plan your travel, consider these tips. When driving, pack snacks from home, carrying reusable beverage containers, and maintaining separate trash bags for recyclables and other waste in your car. Make a game out of minimizing waste – it not only teaches sustainability but can add a fun twist to the journey. When traveling by plane, one could manage waste by having a meal before a short flight to avoid single-use packaged snacks. For longer flights, taking advantage of in-flight meals helps reduce waste as these meals would otherwise be discarded. Train travel, in addition to being an efficient mode of transportation, also offers a refreshing respite from the bustling city traffic. If your travel requires documentation or tickets, digital documents on your phone or tablet help save paper and are less likely to be lost.
Choosing larger, shareable items, using snack cups for family members, and reducing hotel service to only when needed are effective ways to cut down waste. Don’t fall for the convenience of disposable utensils. Carrying reusable utensils, dishes, straws, and cloth napkins might seem like a chore, but such small steps can significantly lessen the landfill load.
Whether you’re headed to the beach, mountains, cities, or abroad, there are specific steps you can take to reduce waste. For beach or lake visits, the use of items that could be swept away by the wind or tide should be minimized. In the mountains, a pack it in, pack it out mindset goes a long way in preserving the natural beauty. City travelers can cut down waste by enjoying meals in local restaurants instead of opting for takeaway. When traveling abroad, especially to European countries known for their waste minimization efforts, be sure to pay attention when you have items to discard as most offer a more diverse suite of options for disposal than the average American city and in many cases have separate recycling bins for plastic, glass, metal, paper and food.
These small steps may seem minor, but collectively, they can significantly impact our environment, potentially steering the future of the tourism industry towards a more sustainable path. As you make summer travel plans, and add to that $1.2 trillion price tag, consider a pledge to travel responsibly and sustainably.
We’ve all been there, right? The mountain of reusable bags we forget to take to the store. The burger that should have been plant-based. The over-packaged product you just splurged on. These gaps between intention and action manifest when we start to diet, to start a hobby, go to the gym and especially when we try to live sustainably. We are all a hot mess of un-met intentions.
Because rather than gap, consumers face giant barriers. Reframing from gaps (which imply something missing in consumer morality), to barriers (which aren’t consumers fault) is empowering for business. The barriers range from price, availability, and structural factors that require infrastructure change, to myths, awareness, and availability, that can marketers can tackle.
To bust these barriers, we need to ask ourselves a crucial question when promoting a product, service, or action: Are we effectively selling the benefits? Because only benefits can bust through barriers. Let’s break it down into three key categories of benefits – functional, emotional, and social:
Functional benefits play a crucial role in selling sustainable products. Consider how sustainability can add value for money, enhance performance and efficacy, improve quality, save time, or contribute to safety. Understanding and emphasising these functional benefits can make sustainable choices more appealing to consumers.
Emotional benefits are equally important. As retailers, it’s essential to acknowledge that the consumer is the hero, not us. The feel-good factor associated with buying sustainable products can be a significant motivator. Does sustainability strengthen sensory enjoyment, provide physical comfort, offer an exciting experience, boost self-worth, or offer a sense of personalisation? These emotional benefits can truly make a difference in consumers’ decision-making.
Finally, let’s not forget about social benefits. How does sustainability impact family dynamics, desirability in the eyes of others, the perception of being cool, smart, or part of a community? Highlighting these social benefits can create a sense of belonging and encourage individuals to embrace sustainable choices.
By Mary Riddle from Triple Pundit • Reposted: July 26, 2023
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is expected to release its long-awaited climate disclosure rule this fall, and businesses are preparing for change. The intent is to create a framework for companies to make climate-related disclosures in a way that is standardized and allows for comparison.
“I think it is helpful to frame the SEC proposal not as a climate proposal, but rather as a proposal to enhance and standardize climate-related financial disclosures,” said Emily Pierce, chief global policy officer at the carbon accounting firm Persefoni and a former SEC lawyer involved in developing the proposed rule.
What’s different about the SEC climate disclosure rule?
The SEC’s forthcoming climate disclosure rule has been over a decade in the making. In 2010, SEC staff issued guidance stating that climate change could impact business operations as it carries material risks that affect financial performance, Pierce said. And anything that could impact financial performance should be communicated to investors.
Five years later, the investor demand for information was growing steadily. “By 2015, there was a collective concern about investor demand for sustainability information,” she said. “Investors were not getting the information they were asking for, and the marketplace was inefficient.”
The Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) rose up to meet that demand shortly after the Paris climate agreement was adopted in 2015. “TCFD developed helpful disclosure frameworks for governance, strategy and risk management processes,” as well as metrics and targets to measure a company’s greenhouse gas footprint, Pierce said.
“TCFD is a market norm, but it wasn’t always complete and comprehensive, and it didn’t allow for comparison,” she explained. “The SEC was inspired by the TCFD framework that investors and companies have found useful.”
What do we know about the new rule?
The SEC’s proposed rule covers how companies communicate their climate-related risks. Companies will be required to disclose material risks, including physical risks and transition risks, related to climate change. These may include sea-level rise, more frequent extreme weather events and wildfires, or changes in government regulation and consumer demand.
Importantly, the rule will not initially apply to all companies, but will be phased in over time. “Phasing is an important part of the proposal, because it’s our way of managing implementation,” Pierce said. “We have to strike the balance between investor protection and creating a rule that is feasible for companies to implement. I think the most likely scenario is that, if it is finalized this year, companies will need to gather data next year for fiscal year 2025.”
The rule will also hold companies’ feet to the fire for claims made about net-zero and emissions reductions. If a company has a public target related to cutting emissions, the SEC will require additional disclosures and obligations related to that target.
“A lot of companies calculate their greenhouse gas emissions today,” Pierce said. “But they do it in a way that does not have as much control over their data, calculations, and outputs compared to what they would have in their financial calculation reporting. When you’re making information investor-grade and compliance-ready, you should bring lessons you have learned from the financial space into the carbon accounting space.”
Emissions created by a company’s direct operations — Scope 1 emissions — and emissions associated with the company’s purchase of energy — Scope 2 emissions — will need to be externally assured, Pierce said. But smaller companies will not need to disclose value chain emissions from assets the company does not own — Scope 3 emissions — unless they set an emissions target for Scope 3, she predicted.
What’s next?
The climate disclosure rule should not contain any surprises compared to the SEC’s current proposal, Pierce said. But the timing of release will be later than anticipated, due to the unprecedented number of public comments and feedback. Many analysts agree it will be released this fall.
“To be ready for climate disclosure, companies need to bring discipline and processes to their broader corporate thinking about governance, strategy and risk management,” Pierce said. “Additional discipline and processes will help them communicate about what they’re doing.”
A lot of companies are already thinking about these issues, calculating their emissions and gathering the necessary information, Pierce said. “There are market rewards to decarbonizing, and they see the value in that. We will see an increase in the market rewarding sustainable behavior, whether it is in access to capital, customer preference, more business-to-business relationships or consumer demand.”
Spain, Barcelona, Mercat de Sant Antoni Market, canned seafood display. (Photo by: Rosie Irene Betancourt/Jeffrey Greenberg/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
Companies should make their voices heard by participating in critical stakeholder events. By Jamie Gibbon & Katy Hladki from Pew Trusts • Reposted: July 26, 2023
With catch worth more than US $40 billion dollars per year, tuna is one of the most important species for supermarkets and other companies in the global seafood industry. So it is critical that its catch is closely monitored to help protect the sustainability of the species.
But that isn’t the case. Of the over 20,000 registered vessels catching and transporting tuna throughout the world’s ocean, only a small portion are independently monitored.
However, that may soon change. Retailers are hearing from their customers that the sustainability of the fish they buy is more important than ever. To ensure greater transparency, which can lead to more sustainable management of tuna species, retailers can—and should—become more active in calls for increased oversight and data collection on the vessels bringing tuna to the market.
In June, Walmart, one of the world’s largest global retailers, committed to improving transparency in the data collection of its tuna supply chain and will soon source exclusively from vessels with 100% observer coverage, through either human observers or electronic monitoring (EM), which uses cameras and sensors to collect information on fishing activity. This level of commitment to transparent, well-managed tuna fisheries is commendable, and while some retailers have made similar calls for transparency, more should do the same.
Making a commitment to 100% observer coverage in tuna supply chains is an important first step. But to ensure that there is sufficient product to meet consumers’ needs while also fulfilling this transparency pledge, retailers should get more involved in the policy process, letting government officials and fishing companies know that sustainability is a priority for the buyers.
Direct engagement with regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) is one way for retailers to do that. RFMOs govern most of the world’s shared commercial fisheries and regulate both the amount of fish caught and how they are caught. By advocating for region-wide EM programs, market members can help ensure that all vessels fishing for tuna will have the tools and rules available to easily collect data on their catch and operations and share that information with government regulators and the companies that buy their fish. That can help retailers meet their commitments to consumers.
Public pressure is already starting to pay off. In the Indian Ocean, where retailers have warned that continued overfishing of yellowfin tuna could affect their buying decisions, governments recently agreed to the world’s first EM standards, which will allow fishing vessels to use cameras and sensors to collect data required by regulators. Similar discussions are underway among Atlantic and Pacific ocean fishery managers, and retailers should advocate for RFMOs in those regions to adopt and implement EM programs that include standards and pathways for improving and increasing observer coverage.
Companies buying and selling seafood directly benefit from healthy tuna stocks. As such, they bear responsibility for ensuring that fisheries are well managed and that vessels are capturing and reporting accurate and transparent data. Through their purchasing practices, sourcing commitments and advocacy actions at RFMOs, businesses can help protect the long-term health and stability of global tuna stocks and ocean ecosystems.
Major retailers committing to increased transparency and data collection can help profoundly improve practices throughout the seafood supply chain, which in turn will promote the health of the ocean and fisheries globally. This will pay dividends to those companies—and seafood consumers worldwide—for a long time to come.
Jamie Gibbon is a manager and Katy Hladki is a senior officer working on Pew’s international fisheries project.
By Michaela Barnett, Founder, KnoxFill, University of Virginia, Leidy Klotz, Associate Professor of Engineering and Co-Director, Convergent Behavioral Science Initiative, University of Virginia, Patrick I. Hancock, Postdoctoral fellow, University of Virgini and Shahzeen Attari, Associate Professor of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University via The Conversation • Reposted: July 25, 2023
You’ve just finished a cup of coffee at your favorite cafe. Now you’re facing a trash bin, a recycling bin and a compost bin. What’s the most planet-friendly thing to do with your cup?
Many of us would opt for the recycling bin – but that’s often the wrong choice. In order to hold liquids, most paper coffee cups are made with a thin plastic lining, which makes separating these materials and recycling them difficult.
In fact, the most sustainable option isn’t available at the trash bin. It happens earlier, before you’re handed a disposable cup in the first place.
Our results show that a decadeslong effort to educate the U.S. public about recycling has succeeded in some ways but failed in others. These efforts have made recycling an option that consumers see as important – but to the detriment of more sustainable options. And it has not made people more effective recyclers.
Experts have long recommended tackling the waste problem by prioritizing source reduction strategies that prevent the creation of waste in the first place, rather than seeking to manage and mitigate its impact later. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other prominent environmental organizations like the U.N. Environment Programme use a framework called the waste management hierarchy that ranks strategies from most to least environmentally preferred.
The U.S. EPA’s current waste management hierarchy (left, with parenthetical explanations by Michaela Barnett, et al.), and a visual depiction of the three R’s framework (right). Michaela Barnett, et al., CC BY-ND
The familiar waste management hierarchy urges people to “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle,” in that order. Creating items that can be recycled is better from a sustainability perspective than burning them in an incinerator or burying them in a landfill, but it still consumes energy and resources. In contrast, reducing waste generation conserves natural resources and avoids other negative environmental impacts throughout a product’s life.
R’s out of place
In our surveys, participants completed a series of questions and tasks that elicited their views of different waste strategies. In response to open-ended questions about the most effective way to reduce landfill waste or solve environmental issues associated with waste, participants overwhelmingly cited recycling and other downstream strategies.
We also asked people to rank the four strategies of the Environmental Protection Agency’s waste management hierarchy from most to least environmentally preferred. In that order, they include source reduction and reuse; recycling and composting; energy recovery, such as burning trash to generate energy; and treatment and disposal, typically in a landfill. More than three out of four participants (78%) ordered the strategies incorrectly.
When they were asked to rank the reduce/reuse/recycle options in the same way, participants fared somewhat better, but nearly half (46%) still misordered the popular phrase.
Finally, we asked participants to choose between just two options – waste prevention and recycling. This time, over 80% of participants understood that preventing waste was much better than recycling.
Recycling badly
While our participants defaulted to recycling as a waste management strategy, they did not execute it very well.
This isn’t surprising, since the current U.S. recycling system puts the onus on consumers to separate recyclable materials and keep contaminants out of the bin. There is a lot of variation in what can be recycled from community to community, and this standard can change frequently as new products are introduced and markets for recycled materials shift.
Our second study asked participants to sort common consumer goods into virtual recycling, compost and trash bins and then say how confident they were in their choices. Many people placed common recycling contaminants, including plastic bags (58%), disposable coffee cups (46%) and light bulbs (26%), erroneously – and often confidently – in the virtual recycling bins.
This is known as wishcycling – placing nonrecyclable items in the recycling stream in the hope or belief that they will be recycled. Wishcycling creates additional costs and problems for recyclers, who have to sort the materials, and sometimes results in otherwise recyclable materials being landfilled or incinerated instead.
Although our participants were strongly biased toward recycling, they weren’t confident that it would work. Participants in our first survey were asked to estimate what fraction of plastic has been recycled since plastic production began. According to a widely cited estimate, the answer is just 9%. Our respondents thought that 25% of plastic had been recycled – more than expert estimates but still a low amount. And they correctly reasoned that a majority of it has ended up in landfills and the environment.
Empowering consumers to cut waste
Post-consumer waste is the result of a long supply chain with environmental impacts at every stage. However, U.S. policy and corporate discourse focuses on consumers as the main source of waste, as implied by the term “post-consumer waste.”
Other approaches put more responsibility on producers by requiring them to take back their products for disposal, cover recycling costs and design and produce goods that are easy to recycle effectively. These approaches are used in some sectors in the U.S., including lead-acid car batteries and consumer electronics, but they are largely voluntary or mandated at the state and local level.
When we asked participants in our second study where change could have the most impact and where they felt they could have the most impact as individuals, they correctly focused on upstream interventions. But they felt they could only affect the system through what they chose to purchase and how they subsequently disposed of it – in other words, acting as consumers, not as citizens.
As waste-related pollution accumulates worldwide, corporations continue to shame and blame consumers rather than reducing the amount of disposable products they create. In our view, recycling is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for overproducing and consuming goods, and it is time that the U.S. stopped treating it as such.
In today’s business world, many functions are outsourced. For example, at my company, we outsource payroll, IT, legal services and taxes because of the highly specialized knowledge required to do the tasks and the economies of scale achieved by the vendors. It doesn’t make sense for us to hire a full-time, in-house attorney with expertise in contracts, employment law, litigation, etc., when there is a buffet of highly specialized lawyers I can access through one relationship with a law firm—and I can rely on them as needed.
A similar theme is emerging in sustainability services. As an expert in providing outsourced CSO services, my company and others in the space help firms achieve their sustainability goals.
One of the biggest challenges faced by businesses today is finding people to assimilate all the knowledge needed to maneuver the energy transition, which places increasing pressure on businesses to reduce emissions, promote circularity and track sustainability. According to LinkedIn’s Global Green Skills Report 2022, demand for “green skills” is outpacing supply, and the specialization of “green skills” is proliferating—from climate and renewable energy to environmental awareness and corporate social responsibility.
Companies are responding to this need by appointing a chief sustainability officer, or CSO, who is expected to lead the response to the energy transition. The skills required to do this are complex, technical and often beyond the abilities of one person. It requires engineers, legal experts, market analysts, investment bankers and project managers.
Outsourcing CSO services, like outsourcing legal and accounting, allows businesses to access specialized sustainability experts. Outsourced CSOs can provide sustainability, business strategy and operational guidance related to the energy transition.
Making The Decision To Outsource
Whether you are leading a small startup or a large publicly traded firm, here are several instances where outsourcing CSO services can be an effective way to address some of today’s carbon challenges:
• New climate startups: You have launched a successful business model and are fortunate enough to be juggling multiple balls—hiring and training, sales and business development, investor relations and more. Your leadership team may not have time to keep up with global climate policies, emerging incentive programs, new competing technologies, evolving carbon markets, data standards and carbon accounting rules.
• Small or midsized privately held businesses: You have loyal customers who like your products or services, and you are growing steadily in a stable environment. Recently, these customers have been asking casual questions about the company’s sustainability efforts. The leadership team doesn’t have the time or the baseline knowledge to analyze the company’s sustainability.
• CEOs or CFOs: It’s time to update investors and shareholders about profit margins, strategic plans and key performance indicators, and they also want to see an analysis of energy transition risks and climate risks. As a believer in risk-averse governance, you know you should include this in your quarterly report, but you are not clear where to start.
• One-person sustainability departments: Pressure from the board and upper management has forced one person to research and respond to a variety of questions over the years, and their role has evolved to include “sustainability expert.” But the questions are becoming more complex and overwhelming. A climate scientist, a policy analyst and a process engineer are needed on the team to fully respond to the situation, but the budget doesn’t allow this.
Of course, outsourcing a task core to a business’ strategic direction is not always a good idea. A CSO is a part of the leadership team and has access to confidential information that is key to a company’s success and competitive advantage, which are not things that can be shared with an outside firm before establishing a high level of trust. In these cases, it is better to plan to have an in-house CSO who can incorporate these business secrets into a long-term sustainability strategy.
Getting Started With An Outsourced CSO
The CSO is usually key to building the company’s “green team” that has the passion for facilitating the energy transition and the specialized skills needed to perform the critical analysis needed. If you are outsourcing a CSO, make sure you have established an internal team with diverse skill sets; these include climate scientists, market analysts, process engineers, policy advisors, etc.
The energy transition requires a business to rethink how it’s doing business, and a CSO must frequently interact with purchasing, marketing, legal, accounting and operations, and talk their language.
A key CSO function is communicating complex technical concepts in simple language. Ask your CSO to conduct an analysis of the risks and opportunities your business faces, so when a customer or an investor casually asks what you are doing on the sustainability front, you can give a clear and confident response.
CSOs lead a company’s response to the energy transition: Look for someone who is unbiased, data-driven, aspirational in their approach, has a strong grasp of internal and external stakeholder needs, and a peer network that includes policy analysts, engineers, auditors, carbon life cycle experts, etc.
The biggest challenge in deciding whether to outsource the CSO function is how to integrate someone external into the day-to-day details of your team’s workflow. Should you give them a company email? How much confidential information should you share? Who should be the main point of contact internally for the outsourced service? Each company has to develop its own processes to govern the level of outsourcing it wishes to put in place.
Some companies starting fresh on the energy transition journey need a temporary leader with a full team of external technical resources that they can use as needed. Others, further down the path, may have an internal CSO on the team, but they need to outsource technical expertise and receive policy briefings and technical analyses, as needed.
Outsourcing the CSO function can make it easier for businesses to make sustainability and strategic decisions. An outsourced CSO can analyze the risks and opportunities a business faces due to climate policy, carbon pricing, consumer preferences or even severe weather events, so when a customer or an investor asks what you are doing on the sustainability front, you can give a clear and confident response.
The RMA aims to fill a crucial gap by offering brands, agencies and publishers a range of services to accelerate their competitive advantage through a sustainability lens. From Sustainable Brands • Reposted: July 23, 2023
As the media world grapples with its role in the climate crisis, the Responsible Marketing Agency (RMA) launched this week as a new breed of specialist with a mission to help media, digital and marketing clients to realize sustainable growth through responsible and progressive practices.
The RMA’s team of ethically minded media and marketing professionals will help brands, agencies and publishers to accelerate competitive advantage, shaping capabilities and enabling delivery of credible environmental, social and governance (ESG) roadmaps and KPIs in line with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
As outlined in the World Federation of Advertisers’ (WFA) and Kantar’s Sustainable Marketing 2030 report, 39 percent of client-side marketers say their companies are only now taking their first steps towards sustainable practices, citing a lack of resources, knowledge and skills — while 15 percent haven’t yet started.
To address this, the Responsible Marketing Agency aims to fill a crucial gap by offering flexible service models to cover advisory, enablement, strategy and partnerships through a sustainability lens.
A BRAND GUIDE TO DRIVING SUSTAINABLE CONSUMER BEHAVIOR CHANGE
Download SB’s new, free guide to learn how your company can create an advantage in the marketplace through sustainable and innovative solutions that influence consumer behavior. The guide features case studies, a list of other helpful resources, and five actionable steps that brands and marketing teams can take to drive sustainable behavior change at scale.
The RMA’s experts are passionate about helping clients plan for what’s next, whilst striving to ensure positive societal impact synchronized with business growth. Its inaugural clients include spirits giantDiageo and the WFA, with which it collaborated recently to create a groundbreaking report covering ten ways advertisers can reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the media supply chain.
As of press time, it’s unclear whether the RMA will focus more on the tactical or the creative side of marketing (or both); but regardless, its launch comes at an inflection point for marketers and advertisers — who are now working to balance market and consumer pressure to deliver impactful, engaging creative that authentically conveys brands’ values; and increasing scrutiny from regulators on the validity of brand claims; as well as increased attention to advertising as an overlooked but addressable carbon hotspot — thanks to significant supply chain emissions during both production and the massive amounts of energy used in their distribution and viewing.
The company says it will offer consultative services to create and shape programs that will drive responsible, sustainable and progressive marketing solutions. The team also helps clients to source and manage third-party relationships to advance progressive marketing programs.
“The Responsible Marketing Agency’s Manifesto states that when brands act responsibly in the media and marketing environment, their success deepens. From brand safety to sustainability, inclusion and ethical marketing practices, the modern marketer’s success hinges on making media and creative fit for progress,” says Hannah Mirza, founder of the RMA and VP of the Bloom Network, who has over 20 years’ experience — including agency, publisher and client-side roles. “However, all too frequently, ESG market solutions are immature and not fit for purpose. So, our team of plug-and-play expert advisors is determined to help in this mission, guiding clients through the ESG maze, navigating new solutions and integrated strategies.
“I love to help clients thrive in uncharted, complex situations — driving opportunities for business growth. As authentic, performance-orientated and trusted independent advisors; we are now offering a full-service capacity — including expertise on supply path optimization in programmatic, through independent analysis, to media decarbonization strategies and DEI programs.”
Investors, customers and regulators have clued in to greenwashing and are stepping up enforcement. By Stephan Liozu from Industry Week • Reposted: July 21, 2023
The era of making fake and false sustainability claims is over. Consumers, NGOs, investors, and regulators are watching closely and are holding businesses accountable. Think twice before making sustainability claims. Do what you say and say what you do. The number of greenwashing lawsuits have exploded for the past five years. A 2020 report by Foley and Lardner reported a doubling of greenwashing lawsuits in the oil and gas industry in just 5 years.
Lawsuits are public and at times very costly. They touch all sectors across all geographies. Let us look at some examples.
Delta Airlines is facing a class action lawsuit over claims that it misrepresented its environmental impact by presenting itself in advertising and promotional activities as being “carbon neutral.”
Nike is being sued by a consumerbecause they “deceive consumers into believing that they are receiving products that are ‘sustainable,’ ‘made with recycled fibers,” and can reduce one’s carbon footprint in a move to “zero carbon and zero waste.
Hyundai Motor UK was fined for claiming that if 10,000 of their hydrogen-powered Nexo cars were on the road, the carbon emission reduction would be the equivalent of planting 60,000 trees
Deutsche Bank is under investigation by regulators in U.S. and Europe because the bank’s asset management arm allegedly sold investment products worth $1 trillion as more environmentally friendly and “sustainable” than they actually were.
Walmart was fined $3 million for making deceptive green claims” about some textile products.
Shell’s 11 board directors were sued for breach of their legal duties under the Companies Act when for adopting and implementing a so-called “Energy Transition Strategy” that fails to align with the Paris Agreement.
Let us start by defining what greenwashing means. It is a practice used by businesses to represent themselves as more sustainable than they truly are. It includes providing misleading information regarding a product’s sustainability or labeling an offer as “green” when it is not.
Greenwashing is not a static concept. It occurs on a spectrum, ranging from wishful thinking to outright deceit. Greenwashing can also be unintentional, as rules and regulations change over time. Finally, it now extends to broader sustainability concepts such as social good and human rights. Government enforcement actions and civil suits alleging greenwashing are on the rise through a myriad of different laws, including securities regulations, consumer protection laws, fraud and misrepresentation statutes and advertising standards. Bottom line, it is serious business!
I propose five steps to avoid greenwashing-related litigation.
1. Review the claims you are making across your business: Conduct an internal inventory of what claims are made and communicated to the market through all the formal and informal channels. That includes written and verbal claims. You might be surprised by the lack of governance and the variability of claims made at the divisional and regional level.
2. Review the exposure related to claims and the quality of the back-up data: Based on this inventory, evaluate the level of risks associated with the most definitive sustainability claims: The above-mentioned lawsuit examples provide a good illustration of how companies might potentially be exposed to greenwashing claims. One of the lessons to be taken from recent legal filings is that companies should avoid sweeping statements about their sustainability efforts. If a company can support concrete statements with concrete data, they are better able to neutralize and defend the greenwashing claims that are now flooding the litigation landscape.
3. Provide training on ESG, green marketing and the associated risks: Part of the sustainability and ESG capability building program should include training on greenwashing and about making sustainability claims in sales and marketing. Teams should be aware of the risks of making unfounded or exaggerated claims. In addition, the same teams should understand the need for solid and concrete data to support claims (including customer data, research data and technical data).
4. Establish a dynamic review of changes in the regulatory landscape and update the governance model: If you pay attention to sustainability reporting requirements, you realize the level of dynamism. Rules and regulations are changing by industry and by country. If you work across many industrial verticals, regulatory changes might happen without your realizing it. Dynamism therefore relates to the speed and complex nature of changes in your regulatory landscape. A review combines the use of the right regulatory benchmark software as well as the involvement of internal experts who scan the landscape. It is really hard to keep up. You might be compliant today but miss an important update in reporting requirements that could impact your sustainability, marketing and communication strategies.
5. If in doubt, bring in the experts. experts include suppliers, consultants, and your internal risk management teams. Do not improvise. It could be costly. Establish regular reviews of your marketing and sales materials by these experts as part of the governance process. Quickly take action if your claims are overstated or non-complaint.
If you are an industrial organization, you do not want to be on the naughty list of greenwashers. That is a given. You must have an internal discussion about the claims you are making to avoid potential risks of litigation. Remember that your customers, investors and regulators might be more sophisticated that you are, and they might reverse-engineer your claims. So, do what you say and say what you do.
Stephan Liozu is founder of Value Innoruption Advisors, a consulting boutique specializing in industrial pricing, XaaS pricing and value-based pricing. He is also the co-founder of Pricing for the Planet, which specializes in pricing for sustainability. Stephan has 30 years of experience in the industrial sector with companies like Owens Corning, Saint-Gobain, Freudenberg and Thales.
CNH Industrial worked with Monarch Tractor to create the New Holland T4 Electric Power, an all-electric utility tractor with zero tailpipe emissions. Photo: CNH Industrial
By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: July 19, 2023
With their reliance on massive combines and other large pieces of diesel-powered equipment, the agriculture and construction industries present a major challenge for electrification. Nevertheless, suppliers are beginning to offer electric options, and the global firm CNH Industrial illustrates how careful strategizing can yield rapid results.
A head start on electrification
The Electrification Portfolio Management team is a relatively new addition to CNH Industrial as the electrification industry picked up steam over recent years. The sector’s rapid rise has enabled CNH Industrial to recruit talent from a deep pool of accomplished electrification experts.
“Now that the technology is known, there is a well-defined supply chain and expertise in the market, we decided to look at the market and bring in that expertise,” said Mario de Amicis, head of the CNH Industrial electrification team.
Knowing both the customer and the technology is another foundation of the company’s strategy. While some firms have gained publicity by electrifying massive pieces of machinery, CNH Industrial assessed the demand for relatively small, lightweight utility tractors, taking particular note of the specific benefits that electrification would bring to customers.
Collaborating to accelerate electrification
Another leg of the strategy involves forming partnerships with experienced electrification companies, helping to accelerate the timeline from concept to market. For its inaugural electric tractor project, CNH Industrial enlisted the U.S. firm Monarch Tractor as a strategic partner.
The result was a prototype version of the T4 Electric Power, an all-electric utility tractor for CNH Industrial’s New Holland Agriculture brand. The prototype was produced in record time and unveiled at the company’s tech day event in Phoenix, Arizona, in December 2022.
A production model will extend to CNH Industrial’s Case IH brand as well, where the company has also introduced an all-electric mini-excavator.
Electric vs. diesel vehicles: Compare and contrast
Around 70 percent of the CNH Industrial’s electrification team comes from the automotive industry, de Amicis said. That experience shows up in T4 features that have become standard fare in electric vehicles, including battery range that can last up to a day depending on the type of work. Another key element is fast-charging capability: a bi-directional charging system enables the tractor to provide power to electric tools (such as welding machines and drills) and function as a generator for emergency or daily use.
The commercial version of the T4 will launch with remote and autonomous features. Similar to those in other electric vehicles, these elements are expected to result in significant productivity improvements.
“Farmers can remotely activate the tractor via a smartphone app,” the company detailed in a recent announcement. “Shadow Follow Me mode lets operators sync machines to work together. A 360-degree perception system detects and avoids obstacles. Telematics and auto guidance keep all functions in check for operators.”
CNH Industrial also took care to incorporate a power take-off feature and other standard elements for attaching implements to a tractor, with a high-tech twist. The T4 comes with a fleet management controller that recognizes and links the attachments, enabling farmers to run the tractor remotely through all stages of use.
All the benefits of electrification
As with all electric vehicles, the T4 eliminates tailpipe emissions and offers a significant savings on operating costs. CNH Industrial estimates a savings up to 90 percent over the cost of fueling and maintaining a diesel engine. The electric drive also delivers improvements in responsiveness, traction control and all-around handling, according to the company.
In terms of agricultural use, the electric tractor eliminates the risk of soil contamination from spills or accidents, de Amicis said. That’s an especially important consideration for regenerative agriculture, which prioritizes soil health.
On a more holistic basis, regenerative practices also prioritize worker health, making a zero-emission tractor all the more attractive.
The T4 reduces noise by up to 90 percent, according to company estimates, and tamps down on vibrations, too. That’s a significant improvement in the well-being of both workers and farm animals, while lessening disturbance for nearby neighbors.
Similar benefits are at work in CNH Industrial’s electric mini-excavator. It is sized to enable it to pass through doorways and conduct work indoors, free of the diesel fumes and noise of conventional equipment.
Next steps for decarbonization
CNH Industrial also offers farmers a methane biofuel option for New Holland’s T7 and T6 tractors. These models are a particularly good fit for livestock farms with digester equipment, which extract biogas from manure.
“Farmers grow crops and use waste products to generate biomethane, which powers the tractor, which, in turn, helps to grow those very crops,” New Holland’s website reads.
Electrifying combines and larger pieces of equipment involves another set of challenges. Here, CNH Industrial is focusing on a hybrid strategy to satisfy customer demand for both performance and efficiency, while also achieving a sharp reduction in carbon emissions, de Amicis said.
“Battery-electric, with no combustion, is a really good application for small machines,” he explained. “But when we move up, we know that — due to the limit of the power density and cost of the battery — we need to talk about hybridization for medium to large machines.
Much of the equipment attached to farm and construction vehicles is driven by hydraulic systems, which lend themselves to electrification.
“Electrification is an opportunity for efficiency,” de Amicis said. “A tractor is pointless alone. It is intended to pull and provide energy for something else — for implements. There is a lot of opportunity because of the hydraulics in implements, and if we move to electrification, we can improve controllability.”
Beyond EV batteries
As much as CNH Industrial and other firms have been helped along their electrification journey by the size and maturity of the on-road electric vehicle market, further progress in the off-road area will require a tailored approach.
The next step involves forming new supply chain partnerships to develop a battery designed specifically for high-voltage systems, de Amicis said. “We can’t simply copy and paste what the automotive industry is doing. Due to the specific requirements linked with our environment, a customized solution is required.”
The decarbonization of the agriculture and construction industries is only just beginning. But equipment suppliers such as CNH Industrial are poised to overcome the technology challenges and accelerate the transition away from fossil energy.
Hot Bread Kitchen is a New York City-based nonprofit organization that creates economic opportunity for immigrant women and people of color with training and job placement in the food industry. (Image courtesy of Hot Bread Kitchen)
When we look at what it takes to be successful in the workplace — and what makes a workplace successful — it becomes immediately apparent that workers need agency over their choices, goals and actions. It’s also clear that women and people who identify beyond the gender binary are systematically denied agency in the workplace — as in, the opportunity to make decisions, take purposeful action and pursue goals.
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted myriad barriers to women’s agency in the workplace, attributable to outdated societal gender norms. In the first months of the pandemic in the United States, women’s employment fell precipitously in comparison to men. The reason? Women still tend to be more likely than men to leave their jobs or downsize their positions to take care of children and/or elderly family members when the need arises.
For those that remain in the workforce, factors limiting the agency of women and gender-expansive people abound. Women’s agency is hindered because they are more likely to fill service-industry jobs that tend to offer limited flexibility or benefits, and women with lower educational attainment are hit the hardest.
Transgender and gender-expansive people face workplace barriers due to being generally underrepresented in the U.S. workforce, and consistently enduring threats of violence, discrimination and stigma. Lack of guaranteed healthcare or paid leave, limited access to childcare, inflexible schedules, fewer opportunities to build knowledge and skills, and much more intersect to limit women and trans people’s freedom to pursue their professional goals.
This shift toward lower workforce participation among women and trans people — and the increased gender inequality that follows — has lasting implications for the future options and decision-making of workers, not to mention for younger generations. Further, lack of workforce diversity is both a result of, and leads to, lack of leadership diversity, further entrenching these conditions.
Mindful of lessons learned from the pandemic, and with the knowledge that women and gender-expansive people are critical to business’ success, we are more aware than ever that organizations and workers excel when they are led with wisdom and compassion. When ranked by their employees, 55 percent of women leaders were perceived to have these two critical traits, versus 27 percent of men. The point is not that women are necessarily better leaders, but rather that they tend to embrace leadership practices that foster more inclusive work environments for everyone, which in turn creates a bulwark against the trends listed above.
The existing gender gap in workplace leadership has real ramifications for the bottom line and for our culture. When various industries’ current leaders (who, generally speaking, tend to be men) continue to take a “traditional” approach to leadership and company policies — one that favors business-as-usual over humanity and equity — it further entrenches norms that exclude women and gender-nonconforming people from leadership positions, diminishes overall productivity, and has larger implications for generational wealth. And, as we saw in the early days of the pandemic, these approaches can push women out of the workforce entirely and limit agency for the longer term.
By embracing an approach focused on wisdom and compassion, employers — from major corporations to local nonprofit organizations — can play an important role in advocating for women’s and gender-expansive people’s agency and success in the workforce and beyond, ensuring all workers have the resources they need to excel at work and at home.
Hot Bread Kitchen provides immigrant women and people of color with culinary skills training and professional readiness programs, job placement, food business entrepreneurship assistance, social services support, bridge training, an extensive employer network, and more. (Image: Wini Lao for Hot Bread Kitchen)
How Hot Bread Kitchen supports empowered workers
This is where Hot Bread Kitchen comes in. Hot Bread Kitchen is a New York City-based nonprofit organization that creates economic opportunity for immigrant women and people of color using the vibrant food industry as a catalyst for personal and professional growth.
We support our program members — who are disproportionately affected by social and economic barriers to wealth generation and long-term stability — as they pursue their career ambitions. We support women and gender-expansive people by providing culinary skills training and professional readiness programs, job placement, food business entrepreneurship assistance, social services support, bridge training, an extensive employer network, and more.
In the years since our founding, it has become clear that these strategies are critical tools for advancing women’s ability to find and sustain employment, grow in their careers, make choices for their families, and achieve their goals.
This holistic approach has been an evolving aspect of Hot Bread Kitchen’s model. When our organization started in 2008, we were a bakery with a simple, but important, mission: teach women bakery skills and connect them with food industry employers to secure jobs. Many other workforce development programs still drive toward a similar goal today: get people who are looking for work in the door, give them relevant skills training, and connect them with a job.
While there’s no arguing that this is an important objective, working side-by-side with our participants over the years has evolved our understanding of what it means to ensure women’s agency, a thriving career, or a meaningful public life. At Hot Bread Kitchen, we learned that for our members to be successful in the long run, we needed to do more — to take an approach that supports the whole person, not just the worker.
Empowering women to succeed in the workplace demands a comprehensive approach to overcoming obstacles, both at work and beyond. But what exactly does this look like, and what can you do to help?
Underwater view of the ocean surface. Image via Shutterstock/Dudarev Mikhail
What’s coming next for sustainability: Mining, oceans, artificial intelligence and justice. By Dylan Siegler from Greenbiz.com • July 18, 2023
Every July, a portal into the future opens. The near future. Say, one to three years out.
During this time of year, we look into that near-future-portal — the database of more than 500 proposed speakers to our February GreenBiz conference — and patterns, distinct from prior years, emerge. We see what the corporate sustainability ecosystem will be talking more and more about next.
I don’t mean decarbonization, data or climate tech, and I don’t mean supply chain issues, nature, Scope 3 emissions or DEI. Those make up the current canon of corporate sustainability priorities, whether your company has a sophisticated sustainability strategy or is just getting started. Combined, they were mentioned more than 1,500 times throughout proposed session descriptions — I ran the write-ups through an online word-frequency counter.
Those topics will certainly be covered at GreenBiz in February, but they were likely once first glimpsed through this proposal season wrinkle-in-time trick in prior years.
Here is a look at what’s just now hitting the Top 40 charts for the first time. It’s a non-exhaustive selection of topics that represent a view to the future of rising risks and opportunities that senior sustainability executives and rising stars are starting to grapple with and want to present or talk about with peers.
What you should have on your radar
Mining and critical minerals Our applicants have tuned in to the challenges around achieving global decarbonization, particularly the energy transition, given it requires critical minerals such as cobalt, lithium, copper and other materials often mined in geopolitically iffy regions.
A sustainability head at Oracle proposes to tease out how the auto industry is achieving traceability of some critical minerals (as well as human rights, carbon and other metrics) at scale using a blockchain platform. Consultancy ERM proposes to bring together reps from mining companies with stakes in critical minerals to talk successes and failures so far in sourcing these materials in response to “customer demand and government incentives like the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).” Others propose more potentially contentious dialogue: Positive takes on the controversial prospect of deep sea mining, and a celebration of a Nevada lithium mine project in an Endangered Species Act conflict.
Oceans The proposals we received this season were not only about protecting oceans, but using them. Multiple proposals promote seaweed as a solution. Seaweed-based yarn startup Keel Labs proposes to spotlight the “potential of the ocean to accelerate our planet’s development towards a more sustainable future,” while World Wildlife Fund proposes to “explore whether accelerating a market for seaweed could be a climate change solution.” Another swath of ideas from entrepreneurs position oceans as central to carbon removal.
A wave of ocean plastic-related proposals and other upstream-pollution-related content include a pitch from Dell and HP on “advancing commercially viable and socially-responsible ocean-bound plastics.”
Artificial intelligence The applications of AI proposed have gone from grand and theoretical to remarkably tactical. UL Solutions proposes a session on “how to write for AI and machine learning readers of ESG reports and communications, as these are the most ‘influential’ readers of ESG reports, parsing and mining company data for raters and rankers.” An SAP proposal promises to show how generative AI can help companies “achieve immediate transparency into their suppliers’ ESG profiles,” and Autocase offered to introduce an AI-assisted online decarbonization planning tool for real estate portfolios.
Justice This year social justice showed up in more intersectional, and specific, contexts than before, and from more innovators building justice into their business models. Supplements company Ritual pitched a session on identifying and tracking PFAS through the supply chain that would make “explicit intersections between sustainability, human rights, justice and traceability.”
Biomaterials startup erthos proposed to discuss how “the intersections of race, gender, social and economic status, and age influence how we view, engage, and protect our planet.” Startup GreenWealth Energy connected environmental justice and workforce development to public EV charging infrastructure funding by highlighting state and local government programs supporting under-resourced “community involvement in the electrification space.”
Is this everything you should be watching? No chance. Is there a good chance these topics will gain traction in the coming year? I’d bet on it. And if it’s something you should start to pay more attention to to help you do your job, we’ll include it in the GreenBiz 24 program. Speakers and sessions will start to be announced next month.
Over two-thirds of consumers between the ages of 18 and 34 are likely to purchase from companies committed to Sustainability. From Viant • Reposted: July 17, 2023
IRVINE, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Jun. 6, 2023– Viant Technology Inc.(NASDAQ: DSP), a leading people-based advertising technology company, today released the findings from its new Consumer Sustainability Study, revealing that over two-thirds of consumers between the ages of 18 and 34 are likely to purchase from companies committed to sustainability. Furthermore, of the more than 1,000 consumers surveyed, 69 percent agreed that businesses have a responsibility to reduce their environmental impact. As sustainability priorities continue to grow among brands, Viant’s new report underscores the importance of sustainability for consumers and how sustainability is a key driver of consumer purchasing decisions.
Key takeaways from Viant’s Consumer Sustainability Study:
When it comes to sustainability, consumers prefer action over words: When asked how important it was for brands to take action towards reducing their carbon footprint, versus just talking about their commitment to sustainability, 65 percent of consumers cited that action was important.
Gen Z and Millennials hold businesses accountable for sustainability: Consumers 18-34 years old feel most strongly that businesses have a responsibility to reduce their environmental impact, more so than those 35 and older.
Renewable energy can positively impact brand perception, especially among younger consumers: Almost three-quarters (74%) of consumers between the ages of 18 and 34 expressed that they would view a brand positively if they are utilizing renewable energy sources. When analyzing all age groups (18+) surveyed, 67 percent of consumers cited that they would view a brand positively if they are utilizing renewable energy sources.
“Our latest research demonstrates that consumers are increasingly looking for brands to not only talk about sustainability and about reducing their carbon footprint, but to take real action,” said Jon Schulz, Chief Marketing Officer, Viant. “As sustainability remains top of mind for both brands and their customers, we are pleased to offer our clients a number of leading-edge solutions, including our Adtricity program, which help brands take real action to achieve their sustainability goals.”
To further support brands and agencies in understanding their carbon footprint from advertising, this week Viant launched its new Carbon Emissions Calculator to help advertisers assess the carbon impact of their digital campaigns.
To learn more about the findings from Viant’s Consumer Sustainability Study, please click here.
About Viant’s Consumer Sustainability Study
This survey was fielded online and reached a total of n=1,197 respondents. Respondents were consumers in the US (18+) who were representative of the national population. The survey was fielded between May, 1st, 2023 – May, 2nd, 2023.
TH Herbert is the CEO of Semarchy, a data software company that enables organizations to leverage their data to create business value.
Giving back to those in need via your time, money or resources can be an incredibly rewarding experience. For businesses, giving back is a chance to use your status as a force for positive change and build a stronger teamwork culture in the process.
More people than ever are paying attention to brands that are taking a stance on something they care about, and employees are increasingly looking for more than just a paycheck. Aligning yourself with charitable work not only sets a great example but allows you and your team to play an active role in community improvement. With more conscious consumers and added corporate pressure to maximize short-term profits, however, many businesses need help understanding how to prioritize philanthropy.
While you don’t have to be a philanthropy-focused business to help your community, I believe that you do need to install some philanthropic spirit into your workplace. While philanthropy is essential in building a reputation for your company as a form of corporate social responsibility (CSR), it shouldn’t be exclusively a tactic to promote your brand image and profit through advertising or cause-related marketing. It’s much more than bolstering your reputation in the media—consider how your business can significantly impact the lives of others, including those within your own company.
Showing that your business is committed to positively impacting society beyond recognition and core business activities, which naturally helps build trust and goodwill among consumers, employees and other stakeholders, is what will ultimately lead to increased brand loyalty and support as a by-product.
According to America’s Charities, employee participation increases when a business decides to make a charitable choice. The company culture notably shapes how employees see their profession, so philanthropic acts, no matter how often, allow employees to use their knowledge and experience while doing good within a community. According to America’s Charities, workplace giving (donating directly from a paycheck) is the most common type of employee engagement. Approximately $5 billion is raised through workplace giving annually, according to America’s Charities.
But there are many more ways to act. Through a philanthropic culture, businesses can differentiate themselves and create a unique selling proposition that appeals to clients looking for socially responsible companies and dedicated to making a change in the world.
Philanthropy In Practice
As an example of how to put this in practice, my company celebrates an annual “Day of Giving.” Even as a highly virtual company, our team finds creative ways to make a positive impact, banding together to raise awareness and money for things like medical research, planting trees or volunteering at local charities.
It’s up to the organization to set an example. For example, during our annual day of giving, my company supplies software and services at huge discounts to nonprofits like Cancer Research U.K. I’ve found that these types of efforts can significantly raise your employer net promoter score(eNPS).
How To Incorporate Philanthropy Into Your Workplace
There are many ways to establish a culture of giving within your workplace. First off, your company itself must make giving a priority. Whether by donations, matching programs or allowing employees time away for charitable endeavors, taking steps to create a culture of generosity adds value to your business, meaning to your employees and instills why giving back is necessary.
Once people start getting involved, I’ve found that it becomes a domino effect. More employees will continue participating, and healthy, friendly competition will often develop between offices. Eventually, volunteer opportunities can expand into much larger endeavors, allowing your company to adopt a philanthropic culture on its own. Employees will feel encouraged to think outside the box, looking for ways to make a difference.
Value Your People
Before encouraging your employees to donate or volunteer for any cause with the company, you must show them that you value them. A business that treats its workers poorly won’t be able to promote a culture of giving back. If employees are unhappy, why would they want to spend more time volunteering with co-workers or contributing to company-wide charity events?
You must listen, support and properly acknowledge your employees for their work if you want to inspire them to share that value with those in need. An organizational health assessment is a good starting point. Ensure that time is taken to understand the feedback and make it actionable is key.
Volunteer As A Team
Establishing camaraderie creates a community within your work environment, allowing people to know one another more deeply. Seeing one member do something wholesome tends to encourage others to participate. Good deeds and kindness can be highly contagious.
I also recommend that you utilize suggestions from employees on charities they may have a connection with—making them a part of the decision making. You can rotate through ideas and make it a time your company looks forward to multiple times a year. It shouldn’t just be a one-time thing.
Donate More Than Money
Donating money is not the only option for charitable giving. Organizations need supplies, volunteers and resources right away, not the money to buy them later. Collecting items or organizing a volunteer day are often much better alternatives. This can also help everyone play a personal role in helping others, knowing that their items will improve other lives.
Giving back can be a great challenge for an organization; it takes time, planning and commitment. But I think you’ll be surprised about the benefits that come along with it. Creating a work environment with opportunities for community initiatives and charitable giving incites motivation for your team to succeed. Incorporating philanthropy into your business model can make your employees more responsible, inspired and satisfied with their jobs.
But progress is being made in laying the strategic groundwork for embedding sustainability into organizations’ DNA. By Vincent Ryan from CFO • Reposted: July 13, 2023
“Sustainability is probably one of the biggest culture change jobs or change management jobs within a company,” said Levi Strauss’s chief sustainability officer at a National Retail Federation trade show earlier this year. “And if you’re working for a company with a very strong culture, I often find that you can use it to pull your strategy forward,” reported Sourcing Journal.
Building a culture that embraces sustainability can serve as an accelerant, agreed the Conference Board and accounting firm Baker Tilly in a report released on July 10. For example, a prime benefit of embedding sustainability into the culture is ensuring “that sustainability is integrated into the company’s business planning processes and the microdecisions employees make daily,” according to the Conference Board report.
Environmental, social, and governance efforts and sustainability — which the Conference Board defines as “the full range of initiatives designed to promote the long-term welfare of a company, its multiple stakeholders, society at large, and the environment” — are increasingly on the minds of business stakeholders.
In addition to upcoming regulatory mandates, it’s why 494 companies in the S&P 500 disclosed some level of ESG-related information for reporting periods ending in 2021, 30 more than in 2020, according to a recent release from the Center for Audit Quality. And 320 S&P 500 companies disclosed having some ESG metrics audited, up from 282 the year before.
Slow Progress
But reporting is one thing, shifting company culture another.
So far, not many companies that participated in the Conference Board research have reached the goal of deeply embedding sustainability into their companies’ cultures. (The data is from a working group of more than 250 executives from 160 companies that the Conference Board interviewed in multiple sessions over eight months in 2022.)
According to the Conference Board, many companies are laying the essential groundwork before focusing on the cultural aspects.
It may take two to three years before a company begins to make tangible progress on the cultural front.
According to the Conference Board, the “prerequisites” for building a company culture infused with an ethos of sustainability are:
Conducting a strategic analysis to determine the sustainability areas the company should focus on;
determining whether those areas intersect with the company’s business and processes;
setting goals in those key areas and deciding how to provide incentives to achieve them;
establishing appropriate governance structures at the board and management level to achieve those goals; and
developing a core narrative that tells the company’s sustainability story.
“Once a company has those strategic elements in place, it can turn to culture — recognizing that changing culture will take time and resources,” according to the Conference Board report. “Indeed, it may take two to three years before [a] company begins to make tangible progress on the cultural front.”
The CFO’s Role
The CFO would be crucial in at least four of those strategic tasks. But a CFO also has a big responsibility to help the CEO (who the Conference Board says should take the leadership role) build the business case for sustainability and, as part of that, bring in the perspective of investors, business partners, and regulators.
However, CFOs should note that making the case for building a sustainability culture involves “both the positive ROI (return on investment) and the negative ROI (risk of inaction),” according to the Conference Board.
“Explaining the negative consequences of failing to change can be a powerful initial motivator that supports the positive case for how increasing the organization’s focus on sustainability will improve the company’s performance in the marketplace, including the markets for products and services, talent, and capital,” the report said.
Positive ROI shouldn’t be neglected, however. As columnist Steve McNally suggested on CFO.com more than a year ago, “Sustainability initiatives can impact long-term planning and value creation. Seek sustainability initiatives with a positive ROI to benefit the organization’s bottom line.”
Target Middle Management
For a cultural change to take root, it must have widespread employee buy-in. A culture of sustainability requires training employees, instilling in them a sense of personal responsibility and accountability, encouraging cross-functional collaboration, and providing incentives like senior management recognition, compensation, or both to change behaviors.
To do that, the Conference Board recommends focusing on middle management — the people making business unit-level decisions and running day-to-day operations.
“Savvy and well-resourced middle managers build buy-in and participation by translating company vision [into] day-to-day execution.”
Claire Simier is the founder and managing principal of Simier Partners.
Within enterprises today, there is an increasing focus on sustainability, with both internal and external stakeholders demanding sustainable initiatives and culture. Within the context of organizational leadership, sustainability refers to both environmental and social outcomes.
This includes everything from minimizing an organization’s negative impact on the environment to being ecologically responsible and reducing or reversing the effects of pollution and climate change. It also involves supporting the well-being of a company’s employees and stakeholders and implementing programs to reduce economic and social inequality in the various communities in which the business operates.
Given the impact of business on people and on the planet, organizations need leaders with a clear sustainability leadership commitment. These leaders must be able to effectively integrate sustainability into organizational strategy and operations, leveraging a sustainable mindset with the skills and initiative to drive the transformation needed to achieve sustainability and commercial profitability.
Adopting A Sustainable Mindset
To implement meaningful sustainable transformation, leaders must develop a sustainable mindset. Plainly stated, a sustainable leader puts sustainability at the core of the business model and is committed to the belief that the commercial success and performance of a business is directly linked with the social and environmental framework in which it operates. A leader with this mindset recognizes sustainability as a source of competitive advantage and is driven by implementing and incorporating changes with the greatest ecological and social impact—for both the short and long term. (This sometimes means taking actions at some short-term cost to profit margins, or operating in a more logistically complex way to keep sustainability at the forefront, understanding the long-term effects will result in environmental, social and economic profitability.)
Sustainable leaders consistently reflect on sustainable values and are able to respond in the most effective way to social and environmental complexities, sometimes challenging traditional approaches to business if necessary. This means promoting sustainable practices in their organizations and surrounding communities, as well as encouraging others to do the same. They both have the intention and the commitment to truly be purpose-driven, with sustainability and long-term profitability as their guiding principles.
Communicating And Relationship-Building
Conveying the mindset of sustainability relies on effective communication to create a shared vision among individuals and organizations, cultivating an environment for collective progress with similar goals. As with any good communicator, sustainable leaders are clear and direct about their sustainable goals and values, which allows them to inspire others to join in the work ahead. These leaders have a knack for breaking down complex information and data about sustainable strategy into understandable message points that are accessible for a range of different audiences. They are skilled at active listening and storytelling and are able to pivot and adapt to the shifting and growing challenges that the environment is facing.
Moreover, these individuals use their skills to build bridges between sometimes disparate groups. They understand the need to build relationships in order to broaden knowledge on numerous topics with one or two strong pillars of expertise and to convey knowledge across sectors to achieve long-term sustainability goals. They know when it’s time to engage ecosystems with specialties beyond those of their organization and can effectively collaborate with leaders in different roles to integrate action plans and key strategies.
Inspiring Others To Look Ahead
Sustainable leaders understand that they must lead by example—by living an authentic and sustainable lifestyle themselves. To get alignment on sustainability goals, they must establish their own credibility, by their passion and personal values, to inspire others. These leaders generate trust which, in turn, increases others’ willingness to work collaboratively towards shared sustainability goals.
Aligning their words with actions, they demonstrate what leading with authenticity looks like, which allows them to inspire others and shift the culture around them. They aren’t intimidated by doing the hard work of reexamining a company’s core values to ensure that the way it operates reflects their commitment to sustainability.
Moreover, these leaders have the courage to look toward an uncertain future, organizationally, ecologically and globally. The complexity of sustainability initiatives can sometimes be financially daunting to reexamine in the short-term; taking a long-term perspective requires patience and perspicacity, but can help leaders make decisions while carefully considering their far-reaching impact on the organization and its stakeholders. Sustainability leaders must recognize the long-term impacts of both climate change and social changes, and provide resources that have the potential to deliver long-lasting results. Those who can embrace and lead with purpose-driven objectives, as well as accountability and progress check-points to keep them from resorting to outdated ways of operating, will be more successful in the long term.
Bringing Everyone Together
A key component of relationship-building is involving a range of stakeholders in decision-making and taking action about sustainable approaches. Sustainable leaders who implement long-term strategies that cast a wider net of goals can better engage stakeholders. They are keenly aware and able to illustrate how integration of sustainability in businesses is both environmentally and socially responsible. Doing so will, in turn, create a competitive distinction, allowing businesses to retain investor support and attract top talent.
When employees, clients and other stakeholders encounter truly sustainable leadership—evidenced by a stated intention, practice and implementation of initiatives that meaningfully support social and environmental goals—it fosters an unusual and enduring relationship of trust and transparency. As organizations all over the world continue to shift their priorities, seek to reduce their environmental impact, save costs, engage employees, enhance their reputation and comply with regulations, leaders who embody a sustainable mindset will be at a strategic and competitive advantage.
IMAGE: ELENA REYGADAS’ ROSETTA RESTAURANT IN MEXICO CITY
The Food Made Good Sustainability Standard is the only certification designed to measure restaurants’ social and environmental impacts, wherever they are in the world. It also highlights areas for improvement and provides credibility in communicating sustainability practices to customers. From Sustainable Brands * Reposted: July 12, 2023
After 15 years of operating in the UK, the Sustainable Restaurant Association (SRA) has launched a globally accessible platform to allow hospitality businesses everywhere to take 360-degree accountability for sustainability to a standard that is recognized by industry and consumers alike.
In response to the universal scale of food-system issues within hospitality, juxtaposed by a genuine desire from chefs and industry workers to contribute to a solution, the SRA has developed the holistic, functional and global Food Made Good Sustainability Standard— which aims to level the playing field by providing businesses with trustworthy, expert-led and up-to-date accreditation, as well as guidance on continued improvement in their commitment to sustainability and credibility in communicating sustainable business practices to customers.
Developed with input from leading food businesses and international experts — including the Ellen McArthur Foundation, WRAP and the Ethical Trade Initiative — the newly global Standard is the only certification specifically designed to measure a restaurant’s social and environmental impact, wherever they are in the world.
The Food Made Good Sustainability Standard builds on The SRA’s signature Food Made Good assessment — which has been the sustainability accreditation of choice for UK foodservice businesses – covering more than 12,000 sites – since its launch in 2010, and has been used as the basis for judging the sustainability award for The World’s 50 Best Restaurants and Bars and all of its regional offshoots since 2013. Used by world-renowned chefs — including France’s Raymond Blanc OBE, Mexico’s Elena Reygadas, The Netherlands’ Richard Ekkebus and Spain’s Ángel León, all of whom embrace sustainability as a cornerstone of their cuisine — the new Standard is designed to measure a business’s social and environmental impact and is built on a 10-point framework, organised across three pillars: Sourcing, Society and Environment. In order to be both effective and globally applicable, the Food Made Good Standard is closely aligned with international norms — including the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
“In an environment in which chefs and restaurant operators understand the need to act urgently and decisively, we recognized the need for a holistic framework defining what ‘good’ looks like across both environmental and social issues,” explains Juliane Caillouette Noble, Managing Director of The SRA. “Issues like food waste, treating staff fairly and animal welfare are universal. Now’s the moment for a global conversation about what it means to be a good restaurant in every sense — with a certification that is digestible for every business, supplier, owner and guest. We are setting the Standard by which a restaurant in Buenos Aires, Beijing or Birminghamcan accurately compare its sustainability achievements and join the Food Made Good movement to build a better industry for our planet.”
Since 2010, The SRA has worked to advance sustainability in hospitality across the UK. Now, with the global Food Made Good Standard, it aims to connect businesses around the world to accelerate change towards a hospitality sector that is socially progressive and environmentally restorative. Areas of focus within each of the three pillars include:
Sourcing 1. Celebrate provenance 2. Support farmers and fishers 3. Serve more plants, better meat 4. Source seafood sustainably
Society 5. Treat staff fairly 6. Feed people well 7. Support the community
Environment 8. Reduce your footprint 9. Waste no food 10. Reduce, reuse and recycle
To achieve the Food Made Good Standard, restaurants must submit answers and evidence on the Food Made Good digital platform and must score at least 50% in the evaluation across the three pillars. Each submission is evaluated, evidence-checked and subjected to a final enquiry from SRA experts, before a final report is completed with a score and an action plan for improvement. Those that score 50-59% will be awarded a 1-Star rating; those scoring 60-69%, 2 Stars; and 70%+, 3 Stars.
“The work The SRA is doing through globally standardizing sustainability in our industry is not only inspired but essential,” Chef Blanc says. “We, as restaurateurs and business operators, need to understand where we are today to work out where we’re going tomorrow. By creating the tools needed to turn the individual’s commitment to sustainability into measurable, reportable action, the Standard is offering accountability and transparency, which are fundamental to the future of our livelihoods and indeed our lives.”
The SRA invites any restaurant, anywhere in the world to start its journey at standard.foodmadegood.org. Its ambition is to help 100,000 restaurants to transform what we eat, how we eat and the impact this has on the world by 2030.
By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: July 12, 2023
Leading U.S. retailer Target disappointed human rights organizations earlier this year when it failed to push back against a wave of aggressive anti-LGBTQ behavior related to its Pride Month merchandise. Now Target has another chance to get it right, and the stakes are high.
Target backs down when anti-LGBTQ activists come calling
Anti-LGBTQ activists confronted staff at several Target stores in May, during the runup to Pride Month. Instead of pushing back, Target removed the offending displays. “Target is pulling some LGBTQ merchandise from stores that it rolled out for Pride Month after confrontations with customers,” Jessica Guynn of USA Today reported on May 23.
Guynn cited a statement from Target, in which the company referred to “threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety,” as well as “volatile circumstances” and “confrontational behavior” that influenced its decision to remove merchandise.
That decision was roundly criticized by hundreds of human rights groups in a letter organized by the Human Rights Campaign on June 5. However, some saw it as a case of better safe than sorry. The confrontations at Target go beyond the actions of a few scattered individuals. They reflect a dangerous environment of anti-LGBTQ entitlement leading to physical attacks on LGBTQ events and individuals. That includes confrontations sparked by the white supremacist organization Proud Boys, a group the Justice Department has connected to the failed insurrection of January 6, 2021.
This environment of entitlement has built up over years of sustained, state-sanctioned attacks on LGBTQ rights. Critics say former President Donald Trump imprinted anti-LGBTQ activists with approval from the highest office of the land throughout his tenure ending in 2020. That was followed by a fresh torrent of state-based anti-LGBTQ legislation in 2021, on the heels of the January 6 insurrection.
New anti-LGBTQ legislation has been cropping up ever since, including a rising tide of book bans directed against LGBTQ authors. That also includes anti-ESG (environmental, social and governance) legislation, which leans heavily on the “woke capitalism” canard to stop businesses from pursuing diversity, equity and inclusion goals.
State attorneys general double down on hate
Social media has also played a key role in raising the profile of anti-LGBTQ activists. The social media effect burst into full flower in April when activists aimed their fire at a promotional relationship between the trans actor and influencer Dylan Mulaney and the Bud Light brand of AB-InBev.
Rightwing commentators including Matt Walsh said the social media campaign against Bud Light aimed to “make ‘pride’ toxic for brands,” Fortune’s Ellen McGirt reported. Guynn of USA Today quoted another such activist, who wrote on Twitter: “Target deserves the Bud Light treatment. We will work to put the pressure on them.”
Seven state attorneys general — representing Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri and South Carolina — appeared to get the message.
On July 5, they issued a joint public letter to Target CEO Brian C. Cornell that all but threatens legal action unless Target stops selling any “potentially harmful” products to minors. “As the chief legal officers of our States, we are charged with enforcing state laws protecting children and safeguarding parental rights. … In light of these responsibilities, we wish to communicate our concern for Target’s recent ‘Pride’ campaign,” they wrote.
This goes way beyond Pride
The letter sparked a wave of media attention, much of it focused on several products that the attorneys general singled out for removal. However, the letter is far more interesting for its recommendations on what to put in, not what to take out.
“It is likely more profitable to sell the type of Pride that enshrines the love of the United States,” they recommended. “Target’s Pride Campaign alienates whereas Pride in our country unites.”
“We live in a different day and age from our nation’s founding. But certain immutable precepts and principles must always endure so long as America is to remain free and prosperous,” they admonished.
As for what type of products and images reflect “love of the United States” and “immutable precepts and principles,” the letter leaves that up in the air. It does, however, strongly suggest that removing all LGBTQ symbolism from products is just the first volley in an attack on any kind of image that appears to be “anti-Christian.”
“Target also sold products with anti-Christian designs, such as pentagrams, horned skulls and other Satanic products,” the attorneys general note.
More fact-free legal action from the usual suspects
The anti-Christian accusation is sensational, but it appears to be woven out of thin air. The letter apparently refers to images in a weeks-old social media post that were identified as fabricatedback on June 2, yet here they are popping up again in an official letter from seven state attorneys general.
Spotting “anti-Christian designs” where there are none is just one more example of the fact-free thinking that has come to characterize policy-making by many Republican office holders from the Supreme Court on down. It’s no surprise to find the same mindset at work elsewhere in the letter, where the attorneys general attempt to show that Target’s Pride campaign was an abrogation of its fiduciary duty to stock holders.
“The evidence suggests that Target’s directors and officers may be negligent in undertaking the ‘Pride’ campaign, which negatively affected Target’s stock price,” they charge.
That’s news to Wall Street analysts. Target’s stock was on the downswing long before the Pride controversy, falling 32 percent in 2022, according to an April analysis posted on Forbes. The analysis, conducted by Trefis, linked the company’s wavering stock price to “a slowing economy, supply chain worries and shifting consumer sentiment,“ along with inventory issues and higher logistics costs.
By May, MarketWatch discerned a spark of good news. “After a difficult 2022, when Target was one of the more highly visible examples of the inventory glut that plagued retailers last year, the benefits of being cleaner were notable in the [company’s first quarter 2023] report,” D.A. Davidson analyst Michael Baker wrote on the platform.
Bringing the news up to date on July 6, the investor organization Motley Fool was even more optimistic. “Target is dealing with major sales and earnings challenges stemming from a sharp demand shift away from merchandise categories that were booming during the pandemic,” observed Motley Fool reporter Demitri Kalogeropoulos, who completely ignored the steamy rhetoric from anti-LGBTQ activists. “Yet inventory levels are down, potentially setting the business up for a solid rebound over the next few quarters.”
If Target learned anything from Pride Month, it’s that nothing will satisfy anti-LGBTQ activists, whether it’s an unhinged individual loudly confronting a store clerk or a phalanx of state attorneys general quietly issuing letters. The best defense is a good offense, as the saying goes. And the retailer has a real opportunity to change its tune.
Reframe your reaction to the new reporting regimen. Here’s how it can benefit you — and your company. By Dylan Siegler, SVP, Sustainability, GreenBiz Group • Reposted: July 11, 2023
At our GreenFin 23 conference last month, disclosure was on the lips of everyone from Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse to Shirley Lu, assistant professor of business administration at Harvard Business School, to Brendan Morrissey, Walmart’s vice president, ESG. But while many speakers at GreenFin proclaimed a reassuring “you got this” from the stage, practitioners in the audience weren’t so sure.
Some of the top worries I heard included:
New compliance structures and frameworks raise the stakes significantly in a field where voluntary (ergo, occasionally squishy) reporting has been the norm. Consequences of not complying with CSRD, for example, will be up to EU member states, and will range from public shaming to cease-and-desist orders to fines.
While simplification and harmonization may happen in the medium term, for now the disparate standards add complexity and uncertainty for disclosers.
Human and technological resources to learn, execute on and adapt to this new paradigm are scarce — and as a result, projects that deliver tangible climate, nature and community benefits will suffer (and so will sustainability staff).
Further, in many companies, these new disclosure rules hit a nerve not because there is anything much to hide, but because they call for cooperation and lock-step alignment in precisely the areas where there is most often dysfunction: Misalignment between sustainability and other key business functions such as finance, legal and risk. Disarray behind the shiny, corporate-comms-approved veneer of the typical annual sustainability or ESG report. Shallow commitments where a deep sustainability strategy with buy-in from the Board on down should be.
That doesn’t even include the many companies without an existing materiality assessment; accounting for GHG emissions in homespun spreadsheets or not yet accounting for them at all; not engaging in third-party verification or attestation of their disclosures; inexperience with Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures reporting; or lacking budget for a consultant or a data platform.
The new disclosure paradigm may force companies to clean up the house the way I do when surprise guests call from down the block to say they’re dropping by — that is, quickly, but not thoroughly.
But the new sustainability reporting rules can be a strategic opportunity, too
An ESG professional I spoke with who didn’t have corporate sign-off to be quoted on the record offered a positive and useful way to reframe that disclosure panic.
In essence, he said, take a page from companies that have reported ESG data en route to an IPO, and make disclosure serve you. Recent studies demonstrate that solid voluntary ESG disclosures of environmental and social issues material to the business (such as emissions, human rights, and supply chain considerations) can help fledgling public companies’ valuations — even if you’re not Allbirds.
I found the redirect inspiring. Rather than a test you cram for, it’s possible to consider disclosure a talent show, and start rehearsing. You typically can’t pick and choose which metrics you respond to, but you can choose what you focus your limited energy and time on in the run-up, and make it count.
Don’t just fill in the blanks. Develop insights you can draw on outside the disclosure context: what’s material, what risks are relevant and what your stakeholders care about. All of these elements will be unique to your business.
Filling in the blanks does, of course, matter. Lean on your voluntary disclosures — if you’ve reported to CDP, you are at least part way there.
Get cozy with Comms, Legal, Finance, Risk, etc., and build a playbook together so none of what you learn is lost. It may be your company’s first rodeo, but it won’t be your last.
This much is clear: Disclosure will bring more attention to your work, especially internally. Focus on what matters, and the result could almost make it worth the pain.
From the Conference Board • Reposted: July 11, 2023
Just 13 percent of executives say sustainability is deeply embedded into their firm’s cultural DNA. Most companies are generally at the early to middle stages of building a sustainability culture, with 49 percent saying it is moderately embedded and 37 percent saying it is slightly embedded.
That is according to a new report by The Conference Board in collaboration with Baker Tilly. The report, Building a Sustainability Culture, is the culmination of a series of Working Group sessions, at which executives from companies in various sectors discussed how to develop and maintain a corporate culture that embraces sustainability.
“To take advantage of the transition to a sustainable economy, companies need to build a sustainability culture that becomes an indelible part of their organization’s character,” said Paul Washington, Executive Director of The Conference Board ESG Center and co-author of the report. “The Building a Sustainability Culture Working Group served as a valuable step in helping leaders equip their workforces with the behaviors, training, resources, and capabilities necessary to meet the unprecedented challenges and opportunities in the areas of corporate governance, sustainability, and citizenship.”
“The findings of our report underscore the need for embedding sustainability into business as usual, in addition to highlighting the distance still left to travel on the journey to a sustainable economy,” said Srinand Yalamanchili, Baker Tilly Director−ESG and sustainability. “Embedding sustainability into culture and business strategy can only be achieved by prioritizing the ‘why’–the positive return on investment and risks of inaction–and taking ownership at both an organizational and individual level.”
The Working Group convened more than 250 executives from 160 companies who met over the span of eight months to focus on how to develop and maintain a culture in which those at the organization think and act with sustainability in mind. The report provides insights into five areas: 1) what is a sustainability culture?; 2) why does it matter?; 3) how do companies build a sustainability culture?; 4) who is responsible?; and 5) how do companies measure success?
Key insights from the report include:
Companies are in the early stages of building sustainability into their culture.
Just 13 percent of executives say sustainability is deeply embedded into their company culture, with 49 percent saying it is moderately embedded and 37 percent saying it is slightly embedded.
Sustainability and cultural change need to be closely linked to the execution of the company’s business strategy.
30 percent of the respondents cite the CEO as best suited to lead the cultural transformation of the organization, followed by 28 percent who cite those responsible for the company’s business strategy and operations.
Both the positive ROI (return on investment) and the negative ROI (risk of inaction) are driving the case for building a sustainability culture.
An initial motivator: Explaining the “Risk of Inaction”—the negative consequences of failing to change.
A constant motivator: Explaining the positive case for how increasing the organization’s focus on sustainability will improve the company’s performance in the marketplace, including the markets for products and services, talent, and capital.
Employees need to feel a sense of ownership when it comes to building a sustainability culture.
75 percent of participants cite a “sense of ownership” as the most important aspect of a sustainability culture, followed by a clear mission, purpose, and values.
Companies may need to move beyond traditional training and compensation to motivate progress.
Only half (50 percent) of participants cite compensation as the most effective way of recognizing and rewarding behavioral change. By contrast, 61 percent cite internal recognition from senior management as the most effective, and 54 percent cite promotions and career opportunities.
About The Conference Board ESG Center
The Conference Board ESG Center serves as a resource, platform, and partner to help Member companies address their priorities in corporate governance, sustainability, and citizenship. ConferenceBoard.org/ESG
Sustainability in furniture manufacturing is based on a symbiotic relationship between manufacturers and consumers, that places responsibility on both sides of the supply and demand equation, says Bisley’s Operations Director, Paul Crutcher.
There’s no doubt that we as furniture manufacturers must lead the way in innovating and developing sustainability in their furniture and interiors solutions for our homes and workspaces. However, for this to be possible there is a necessity for consumers to require it. The marketplace must demand sustainable furniture solutions, otherwise the incentive for manufacturers to enthusiastically pursue a sustainable agenda based on net zero principles will diminish.
Essentially, in the modern commercial world, both suppliers and consumers have a direct role to play in ensuring the implementation of sustainable practices. And each must hold the other to account.
Fortunately the manufacturing sector is now largely beginning to move in a sustainable direction, with ethical firms and organisations clearly stating, publishing and auditing their sustainable credentials and practices.
At Bisley, our commitment to sustainable manufacturing practices, outlined in our ‘Green Book’ is core to our operating philosophy. We often use the phrase that our furniture is ‘made for life’, and while that is true of our products, we also take that ethos into every part of our manufacturing processes and company culture.
We want furniture that lasts a lifetime for our customers; made from the highest quality materials, using the latest innovative technologies and processes with minimum impact on our environment.
And we’re not alone. Across the manufacturing spectrum there are companies truly revolutionising the way they work in pursuit of a net zero agenda.
However, I often worry that while many manufacturers in the furniture sector, in which I operate, are really drilling down on their sustainability agendas, there are those who are not, and it is my belief that many consumers may not know the difference. Especially when you consider that there is rather a lot of ‘green washing’ going on out there.
For example, do consumers know the questions to ask, and the touch points to look for, when trying to identify a sustainably led furniture manufacturer or brand, from one that does little to contribute to our collective net zero agenda?
And on the flip side, are we as a sector articulating our sustainability credentials effectively to consumers, so that their knowledge is broadened? I think in both these areas, there is definite room for improvement.
So what should consumers be looking for when it comes to making conscious purchasing decisions about furniture for their homes and workplaces?
Legitimate and sector specific accreditations
A good place to start with identifying sustainable manufacturers and brands is to look for their industry recognised green certifications. These will no doubt be published on their websites, so if they’re not there, then chances are it’s because they don’t have any – a red flag. And if you’re a manufacturer that isn’t shouting about your green accreditations – it’s time to start. Remember it’s a two way street.
Fair Trade, Global Recycled Standard and Certified B Corporation are all good examples of well known accreditations that are widely recognised as denoting a sustainable company or organisation.
However, best practice certifications vary from sector to sector meaning there is no one size fits all label that clearly proclaims a company to be a sustainability champion, making it tricky for consumers to be confident in their purchasing decisions.
As a British furniture manufacturer Bisley has memberships and accreditations with a wide range of bodies, including the Furniture Industry Sustainability Programme (FISP), which is recognised as the benchmark for sustainable practices in the UK furniture industry. It is widely referenced by procurement teams and furniture specifiers as a key part of an organisations sustainable procurement policies.
The message to consumers here is – do your research. The firms that are working to sustainable standards will let you know about it and have the creds to back it up.
Materials and the circular economy
Historically, the approach to resource consumption has been very much linear (take, make, use, dispose). But things are changing as companies become more and more aware of circular economy principles, especially within the product design phase.
In essence, the circular economy aims to reduce finite natural resource extraction, so basically, our aim is to keep goods in circulation longer, so we don’t have to take more things out of the ground, and at Bisley we encourage the use of materials with a higher recycled and recyclable content.
To help achieve this, alongside general and vital energy efficiency measures within our workspaces and places, at Bisley we have been looking at the products we create from a more macro perspective.
For example, we consider a product’s full lifecycle – from upstream material extraction and processing through to end of product life. Essentially, when you’re looking at that product, you’re not just looking at the product itself. We should also be considering things like – where did those materials come from? And what’s the expected life span of the product? How will this product ultimately be disposed of? All manufactured products need to be considered from a circular economy perspective – both upstream and downstream.
However, from a consumer perspective – what does all of this mean and what kind of things should people be looking for? There are a number of ways to go about identifying companies that operate with a circular economy based ethos, but a few key pointers include:
Being repair friendly: Products will naturally degrade overtime which is when many get replaced. However furniture manufacturers can help slow the turnover process by designing pieces with easy to access/repair modular features with interchangeable spare parts and accessories, such as drawer slides or door hinges, across a wide product portfolio.
Can a product be upgraded/evolved easily?: Firms that can supply add-ons, product spin-offs (e.g – exchangeable doors or new hardware like handles), or refurbishment services can help extend a product’s purpose and lifecycle.
Take back schemes: Some firms offer take back schemes, which means that used and unwanted furniture, and their various component parts, many of which can be recycled, do not end up in landfills.
Packaging
When it comes to packaging there is so much that can be done to operate in a more sustainable way – from managing the packaging that raw materials arrive in at a manufacturing facility, to the packaging in which products are delivered to retailers/consumers – the second of these points being something that consumers are becoming more aware of, and prone to publicly calling out brands that utilise excessive, toxic packaging.
As a result it’s something that most manufacturers are becoming increasingly more savvy about.
From a waste management perspective, at Bisley over the past 12 months, 98% of manufacturing waste was recycled or diverted from landfill. This includes cardboard and plastic wrap waste from input materials and components, which are collected and baled on-site then sold back to our packaging suppliers.
Our approach to the packaging our products leave the factory in is similarly conscious and baked in from the product concept stage and right through the design process, in order to minimise materials and to help maximise space and efficiency during the transportation process.
Similarly many manufacturers are also utilising packaging materials that are made in the UK in order to shorten supply chains, and trialling new, almost infinitely recyclable packaging materials. These are things that consumers will likely be less aware of, so manufacturers and brands should make a point about publishing information about their efforts to improve their packaging processes on their websites. Share positive information.
Paul Crutcher is Operations Director at Bisley, with responsibility for Procurement, Manufacturing and Logistics. Photo: Bisley
Transportation
Despite the trend for the offshoring of production across multiple sectors over the past twenty-five years, many firms who initially embraced the concept are now beginning to swim against the tide and return home, largely led by rises in overseas wages and the time and cost involved in shipping goods great distances, among other factors.
And this is a trend that has been exacerbated by the pandemic. The onset of Covid saw those companies with longer, more complex supply chains scattered across the globe, experience complete production paralysis. And because of this onshoring, or at the very least, nearshoring of organisational supply bases is being activated across numerous sectors, so products are not stranded tens of thousands of miles away, and are near, or close to, their end market in the event of a global catastrophe. It’s a trend that is already in action in the big tech sector, with firms like Apple, Amazon, Samsung and Google moving production out of China in light of geostrategic concerns.
But also economic/supply chain issues aside, sustainability factors are at play here. After all, shipping goods halfway around the world, from their production sites to their end markets, is not a good approach to reducing carbon outputs. Which is why onshoring/near shoring is becoming increasingly more appealing to firms who are looking to deliver on net zero targets.
At Bisley, a company that has always remained true to its ‘Made in Britain’ values and never offshored manufacturing, it’s a trend we welcome. And while we do export to different global territories, our largest market remains the UK, which is why we manufacture here. That and the fact that British manufacturing is a hallmark of excellence.
With this in mind, I would suggest to consumers that have an interest in sustainability – to check where goods are made, and interrogate this rigorously to avoid brand washing. Products made and sold in the UK come with a significantly reduced carbon footprint attached to them than those made in Asia for example. Not to mention a greater likelihood of delivering on circular economy principles – like the availability of spare parts and repairability designed to extend product life cycles – outlined previously.
By Denise Lugo Editor, Accounting and Compliance Alert from Thomson Reuters • Reposted: July 4, 2023
As expected, the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) on June 26, 2023, issued two new disclosure standards that aim to interweave the climate and sustainability footprint of businesses into financial reporting.
The standards are the first round of environmental, social and governance (ESG)-related disclosure rules to be developed by the board and are being pushed for global use. Both standards are effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2024. Earlier application is permitted if both are applied at the same time.
“Our language is an accounting language; it is sustainability translated into an accounting language,” ISSB Chair Emmanuel Faber said in a speech at an IFRS Foundation conference that same day. “So you will find in S1, in particular the general requirements, a huge amount of notions that you’re very familiar with on purpose because we want as much as possible that connection within the general purpose financial reporting with the financial statements and with the valuation,” he said. “We are here to support the needs of the primary users of general purpose financial reports in the amount and the decision that they take on providing resources to entities, companies, bankers investors and others. That’s the reason why we exist and for that we know which language they need to be using and we’re focusing on that.”
Under IFRS S1, General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information, and IFRS S2, Climate-Related Disclosures, businesses must disclose all sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect their cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term that could reasonably be expected to affect prospects.
S2 is specific to climate-related risks to which the entity is exposed, i.e., climate-related physical risks; climate-related transition risks; and climate-related opportunities available to the entity.
The ISSB’s trustees have stressed that the rules are to be viewed as a global baseline for use worldwide.
“The global baseline approach, supported by the G20 and others, will provide investors with globally comparable sustainability-related disclosures that have the potential to move market prices, without constraining jurisdictions from requiring additional disclosures,” IFRS Foundation Trustee Chair Erkki Liikanen said in a statement. “This will help companies and investors by tackling duplicative reporting.”
Upon issuance, the standards pulled strong support from regulatory and other bodies including the AICPA-CIMA, the Financial Stability Board, and International Organization of Securities Commission (IOSCO).
“IOSCO has been actively involved in the IFRS Foundation’s consideration of whether and how to apply its trusted reputation and internationally renowned global standard-setting process to the topic of sustainability disclosures,” IOSCO Chair Jean-Paul Servais said in a statement. “We commend the leadership of the ISSB for the pace and quality of their work. IOSCO is conducting an independent assessment of the ISSB Standards, with a view to completing this review promptly.”
According to the main tenets of the guidance, both S1 and S2 require business entities to disclose information that will enable investors to understand:
the governance processes, controls and procedures a business entity uses to monitor, manage and oversee sustainability (S1) and climate-related (S2) risks and opportunities;
the entity’s strategy for managing sustainability (S1) and climate-related (S2) risks and opportunities;
the processes the entity uses to identify, assess, prioritize and monitor sustainability (S1) and climate-related (S2) risks and opportunities, including whether and how those processes are integrated into and inform the entity’s overall risk management process; and
the entity’s performance in relation to its sustainability (S1) and climate-related (S2) risks and opportunities, including progress towards any climate-related targets it has set, and any targets it is required to meet by law or regulation.
This article originally appeared in the June 27, 2023 edition of Accounting & Compliance Alert, available on Checkpoint.
The Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) is a directive established by the European Union, which mandates large companies and select organizations to disclose their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance.
Adopted in 2014 and enforced since 2017, the NFRD ensures transparency and accountability in reporting non-financial aspects for these entities.
The NFRD is a significant step forward in the fight for sustainability. It requires companies to disclose information about their ESG performance, which will help investors, consumers, and other stakeholders to make more informed decisions about where to put their money and how to spend their time and resources.
The Non-Financial Reporting Directive covers a wide range of ESG issues, including:
Environmental issues: climate change, pollution, and resource use
Social issues: human rights, labor practices, and diversity
Governance issues: corporate governance, risk management, and ethics
The Non-Financial Reporting Directive requires companies to report on their ESG performance in a way that is:
Consistent: Companies must use the same methods and metrics to report on their ESG performance. This will make it easier for investors and other stakeholders to compare the ESG performance of different companies.
Comparable: Companies must report on their ESG performance in a way that is comparable to other companies in the same industry. This will help investors and other stakeholders to understand how a company’s ESG performance compares to its peers.
Transparent: Companies must provide detailed information about their ESG performance. This will help investors and other stakeholders to understand the risks and opportunities associated with a company’s ESG performance.
The NFRD is a complex directive, and there are still some challenges to its implementation. However, the directive is an important step towards a more sustainable economy.
By requiring companies to disclose information about their ESG performance, the directive will help to increase transparency and accountability, and it will encourage companies to improve their ESG performance.
The Impact of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive
The NFRD has had a significant impact on the way that companies report on their ESG performance. In the years since the NFRD came into force, there has been a significant increase in the number of companies that are reporting on their ESG performance.
This directive has also led to an improvement in the quality of ESG reporting. Companies are now providing more detailed information about their ESG performance, and they are using more consistent and comparable metrics.
The NFRD has also had an impact on the way that investors and other stakeholders make decisions. Investors are now more likely to consider ESG factors when making investment decisions.
Consumers are also more likely to buy products and services from companies that have a good ESG reputation.
The Future of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive
The NFRD is a dynamic directive, and it is likely to be updated in the future. The European Commission is currently working on a new directive, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), which will replace the NFRD.
The CSRD is expected to be more ambitious and it is expected to require companies to report on a wider range of ESG issues.
The CSRD is a significant step forward in the fight for sustainability. It will require companies to disclose more information about their ESG performance, and it will encourage companies to improve their ESG performance. The CSRD is expected to have a positive impact on the environment, society, and the economy.
The Non-Financial Reporting Directive is an important step towards a more sustainable economy. It requires companies to disclose information about their ESG performance, which will help investors, consumers, and other stakeholders to make more informed decisions about where to put their money and how to spend their time and resources.
The NFRD has had a significant impact on the way that companies report on their ESG performance, and it is likely to be updated in the future to become even more ambitious.
The CSRD is a significant step forward in the fight for sustainability, and it is expected to have a positive impact on the environment, society, and the economy.
ESG stands for environmental, social, and governance. It is a framework for evaluating how companies manage their environmental, social, and governance risks and opportunities. ESG investing is the practice of investing in companies that have good ESG performance.
Understanding ESG
ESG encompasses a broad range of factors that evaluate a company’s performance and its impact on society and the environment.
Environmental factors focus on a company’s ecological footprint, including its carbon emissions, resource consumption, and waste management practices.
Social factors assess a company’s treatment of employees, diversity and inclusion policies, community engagement, and supply chain practices.
Governance factors examine a company’s leadership, transparency, board structure, and adherence to ethical business practices.
ESG as a Catalyst for Sustainable Change
ESG considerations are no longer just a checkbox exercise but a catalyst for positive change. Increasingly, consumers, employees, and investors are demanding accountability and transparency from companies.
Businesses that prioritize these factors are better positioned to attract and retain customers, enhance their brand reputation, and foster innovation.
Moreover, integrating this thesis into investment strategies can potentially deliver long-term financial performance, manage risks, and align portfolios with the values of investors.
Driving Responsible Business Practices
ESG considerations compel businesses to adopt responsible practices that benefit society and the environment.
Companies are now integrating sustainability initiatives into their core operations, such as implementing energy-efficient practices, reducing waste, and prioritizing renewable energysources.
Furthermore, it encourages companies to uphold strong labor rights, ensure workplace safety, and promote diversity and inclusion.
These responsible practices not only benefit the communities in which companies operate but also improve employee morale and productivity.
Risk Management and Resilience
ESG factors play a crucial role in identifying and managing risks. By assessing a company’s environmental impact, for example, investors can better understand its exposure to climate change-related risks, such as physical risks (e.g., extreme weather events) and transition risks (e.g., policy changes and market shifts).
Similarly, social factors help identify risks associated with poor labor practices, supply chain disruptions, or reputational damage due to unethical behavior. Integrating ESG into risk management strategies enhances resilience and long-term viability.
Investing for Impact
ESG investing, also known as responsible or impact investing, has gained significant traction. Investors are increasingly allocating capital to companies that align with their values and exhibit strong ESG performance.
This approach allows investors to support businesses that prioritize sustainability, social responsibility, and effective governance while pursuing financial returns.
These focused investment products, such as ESG-themed funds and green bonds, provide opportunities for individuals and institutions to drive positive change through their investment decisions.
The global ESG investment market is expected to reach $53 trillion by 2025.
The Benefits of ESG Investing
There are many benefits to ESG investing, including:
Potential for higher returns: ESG-focused companies tend to be more resilient and have lower risks, which can lead to higher returns for investors.
Reduced risk: ESG investing can help to reduce risk by mitigating environmental, social, and governance risks.
Positive impact: ESG investing can help to create a more sustainable future by investing in companies that are committed to environmental and social responsibility.
More transparency: ESG-focused companies tend to be more transparent, which can give investors more confidence in their investments.
The Challenges of ESG Investing
There are also some challenges to ESG investing, including:
Lack of standardization: There is no single standard for ESG reporting, which can make it difficult to compare companies.
Cost: ESG investments can be more expensive than traditional investments.
Greenwashing: Some companies may engage in greenwashing, which is the practice of making false or misleading claims about their ESG performance.
FAQs
What does ESG stand for?
Environmental, Social, and Governance
What is ESG Investing?
ESG investing, also referred to as sustainable or responsible investing, is a strategy that incorporates environmental, social, and governance factors into investment decisions. It surpasses the boundaries of conventional financial analysis to assess how companies and investments influence the environment, society, and governance practices.
A guest blog on creating ethical and socially responsible supply chains by Emy Kane, managing director of Lonely Whale, and Michael Sadowski, executive director of The Circulate Initiative via Economidst Impact • Reposted:July 1, 2023
An estimated 140m tonnes of plastic have accumulated in the world’s oceans and rivers, with an additional 8m tonnes added each year. Without intervention, this figure is projected to more than triple by 2040, reaching 29m tonnes annually. We are at a critical juncture, and while the challenge ahead may seem daunting, there is enormous potential for corporate decision-makers to seize this global opportunity.
Companies have recognised the severity of plastic pollution and realise that more than 70% of their youngest customer demographic are willing to pay extra for sustainable products. What is now urgently needed to address this problem is collaboration across companies and sectors—to develop ocean-bound-plastic (OBP) supply chains, material-usage scenarios, product designs and socially responsible sourcing practices that help to mitigate pollution and secure the livelihoods of people throughout the value chain.
Embracing the spirit of radical collaboration
Collaboration is vital in developing commercially viable and socially responsible OBP supply chains, as demonstrated by the success of NextWave Plastics. Co-founded by Lonely Whale and Dell Technologies in 2017, NextWave created the first global network of OBP supply chains. At first, rapid impact was hindered by limited access to OBP material and fragmented industry understanding. Thanks in part to the consortium’s leadership, there is now a thriving market for OBP, and brands can readily find OBP material to use in their packaging and products. While there is much more to be done, knowledge-sharing within NextWave will help increase the use of OBP across global supply chains.
Sharing insights is critical to ensuring the long-term sustainability of projects launched today and placing the human element at the centre of business decisions. As we celebrate five years of collaborative work with NextWave, we are increasing our impact under the new leadership of The Circulate Initiative. Together we will expand the diversity of insight around supply-chain maturation and hard-to-recycle plastics that collectively improves the lives of those across the OBP value chain. This global crisis is not just about plastic, but also people.
Building a socially responsible supply chain
Plastic waste management and recycling rely heavily on the informal sector, with informal workers accounting for nearly 60% of plastic recycling globally. They often work in unsafe environments and are at risk of injury and illnesses. Improving the livelihoods of these individuals is essential to developing a robust recycling supply chain. The conditions that lead people to become waste workers can be complex and entwined with structural and systemic issues, especially poverty and gender inequality. Although working conditions can be hazardous, informal waste workers almost never benefit from regulatory protections or other employment-related benefits. As brands and companies make commitments to sustainability and the market for recycled plastic commodities continues to grow, informal waste workers must have a seat at the table.
Understanding these complexities, NextWave members compiled their shared knowledge to create the Framework for Socially Responsible Ocean-Bound Plastic Supply Chains. This comprehensive framework, vetted by external advisors and partner organisations, defined a vital road map for brands and manufacturers to create circular supply chains that provide protections for all workers. Implementation of the framework aims to create supply chains that have both the infrastructure and support necessary to meet demand as well as align with globally approved social and environmental standards.
Securing a future with accountable practices
Today, corporate leadership is leading the way for the future of business and our planet by securing social and environmental benefits for multiple stakeholders, including waste collectors, local communities and recyclers. However, sustained success requires collective action across sectors and competitors. As the United Nations and 175 member states deliberate on an internationally binding treaty on plastic pollution, there is no better time for companies to collaborate with other industry leaders to co-design a future that combats plastic pollution.
Wind turbines and solar panels produce energy using free and green sources of power — the sun and wind. Photo: JIA YU/MOMENT/GETTY IMAGES PLUS
Projects that could generate more than 1TW of renewable energy are still waiting to be constructed and connected to the grid in all parts of the world, due to delays in permitting and a lack of investment in grid infrastructure. By Tom Idle from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: June 26, 2023
First, the good news: The amount of clean energy being generated worldwide is at record levels. Capacity increased by almost 10 percent in the last 12 months; and an impressive 83 percent of all new power that came on stream was produced by renewable-energy systems such as wind and solar. While the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) warns that the sector must grow to three times its current level by 2030 if we are to stay on a 1.5° Celsius pathway, the consistent growth shows “the resilience of renewable energy amidst the lingering energy crisis,” says IRENA Director-General Francesco La Camera.
However, new data show that while clean-energy installation continues to soar, a number of barriers remain that are making it hard for many economies to shift fully away from fossil fuels.
REN21’s latest Renewables in Energy Supply module, launched as part of its annual Renewables 2023 Global Status Report, suggests a lack of attention has been paid to energy technologies and carriers beyond wind and solar power. Deficient policies, permit bottlenecks and uneven investment are exacerbating the problem, according to the think tank.
The group has examined the way final energy is distributed among heat, fuel and electricity; geographies and technologies — including bioenergy, geothermal power and heat, heat pumps, hydrogen, hydropower, solar PV, concentrated solar power, solar thermal heat, ocean power and wind power. Right now, the global energy supply base is split between providing heat (49 percent) and fuel (29 percent), with electricity having the lowest share (22 percent). In 2022, the share of renewables across the entire power sector reached 30 percent, largely thanks to favourable long-term policies that have helped to drive down costs. ‘But across all sectors, renewables cover just 12.7 percent of the total energy system — which is a relatively low share in the larger scheme of things,” REN21 Executive Director Rana Adib told Sustainable Brands®.
An exploration of the other energy carriers — fuels and heat, which provide most of the world’s energy — reveals what Adib claims to be “dismal” renewable energy shares of just 3.6 percent and 9.2 percent, respectively.
“It shows that efforts are narrowly focused on transitioning the power supply. Such a limited focus is ultimately slowing the shift to a renewables-based system, delaying efforts to reach the Sustainable Development Goals and maintaining the status quo of energy insecurity,” she adds.
Both the International Energy Agency (IEA) net-zero scenario and IRENA’s 1.5° Celsius scenario suggest that electricity will supply just 50 percent of our total energy by the middle of the century. That’s why it’s crucial more attention is paid to renewable heat and fuels, as well as diversifying renewable-energy technologies, Adib says.
“We cannot continue to neglect the other carriers — renewable heat and fuels — if we are serious about cutting emissions and addressing the climate, energy and poverty crises. It took time, investment and policy attention to expand to 30 percent renewable power. We now need to award heat and fuels similar policy attention to achieve the critical shift we need.”
So, what does that look like? Are there some quick wins from a policy point of view that might help to shift the renewables market? One very quick win would be to address the permitting issues that continue to cause delays, Adib says: “If there’s political will, it can happen. But governments need to stop sending mixed signals on fossil fuels. They continue to subsidize fossil fuels when clearly renewables are the least-cost option; but they are not operating in a level playing field.”
Currently, projects that could generate more than 1 terawatt of renewable energy are still waiting to be constructed and connected to the grid in all parts of the world, due to delays in permitting and a lack of investment in grid infrastructure. “It’s like, you manufacture cars and wait for roads. When we built cars, we did it with confidence that roads will accompany the process. The same thought and action process must apply to renewables,” she asserts.
Proving to governments that there is absolutely the demand for clean energy is crucial — especially at a time when the pro-fossil fuel movement is as strong as ever and getting more difficult to identify, due to the prevalence of greenwashing.
“Right now, there’s a real push for hydrogen. But the reality is that, globally, just 1 percent of the hydrogen produced is produced from renewable energy — all the rest is fossil-fuel-based,” Adib says. “So, this already requires quite of a technical understanding of what is happening. That’s a big risk.
“The energy crisis has shown the importance of security of supply. To shield us from new crises, policymakers must immediately ramp up efforts in all renewable-energy technologies — including hydropower, geothermal, ocean, CSP and bioenergy. If we don’t quickly evolve these alongside solar PV and wind, we will still need to depend on coal, oil and gas, and nuclear for our energy supply well into the future.”
This report brings into focus the key sustainability issues and priorities, and the business opportunities they present. From AccountAbiity • Reposted: June 23, 2023
AccountAbility, a trusted global ESG Consulting and Standards firm with a three-decade history in guiding leaders to build better companies, today released the AccountAbility 7 Sustainability Trends 2023 Report. Leveraging the firm’s global consulting, research, and standards experience, the report provides timely data, comprehensive insights, and action-oriented guidance to help organizations across industries and geographies make informed sustainability decisions towards meeting their business objectives.
“Consumers and society, as a whole, are expecting more (and different) from business – in an atmosphere of low trust and high expectations,” comments AccountAbility CEO Sunil (Sunny) A. Misser. “Today, the sustainability agenda is central to business competitiveness. Leaders recognize the financial imperatives of moving to a more sustainable economy and the business potential this presents. With this 7 Sustainability Trends 2023 Report, we enable organizations to navigate the fast-changing ESG landscape and focus on the meaningful trends that are shaping the business agenda.”
The AccountAbility 7 Sustainability Trends 2023 Report provides organizations and businesses with timely and valuable insights into the most pressing environmental, social, and governance issues. In identifying and analyzing these latest trends, challenges, and opportunities in sustainability, the report enables strategic planning, informed decision-making, and effective stakeholder engagement. This report helps organizations align their strategies with evolving sustainability priorities, anticipate future developments, and address risks and opportunities proactively.
Furthermore, the report is designed to enhance investor confidence, supporting sustainability reporting, facilitate knowledge sharing, and promote policy and regulation alignment. The AccountAbility 7 Sustainability Trends 2023 Report is an important tool to help organizations stay at the forefront of these important developments, drive positive change, position themselves as leaders in sustainability, and deliver on their business agenda.
The AccountAbility 7 Sustainability Trends 2023 Report was researched and compiled by the firm’s Global Leadership, Consulting, Research, and Standards teams and benefits from the firm’s extensive work with prominent global organizations across Industries, including Financial Services, Energy & Extractives, Healthcare & Pharmaceuticals, Real Estate, Consumer Packaged Goods, Telecom & Technology, Foundations, Governments, and others, in jurisdictions including the US, UK, EU, Mid-East, and Asia.
The AccountAbility 7 Sustainability Trends 2023 – Highlights
Navigating The Net Zero Landscape: Against an unprecedented volume of net zero commitments, what are the risks for those that fail to act, and the opportunities for transparent leaders?
Stakeholder Activism Is Getting Louder: As businesses face increasing pressure to take a stance and demonstrate actionable progress on a range of ESG issues, how best can leaders balance this with the imperative to maximize shareholder value?
Geopolitics: The New “G” In ESG: In an era of increasingly globalized business operations, how can organizations address the outsized role that the new G (Geopolitics) is playing in the business landscape?
Building an Effective, Future-Focused Board: As demands and expectations shift, how best to equip future-focused Boards to meet the requirements of the evolving business environment?
Next Generation ESG Disclosure and Reporting: A shift from voluntary to mandatory ESG Disclosure is set to heighten attention on corporate sustainability disclosure practices. How will these changes impact ESG Reporting?
The Road to a Sustainable Value Chain: How can the integration of sustainability criteria into supply chains drive organizational shifts towards a more context-aware and competitive value chain?
Nature Based Assets Will Drive Valuations: As nature-based assets are increasingly recognized for their significant impact on valuations, what steps can companies take to achieve nature-based performance goals?
Modern third-party risk management requires deep, near-constant monitoring by Matthew Debbag from Corporate Compliance Insights • Reposted: June 22, 2023
Ethical sourcing and due diligence have become crucial components of third-party risk management. But as Creditsafe’s Matthew Debbage explains, many companies still aren’t taking the threat seriously enough.
Despite the increasing focus on compliance and risk management,a recent survey by Creditsafe found that nearly half (42%) of companies would still work with a supplier even if they have been sanctioned or involved in corruption, bribery, fraud, money laundering or forced labor. And it’s not as if this is simply a function of ignorance of the truth: 83% of companies run compliance checks on international suppliers at least once a quarter, indicating that they are either not taking the results seriously or may be ignoring the outcomes.
We expected the respondents in our study to show a stronger commitment to ethical sourcing, but what we discovered was a contradiction between companies’ publicly espoused values and their actions.
This contradiction highlights a significant issue in global supply chain management, and it must change if brands want to restore customer confidence and prevent costly mistakes like lawsuits or fines.
Answering the call for ethical sourcing
Ignoring ethical sourcing and supplier due diligence within your business and with your international suppliers can have severe consequences. A brand’s reputation can be severely damaged, with negative publicity or plummeting stock prices and could be subject to lawsuits, compliance violations and regulatory fines.
There are a number of laws in place to safeguard the U.S. market from unethical businesses. The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act bans imports from China’s Xinjiang region unless companies can prove their goods were not produced using forced labor or child labor. More legislation in this area is possible, as a bipartisan measure, the Slave-Free Business Certification Bill, would require certain large companies to carry out audits on their supply chains to ensure they are free of slave labor.
Beyond compliance violations, another huge risk is the financial and reputational impact. Industry giants like H&M and Nike have encountered consumer boycotts due to their association with suppliers engaging in forced labor.
On the other hand, a prime example of how being a purpose-driven, sustainable company can boost revenue growth and profitability is Patagonia. Regarded as one of the world’s most responsible companies, Patagonia monitors all of its processes, including every step of the manufacturing process, with the goal of minimizing its environmental and social impact. The clothing brand is also a certified B Corporation, having met or exceeded stringent criteria consistently and earning an “outstanding” score in each of the past five years.
Three ways to improve third-party risk management
Here are three ways compliance professionals can enhance third party risk management:
Screening for compliance: By leveraging real-time sanctions databases, global enforcement lists, adverse media coverage and profiles of politically exposed persons (PEPs) and state-owned companies, organizations can proactively identify potential red flags and compliance risks. An automated approach can streamline the screening process and optimizes decision making of potential supplier partnerships.
Mitigating operational disruptions: Timely identification of red flags and potential risks allows organizations to proactively develop contingency plans, ensuring they can swiftly address disruptions, such as factory shutdowns, by swiftly reallocating production orders to alternative suppliers.
Enhancing financial stability: One key aspect of third-party risk management is assessing the financial stability of international suppliers. Such insights are vital, as disruptions in the supplier’s operations, whether due to financial difficulties, political unrest, worker disputes or unforeseen events like pandemics, can severely impact a brand’s ability to fulfill production orders on time.
Matthew Debbage is the CEO of the Americas and Asia for Creditsafe. As a longtime veteran of Creditsafe, he has held various leadership roles including COO of Creditsafe Group and CEO of the Americas and Asia since 2012. Over the past 10 years, he led the expansion of the business in the United States, where he has built a high-performing team, driven impressive revenue growth and worked with thousands of American businesses across various industries.
Eric Block On Responsible Branding 
You must be logged in to post a comment.