Image: Plastics for Change

A new report finds that only a handful of studies have examined whether and how a circular economy can alleviate poverty and benefit vulnerable communities in low-income countries. From Sustainable Brands • Reposted: May 12, 2023

Circular-economic models and strategies are growing in popularity among businesses and policymakers as a means to increase efficiency, reduce waste and reach climate goals. By increasing the reuse and regeneration of products and materials, a projected 7-8 million new jobs can be created. But a new report by Circle Economy, the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the Solutions for Youth Employment (S4YE) Program at the World Bank‍ identifies knowledge gaps that may hinder the equitable creation of new employment opportunities.

Decent Work in the Circular Economy: An Overview of the Existing Evidence Basereveals that current research on circular-economic job opportunities displays a strong Global North bias. It fails to address the impact of circular interventions on people in the Global South — including atypical workers, women, migrants, youth and other vulnerable populations. Additionally, the study outlines what we currently know about jobs in a circular economy and pinpoints research gaps — calling for more consistent and internationally relevant evidence to create a stronger foundation for decision-making.

According to the report, 84 percent of current research focuses on the Global North. Sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and North Africa were the least represented regions — despite the fact that most circular-economic activities are now located in the Global South. Moreover, while 73 percent of workers in low-income countries are employed in the informal economy, most research concerns formal, regulated work.

Existing research also focuses disproportionately on job creation and disregards job quality— including working conditions and wages. The report finds that only a handful of studies have examined whether and how a circular economy can alleviate poverty and benefit vulnerable communities in low-income countries.

“The link between environmental sustainability goals and human development and jobs has often been overlooked, especially in the context of developing countries where most workers are clustered in the informal sector — which is characterized by low-quality, low-paying jobs,” says Namita Datta, Program Manager at S4YE. “The shift to more circular approaches calls for policies that ensure that the jobs created are not only good for the environment, but also good for workers.

“The focus would be on addressing the low-quality, low-paying jobs in the informal sectorwith hazardous working conditions and exposure to toxic materials that are associated with circular activities like waste management, recycling, repair and reuse,” Datta explained. “But this integration will require intentional and adequate policies, as well as further evidence to understand the impact of a circular economy on people’s livelihoods. A truly just transition to a circular economy will require reskilling and upskilling opportunities for workers to access better job opportunities.”

Decent work in a circular economy: 5 themes

Five key themes underpin current research into decent work in a circular economy; these represent some of the crucial opportunities and challenges and should be considered for circular transition to lead to a more just and inclusive society:

1. Labor market and sectoral transformation — Employment and job creation are often described as the most important social and economic contributions of a circular economy. Based on a comprehensive 2018 ILO study, global employment growth was estimated to be driven by Latin America and the Caribbean (over 10 million jobs) and Europe (around 0.5 million jobs) due to new jobs in recycling and reprocessing. The region expected to have most employment gains is the EU, benefiting from the ‘first-mover advantage’ compared to the rest of the world.
2. Informality in a circular economy — The informal economy is estimated to employ 60 percent of the world’s population; yet most studies and policy approaches assume that the economy is part of a regulated, formal economy. This is especially significant in the Global South — where the reuse, repair, waste-collection and recycling sectors provide ample employment to low-income workers. Yet, the informal economy is not sufficiently included in the Global North’s circular economy agenda and existing research does not adequately consider the wide-ranging circular activities operating informally in the Global South.
3. Work reallocation and skills development — The successful reallocation of workers from linear to circular sectors is dependent on access to training and related policy measures. Gaining the ‘deep skills’ required for circular interventions relies on employers’ and educational institutions’ knowledge of circular business models. Lack of knowledge can result in a deep skills gap — especially in low-income countries, where access to STEM skills for remanufacturing and related sectors may be lacking.
4. Working conditions and social protections — Some academics and practitioners have proposed a circular economy as a solution to eradicate poverty (SDG 1). Still, research on poverty alleviation is lacking; most occupational health and safety concerns relating to circular activities are associated with the global waste trade and secondhand goods flowing from Global North to South, where workers are often exposed to toxic waste.
5. Gender discrimination and social equity — Projections show that the transition to a circular economy will increase female employment globally. Beyond gender equity, concerns relating to the social blind spots of circular-economic interventions among underrepresented circular actors (ex: migrant workers, youth) were only studied in-depth three times, revealing a significant knowledge gap.

Alette van Leur, Director of the ILO’s Sectoral Policies Department, said, “There is no doubt that a circular economy can help us reach our climate goals. However, the links between circularity and the achievement of social and economic progress remain overlooked. The shift towards a more circular economy offers significant opportunities for the world of work, such as the creation of new jobs and sustainable enterprises. However, fully unlocking the potential of this new economy requires a just transition that addresses the current inequalities and suboptimal working conditions currently present in the circular economy. If not managed properly, these issues could continue to impede progress towards a more equitable and sustainable future.”

Ultimately, the new report calls for more in-depth and inclusive research on decent work and the circular economy — which puts the Global South, informal workers and global value chains in the spotlight. The authors also reveal the need for joint advocacy and data partnerships to close knowledge gaps and build links to other important themes — such as climate justice and women’s empowerment.

“Having better data and evidence to understand how the circular economy can create better-quality jobs in different industries around the world is crucial for a just transition,” says Hatty Cooper, Director of Governments and Institutions at Circle Economy. “Also, the circular economy is still seen as an environmental agenda; and its social and economic benefits are yet to be fully embraced, despite the importance of this topic. We need to work in partnership to create and put evidence of its socioeconomic impacts in the hands of practitioners and decision-makers.”

Decent Work in the Circular Economy is the first output under Circle Economy, the ILO and S4YE’s joint Jobs in the Circular Economy initiative — which aims to address gaps in the evidence base for circular jobs through collaboration with an international community of research institutions, industry representatives, social partners, governments and public agencies. The initiative was launched on May 9 at the Geneva Environment Network; findings from the report will also be presented later this month at this year’s World Circular Economy Forum.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/defining-the-next-economy/circular-economy-create-millions-jobs-global-north-bias

10 years on from the Rana Plaza disaster, major fashion labels are using false green claims to conceal their destructive business model. Can big-brand fast fashion really be as sustainable as they promise? From Greenpeace • Reposted: April 23. 2023

On 24th April 2013 1,134 people lost their lives while making clothes due to the collapse of the Rana Plaza clothing factory in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Despite a number of labour rights initiatives, and the rise of a global fashion activism movement, including Fashion Revolution and Greenpeace’s Detox campaign, the global fashion industry is more broken than ever. 

Clothing production doubled from 2000 to 2014, taking an already unsustainable level of production each year to an estimated 100 billion garments.

A new Greenpeace report has exposed the biggest false green claims made by major global fashion labels. Here’s what it found.

Sustainable fashion claims by big brands – can they be trusted?

Sustainability sells. And fashion labels make incredible claims to appeal to a new kind of consumer. But brands are hiding their lack of action behind false claims of environmental responsibility.

Without the evidence to back up the eco-claims made on their labels, fashion companies are guilty of greenwashing. This is when companies make themselves look eco-friendly to the public but continue polluting the environment behind the scenes.

Big fashion labels promise recycled materials, take back systems and recycling schemes. But due to the ever-increasing volumes of fashion being produced, these promises are impossible for companies to keep.

A recent screening of sustainability claims in the textile, garment and shoe sector suggested that 39% could be false or deceptive.

Big brands like H&M and Decathlon have been found by regulators to have been making false green claims. In the UK, authorities have investigated similar claims made by ASOS, Boohoo and George at Asda, as part of a larger effort to develop its Green Claims Code.

In terms of materials, recycled polyester especially is becoming a central sustainability myth for the fashion industry. Clothes are being labelled as ‘recycled’, even though there’s no evidence that they are part of a truly circular system for clothes. 

This is potentially misleading – consumers might think that the term ‘recycled’ means they are made out of old clothes, and can be recycled again into new clothes, when neither is the case.

This is not only creating a false sense of security for customers, but hiding the facts about plastic recycling: as of 2015, only 9% of all plastic waste ever created has been recycled.

When fashion brands talk about recycling and circularity – this is what actually happens

Only 3% of clothes are made from recycled materials

Most of the 3% is fabric made from plastic drinks bottles. It is not recycled again but burned or dumped

Less than 1% of all clothes are made from old textiles

Greenpeace report: which brands are making false green claims, and what are they?

The report examines the sustainability claims made by 14 brands through their self-defined special ‘eco-friendly’ or ‘responsible’ collections. In doing this, the report was able to assess which brands are the most guilty of greenwashing.

Well known brands’ supposedly sustainable collections that are in the greenwash danger zone include:

Decathlon Ecodesign

H&M Conscious

Mango Committed

Primark Cares

Tesco F&F Made Faithfully

Zara Join Life

The promises made by brands on these labels were found to be lacking in a number of ways, such as:

• Confusing labelling for customers, including false ‘certifications’ which are simply named after company sustainability programmes. 
• Lack of in-house or even third-party verification on environmental, social and human rights measures.
• Lack of public information from across the chain of production.
• No attempt to slow the production of large volumes.
• Misleading claims of ‘circularity’ relying on recycled polyester from plastic bottles
• Using ‘sustainable’ or ‘responsible’ on materials which are only slightly better 
• Promotion of fabric in blends such as polycotton, which is unrecyclable.
• Continued reliance on discredited measurement tools such as the Higgs Index on Materials Sustainability.
• Lack of breakdown of information about materials.
• Relying on small scale changes when large changes in volume production are needed.

What must fashion companies do?

The only true way to make fashion companies green claims work is for them to reduce the amount of clothing they’re making. But many fashion companies won’t even tell us how many clothes they produce each year.

The textile industry is responsible for five to ten percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. 85% of its greenhouse gas emissions come from the supply chains which are mostly located in the Global South.

Reducing the volume of clothing made will bring these environmental costs down, and stem the flow of clothing waste – again to countries less able to deal with it. Worldwide, one truckload of clothing is incinerated or landfilled every single second.

The simple truth is that fast fashion will never be sustainable. Companies are virtually writing their own sustainable fashion rules themselves. Many of them are refusing to even publish volumes, let alone reduce them.

Read the full report for more detailed information on companies, claims, and the potential for change in EU regulations.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/news/fashion-greenwash-report-companies-hiding-true-environmental-costs-fast-fashion/

Image credit: Brian Yurasits / Unsplash

By Riya Anne Polcastro from triplepundit.com * Reposted: April 24, 2023

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may soon enact stricter rules against greenwashing. The agency is taking public comments on its Green Guides, established in 1992 to assess sustainability claims. Changes are certainly due — especially considering the ubiquity of false claims across marketplaces. But without an enhanced budget for enforcement, new rules are unlikely to have the teeth they need to make a difference. The issue also begs the question: How can the FTC even begin to define “green” with so many competing factors?

Greenwashing in action

Examples of greenwashing abound — from misleading claims about a product’s recyclability or compostability to misrepresentations of companies’ carbon footprints, the certification of illegal logging, and more. Naturally, some of the most egregious examples come from fossil fuel producers and investors, such as Shell and HSBC.

Purveyors of petroleum products – including Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP and Total Energies – have attempted to rebrand themselves in the fight against climate change. But while 60 percent of their 2021 advertising attempted to paint them in this light, renewable energy made up a mere 12 percent of their total investments. Similarly, HSBC claimed to be on the path to net zero and even touted its tree-planting program — all the while investing heavily in fossil fuels, including coal.

Exaggerated claims about the recyclability of a product, as well as the amount of recycled material a product is made from, are also common. As are assertions regarding the use of so-called “ocean-bound” plastics. Coca-Cola is guilty of just that, according to the Changing Markets Foundation. The beverage company spent a small fortune touting its use of such plastics, while failing to do anything about its role in creating the problem as the world’s single most prolific plastic polluter, according to the NGO. Brand audits show that Coca-Cola’s total plastic pollution continues to grow.

But the issue of greenwashing is hardly limited to a handful of brands. “Our latest investigationexposes a litany of misleading claims from household names consumers should be able to trust,” George Harding-Rolls, campaign manager for Changing Markets Foundations, told the Guardian last year. “This is just the tip of the iceberg, and it is of crucial importance that regulators take this issue seriously. The industry is happy to gloat its green credentials with little substance on the one hand, while continuing to perpetuate the plastic crisis on the other. We are calling out greenwashing so the world can see that voluntary action has led to a market saturated with false claims.”

This is precisely why the FTC is finally moving toward updating its Green Guides — which are supposed to aid brands in ensuring their environmental claims are accurate and do not mislead consumers. However, the guidelines were last updated in 2012. A lot has been learned since then about what makes a product sustainable, as well as the depths some marketers will stoop to in order to woo eco-conscious consumers.

But what about enforcement?

Unfortunately, the guides are likely to remain just that — guidance that is rarely enforced through the courts. While suits were brought against Walmart and Kohls last year for claiming rayon products were made from bamboo, their total penalty of $5.5 million is arguably a drop in the bucket. 

Indeed, only a few greenwashing suits have been brought to court each year since their height in 2014 and 2015, according to the list on the FTC’s website, with no penalty cases occurring between September 2019 and May 2022. It’s therefore difficult to believe that the updated guides will have much of an effect.

Daring to define “green”

Another relevant issue is how to even define what makes a product environmentally friendly with so many aspects to consider. Electric vehicles (EVs), for example, have been hailed as the holy grail of environmentalism by the U.S. government. But for all intents and purposes, an EV for every driver would cause unfathomable environmental destruction.

Likewise, while net zero is currently being held as the gold standard, many of the offsets used to achieve it are dubious at best. And recycling may be better than using virgin materials, but it creates its own set of problems and still pales in comparison to the ever-forgotten need to reduce first.

In truth, defining “green” should ultimately come down to what’s not being used, instead of what is — meaning the only truly green product would be no product at all. While that is not realistic in a market economy, the FTC would be wise to use its updated Green Guides to discourage the rampant consumerism and single-use products that got us into this mess in the first place.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/ftc-green-guides-greenwashing/772391

Making sustainability form part of STEM education could help reverse or halt environmental damage. Image: WEF

By Cemil Cihan Ozalevli, Co-Founder and Chief Content Officer, Twin Science and WEF Tech Pioneer 2022 via the World Economic Forum • Reposted: April 14, 2023

• The world is at a dangerous environmental tipping point and the next generation can learn to steer it back onto a healthy course.
• By equipping school children with the right knowledge and skills, we prepare them to face the challenges of the 21st century and to become trailblazers of positive transformation in our world.
• With the ‘STEM for Sustainability’ approach, future change-makers can learn to use technological advancement to help halt or reverse climate change.

Turkey’s eastern region is a place where life is at its most extreme. Following a 7.8 magnitude earthquake and a powerful aftershock on the 6th of February 2023, the infrastructure is damaged beyond repair and the inhabitants are in desperate need of help.

As a result of the earthquake, over 50,000 people lost their lives in Turkey and over 5,500 in Syria. My hometown, Adana, was a city that was also affected. I lost friends, family members and neighbours, it was a personal turning point in my life.

A Monday morning that should have started with science, hope and prosperity turned into shock and denial, leaving me with one of the hardest decisions in my life. On the morning of the 6th of February, I was preparing for a STEM workshop for blind children at the United Nations Headquarters. I picked up the phone and called my parents. They were on the way to the rubble of the collapsed city to help rescue our friends and family. I was at a crossroads.

Should I join them? I thought can I help them and how can I be of any use in this situation? As a social entrepreneur and engineer who has dedicated his life to transforming education, I decided to use my skills where they will create the greatest outcome, effect and good impact for humanity and my home country, to prevent future disasters, teach children about the importance of sustainability, how to put the heart into science education and show those visually impaired children that science also belongs to them, that they are also included and considered.

Having full trust in my nation and the global community to rescue the day and bind up wounds, and, with all the sadness in my heart, I decided to honour my word for the United Nations and for RASIT (Royal Academy of Science International Trust). I decided to take the role of saving the future, which was both a turning point for my life and also a breaking point for our region.

We are very proud of you. You created a system to give something for the kids to give them the possibility to create. That’s really fantastic. You are redesigning thinking to achieve a sustainable future.”— Csaba Kőrösi, President of UN General Assembly

Re-evaluating our priorities and the need for sustainable development 

We tend to talk about tragedies and destructive dimensions. But are we talking about the root reasons behind them? Our bad urbanisation, profit-first strategies and construction policies are essentially the reason for it. We knew it beforehand and kept repeating and listening to the same conversations without considering the key education aspect, which would make the true difference.

The debate on the role of conscience in engineering is not new, but for my country, the breaking point of realisation has occurred, unfortunately with a disaster. In a world of technological advancement, where engineering sustainable structures are so easy and available, why did we choose to prioritise profit? Why did we skip sustainability and overlook the reason for technological advancement, which is to improve all life on earth, including humans, animals and the whole ecosystem?

We don’t have the luxury of waiting for this breaking point to happen. We have already started to experience environmental problems shattering our world. The climate crisis is human-made and we must change the way we live.

With the urge to create something that would have the ultimate good impact, we started a social impact-driven ed-tech company called Twin Science, which was also chosen as one of the Tech Pioneers by the World Economic Forum in 2022.

Developing STEM For Sustainability

We offered learning opportunities to over 20,000 kids. During these workshops, it became evident that traditional education was not enough and was outdated. The education these children had was uniform and did not illustrate real-world issues comprehensibly. To address the world’s future global issues, Twin Science was created with my co-founders to foster an education that emphasises STEM competency and social consciousness. We believe this to be a crucial combination for success.

Our education approach is focused on raising double-winged children, who are well-rounded individuals with academic and social capabilities. By equipping them with the right knowledge and skills, we prepare them to face the challenges of the 21st century and to become trailblazers of positive transformation in our world.

With two wings, children can fly. One wing represents strong competence in STEM areas with highly developed 21st-century skills. The second wing denotes a strong sense of social responsibility to apply this knowledge. By using these two wings, children will be empowered to have a positive impact on our world. We believe that to raise such individuals, learning needs to be fun, engaging and inspiring.

How will children initiate a cultural transformation?

Children will use STEM for sustainable development. With STEM for Sustainability, children now have the knowledge that natural disasters can be prevented and lives can be saved via our ‘Earthquake Detection’ project. They see the impact of unsustainable farming through the ‘Sustainable Farm’ project. They consider the accessibility of blind people and prototype a ‘Smart Cane’ project and grasp the importance of saving the planet with the prototype ‘Ocean Cleaning Robot.’

The future engineers and architects who will build cities will prioritise the ecosystem, the lives of the residents and the lives of the animals in the area and their impact on the world. They will prioritise living ‘together’ with the land, not ‘of’ the land. They will be the changemakers and future leaders who will make a cultural transformation.

Children will use STEM for sustainable development. Image: Twin Science

In our lessons, we learned how, depending on the angle of the sun shining on the solar panel, it can create more energy. Using this information, we made a solar panel that rotates towards the sun so that we can maximise our solar energy. It has given us the confidence to see what we can do with technology and how it can help us towards a sustainable future.”— A pupil at Reigate St Mary’s primary school, UK, on using STEM for Sustainability equipment

Science is not only a matter of the mind but of the heart as well. With the ‘STEM for Sustainability’ approach, future change-makers make use of technological advancements, as well as develop social awareness, learn about responsible decision-making, exercise their conscience and consider the collective well-being of society.

The truth is the 21st century is going to be a really challenging time for the rising generations. So it’s imperative that we equip them with a knowledge of the issues and the skills to deal with problems caused by climate change, such as food security and water scarcity. We need to see STEM For Sustainability integrated into our curriculums just as thoroughly as English and maths are and we need to see that in every school across the country.”— Marcus Culverwell, Headteacher at Reigate St Mary’s primary school, UK

Through this approach, children will be using STEM to create a sustainable world that we all want and need.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/04/why-sustainability-must-become-an-integral-part-of-stem-education/

Every organization should be able to identify what a sustainable version of itself looks like, who is needed to run and support that, and where there are needs for new skills and roles within it. By Kathleen Enright from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: April 7, 2023

The war for talent may be ongoing, but the battlefield is being redrawn. The seismic changes to people’s lives wrought by COVID, the climate emergency and the cost-of-living crisis have all reshaped the demands employees are making on the companies they work for. The Great Resignation was, at its core, a movement to find greater purpose in work and is an indication of the power dynamics swinging in favour of the workforce. To win the hearts and minds of the best and brightest, corporates need to acknowledge these shifts and alter their tactics accordingly.

Tony Danker, Director General of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), openedits recent Future of Work Conference by recognising that “new realities demand a new approach.” Alongside the expectation for more flexible working models, he highlighted that people are increasingly making career choices based on employers’ social and environmental ethics and that businesses need to adopt new values to win them over. “It’s no longer just that they work for us,” he warned. “We have to work for them.”

Danker’s argument was that British businesses must embrace bold climate goals and demonstrate their social awareness through “active diversity and inclusion strategies” if they want to attract Generation Z workers. Young talent, he believes, will only work for businesses that share their own values.

It doesn’t start — or end — with Gen Z

All of which is true. But by focusing on the need for purpose among workers at the start of their careers, Danker overlooks the rising demand among employees of all ages for corporations to demonstrate social and environmental accountability. Generations X and Y are just as keenly focused on sustainability when it comes to picking their employer.

A 2020 report by intranet company Unilyfound that 72 percent of multigenerational UK office workers were concerned about environmental ethics — and 65 percent would be more likely to work for a company with strong environmental policies. Climate change, human rights and social equitychimed particularly loudly with workers in their 30s and 40s.

Employers who focus solely on the demands of Gen Z when it comes to incorporating sustainability into their business, marketing and brand strategies will be ignoring the needs of a significant — and expanding — proportion of their staff. Employee demographics are changing, with the proportion of over-50s in the workforce steadily increasing. According to Cebr research, by 2030 47 percent of over-50s will be in employment. To put this into context, in 2032 the first of the millennials — aka Generation Y — will enter their 50s. Meanwhile, the employment rate of over-60s has almost doubled in the last two decades and is set to continue increasing.

Attraction is futile without retention

While it is clearly crucial to consider the requirements of their future workforces, businesses need to be aware that social and environmental issues also play strongly with senior talent. The generation of employees currently raising young children have heightened fears over the planet’s fragility, while those established in their careers have greater leverage to make employers respond to their priorities. Disregard them, and they will take their skills and experience elsewhere. Fundamentally, corporate responsibility isn’t just a factor in talent attraction but, crucially, in talent retention.

Among every demographic, the talent pool is worried about the future and well-informed about the realities of the climate crisis. Workforces want businesses to do more but they will not be duped by punchy slogans or unsupported promises. The Unily research found that 83 percent of office workers believed their employers were doing too little to address climate change, suggesting a worrying gap between intention and action on the part of employers.

This is partly due to a failure by companies to align their sustainability strategy with business strategies across every aspect of their organisations — a failure to demonstrate how sustainability is rooted in the business, how it is driving change, reshaping it for tomorrow; and how employees will play a critical role of in that journey. In our ProgressPoint surveyof 20 global companies, Salterbaxter analysed the employee communications of progressive employers to understand how their sustainability strategy was being framed to staff and if it enabled them to make active decisions. Were employees, for example, provided with opportunities to take on real-world sustainability challenges? It was an area when almost every business fell down.

Empowering workers to contribute to sustainability solutions is far more motivating than simply raising awareness of corporate sustainability strategies and is a significant factor in talent retention. But we found that the companies we analysed scored only averagely or poorly in how they positioned sustainability in their employee value proposition or in their employee development programmes — they may have progressive sustainability strategies, but they are not taking their talent along with them.

Authenticity is everything

The retention issue makes it essential that companies embed their sustainability strategy into their human capital strategy — as well as their wider business strategy — rather than having it sat alongside existing HR operations. Doing so means demonstrating how the sustainability strategy helps deliver the business strategy and effectively communicating that combined strategy to existing and potential talent so that they are engaged and inspired.

Marketing an organisation as a sustainability-led employer is largely insufficient. Attracting and retaining top talent means hitting multiple proof points that show the sustainability strategy is long term and operational. This includes making genuine progress against environmental and social goals, including the UN SDGs, and striving to meet credible corporate sustainability standards.

Alongside those goals and targets, the sustainability strategy should outline who will deliver them. There must be a framework in place to bring talent into the company, and then a platform from which they are empowered to take the strategy forward. Each business should be able to identify what a sustainable version of itself looks like, who is needed to run and support that, and where there are needs for new skills and roles within it.

Conclusion

Demonstrating that sustainability strategies lie at the heart of the business will enable companies to secure the best talent — which will then allow those businesses to deliver on the sustainability challenges they face now and in the future, thus attracting (and retaining) future talent. It’s a powerful virtuous circle for those that get it right.

We are already seeing that the future of work will be very different from the past. Business as usual is over. This is the beginning of a long-term shift in power dynamics in the workplace that will see employers fighting to attract and retain talent in new ways. Those that recognise and authentically respond to the ethical priorities of their current workforce and future talent will be best placed to succeed in tomorrow’s business landscape.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/organizational-change/employee-values-authentic-sustainability-strategy-win-talent-war