CSR | Eric Block On Responsible Branding

How to prove that sustainable business is good business

25 07 2024

Photo: Adobe Stock

By Natalie Runyon, Director / ESG content & Advisory Services / Thomson Reuters Institute • Reposted: July 25, 2024

A new return on sustainable investment methodology enables companies to quantify the financial benefits of their business investments and sustainability initiatives to better demonstrate sustainable growth and long-term value creation

Sustainability is key to both business and societal progress, but many companies struggle to demonstrate the financial benefits of their sustainability initiatives, especially when tackling environmental, social & governance (ESG) concerns.

To address this, the NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business (CSB) created the Return on Sustainability Investment (ROSI) methodology. This approach connects sustainability efforts with financial outcomes, providing a stronger business case for existing and future sustainability projects, according to Tensie Whelan, Director of NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business.

From corporate C-Suite leaders, the ROSI framework provides a structured approach to enhancing business performance across social, environmental, and financial dimensions. It achieves this by integrating sustainability principles into the core business strategy, decision-making processes, and accounting practices. (Previously, we have underscored how to embed sustainability into core operations through risk management and financial workflows.)

By quantifying the comprehensive range of costs and benefits, including intangible factors, the ROSI framework enables organizations to drive sustainable growth and create long-term value.

How to calculate the ROI of sustainable business

Quantifying the return on investment in sustainable business initiatives with the ROSI methodology involves five steps, including:

1. Make sure existing sustainability initiatives align with the enterprise’s material issues — You should evaluate whether your organization’s sustainability initiatives correspond with the company’s significant issues. Notably, Whelan said she discovered that many companies have not yet clearly outlined their material sustainability strategies — those that address sustainability issues which have a considerable impact on the company or are significantly influenced by the company’s operations.

In her work with the automotive industry, Whelan and her team identified 16 strategies focused on addressing critical sustainability challenges, including waste management, innovation in products such as electric vehicles, and water conservation. These broad strategies typically span multiple activities that may not initially be recognized as part of these strategies but should be included in future ROSI calculations.

2. Assess practices that are put in place — You should also evaluate the practices that have been implemented. In many organizations, the practices associated with a particular sustainability strategy have developed over time, and it’s often not clear who fully understands these changes. Additionally, it may not be immediately evident which modified practices will be financially beneficial. In such cases, you should try to identify as many altered practices as possible for each strategy, without initially assessing their financial impact. Multidisciplinary teams are essential in recording these developments.

A CSB analysis of the automotive industry identified 240 modified practices. One particular practice, within the waste management strategy, involved recycling paint and solvents in order to lower emissions of volatile organic compounds.

3. Document positive outcomes — This step includes grouping the benefits into four drivers — risk management, innovation, operational efficiency, and employee retention. For instance, enhanced management of waste, energy, and water typically boosts operational efficiency.

4. Measure the financial value of benefits — The next step is to identify how to measure the economic impact of beneficial results. This can often be accomplished by comparing a new approach to an established standard. For example, to evaluate the value of recycling solvents in the automotive industry, a team collected data on the quantity of solvent reclaimed and recycled, the cost per unit of new solvent, the cost per unit for reclaiming and recycling solvents, and the price of water-based alternative solvents. Although this information was readily available, it had not been previously compiled for analysis, Whelan said.

5. Determine the total financial value — It’s important to note that each broad strategy consists of various specific practices. By summing up the financial impact (positive or negative) of each practice within a strategy, it becomes possible to pinpoint which strategies are most lucrative and where to allocate resources effectively. For instance, CSB gathered data from an automotive company regarding the economic effects of lowering harmful emissions through enhanced filtration systems and the implementation of solvent reuse and substitution. Then, to quantify the financial advantages of increased production efficiencies, the CSB team calculated the savings by multiplying the annual reduction in solvent usage by the average price of new solvent, resulting in yearly savings of $72 million.

More rigor, C-Suite and board involvement needed

Many corporate leaders well known for their leadership in sustainability too often lack the rigor in accounting for the financial benefits of their sustainable business strategies. In addition, companies sometimes focus too narrowly on just the financial analysis of capital investments. In some cases, these investments can reduce costs by conserving natural capital or enhance employee retention and productivity. This is why companies must expand the lens in which they analyze capital investments and quantify the monetary value of their sustainability activities with the same diligence and discipline that they use to quantify the value of their core operational activities.

Whelan highlighted the critical nature of having visible ownership of sustainability at the most senior levels of the company leadership, including the chief legal officer, the chief financial officer, and the chief information officer.

In fact, company management and the board of directors should discuss embedding a sustainability strategy and ROSI-inspired key performance metrics (KPIs), in addition to enhancing reporting and compliance.

Indeed, boards already are being held accountable for greenwashing and for inaction on material negative impacts, Whelan notes, adding that there is still a ways to go before boards demonstrate they have the right level of expertise. In 2018, 21% of board members among Fortune 100 companies had Social experience — the S of ESG — and only 6% of corporate directors had expertise in the E and G, according to CSB’s analysis. By 2023, almost half of the 1,171 board members had ESG credentials (13% E credentials, 15% Gcredentials and 21% S credentials) — an significant rise over five years. To many, however, that is not enough given the urgency.

To help expedite urgency, Whelan said she urges companies to use ROSI to assess the financial risks associated with inaction vs. action — or simply the value of maintaining the status quo vs. making investments to ensure the sustainability of the business. The consequences of inaction on the existential threat of climate change will disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, exacerbating human rights violations (including the right to life, health, and dignity), and thwarting access to basic needs like clean water, food, and safe shelter.

It will also threaten business viability if not addressed.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/posts/esg/sustainable-business/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business (CSB), responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, Thomson Reuters Institute
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Two-thirds of US’s 100 biggest businesses “avoid greenwashing” by keeping quiet on ESG

10 07 2024

Photo (L to R) – Garrett Bond (Senior Director of Analytics, Ringer Sciences), Dr Lucy Walton (CEO, Connected Impact) and Taylor Schott (Senior Manager – Analytics, Ringer Sciences), who conducted the report research. Photo: Business Wire

From Business Wire • Reposted: July 11, 2024

New research suggests that almost six in ten (58%) of the top 100 largest public and private US companies are responding to greenwashing concerns by keeping quiet on genuine ESG progress.

With global ESG assets surpassing $30 trillion in 2022 and 85% of investors reporting that ESG assets lead to better returns¹, companies that remain quiet may be missing out on potential investment opportunities and consumer demand².

The Transparency Index 2024 report, published by data insights company Connected Impact, and data science consultancy Ringer Sciences, reviewed over 600,000 corporate communications from 200 companies to identify the “transparency gaps” between what businesses communicate on social media about ESG topics, and what they factually disclose about their targets and performance in annual reports, websites and other corporate documents.

The findings reveal only 2% of US companies “over promoted” their ESG progress, with 58% “under promoting” and disclosing more factual data on ESG than promoted. In a climate of stringent regulatory scrutiny, where mistakes can result in fines and reputational damage, companies may be hesitant to promote their legitimate ESG credentials due to fears of greenwashing accusations. This puts them at risk of “greenhushing” – where organizations choose not to publicize details of their climate targets, or their plan to reach their targets, to avoid scrutiny and allegations of greenwashing.

Dr. Lucy Walton, CEO of Connected Impact, said: “Businesses are under increasing pressure to avoid greenwashing – with increasing regulations and potential fines for those who misrepresent their legitimate ESG efforts.

“But businesses must also take action to avoid ‘greenhushing’. Our data reveals that businesses are more likely to under-promote than over-promote their ESG initiatives. This cautious approach can deter investment and undermine credibility.”

Only four in ten (40%) of companies offered a “balanced” picture, with a minimal transparency gap. The report argues that businesses with a small gap are more trustworthy than their peers. The report examined emissions, ethics, diversity and inclusion topics to represent E, S and G criteria. Emission disclosures had the largest gap, with 67% of companies disclosing more on emissions than they communicated. While governance had the smallest gap, with 40% of companies having a gap between their ethics discloses and communications.

Dr. Walton added, “ESG transparency is currently a missed opportunity for the top 200 businesses in the UK and US. We know most consumers favor responsible brands and transparent businesses. We know a well-governed transparent business attracts more investment and top talent³. This report equips businesses to identify – and close – transparency gaps so we can all make better decisions about where to invest our money, time and attention.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240709169203/en/Two-thirds-of-US

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Connected Impact, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, Greenhushing, Greenwashing, responsible brands, Ringer Sciences, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

80% Of CEOs Feel Pressured To Improve Human Sustainability

5 07 2024

The C-Suite is yielding to pressures to focus more on human sustainability in the workplace. Image ” Getty

By Bryan Robinson, Ph.D. via Forbes • Reposted: July 5, 2024

Recently, Deloitte released The important role of leaders in advancing human sustainability Report in partnership with Workplace Intelligence and based on a study of 3,150 employees, managers and C-level executives across the U.S., U.K., Canada and Australia. Now in its third year, the survey reveals that the majority of the C-suite, including around eight out of 10 CEOs, say they’re feeling pressure from employees (82%), customers (78%), investors (78%), partners (77%) and board members (77%) to make public commitments to improve human sustainability.

I spoke by email with Sue Cantrell, vice president of products, workforce strategies at Deloitte Consulting, who defines human sustainability as, “the degree to which an organization creates value for people as human beings, leaving them with greater health and well-being, stronger skills and greater employability, good jobs, opportunities for advancement, progress toward equity, increased belonging, and heightened connection to purpose.”

She told me the survey found that shifting from a mindset that centers on extracting value from people toward an approach that refocuses on helping humans thrive is a leading course of action, especially in the face of growing stakeholder pressures, dwindling worker health and other workforce-related risks.

One of the more surprising facts, according to the report, is that leaders are mostly embracing this pressure: 88% would like their pay to be tied to human sustainability metrics, and 71% believe their company’s leadership should change if they aren’t advancing human sustainability. Around three out of four executives agree that human sustainability is an enterprise risk that should be measured and monitored (73%) and discussed at the board level (75%).

The report claims that doing well by workers and the world offers long-term benefits for both people and organizations. I recently reported on a meQ survey that supports these claims, showing that when employers refocus on employee hope and well-being, workers are less likely to suffer from burnout (74%), anxiety (74%) and depression (75%). And 33% are less likely to endorse quiet quitting.

But to help companies move their human sustainability efforts forward and reap these benefits, Cantrell recommends that leaders increase their understanding of worker realities at their own organizations. “In our survey, most executives (93%) and workers (88%) agree that the purpose of a company should be to create value not just for shareholders, but for human beings and society as well.” Cantrell points out that data from the survey also uncovers a disconnect between workers and leaders when it comes to taking action, as the following statistics indicate:

Advancing human sustainability. 82% of executives believe their company is advancing human sustainability, but just 56% of workers agree. The report found that some leaders fail to recognize that for most people surveyed, work is a negative rather than a positive force in their lives.
Company’s positive effect on employee well-being. Around 90% of executives believe working for their company has a positive effect on employee well-being, skills development, career advancement, inclusion and belonging and their sense of purpose and meaning. But just 60% (or fewer) of workers agree.
Improvement of well-being dimensions. Seven out of 10 executives believe well-being dimensions—a key component of human sustainability—improved for their employees. But workforce well-being continues to need focus as only around one out of three workers say their physical (34%), mental (32%), financial (35%) and social (31%) well-being improved last year.
Seven out of 10 workers say if their organization increased its commitment to human sustainability, this would improve their overall experience at work (72%) and increase their engagement and job satisfaction (71%), productivity (70%), desire to stay with their company long-term (70%) and trust in their company’s leadership (69%).
Eighty-two percent of executives say companies should be required to publicly report their human sustainability metrics. However, 81% admit their own organization isn’t doing enough when it comes to making public commitments around human issues. Around a third (32%) of these leaders say this is because the goals they could realistically accomplish are trivial and they’re embarrassed to make public commitments around them.
A significant majority of executives (88%) would like their compensation to be tied to human sustainability metrics. Remarkably, nearly half (47%) would like at least 75% of their compensation to be linked to these metrics. What’s more, 61% of the C-suite say they’d accept a pay cut to work for a company that is advancing human sustainability.

“It’s promising that so many of today’s leaders are willing to take ownership of human sustainability,” said Dan Schawbel, managing partner at Workplace Intelligence.“However, some executives don’t realize that their own employees are dealing with a sub-optimal work experience. The disconnects uncovered in our research should be a call to action for leaders as they embark on their mission to create greater value for all stakeholders within the broader human ecosystem.”

Cantrell suggests that to close that gap, leaders must consider using metrics focused on human outcomes, making public commitments around these metrics and aligning compensation with these outcomes. She believes that by prioritizing a positive human impact, organizations can reap the benefits of attracting new talent, appealing to customers and clients and increasing profitability, while workers can experience a positive effect on their well-being, skills development career advancement, inclusion and belonging, and their sense of purpose and meaning.

“Embracing human sustainability can have benefits for both business and people,” declares Paul Silverglate, U.S. executive accelerators leader and Deloitte’s U.S. technology sector vice chair. “Today’s C-suite has the opportunity to help ensure it is prioritized at the highest levels of their organizations, helping them become more rewarding and productive places to work.”

Renée Zavislak, a burnout expert and licensed California-based therapist, informed me that corporations big and small are starting to realize that refusing to proactively address employee well-being isn’t an option, but many businesses are learning this lesson the hard way. Burned out employees are costing employers $3,400 of every $10,000 in salary as productivity decreases. And depression alone is costing the global economy $1 billion in lost productivity.

“Companies need to respond to employee needs by respecting boundaries and the right to disconnect before resentment and burnout make top performers leave,” Zavislak declares. “Companies usually wait until it’s too late to act on burnout. They need to start embracing preventative solutions.” Zavislak concludes that when someone’s job security depends on working 60-80 hours a week, and they have to take calls on vacation, it means companies aren’t taking mental health seriously.

“There is an incredible momentum building for organizations to make meaningful change, adds Jen Fisher, retired managing director at Deloitte U.S. “But leaders should move away from a legacy mindset that centers on extracting value from people and instead embrace the concept of human sustainability, which can support the long-term, collective well-being of individuals, organizations and society.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/bryanrobinson/2024/07/03/80-of-ceos-feel-pressured-to-improve-human-sustainability/

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

Why Your Business Needs an Effective Sustainability Strategy

21 06 2024

Graphic: Entrepreneur

By Cristina Martinez Gonzalez, SSG Market Leader Iberia, Lenovo from CSR Newswire • Reposted: June 21, 2024

It’s vital that we look after the planet for future generations, but that’s not the only reason to implement a sustainability strategy within your organisation. Cutting emissions, embracing the circular economy, and helping to keep already efficient devices running for longer makes sense from a financial point of view as well, and can even help your organisation to attract the best employees.

Of course, putting people and planet first should top your considerations, and an effective sustainability strategy can help towards limiting our impact on climate change, reducing waste, conserving resources, and protecting delicate eco-systems.

How legislation is helping to drive change

Legislation around ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) and sustainability is beginning to shape industries around the world, with governments adopting increasingly stringent targets.

EU rules[1] already require large and listed companies in the European Union to publish regular reports on the social and environmental risks member state’s face, and on how their activities impact people and the environment. The regulations facing all organisations are only likely to become stricter.

According to Deloitte[2], the transition to a lower carbon and more sustainable society is reshaping the economy in Europe, creating new opportunities, and altering the cost of doing business. The implications are stark, the organisation explains. “Failing to become more sustainable will make companies vulnerable to the loss of revenue and reputation, as well as to litigation and regulatory penalties.”

It’s clear that simply ignoring sustainability is not an option for organisations in the long run, but there are also opportunities and benefits for businesses that implement a sustainability strategy sooner than later.

An effective sustainability strategy could also help you be more cost-effective

For starters, there’s potential to be more cost-effective. Scalable as-a-Service solutions such as Lenovo TruScale can help your business to simplify the procurement, deployment and management of reliable IT equipment, taking a flexible and cost-efficient approach to new levels of demand.

Embracing the latest energy-efficient devices can help your business to manage CO₂ emissions and power consumption, potentially saving on operating costs, while also helping you to tackle challenges such as growing your business, simplifying security, and general maintenance.

There’s also scope to offset emissions when you do purchase new IT equipment, thanks to solutions such as Lenovo’s CO₂ Offset Services. This service estimates the carbon emissions across the average lifecycle of the device from manufacturing to shipping, typical use, and end-of-life, and supports a variety of climate action projects.

Just because you buy new devices doesn’t necessarily mean your old equipment will end up in landfill. We do everything we can at Lenovo to ensure older devices get a second lease of life, and our Asset Recovery Service(ARS) is designed to maximise the reuse, recycling, and/or environmental disposal of replaced and end-of-life products, parts, and waste. And with Lenovo’s recently launched Certified Refurbished PCs, you have the option to buy quality refurbished IT equipment and support the circular economy.

Keep older energy-efficient technology running for longer

Naturally, there are plenty of organisations that don’t need to overhaul their tech stack. If your equipment is already energy efficient and performs well, your tech provider can also help you to keep your devices running for longer, doing your bit when it comes to reducing waste and conserving resources.

Solutions such as Lenovo Premier Support Plus come with Accidental Damage Protection (ADP)[3] as standard, which can make a big difference when it comes to device longevity and saving money. Compared to the cost of most common repairs or system replacements, for example, you could save between 50%-93%[4] with ADP, which could be the difference between keeping an old laptop for another couple of years or having to replace immediately.

Attracting top talent

Social and regulatory requirements aside, embracing sustainability can also enhance your company’s reputation. This can play a key role in helping you to attract and retain the best talent.

According to a survey from IBM[5], 71% of employees and employment seekers say that environmentally sustainable companies are more attractive employers. More than two-thirds of the full potential workforce* are more likely to apply for and accept jobs with environmentally and socially responsible organisations, and nearly half surveyed would accept a lower salary to work for such organisations.

The potential to grow your business

An effective sustainability strategy isn’t just appealing to potential employees – it’s becoming increasingly important to society at large. Consumers also care about sustainability, and your strategy could be the difference between customers picking your business or opting for a competitor.

Deloitte explains[6] a third (34%) of consumers stated their trust in brands would be improved if the brand was recognised as an ethical/sustainable provider by an independent third party. A similar proportion (32%) claimed that their trust in brands would be improved if the company had a transparent, accountable, and socially and environmentally responsible supply chain.

All of these factors add weight to the already critical importance of a sustainability strategy, not only because it makes sense to limit our impact on the planet, but because it also makes justifiable business sense.

It’s inevitable that you’ll need to embrace sustainability at some point if you want your business to thrive in the long term, so why not look at ways you can get ahead of your competition as part of the journey?

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/804626-why-your-business-needs-effective-sustainability-strategy

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

Sustainability Is Now A Critical Link In Corporate Talent Strategy

19 06 2024

By Mary Foley, Contributor from Forbes • Reposted: June 19, 2024

Working, team and computer work of office teamwork workers group with diversity using technology. Tech staff busy with cloud computing data information and web research for a online project together — *Photo: Getty*

Sustainability is a huge factor for the modern workforce.

Now more than ever, corporations are combing the ends of the Earth to find skilled workers. Unfortunately, they’re coming up short, and it may not just be prospects holding out for better benefits or more flexible hours.

According to a recent analysis, by 2030, it’s likely that more than 85 million jobs could go unfilled globally because there aren’t enough skilled people to take them. In critical industries – like cybersecurity for example, where the explosion of generative AI (GenAI) has created a massive need for talent – the gap between the number of skilled staffers needed and the number available has risen 12.6% year over year worldwide, according to another analysis. And now, there is a whole new level of complexity to add to the equation: sustainability.

More than 40% of Generation Z and Millennial workers plan to change jobs due to climate concerns, as stated in a new survey from Deloitte. That’s a stark contrast for a culture that’s only a few decades removed from worshipping the power tie-wearing, greed-is-good, Gordon Gecko-style antihero. But that is the new reality in which corporations must operate, and it’s just the latest in a laundry list of sustainability-related vulnerabilities that they’ll have to account for.

An Employee Evolution

This trend has already started to take root as Millennials begin to unseat Baby Boomers and Gen Xers as the dominant presence in the global workforce. Over three-quarters (76%) of Millennials said back in 2016 that they consider environmental, sustainability, and governance (ESG) commitments when deciding where to work, a number that likely has and will continue to increase as more corporations put sustainability strategies front and center in their recruiting practices.

Meanwhile, changing social norms have also caused an evolution within the pool of available workers. Gen Z – whose entrance into the workplace was interrupted and permanently disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic – says the workplace is a critical environment for their social interaction. This group, who only know the era of Zoom calls and Teams meetings, also report lower levels of emotional and social well-being compared with other age groups. Mental health and wellbeing are key components of the S (Social) element of ESG and in addition to the global legal compliance obligations associated with employers’ duty of care, there is also the consideration that lower well-being usually correlates with worse performance at work.

Considering that Millennials and Gen Z will account for over half of the global workforce by 2030, these factors represent a huge departure from how companies have grown accustomed to recruiting. And now, as longtime employees with decades of institutional knowledge are retiring, workers who are starting to assume critical roles in the corporate hierarchy, have very different priorities and skill sets. That creates a perfect storm of challenges for companies looking to not only hire good talent and retain the acquired knowledge of the departing talent, but also define their sustainability objectives and initiatives.

Overcoming the Vulnerability

That’s not to say that corporations can’t navigate their way through this new era. For years, experts and analysts have been warning about the high stakes that are riding on corporate sustainability strategies. This is no different. Those companies that fall short on compliance run the risk of fines, reputational harm, and delays in their supply chains. However, those that can prove their leadership in taking a proactive stance on sustainability have a huge opportunity to not only manage these risks but also to become the employers of choice for the growing crop of talent that’s putting their values at the center of their career journeys.

Throughout that process, clear, quantifiable data will be the critical ingredient that separates the leaders from the laggards. Increasingly, corporate reputations for sustainability will be determined not by advertising campaigns or bold pronouncements about emissions targets, but by a detailed set of performance metrics that will be reported in accordance with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and new global sustainability standards developed by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB).

The new world order of corporate sustainability is one where so-called “green” credentials are being treated like finance and accounting data instead of aspirational ideals. To get to a place where companies can clearly and efficiently report this data and communicate it to key stakeholders – including employees – companies will need excellent reporting, monitoring and – importantly – subject matter experts with enough institutional memory and domain knowledge to understand how all the pieces fit together.

With new legislation cropping up seemingly every day, maintaining that level of commitment to embedding sustainability isn’t easy, but it is well worth the investment. Don’t believe me? Ask the next interview candidate yourself.

To read the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryfoley/2024/06/17/sustainability-is-now-a-critical-link-in-corporate-talent-strategy/

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

18 Reasons Why Sustainability Can Be A Strategic Business Advantage

14 06 2024

Photo: Getty

By The Forbes Business Council from Forbes • Reposted: June 14, 2024

In recent years, sustainability has become a key topic amongst individuals and businesses. As the public becomes increasingly aware of climate change and their role in reducing unnecessary waste, more and more people are choosing to support organizations that espouse sustainability and business practices that minimize environmental impact. In addition to the reputational benefits, implementing sustainable initiatives has far-reaching advantages.

As experts, the members of Forbes Business Council have experience navigating a more sustainability-minded business landscape. Below, 18 of them share reasons why focusing on sustainability can be a strategic business advantage and the benefits of taking an eco-friendly stance.

1. It Can Set Your Business Apart

Focusing on sustainability can differentiate a business by appealing to environmentally conscious consumers and investors. One major advantage is the potential for cost savings through efficient resource use and waste reduction, which also minimizes environmental impact. This eco-friendly approach can enhance brand reputation, customer loyalty and long-term profitability. – Deyman Doolittle, ShipSigma

2. It Indicates Long-Term Viability

Sustainability is a core tenant of future-forward businesses—not only is it important to customers and employees but stakeholders and shareholders recognize sustainability as an indicator of a business’s long-term viability. As we look ahead toward an uncertain future, sustainability is one of the key ways a business can maintain resilience in the marketplace. – Jamie Houston, Aurora Sustainable Lands

3. It Enables Proactive Responses To Industry Changes

Adopting sustainability in the long term helps enterprises move ahead of the market shifts and laws while also offering a way to become more innovative and efficient. It also improves the brand image by attracting consumers, talent and investors. A major advantage of the exercise is developing a culture of long-term sustainability and sector leadership by embracing uncertainty and setting standards. – Chris Kille, EO Staff

4. It Provides A Competitive Edge

In government contracting, focusing on sustainability can provide a competitive edge, as it aligns with increasing federal mandates for eco-friendly practices. A significant pro is enhanced reputation; businesses that prioritize sustainability often gain favor with the public and governmental organizations, potentially leading to more opportunities and partnerships. – Dr. Malcolm Adams, Avid Solutions Intl

5. It Expands The Target Audience

The focus on sustainability expands the company’s target audience, including people looking for companies that support sustainability. Focusing on sustainability also gives employees a purpose and the opportunity to do good in the world, uniting people around a cause. – Gaidar Magdanurov, Acronis

6. It Can Narrow The Divide Between Large And Small Businesses

While sustainability to some advocates is our moral compass and strategic beacon, given the increasing strengthening of high-quality carbon projects, it has also provided a new context of monetizing with carbon credits gained. Sustainable financing syndicating with blended government grants will now narrow the financial chasm between large and smaller enterprises. – Victor Tay, Global Catalyst Advisory

7. It Enables The Surrounding Ecosystem To Thrive

If the surrounding environment and society aren’t flourishing along with a company’s growth, such imbalances can eventually tower over your business sustainability in multiple ways, even threatening operational existence. Businesses thrive when the surrounding ecosystem feeds their growth and creates a positive loop of cause and effect, opening up new opportunities and synergies. – Sabeer Nelliparamban, Tyler Petroleum Inc / ZilBank

8. It Brings The Business In Alignment With Clients’ Values

We’re seeing a lot of clients asking us to meet sustainability standards that fit within their value system. Additionally, we have a lot of job candidates asking about them. Internal sustainability standards not only help the environment but they can be used to show potential clients or employees that your company stands for more than just the product you create or the service you provide; it shows your values. – Scott Wassmer, Appnovation

9. It Demonstrates Care For More Than Profits

It’s encouraging to see more businesses incorporate sustainability in various ways—from making building systems and operations more efficient to reducing corporate travel requirements. Sustainability as a core business value saves on costs and supports employee growth and retention. It shows you care about more than just profits and are creating a lasting, positive legacy. – Jeff Sprau, Legence

10. It Enhances Business Efficiency

One major benefit is that it can help companies reduce costs and waste by finding more efficient ways to operate. For example, businesses can implement circular economy practices like renting or repairing products instead of throwing them away. This can lead to significant cost savings over time. – Allison Ballard, CORT Furniture Rental

11. It Can Facilitate Cost Savings

There’s a marketing advantage but it will not apply to every customer. However, if you concentrate on the cost savings, such as energy costs, that’s a real advantage. Sustainability practices can cut down your electricity and fuel costs significantly. That kind of efficient thinking can also be applied to making your operations simpler and more logical. – Zain Jaffer, Zain Ventures

12. It Enhances Brand Reputation

Focusing on sustainability enhances brand reputation, attracting loyal customers and like-minded employees, as well as creating compelling PR content. It also opens the door to press contacts and articles, which can promote the brand effectively. A major pro is cost efficiency through resource management and positioning your company as a sustainability leader, which will appeal to investors and strategic partners. – Kolja Brand, Aurum Future

13. It Provides Long-Term Financial Benefits

Embracing sustainability isn’t just good ethics—it’s smart economics. Businesses that prioritize eco-friendly practices often see enhanced brand loyalty and attract eco-conscious consumers and investors alike. One major pro is the long-term cost savings; sustainable operations reduce waste and energy usage, leading to significant financial benefits over time. Green is the new gold standard. – Aleesha Webb, Pioneer Bank

14. It Can Drive Operational Efficiency

At AstraZeneca, sustainability is a core part of our strategy that gives us an edge by driving operational efficiency, allowing us to minimize our environmental impact while achieving cost savings. It also helps us mitigate risks to ensure the resilience and longevity of our business by aligning with the values of our stakeholders who prefer companies with strong environmental credentials. – Mohit Manrao, AstraZeneca

15. It Enables Risk Mitigation

Focusing on sustainability can be a strategic advantage because it aligns with increasing consumer demand for ethical practices, potentially boosting brand loyalty and market share. A major pro is risk mitigation—sustainable businesses often pre-empt and adapt to regulations, reducing long-term operational costs and protecting against the volatility of resource scarcity. – Mohammad Bahareth, MBI

16. It Centers Future Buyers

A 2022 Deloitte study found that 89% of Gen Z believe the world is at a tipping point in responding to climate change, which remains their top concern. Gen Z is our future generation of buyers. Brands like Levi’s and Patagonia understand this market segment well and are already capitalizing on that insight with their practices. Sustainability is also backed by the genuine ethos of what’s good for people is good for business. – Josh Jebathilak, Fruition

17. It Grants Access To Innovative Tech

Focusing on sustainability in business can be a strategic advantage, especially as technology evolves towards green solutions. One pro of adopting an eco-friendly stance is access to innovative sustainable technologies. Early adoption can position a company as a leader in harnessing these advancements to improve efficiency and offer cutting-edge solutions to customers. – Ran Ronen, Equally AI

18. It Strengthens The Company’s Reputation

Sustainability boosts brand image, cuts costs via efficiency, attracts eco-conscious consumers and ensures resource availability. This appeals to investors, employees and customers who prioritize ethics. Eco-friendly firms meet society’s expectations for a cleaner planet. Sustainability strengthens reputation and stakeholder support through forward-thinking approaches. – Vikrant Shaurya, Authors On Mission

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2024/06/07/18-reasons-why-sustainability-can-be-a-strategic-business-advantage/

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

Gartner Survey Reveals 69% of CEOs View Sustainability as a Growth Opportunity

7 06 2024

From Gartner • Reposerd: June 7, 2024

Sixty-nine percent of CEOs view sustainability as a leading business growth opportunity in 2024, according to a recent survey of CEOs and senior executives by Gartner, Inc.

“As CEOs reset their long-term strategies, environmental sustainability remains one of the leading factors that will frame competition,” said Kristin Moyer, Distinguished VP Analyst at Gartner. “Despite much corporate greenwash, recent economic conditions could have triggered a reversion to environmental, social and governance (ESG) cynicism and a refocus on profit at all costs. However, the overall commitment of CEOs appears unwavering.”

The 2024 Gartner CEO and Senior Business Executive Survey was conducted from July to December 2023 among over 400 CEOs and other senior business executives in North America, Europe, Asia/Pacific, Latin America, the Middle East and South Africa, across different industries, revenue and company sizes.

“Sustainability consistently remains a top 10 business priority, surpassing even productivity and efficiency this year,” said Moyer. “Leaders and investors know environmentally cavalier corporate behavior is a mid- to long-term risk to business results, with a big price to be paid when environmental factors are ignored as externalities. However, smart CEOs realize big sustainability challenges create new areas of business opportunity.”

Achieving Sustainable Business Growth
According to Gartner’s annual survey, the leading ways CEOs are using sustainability to drive business growth are through sustainable products and services (33%); sustainable business practices (18%); stakeholder engagement (18%); and decarbonization (18%). Digital investments and innovation is ranked ninth at 8% (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Environmental Sustainability to Drive Business Growth

Source: Gartner (June 2024)

“Digital technology can accelerate progress toward sustainability goals, going beyond compliance to help enterprises reach targets, enable new business models and unleash revenue streams,” said Moyer.

According to Gartner, digital technology plays an important role in driving both financial and sustainability outcomes. For example, the Internet of Things (IoT), data and analytics can optimize wind turbines, which reduces costs and greenhouse gas emissions. AI and IoT can reduce food loss costs and waste; whereas a circular economy marketplace can create new revenue and reduce waste.

Climate Change Driving Agenda
The Gartner survey revealed 54% of CEOs say their businesses are affected by changing weather patterns, at least moderately. Over half (51%) acknowledge changing weather patterns are causing them to plan changes to the way they operate or have already done so.

“CEOs see that climate change is causing weather pattern shifts that are directly impacting their business operations already,” said Moyer. “Those operations must be adapted, with technology playing a vital role in driving these changes, especially in the dynamics of supply chains.”

The Gartner survey revealed the biggest impact of changing weather patterns cited by CEOs is operating dynamics (30%), particularly changes to logistics, such as warehousing, timing and routing of deliveries. Relocations (including nearshoring) comes in second (14%), followed by automation, technology and data (13%).

Gartner clients can read more in the report “2024 CEO Survey — The Year of Strategy Relaunches.”

Additional leadership trends will be presented during Gartner IT Symposium/Xpo, the world’s most important conferences for CIOs and other IT executives. Gartner analysts and attendees will explore the technology, insights and trends shaping the future of IT and business, including how to unleash the possibility of generative AI, business transformation, cybersecurity, customer experience, data analytics, executive leadership and more. Follow news and updates from the conferences on X using #GartnerSYM.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2024-06-05-gartner-survey-reveals-69-percent-of-ceos-view-sustainability-as-a-growth-opportunity

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

Gen Z Becoming More Skeptical of Influencers, Sustainability Messaging

3 06 2024

From Sustainable Brands • Reposted: June 3, 2024

New survey of Gen Zs in the US and Canada suggest a growing distrust of influencers; and while sustainability is still a consideration when purchasing, budget, price and brand authenticity are paramount.

AI-powered conversational-research firm Rival Technologies and market-research consultancy Reach3 Insights have released a new report revealing Gen Z’s shifting attitudes on social media, influencer marketing, online shopping, sustainability and brand loyalty.

Based on a mobile-first, conversational survey of 750 Gen Zs (aged 18-27) in the US and Canada in April 2024, the 2024 Gen Z Marketing & Engagement Report found that social media’s role in purchase discovery is increasing — but it is only one step in a long and complex buying journey. Among Gen Z consumers who shop online, only 18.4 percent complete the purchase directly through social channels. In contrast, 88.2 percent buy via online marketplaces (Amazon, Etsy, etc) and 74.6 percent through brand websites.

When asked which social media platforms they use to discover new brands, Gen Zs highlight Instagram (70.3 percent), TikTok (34.3 percent), and YouTube (33.1 percent) as top channels.

The research also suggests that the buzz around influencer marketing may be fizzling out: Contrary to studies even from last year, in which a majority of younger consumers credited influencers with having a major impact on their sustainable purchasing and lifestyle habits, 47.5 percent of Gen Zs now say they are “not very likely” or “not likely at all” to buy something recommended by influencers. Many respondents described paid influencer partnerships as “very insincere” or “annoying,” with some respondents asserting a preference instead for “normal people with normal incomes and lives” to be the voices promoting the products. The report points out that influencer marketing can still work; but authenticity is key, as these shoppers are showing a new preference for substance over style — emphasizing the importance of ensuring that any influencer used is a good fit for the product and can create relatable content.

“Influencer marketing is at risk of facing a serious reckoning,” says Paula Catoira, Chief Marketing Officer at Rival Group — parent company of Rival Tech and Reach3. “To ensure ROI from influencer partnerships, brand marketers need to understand their Gen Z customers and align their marketing strategy with the need of this audience.”

Gen Z attitudes on sustainability itself also seem to be shifting. The report found that 42.9 percent of Gen Zs prefer sustainable products when available, but it’s not the only consideration. Budget and price are big factors in buying decisions. This helps explain why fast fashion, for example, continues to grow despite its impact on the environment — a phenomenon that was recently parodied in the season finale of “Saturday Night Live.”

And as always, authenticity is key — as Gen Zs are one of several consumer segments that are increasingly savvy about identifying greenwashing. Influencers themselves are well aware of this; and a 2023 study found more and more content creators are steering clear of sustainability-related content due to a lack of insight and clarity around company and product sustainability claims.

The report points out that for many brands that cater to Gen Zs, sustainability can still be a huge competitive advantage as long as product prices remains competitive. And being transparent about brand claims is paramount: The research suggests that brand websites (59.9 percent) and packaging (43.5 percent) play a key role in communicating details about brand sustainability efforts; when it comes to this, Gen Zs say they are much more likely to believe third-party websites (42 percent) than influencers (12 percent).

“Our research highlights how the attitudes and behaviors of Gen Zs can shift significantly as they go through different life stages and as socio-economic factors evolve,” said Andrew Reid, CEO and founder of Rival Technologies. “To get accurate and nuanced insights on Gen Zs and win their loyalty, brands need to engage with these young consumers on an ongoing basis and do it in a way that’s aligned with their expectations and behaviors.”

One of the study’s key takeaways for marketers is that Gen Zs want to feel they can build an authentic and personal connection with brands; and while they still prioritize sustainability, socio-economic factors such as inflation have very real impact on how this group views and prioritizes sustainability-related issues.

As Jennifer Reid, Co-CEO and Chief Methodologist at Rival Group, points out: “Among a generation fueled by skepticism, trust is paramount for both engagement and loyalty. And since authenticity, honesty and transparency are critical in building that trust, they should be the goals of every marketer with young consumers in their sightlines.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/gen-z-skeptical-influencers-sustainability-messaging

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Ge4n Z, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

6 Approaches To Translating Sustainability Into Strategy

28 05 2024

Sustainability has become crucial for companies around the globe, yet many struggle to incorporate … Image: GETTY

By Mike Rosenberg (IESE Business School) via Forbes.com • Reposted: May 28, 2024

With the world at an environmental tipping point, sustainability has become a vital strategic consideration for companies around the globe.

Catastrophic weather events are more frequent and more prolongued. A generation of young people is demanding solutions to the planet’s problems. And the financial community has awakened to the reality that climate and other sustainability-related issues will have real impact on their businesses.

Yet many companies still struggle to come to terms with what environmental and social sustainability means for them and for their strategy and operations. Here, I explore how senior managers might choose to address the sustainability challenge, offering six strategic options that I’ve seen companies take.

Weighing the strategic options

Each company must decide how much to do along the different aspects of environmental and social sustainability, assuming that the baseline is compliance with legal requirements and regulations. There are many factors that go in to determining this, from location and sector to corporate values and consumer demands.

1. Take the Low Road

This approach involves doing the minimum required to comply with the laws in each of the countries and territories where your company operates. It implies taking a reactive stance to changes in legislation, societal norms or new industry developments.

While there is nothing wrong with this approach from a legal standpoint, one might question its wisdom from a dynamic perspective since, over time, laws and regulations will inevitably change. Adapting late to evolving trends might be more costly than being an early mover. Another danger is that if senior management tells employees that minimal compliance is sufficient, they may interpret this as tacit approval to test the limits of regulation.

2. Wait and See

Some companies will want not only to comply with the basic legal requirements in force today but also to actively monitor the situation in terms of the evolving attitudes of employees, consumers and the general public, and track leglislation in the pipeline.

This approach requires a somewhat higher degree of sensibility to these issues than Take the Low Road as it will make sense to begin gathering data on your firm’s current environmental and social performance, in order to have the information you’ll need for future actions.

3. Show and Tell

This strategy involves making important progress on sustainability and then making it a key part of your firm’s communications strategy. It should not be confused with greenwashing, which is about showcasing token sustainable activities to give a false impression. Show and Tell, on the contrary, is about telling an authentic and coherent story.

The risk of Show and Tell is that if sustainability is central to communications, your firm needs to show consistent commitment in all of its activities and in all countries and territories. Evidence of a double standard between environmental practices in developed and developing countries, for example, can be seized upon to challenge a firm’s social license to operate.

A related problem is what Helle Bank Jorgenson, founder and CEO of Competent Boards, calls “greenwishing,” which is about making bold claims for the future without having detailed plans or initiatives to actually bring them about.

4. Keep Quiet

An interesting counterpoint to Show and Tell is what I call Keep Quiet. There are a number of companies that do amazing work on both the environmental and social side of sustainability but that do not, for a variety of reasons, make it the center piece of their communications. Such companies will publish their sustainability report and participate in initiatives such as the Carbon Disclosure Project and Science Based Targets but they keep a relatively low public profile.

Recently I have seen a trend for companies to move from Keep Quiet to more of a Show and Tell stance, sharing with stakeholders their sustainability efforts.

5. Pay for Principle

This is what I call companies in which the founder or lead shareholders choose to take the firm in a sustainable direction based on their own ethical convictions. The fundamental rationale is not a medium-term business case but rather deeply held beliefs that reducing air and water pollution, protecting the natural landscape, becoming carbon neutral and/or supporting the community should form part of the corporate agenda.

What sometimes happens in these cases is that the company then uncovers a market segment which values what it is doing sufficiently to pay more for its products and services.

6. Think Ahead

The final approach requires going beyond what’s needed today, based not so much on principle but on hard business logic. Here, the senior management team is convinced that the world is changing in specific ways and has an asset base which requires a medium- or long-term approach to transforming it.

If, for example, your company has 30 manufacturing facilities, 300 aircraft or 30,000 trucks and believes that it will have to transform those assets over the next 10-20 years, then following a Think Ahead strategy would begin today with pilot projects. The asset base would be gradually transformed as each element reaches the end of its natural life.

Think Ahead is the opposite of greenwishing: it means crafting a detailed plan for the next five to 15 years to transform your operations to a more sustainable model.

Which of these six approaches should your company take? My recommendation is for your leadership team to honestly assess where the company is today and agree where it should be someday in the future. Next, define when “someday” is, and work out a real plan on how to get there.

Mike Rosenberg is a professor in the Strategic Management Department of IESE Business School. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/iese/2024/05/27/6-approaches-to-translating-sustainability-into-strategy/?sh=4907dd0227f3

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, IESE Business School, responsible brands, Show and Tell, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

80% of Companies See Sustainability as a Potential Revenue, Profitability Driver: Morgan Stanley Survey

23 05 2024

By Mark Segal from ESGtoday.com • Reposted: May 23, 2024

The vast majority of companies view sustainability as a value creation opportunity, with more than three quarters anticipating potential benefits ranging from higher revenues and profitability to lower cost of capital, although many also expect increased sustainability-related costs and a need for significant investment, according to a new survey released by Morgan Stanley.

For the study, “Sustainable Signals: Understanding Corporates’ Sustainability Priorities and Challenges,” Morgan Stanley surveyed more than 300 public and private companies with revenues greater than $100 million, across North America, Europe and Asia Pacific, and representing a broad range of industries.

The survey indicated that nearly all companies now recognize the impact of sustainability on their long-term corporate strategies, with 85% of respondents reporting that they see sustainability as a value creation opportunity, including 53% who view it primarily as value creation and 32% as both value creation and risk management, while 15% view sustainability primarily as risk management. Only 1% responded that sustainability is not material to long-term corporate strategy.

Sustainability as a value creation opportunity topped the list of “very significant” reasons reported by companies for pursuing sustainability strategies, cited by 50% of respondents, followed closely by compliance with government regulation at 48%, and a moral obligation at 47%.

According to the survey, more than 80% of companies see potential financial opportunities from their sustainability strategies over the next five years, including 81% who see sustainability as somewhat (41%) or very (40%) likely to drive higher profitability, 79% to drive higher revenue (35% very likely, 44% somewhat likely), and 82% to improve cash generation capabilities (38% and 44%). Another key benefit highlighted by the study was improved access to capital, with 77% of respondents reporting that sustainability could drive lower costs of equity or debt over the next five years.

While respondents saw opportunities to benefit from sustainability, the survey found that companies are also aware of the potential challenges and costs associated with their sustainability strategies, including 69% anticipating very (28%) or somewhat likely (41%) costs from changing processes, 72% seeing higher costs or legal risks from sustainability regulation, and 73% seeing higher costs or scarcity of raw materials over the next five years. The most cited challenge reported by respondents was restructuring supply chains to meet human rights obligations, viewed as somewhat or very likely by 74% of companies.

Accordingly, respondents reported the high level of investment required as a very significant barrier to delivering or establishing a sustainability strategy, cited by 31% of companies, in addition to 28% citing conflicts with the financial goals of the company, while 22% said that it is hard to justify the near term negative financial impact, even with the long-term benefits.

The study also found nearly all companies, 92% expect climate change to impact their business models by 2050, while 23% report that it is already a risk to their business model today, similar to risks including technological change (25%), competitor actions (25%) and supply chain instability (23%).

The survey also highlighted a perceived need by the companies for sustainability expertise at the board level, with 57% of respondents reporting that board members could benefit from more knowledge regarding sustainability regulations, 43% in sustainability-labelled financial instruments, and 40% in sustainability disclosure. Overall, only 37% of respondents agreed that their company’s board has sustainability expertise.

Jessica Alsford, Chief Sustainability Officer at Morgan Stanley and CEO of the Institute for Sustainable Investing, said: “Sustainability strategies and core business strategies are converging, with companies increasingly seeing sustainability factors as integral to the company’s long-term value creation. There may yet be challenges in developing expertise and financing models, but corporate leaders view sustainable business practices as fueling the creation of value as well as the mitigation of risk.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.esgtoday.com/80-of-companies-see-sustainability-as-a-potential-revenue-profitability-driver-morgan-stanley-survey/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, organ Stanley, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding

Five Tips For Bringing Sustainability Into Your Business Practices

13 05 2024

Image: Getty

By Lourdes McAgy, Forbes Business Council via Forbes • Reposted: May 13, 2024

Sustainability might have seemed like a passing fad at first, but today, I believe it’s a must-have for any business. In fact, 78% of consumers believe sustainability is important, according to a report by Nielsen. And, almost half of respondents to a PWC survey said they often or always recommend a brand with good environmental practices.

Many businesses might avoid investing in sustainability because they feel it doesn’t add value to their bottom line. But in my years as a consumer packaged goods business owner, I’ve learned that going green can be a great way to preserve customer trust and keep your business in the black. Adopting a more sustainable approach to business can help with costs, differentiate you from competitorsand make the world a better place. It’s a true win-win-win.

Sustainability doesn’t have to be expensive, time-consuming or difficult. In my experience, a few minor, common-sense adjustments can improve multiple aspects of your business. Whether you’re new to sustainability or looking for ways to embrace it across your enterprise, follow these five approaches to begin building a more sustainable brand.

1. Sustainable Packaging

Plastic waste and pollution is a global crisis. Single-use plastics and non-recyclable materials found in most packaging contribute to landfills and a high carbon footprint. Shifting from traditional, plastic-laden packaging to sustainable alternatives isn’t just an environmental statement but also a strategic business move.

Sustainable packaging uses environmentally friendly, renewable and low-waste alternatives to traditional plastic. Opting for sustainable materials is a good start, but it’s better to rethink the entire lifecycle of your packaging. You can consider working with a packaging designer to take a more sustainable approach to packaging. I suggest these tips to help make the switch:

• Assess your current packaging to see how you can reduce material use or switch to recyclable or biodegradable options.

• Explore innovative alternatives, such as mushroom- or seaweed-based packaging or recycled paper.

• Think about the packaging’s lifecycle. Go for packaging that’s easy to recycle, compost or reuse.

2. Eco-Friendly Branding

Committing to sustainability isn’t something you should do quietly. Consumers want to support sustainable companies, so shout about it. Eco-friendly branding unites your sustainable practices with consumers’ perception of you as a green company, so rethink how you present yourself to shoppers.

You don’t have to change your color palette to green, white and brown, either. Eco-friendly branding can include:

• Adding eco-labels and certifications that your company is qualified for, such as Fair Trade, to your products and website.

• Designing products with the environment in mind. For example, opt for reusable products instead of disposable ones.

• Asking employees to advocate for your sustainability initiatives.

• Highlighting sustainability in your marketing campaigns.

3. Top-Down Sustainability Initiatives

Many CEOs give lip service to the idea of sustainability, but not all of them actually support it. Consumers are leery of greenwashing, so CEOs need to genuinely and enthusiastically support environmental efforts so customers take them seriously.

To reap the benefits of sustainability, CEOs have to walk the walk. That means supporting sustainability goals with both time and funding. As a leader, it’s also your duty to engage stakeholders, from managers to employees, to build a culture that values sustainability. My company, for instance, works with third-party certifying bodies to help with this initiative. It is easy to get lost in what we should be doing regarding sustainability. Our certifications help us stay aligned with the trends and demands of consumers and our industry.

4. Green Business Operations

Your products and brand might look green, but what’s happening under the hood? As CEOs, it’s our job to run an ethical business that’s a good steward of our resources. In practice, that means embracing green business operations whenever possible. Fortunately, I’ve found there are easy changes you can make. A few steps you can take to “go green” include:

• Switching to low-water toilets and water fixtures at the office;

• Opting for LED lightbulbs;

• Introducing recycling programs to the office;

• Encouraging everyone to go paperless;

• Allowing work-from-home days to reduce carbon footprints;

• Installing solar panels.

5. Sustainability Metrics And Reporting

Consumers want to support sustainable brands, but greenwashing has made them increasingly jaded. I believe the best way to rebuild that trust is with transparency. If you’re trying to become more sustainable, it’s crucial to measure how successful you actually are. After all, you put in a lot of hard work; don’t you want to know if it’s worked out?

Consider leveraging eco-tracking tools to monitor your company’s plastic waste, water usage and carbon footprint. Ideally, you want to see a reduction all around, but you’ll never know how you’re doing if you don’t track your progress. Plus, progress tracking boosts customer confidence and shows you take sustainability seriously.

Who says businesses have to choose between profits and the environment? You are running a business to make a profit. But, you can strike a balance between economic success and environmental responsibility by embracing sustainability at every level of your company. Change is daunting at first, but maybe it doesn’t have to feel like a change but more so an added step to take. I believe that if we as leaders can operate our businesses while considering these sustainability trends, then we are on the right track.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2024/05/10/five-tips-for-bringing-sustainability-into-your-business-practices/?sh=1cfd6588263f

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

Building New Levels Of Consumer Trust Through Ethical Marketing And PR Practices

10 05 2024

Image: Getty

By Nick Leighton, Forbes Councils Member via Forbes • Reposted: May 10, 2024

There’s no doubt that we live in an extremely competitive economic environment. With the costs of living rapidly increasing, consumers are more hesitant to let go of their hard-earned money. This shift is forcing marketing and public relations (PR) professionals to rethink the way they are promoting their brands, products and services. The unfortunate consequence of added pressure is the temptation to implement marketing strategies that can be deceptive, unethical and sometimes illegal. These unethical practices can include exaggerating the consumers’ expected results, using tricky terminology or designing intentionally confusing terms and conditions.

Marketing and PR professionals who engage in these activities and behaviors risk destroying their brand’s reputation in the marketplace. The reality is that consumers are becoming more aware of these unethical practices. In fact, “one study by the American Association of Advertising Agencies found that 96% of people believe advertising and marketing professionals don’t practice integrity.” This is important to note since over 70% of consumers believe trust is essential when making purchasing decisions. For this reason, it’s critical that marketing and PR professionals carefully balance implementing new and innovative ways of marketing without crossing ethical boundaries.

Equip your team with an ethics toolbox.

Marketing and PR is typically a team sport since there are usually a handful of individuals or departments that are involved in crafting the consumer’s experience and messaging. Since the actions of each group or individual are direct reflections of the brand, firms should start by establishing clear, ethical guidelines for the team to follow.

These guidelines should outline expected ethical behavior, actions that are not acceptable, compliance with any government regulations and a commitment to keep communication honest and transparent. This guide should also provide the team with instructions on how to report unethical behavior to management.

In addition to policy documents, the company should also prioritize continuous education on ethical standards by offering regular training sessions, workshops and other resources. This can help the team better spot unethical trends and conflicts of interest and avoid any legal implications.

Embrace transparent and open communication.

Transparency is the key to building trust with consumers. Marketing and PR firms can embrace transparency by being open about their practices, disclosing potential conflicts of interest and clarifying product outcomes. No brand is perfect. Mistakes can and will happen. However, you can still maintain transparency by quickly acknowledging any mistakes publicly and letting the consumer know how you are correcting the situation.

By adopting transparent communication strategies, consumers will quickly recognize your brand as a trusted source of information. This is a win-win. For the consumer, this removes barriers of skepticism and provides confidence that they are getting the service or product they want. Brands benefit by differentiating themselves from competitors in the marketplace and ultimately don’t have to work as hard to convince consumers to trust them.

Adopt responsible technology practices.

Technology is quickly changing the way brands create and market products and services. This can create a slippery slope when it comes to ethical practices. Incorporating responsible technology practices is essential for marketing and PR firms leveraging consumer data and artificial intelligence (AI) to shape strategies. Brands can foster responsible technology practices by having processes in place to protect consumer privacy, disclose the use of AI-generated products and content and provide a level of human oversight to maintain authenticity.

Conduct thorough research.

All it takes is one half-truth or incorrect statement to destroy a marketing firm’s reputation and credibility with consumers. It’s critical that marketing and PR professionals take the time to carefully conduct proper research and due diligence to avoid inadvertently spreading misinformation or using misleading statistics and instead ensure accurate representation of their brand. By investing time and resources in robust research practices, firms can uphold ethical standards and maintain their credibility.

Form ethical partnerships.

Marketing and PR firms can strengthen their ethical initiatives by collaborating with like-minded organizations and engaging in cause-focused marketing. Partnering with industry associations and advocacy groups amplifies ethical advocacy and the sharing of best practices. Cause-focused marketing initiatives demonstrate commitment to social responsibility by appealing to socially conscious consumers.

This mindset can also extend to scrutinizing the clients you choose to work with by carefully evaluating any potential clients, as associating your brand with an unethical partner can indirectly influence the reputation of your firm.

Track and monitor consumer feedback and sentiment.

Understanding consumer sentiment is crucial for marketing and PR professionals to avoid potential ethical concerns in their campaigns. By regularly tracking sentiment indicators and soliciting feedback, firms can work to adjust and align their practices with ethical standards. This can help maintain trust and credibility with the audience while fostering transparency and accountability.

As businesses adapt to the changing landscape of marketing and PR, embracing ethics is crucial for building trust and success in a socially conscious marketplace. Having a business coach in your corner can provide invaluable guidance in establishing ethical practices, navigating evolving expectations and holding your brand accountable. By leveraging the expertise of a business coach, firms can drive long-term success while making a positive impact on society.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2024/04/30/building-new-levels-of-consumer-trust-through-ethical-marketing-and-pr-practices/?sh=1bdbc4276e78

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

‘Invisible’ consultants help companies write sustainability reports. Here’s why that’s a problem

30 04 2024

Image: witsarut sakorn/Shutterstock

By Hendri Yulius Wijaya,PhD Student in Political Science (Joint Supervision with Business School), The University of Melbourne and Kate Macdonald,Associate Professor, Political Science, The University of Melbourne via The Conversation • Reposted: April 30, 2024

Around the world, more and more companies are publishing sustainability reports – public scorecards detailing their impacts on society and the environment.

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) reports outline the positive and negative effects of a company’s activities, and the steps they’re taking in response.

Companies publish these reports as their own documents. But often, externally hired consultants play an invisible role in gathering data and framing it in a positive narrative the public will find easy to digest.

And getting these reports independently evaluated – “external assurance” – is still not required by many regulators around the world. As a result, they can allow companies to “greenwash”.

This could be by only disclosing information that makes a company look “sustainable” to the public. Or by only reporting on categories that paint them in a good light, and excluding the less flattering ones.

The problems inherent in this process create a blind spot for society. We urgently need to shine a light on consultants’ unseen involvement in sustainability reporting.

The business of polishing ‘facts’

It’s increasingly becoming mandatory for large publicly traded companies to disclose their social and environmental performance, particularly across Europe and the Asia-Pacific region.

In Australia, such reporting is voluntary, but widespread. As many as 98% of top Australian companies published sustainability reports last year. Consulting firms have quickly expanded their existing lines of service to capture this growing market opportunity.

Consultancies legitimise their expertise by offering businesses a range of frameworks and discourses. These convey the benefits of implementing sustainability measures and show how they could boost profitability.

But use of the firms has attracted heavy criticism.

Protester pours liquid out of a drum that reads — *Consulting firms conducting ESG work for major polluters have attracted harsh criticism. Vincenzo Lullo/Shutterstock*

One argument is that consulting firms actually undermine their own sustainability services by continuing to do work for major companies in polluting industries, such as the oil and gas sector.

Another is that consulting firms’ contributions to sustainability are largely superficial. It’s too easy for companies to engage them just to tick boxes – perhaps to meet certain global standards or frameworks in bad faith, or create the impression they are responsible companies in other ways.

Problems with the process

Drawing on the lead author’s previous experience as a sustainability reporting professional in Indonesia, we wanted to take a closer look at these criticisms.

To examine the issue properly, we need to recognise that a power imbalance can arise between external consultants and the companies that hire them when sustainability reports are treated as an end in themselves or “time-bound projects”.

This attitude stands in stark contrast to the continuous strategy of measurement and disclosure that is required to create meaningful change at a company.

First, with such a narrow view of reporting, consultants are treated as simply a service provider – they are hired to complete a report within a given timeframe. But this limits their exposure to a company’s overall operations. Consultants have to rely on information passed on to them by employees, or they distribute oversimplified, generic forms for the organisation’s members to quickly fill in.

Who they get to speak with to gather this information is also completely at the whim of their client. Under these constraints and tight deadlines, it’s difficult for them to perform meaningful data analysis.

Second, in practice, “reporting” often actually means “selecting which information shall and shall not be presented to the public”.

Using external consultants to prepare a report might seem like it would offer an unbiased or independent perspective. But the reports are heavily scrutinised by company management, who ultimately make the final decision about what to include.

And third, pressure to comply with certain regulations and standards can make companies shortsighted. Consultants are tasked with ensuring a company “ticks the box” and fulfils its reporting requirements. But if this is the primary incentive, the information presented can be superficial and lack context.

A deeper contextual analysis is necessary to describe what lies behind the raw numbers, including a company’s challenges, improvement targets and the path forward.

What needs to change?

Consultants can still play a key role in the global move to ESG reporting. But the industry’s approach needs to change.

For one, sustainability reports cover a wide range of ESG topics – from climate to social inclusion. It is impossible for a single consultant to tackle all of them simultaneously. Companies should ensure there is a diverse range of experts in the teams they hire.

More countries could also pass laws requiring “external assurance” – independent, standardised cross checking of companies’ sustainability reports.

Meanwhile, companies and consultants need to return to the underlying principle of sustainability reporting: it’s not just about producing marketing material. Faced with a very real global crisis, it’s a key way to measure the impacts, risks and challenges of doing business, and present a company’s action plan to address them.

It’s important to be sceptical when the information in a sustainability report only shows good performance. Nobody is perfect. Neither is any business.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://theconversation.com/invisible-consultants-help-companies-write-sustainability-reports-heres-why-thats-a-problem-228092

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

Brands and the Responsibility for Sustainable Shopping Habits

10 04 2024

By Emma Lewis from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: April 10, 2024

s we work to find a balance between greenwashing and greenhushing sustainability claims, here are several tips for brands to keep authentically guiding consumers toward better purchases.

Easter. A time for fun and family time, or a case of excessive consumerism? It’s no secret that Easter candies, chocolates and gifts often come in plastic, non-recyclable or multi-material packaging. Consumers can find themselves caving to the pressure of the yearly egg- and treat-buying ritual, and in an ethical conundrum where the build-up of waste is almost inevitable. But are brands doing enough to encourage sustainable behaviour in the frenzy?

Only last year, the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) began stamping down ongreenwashing — introducing new guidelines and issued a record-breaking 29 formal rulings on sustainability issues, notably banning adverts by airlines including Air France, Lufthansaand Etihad for portraying a misleading picture of their environmental impacts. This year, the ASA is focusing on the food and beverage industry and has introduced new AI tools to help identify and evaluate claims from brands making sustainability assertions.

Yet, these greenwashing countermeasures may have inadvertently swung the pendulum towards ‘greenhushing‘ — with some companies not actively promoting their sustainability progress to avoid criticism. This may create the unintended knock-on effect of limiting sustainability action and instituting a vicious cycle where such activities are deprioritised.

Sustainability and shopping — a dichotomy?

Shopping sustainably should be a seamless and stress-free experience. But complexity can burden shoppers with a myriad of products, promotions and promises — particularly during holiday seasons. Confusing consumers around the meanings of terms including ‘carbon neutral’, ‘compostable’ or ‘recyclable’; or by over-egging their sustainable offer and listing an overwhelming number of sustainable practices intensify the complexity.

By applying a philosophy of simplicity when integrating sustainable claims, brands can make it intuitive and easy to engage with. This is a win for the consumer — which, in turn, is a win for the brand; and ultimately, a win for the planet.

Simplifying your sustainability claims

Brands ought to consider how to authentically embed sustainability credentials into their business strategy, product offering, portfolio approach and manufacturing in a way that is simple and standardised. They should then communicate these successes clearly — when they have the power to influence other brands as well as the sustainability footprint of millions of consumers, getting it right matters. Take IKEA — its ‘People & Planet Positive’ sustainability strategy is embedded into all of its business practices; and the brand clearly outlines itsambitions and commitments.

The below considerations should be key for any brand looking to become a beacon for sustainable business and attract like-minded partners and consumers.

Design

On-pack sustainability credentials should be direct, provable and to the point. Don’t bombard the pack with too much information, as this will only increase shopping stress. Streamline product packaging and eliminate unnecessary layers and components that will contribute to waste. In terms of the actual product, consider using minimal, eco-friendly packaging materials and durable, high-quality items. There are alternative materials out there which are both sustainable and innovative — think seaweed plastic or shrimp-shell polystyrene!

Digital transparency

Incorporating QR codes into packaging and marketing materials provides easy access to more detailed information about sustainability terms, sustainable practices and the supply chain. Link these codes to a dedicated webpage or digital platform to enable customers to learn about environmental initiatives, product lifecycle, and tips for reducing waste.

Local & domestic sources

Domestically or locally source products and materials to secure and simplify your supply chain, reduce your carbon footprint and support the community. This enables companies to build an authentic story into the brand — after all, people don’t buy products; they buy stories.Patagonia is a key example of a brand built around locally sourced materials and fair labour practices, working directly with farmers wherever possible.

Forge partnerships

The above point also rings true when developing brand partnerships. Actively participate in initiatives that contribute to reforestation, renewable-energy projects, or other sustainable practices.

By simplifying your brand offer, consumers are less likely to be overwhelmed by decision paralysis and be more thoughtful about purchases. Instead, consideration is made towards important sustainability factors — such as the supply chain, manufacturing processes, materials used and impact on local communities.

Empower consumers

While brands should make every effort to embed sustainability initiatives, consumers should also be making a conscious effort to join up with brands — the brand sets the target and consumers finish the race.

For example, if a brand communicates its involvement in a closed-loop recycling system, it should also provide recommendations for how consumers can do their own due diligence and participate. This could be through recycling collection programs, reusing or repurposing packaging materials, or supporting brand take-back programs that accept products back for recycling or refurbishment.

Brands, this Easter and throughout the year … while it’s tempting to cave to pressures to enhance your sustainability credentials, you must consider the authentic reasons you are evolving for the future. Take meaningful steps to tangibly simplify the customer experience and your own practices at the same time.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/responsibility-sustainable-shopping-habits

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, Greenhushing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, UKASA
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

People Want Their 401(k) Plans to Align With Their Values, Survey Finds

10 04 2024

(Image credit: Markus Spiske/Unsplash)

By Mary Mazzoni from Triple Pundit • Reposted: April 10, 2024

Most financial professionals likely assume a strong return is all everyday investors are looking for as they save for their retirement. But even in a tough economy, a growing segment of global investors are equally concerned about aligning their money with their personal values, according to new research.

The global insights consultancy GlobeScan and the climate policy think tank InfluenceMap surveyed 5,000 retail investors — in other words, regular people who participate in 401(k) retirement plans and pension schemes or who dabble in purchasing individual stocks — to understand more about their preferences. Surveyed investors represent 10 countries and territories around the world, including the United States, Canada, Australia, France, Germany, Hong Kong and Japan.

More than 8 in 10 of these investors (89 percent) either “strongly” or “somewhat” support investment funds putting money behind companies in the clean energy space, and 87 percent support funds actively encouraging the companies in their portfolios to act on climate change, according to the research. Further, over a third of surveyed investors strongly support funds excluding “companies that contribute significantly to climate change,” and another 43 percent somewhat support it.

Many of these investors are also looking for the funds they do business with to provide information about how their investments impact nature and wildlife, economic inequality, and climate change, with more than 85 percent either strongly or somewhat supporting these disclosures.

“The financial system is all obviously predicated upon fiduciary responsibility and maximizing profits, but I don’t think the industry is very good at engaging their passive investors,” Chris Coulter, CEO of GlobeScan, told TriplePundit. “In this world of transparency and ability to reach people, we probably underestimate the innate, baseline sense of importance of sustainability issues for investment decisions among retail investors.”

Level of importance for funds acting to support nature and climate action — Interest in sustainability issues among global investors. *(Click to enlarge)*

How can funds align with investor preferences?

Findings like these dovetail with recent research from TriplePundit, in which more than half of surveyed U.S. consumers agreed it is “important” or “very important” for financial service companies to act responsibly when it comes to society and the environment. Over 30 percent said they switched their retirement fund provider in 2023 for sustainability reasons, according to the study conducted in partnership with 3BL, the research technology company Glow and panel partner Cint.

But even as sustainability becomes a more influential purchase driver for everyday investors, fund managers have been slow to respond.

“GlobeScan’s research shows the extent of retail investors’ demand for ambitious climate action by their fund and pension managers,” Daan Van Acker, program manager at InfluenceMap, said in a statement. “This stands in stark contrast to InfluenceMap’s findings that the world’s 45 largest asset managers are investing almost three times more assets in fossil fuel companies than green ones, while the proportion of managers with ambitious investee company stewardship has almost halved since 2021.”

Given the ongoing disconnect, research like this is a powerful tool for financial professionals interested in aligning their firms’ activities more closely with consumer preference.

“If I was in a fund and saw these metrics, I’d be intrigued, because you’re looking at 80 to 90 percent of people saying this stuff is important,” Coulter said. “There’s depth and foundational elements that even if you eroded a little bit, you still have significant majorities that are into this, so there’s an opportunity here.”

Investors support investment funds acting on climate biodiversity and inequality - survey finds — Levels of support for investment funds acting on various sustainability issues among global investors. *(Click to enlarge)*

Still, growing political backlash against the use of environmental, social and governance (ESG) principles in investment decisions poses real risk for funds, particularly in the U.S. Among the recent examples, Texas’s Permanent School Fund pulled $8.5 billion out of BlackRock last week, arguing the asset manager’s focus on ESG hurts investors and runs counter to its fiduciary duties.

BlackRock stopped using the term ESG to describe its interactions with portfolio companies, citing increased weaponization of the term, CEO Larry Fink said last year. But the so-called “anti-ESG” backlash still cost the company an estimated $4 billion in assets in 2023.

Amidst this environment, fund managers would be wise to pay attention to the global interest in sustainability among investors, and perhaps test new offerings and policies in markets outside the U.S. first, Coulter advised.

“The context of the ESG politicization and the weaponization of these issues makes it much more challenging,” he said. “It’s only for the brave, probably, in the U.S. In most other markets, it’s much less of an issue. Testing in other markets outside the U.S., where there’s a bit of a stronger sense of interest and importance and also less risk around the anti-ESG backlash, would be a sensible thing to do.”

Taking note of these global trends — with an eye toward a continued strong interest in the U.S., where more than 70 percent of investors say it’s important for their investments to consider climate change, nature and economic inequality — can help fund managers maintain perspective in a difficult time.

“There’s a lot of noise out there, a lot of politicization, but the underpinning reality once this fever breaks is that there’s opportunity here to build something,” Coulter said. “Listening, understanding, getting close to people, hearing their own words, language and needs, and then finding ways to develop value propositions on the back of that, is really important.”

Interest in sustainability among US investors — Interest in sustainability among U.S. investors. *(Click to enlarge)*

Messaging matters for funds, investors and the public

Even in the U.S., financial companies have an opportunity to connect with investors around issues that are less subject to political partisanship, with investments in nature, conservation and biodiversity being a clear example. Where the gravity of the climate crisis can easily overwhelm people to the point they tune out, the proactive, solutions-oriented tone of conversations around nature lend themselves to greater engagement among investors and the public, Coulter said.

“Winning on climate change means we avoid the apocalypse and we all don’t die. That is sort of the extreme expression of success on climate change and net zero, so it’s inherently negative or inherently focused on avoiding tragedy,” he explained. “Winning or being resilient on nature is infinitely positive in consumers’, retail investors’ and other stakeholders’ minds. You can always imagine a much more positive future for nature, and that means it’s got more energy and more possibility than just the climate conversation and decarbonization.”

Leaning into these areas with universal appeal can help fund managers to meet consumer preferences while providing much-needed funding to preserve natural resources, which also helps to fight climate change and promote economic equality.

Still, there is only so much that mainstream sustainable investing can do to drive progress. “With the trillions of dollars of assets under management that meet certain ESG criteria, it’s extraordinary numbers, and yet we don’t see any dramatic change in the impact that companies have on the environment or on people on the ground,” Coulter said. “There are two potential reasons for that. One is that it’s in the system now: There’s a lag in the system, while this amazing hockey stick impact curve is taking shape, and things will start to change dramatically because capital has been allocated in certain ways. Or two, the bar has not been high enough to differentiate what good looks like versus what average or status quo looks like.”

In particular, most sustainable funds apply negative screens to exclude entire sectors, such as oil and gas, or exclude companies with especially poor social and environmental records. But fewer have built funds around companies that have an especially positive impact on people and the environment, leaving investors with little information about how this approach would really perform. “Someone has to prove that the social impact approach actually delivers much more returns, and that’s still to be done,” Coulter said.

Research like this indicates the approach could be well received. “There’s an underlying value set that people have: People love nature, they’re worried about climate, and they care about inequality. And these are generally long-term investments, so it’s not about next quarter. It does change the future discounting risk for people that in the next 30 years, this makes sense. It’s very rational and it also fits with my values.”

Graphics courtesy of GlobeScan and InfluenceMap.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2024/investors-interest-sustainability-esg/798556

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

80% of Global Investors Now Have Sustainable Investment Policies in Place: Deloitte/Tufts Survey

5 04 2024

Photo: Deloitte

By Mark Segal via esgtoday.com • Reposted: April 5, 2024

The vast majority of professional investors globally have put in place ESG investment policies over the past several years, with investors looking both to minimize sustainability-related risk and capitalize on opportunities, and citing factors including regulatory requirements, improved performance and talent attraction, according to a new study released by global professional services firm Deloitte and The Fletcher School at Tufts University.

For the study, Deloitte and The Fletcher School surveyed more than 1,000 asset owners, asset managers, and investment advisers, including CEOs, CIOs, Heads of Strategy and other senior investment executives across regions including North America, Europe, and Asia, and also conducted interviews with sustainability and investment leaders, between January and December 2023.

The study found significant growth in the proportion of investors establishing sustainable investment policies, with 79% of investors reporting having a policy in place, up from only 20% 5 years ago. Nearly all other investors report having a “loosely defined ESG investing policy” in place or have plans to develop a sustainable investment policy, with only 1% reporting no plans for a policy.

Despite highly visible anti-ESG campaigns ongoing in the U.S., the survey found that U.S. investors were actually more likely to have sustainable investment policies in place than their global peers, with 83% of professional U.S. investors reporting having ESG investing policies, up from 27% five years ago. European investors lagged their U.S. counterparts slightly, at 75%.

The study asked investors to list the top 3 drivers for integrating sustainability factors into their investment decision-making processes, with the most commonly cited reasons including regulatory requirements (39%), improved financial performance (36%) and stakeholder influence or pressure (34%). Interestingly, U.S. investors, while also reporting regulatory pressure as the most common driver for integrating sustainability factors (39%), were more likely to cite talent retention and attraction as a key driver, at second place at 37%.

Chris Ruggeri, a Deloitte Risk & Financial Advisory principal and sustainability, climate and equity leader, said:

“Many factors, including evolving regulatory requirements, financial performance pressures, and stakeholder expectations, are driving the U.S. movement toward integrating sustainability and ESG into investment decision-making. As such, company leaders and their boards have an important opportunity to take actions that can improve investor confidence and trust levels in those investments, such as making enhancements to the sustainability information, disclosures, and other sources that inform buy, sell, and hold decisions.”

Additionally, while more than 83% of investors reported either regularly or occasionally using sustainability information in their fundamental investment analysis, interviewed investors said that they did not believe that ESG factors are effectively incorporated into equity prices yet, according to the study.

The survey also assessed the key barriers inhibiting organizations’ ability to implement sustainable investing, with the most commonly cited challenges including a lack of clarity on how to integrate ESG information and inconsistency or incomparability of ESG ratings data, with other top factors including over- or under-regulation, cost constraints, and a lack of clear strategies by corporations to achieve their ESG goals.

The study also found a strong correlation between the trust investors have in ESG data sources and their use of those sources, with in-house proprietary data systems and audited or assured corporate disclosures reported as the top 2 trusted (70% and 69%, respectively) and most regularly employed (51% and 52%, respectively) sustainability data sources. Interviewed investors indicated that they expect that recently launched sustainability disclosure standards and regulations will address many of the ESG data challenges, with increased consistency and standardization.

Michael Bondar, a Deloitte Risk & Financial Advisory principal and global enterprise trust leader, said:

“There is considerable room for improvement in how organizations collect, measure, report on, and validate sustainability data to earn investor trust. But, more consistency and dependability in sustainability reporting for measurement and analysis purposes should help enhance confidence for stakeholders throughout the corporate ecosystem.”

Bhaskar Chakravorti, Dean of Global Business at The Fletcher School at Tufts University, added:

“The focus on sustainability data is growing globally. India’s Securities and Exchange Board requires top public companies to disclose ESG related activities, and the European Union now requires sustainability disclosures under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive starting from periods beginning in 2024. And as of this month, rules were adopted in the United States as well.”
To view the study and see the original post, follow this link: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzGxSbkzrMzcjlSHttMWmQVwZSfj

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

4 ways to become a conscious leader in sustainability

2 04 2024

Source: Shutterstock/Philip Steury Photography

By Shannon Houde from GreenBiz.com • Reposted: April 2, 2024

A conscious leader is someone who understands their role in creating a world that works for everyone and takes action to make it happen.”
— Gabrielle Bernstein

Conscious leadership connects many of the most inspiring changemakers.

There’s former Unilever CEO and Dutch businessman Paul Polman, who prioritized social and environmental responsibility at the consumer goods giant, resolutely carving out a path for the good of the planet rather than solely commercial gain.

Former New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern, now trustee of the Earthshot Prize, called the climate crisis a matter of “life or death” as she laid out an ambitious but controversial “green” roadmap for the country.

And Costa Rican diplomat Christiana Figueres artfully negotiated the Paris climate accord while navigating turmoil in her personal life.

Each of these leaders embodied their values, acted with courage and prioritized empathy and humility over personal plaudits — three core components of a conscious leader.

You can break these components down much further, of course. In fact, according to U.S. consultancy Conscious Leadership Group, 15 commitments are required to become a conscious leader, including candor, curiosity and responsibility. However you define it, the crux of conscious leadership is acting for the good of people and the planet. Here are four ways to become a more conscious leader.

1. Start at home

Take the time to embed routines and rituals into your day that get you in the right mindset before you even reach the office, recommended Holley Chant, CSO at regenerative tourism company Salva, while speaking in February at an Impact Leaders Lab event, a private platform in which sustainability professionals can accelerate their professional development. “You’ve got to get up every morning and clean your slate.” For Chant that means fitness, meditation and ice baths. Seek out connection as part of these rituals, too. “The work that we’re meant to do as sustainability leaders doesn’t just happen when we’re at work with our ESG hat on. It’s also our work as humans, in the way we show up in our community, how we help both ourselves and other people to deal with the ups and downs of life. It’s how we find joy, community and those connections.”

2. Flex your curiosity

Conscious leaders look beyond their own role, organization and industry in their quest for inspiration. For those working within sustainable leadership, whose remit often transcends a single function, department or even sector, this willingness to cast the net wide in their hunt for relevant ideas and potential solutions is invaluable. So flex that curiosity muscle as often as you can. That could be as simple as checking out a new podcast that looks at climate developments from a brand new perspective or reading a nonfiction book by an environmental campaigner you admire. But it also means being more curious in your interactions with others. Next time you find yourself ready to disagree with a point made during a meeting, for example, take a pause and challenge yourself to understand the other person’s viewpoint. Get curious about these perspectives, rather than jumping to judgment, and you’ll find skills such as empathy, innovation and communication develop naturally.

3. ‘Listen as if your life depended on it’

According to 2018 research by the University of Illinois, most people can recall only 20 percent of the ideas expressed by the other person in a conversation. Imagine what implications that has for a CSO looking to understand the barriers to change that are stalling progress on sustainability within an organization? Or the sheer volume of original ideas they might be missing when they fail to absorb the feedback from frontline staff? So instead, “listen as if your life depended on it,” recommended Chant. “That means turning off all your planned responses and really listening with the aim of being able to repeat back 90 percent of what they said.” As well as allowing you to tap into ideas you’d otherwise have missed, this skill of active listening helps develop all sorts of critical skills required to excel within sustainability, from communication, to engagement, curiosity and empathy.

4. Choose gratitude

The future of the planet can be a heavy topic, one that triggers fear, grief and anxiety. One 2021 study in The Lancet found that more than half (59 percent) of 16-25 year olds — the demographic most likely to pursue “green” jobs — were “extremely worried” about the climate crisis. But rather than wallow alongside them, conscious leaders find ways to lift others from a sense of despair and divert their attention to solutions and opportunities instead. To cultivate this skill, practice presence and gratitude. Intentionally take time to identify milestones that have been reached, progress that has been made and exciting new solutions that offer hope.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/4-ways-become-conscious-leader-sustainability

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

A sustainable future begins at ground level

2 04 2024

The planet contains myriad types of soil and ground cover, each with unique properties and sustainability requirements. (AP Photo/Virginia Mayo)

By Shahid Azam, Professor, Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, University of Regina via The Conversation • Reposted: April 2, 2024

In 2015, the United Nations adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a “call to action” in “global partnership.” By 2023 it appears that our progress has been far from satisfactory in achieving these goals.

Setbacks due to natural disasters, rising costs, armed conflicts, and the COVID-19 pandemic have even reversed progress already made on some of the goals.

The UN 2023 report concludes that aspects of sustainability (environmental, economic, and social) should be considered as a whole to bring about meaningful recovery. Science is identified as the vehicle for that change. But it must be “multidisciplinary, equitably and inclusively produced, openly shared, widely trusted and embraced, and ‘socially robust’ – relevant to society.”

The report also shows that progress in other areas of development can negatively impact land — and the life that depends upon it. Furthermore, terrestrial ecosystems are at further risk due to climate change, landslides, earthquakes and environmental pollutants.

To improve the quality of life for both current and future generations we have to protect, restore and promote sustainable land.

Scientific principles are available

To manage our environment, we need to understand the relationships between atmosphere, soil, and pollutants at local and regional scales — and also across time.

The grounds surface — excluding many manufactured surfaces like concrete — is like a membrane that allows the migration and retention of air, water, contaminants and heat.

Every type of human development activity including commodity extraction, building roads and urban facilities, agricultural practices and even the containment of mining and municipal waste is affected by the porous nature of soils.

Soil falls from a mands hand. — *A man inspects dry soil, in Nador, northern Morocco, on March 8, 2024. (AP Photo/Mosa’ab Elshamy)*

We know that the removal of groundwater results in soil settlement. On the flip side rainfall causes landslides as the excess water pressure breaks down the soil’s structure. Moreover, seasonal weather causes both wet and dry cycles and freeze and thaw cycles which generate repeated soil shifting.

It is essential that we as scientists and policymakers consider the geology, climate and environment to help predict soil behaviour at a given site.

Canada has capacity and experience

Canada possesses the second largest landmass on the planet and is home to a wide variety of soils including clay, loess, organic peats, glacial tills, aquifers and even deserts and permafrost. This huge variety of ground conditions presents unique challenges at each location.

Over the decades, engineers have met these challenges through the development of methods to avoid soil failure in major projects with examples ranging from the Downie Slide in British Columbia to the Confederation Bridge linking New Brunswick with Prince Edward Island.

The success of large and lengthy projects is directly the result of the willingness of planners, scientists and policymakers to work across diverse disciplines, accommodate regional experiences, broadly share information and use observation to continually improve. All together, this has generated an extensive body of empirical data.

The logical next step is to develop a scientific framework that can address complex atmosphere-soil-contaminant interactions. Such a context can be applied to almost any situation involving various types of fluids and solid particles.

Take, for example, the case of tailings storage facilities. These facilities contain waste slurries (residual solids in processed liquids) often for many decades after the mine they originally served has closed. The experiences of dam breaches at Mount Polley, B.C. and Brumadinho, Brazil raise acute public concern over the conventional disposal of mining wastes.

A clear understanding of the interfaces between soil particles and polluted liquids in wet, dry and frozen states will provide a foundation to devise new methods to reduce building projects’ required footprint and risk of failure. Similar specific solutionscan be developed to reduce the impact of deicing salts on roads, fertilizers on farmland and terrestrial oil spills.

Sustainability makes socioeconomic sense

The Canadian Critical Minerals Strategy accelerates the extraction of critical minerals, however, it also requires safer tailings management across all stages from opening to long after the mine closes.

Likewise, the design of urban infrastructure in light of climate change and the management of agriculture lands is critical to restore societal confidence while ensuring we meet our target of net-zero emissions by 2050. Scientific solutions can enable economic growth and address environmental issues at the same time.

Applying new methods in the field will need public approval. We will have to work together within our communities to usher in a new era of socially robust science to safeguard our lands. At the same time, we should strive to transfer local experience into knowledge that can combat global challenges.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://theconversation.com/a-sustainable-future-begins-at-ground-level-222943

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

SEC Climate Disclosure Rule: Let the Lawsuits (and the Decarbonization) Begin

30 03 2024

(Image: Tada Images/Adobe Stock)

By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: March 30, 2024

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published its long-awaited climate disclosure rule earlier this month, compelling public companies to make data on their greenhouse gas emissions available to investors. Public officials allied with fossil energy interests have already filed at least two lawsuits to block it. But the Joe Biden administration is forging ahead with a $6 billion program to decarbonize cement, steel and other energy-intensive industries, regardless of what happens in court.

Here come the lawsuits

The new SEC rules build on existing requirements for climate-related disclosures made by public companies.

“The final rules reflect the commission’s efforts to respond to investors’ demand for more consistent, comparable, and reliable information about the financial effects of climate-related risks on a registrant’s operations and how it manages those risks while balancing concerns about mitigating the associated costs of the rules,” according to the SEC.

Some environmental organizations were critical of the final rulemaking, and fossil energy stakeholders also weighed in. That includes a petition for review joined by 10 Republican-led states, filed in the U.S. Court of the Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which handles cases from Florida, Alabama and Georgia.

The lawsuit is somewhat vague as to details, though Utility Dive is among the news organizations noting that opponents argue the SEC overstepped its authority.

“Petitioners will show that the final rule exceeds the agency’s statutory authority and otherwise is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law,” the lawsuit reads. “Petitioners thus ask that this court declare unlawful and vacate the commission’s final action.”

The 11th Circuit took no immediate action, but the 5th Circuit, which handles cases from Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, issued an administrative stay in response to a request filed by the firms Liberty Energy and Nomad Proppant Services. Administrative stays halt further legal proceedings until a ruling is made on the request.

The Republican-led states of Louisiana and Mississippi were also a part of a 5th Circuit lawsuit that was filed along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Longview Chamber of Commerce and two Texas-based stakeholder organizations, the Texas Association of Business and the Texas Alliance of Energy.

Fossil energy stakeholders are not the only ones unhappy with the new rules. The environmental organization Sierra Club and the Sierra Club Foundation filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals accusing the SEC of not going far enough to protect investors.

“Through legal recourse, we aim to hold the SEC accountable to its mission: protect and empower the rights of every single investor,” Dan Chu, executive director of the Sierra Club Foundation, said in a statement, noting that the Foundation is itself an investor.

A $6 billion boost for decarbonization

The new rule was not scheduled to go into effect until 60 days after it was announced on March 6, so the 5th Circuit administrative stay will not have an immediate impact on the timeline. Still, the clock is ticking, and public companies in the U.S. are already being advised to prepare for implementation.

“Companies need to continue to evolve governance and disclosure of climate-related risks and performance not only to prepare for SEC requirements, but also to find new sources of competitive advantage and to realize opportunities while meeting evolving stakeholder expectations in a rapidly changing world,” Joe Sczurko, president of earth and environment at the leading consultancy WSP USA, wrote for TriplePundit.

That chore just got a little easier for the dozens of leading U.S. companies that qualified for funding through a new $6 billion decarbonization program organized under the U.S. Department of Energy. The funds are allocated from the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.

The sprawling 20-state, 33-project program is aimed at applying a broad slate of carbon-reducing technologies to industries that are difficult to decarbonize through ordinary electrification alone.

“The projects will focus on the highest emitting industries where decarbonization technologies will have the greatest impact, including aluminum and other metals, cement and concrete, chemicals and refining, iron and steel, and more,” according to a statement from the department.

The program is also expected to create tens of thousands of new jobs, with a focus on community benefits and labor rights. “Nearly 80 percent of the projects are located in a disadvantaged community,” according to the Department of Energy.

Food and beverage firms can lead the way

The funding program showcases new technologies, with the expectation that the qualifying projects will model best practices for adoption throughout their industries.

Three of the top food and beverage brands in the U.S. are represented in the Department of Energy’s list of highest-emitting industries. They were selected based partly on their ability to showcase technologies that lend themselves to widespread adoption and high consumer visibility.

“These projects can increase consumer awareness around embodied emissions by decarbonizing products that Americans consume every day like ice cream, ketchup and BBQ sauce,” according to the department.

One of the awardees is the consumer goods company Unilever, which plans to deploy up to $20.9 million in federal funding to replace gas boilers at several locations with electric boilers and heat pumps. The system also involves recovering waste heat.

“Along with reduced emissions, this project has an extremely high replicability potential and will create a model that could lead to further decarbonization throughout the food and beverage sector where approximately 50 percent of processing emissions are from low temperature heating,” according to the Department of Energy.

Similarly, the food company Kraft Heinz was awarded up to $170.9 million for a multi-state project that includes renewable energy and energy storage elements integrated with heat pumps, electric heaters, electric boilers and biogas boilers.

The U.S. branch of the beverage company Diageo won the third award in the food and beverage category. It was awarded up to $75 million to demonstrate how on-site renewable energy can be paired with new large-scale, long-duration energy storage technology to replace gas-fired heating systems. The battery, developed by the firm Rondo Energy, is designed to provide continuous energy from wind and solar resources — even when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining.

As for the new SEC rule, it will be difficult to stuff the genie back in the bottle. The Department of Energy program is all but certain to foster climate-based competition throughout the U.S. food and beverage industry. Once the new systems are up and running, household brands under the Unilever, Kraft Heinz, and Diageo umbrellas are going to set a high bar for others to meet, regardless of what happens in court.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2024/sec-climate-disclosure-rule-lawsuits/797871

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

Consumers Vote With Their Wallets: The Unspoken Consensus On Sustainability

30 03 2024

Image: Getty

By Ross Meyercord, CEO of Propel Software via Forbes • Reposted: March 30, 2024

In an era where political divisions often seem insurmountable, there’s an underlying consensus among American consumers that transcends party lines: the importance of sustainability.

As the CEO of a company at the forefront of product value management (PVM) SaaS solutions, I’ve observed firsthand how sustainability has moved from a niche concern to a driving factor influencing consumer purchase decisions. In the 2024 election year, we will witness polarization among the two sides, but as consumers cast their votes—with dollars rather than ballots—a clear message of unity around brands that support environmental causes is being sent.

Customers Prioritize Sustainability

Propel recently conducted a consumer sentiment survey with OnePoll to determine what influences purchasing behaviors for sustainable products and brands. The survey was designed to offer businesses a window into consumer purchase behaviors and to help companies identify how closely they should be tracking and publicizing their sustainability efforts for the products they develop. The data compiled from a study of 2,000 U.S. consumers revealed compelling insights on how Americans prioritize eco-friendly purchasing decisions and how political affiliations impact those purchasing decisions.

The data shows consumers, regardless of political affiliation, are putting their hard-earned money towards brands and products that elevate environmental causes. And those brands that accurately communicate their environmental practices to consumers are being rewarded by consumers with increased revenue and greater loyalty.

Propel’s survey confirms a trend that Americans are severing ties with companies that aren’t focused on sustainability. In fact, the New York University Stern Center for Sustainable Business discovered in a survey that sustainability-marketed products are not only growing twice as fast as conventionally marketed products, but they are going at premium prices.

Likewise, Propel’s survey uncovered that more than 50% of consumers from both major political parties stated they’d be willing to spend extra on brands that champion environmental causes. And, contrary to traditional thinking about party ideology, more Republicans (66%) than Democrats (55%) cited they’d pay a 10% to 30% premium for eco-friendly brands. This data dismantles the myth of sustainability as a partisan issue, highlighting the shared commitment consumers have that bridges the political divide.

Why Businesses Must Rethink Their Sustainability Strategy

Many of the statistics we uncovered about consumer behavior challenge us to rethink our strategies to align business processes with the value of sustainability and environmental stewardship. As business leaders, CIOs, tech innovators and C-suite executives, we all need to sit up and pay attention.

As the architects of products and services that define our daily lives, we have a responsibility to embed sustainability into the fabric of our business practices. It’s up to us to reimagine how we design, manufacture and dispose of products, ensuring that every step of the lifecycle minimizes its environmental impact and promotes a circular economy.

The findings send a clear message to brands about how consumers view their products and how those brand messages influence purchase behavior. In particular, many consumers are actively looking for environmental claims when making purchases (66%), with a significant portion (58%) willing to alter their brand loyalty if a company fails to demonstrate eco-friendly practices. This is a powerful reminder that sustainability is not just a moral imperative, but a competitive advantage.

These findings further back up a 2021 PwC survey that found environmental, social and governance (ESG) has become a “make or break” consideration for investors globally, with nearly half willing to divest from companies that aren’t taking sufficient action on ESG. In a marketplace where consumers and investors are increasingly discerning, brands that fail to prioritize environmental considerations risk not just alienation but obsolescence.

Despite the tumultuous political climate of the past decade, there’s common ground to be found in the values we share as consumers and citizens. And, the message we as business leaders should be taking from it is: Aligning with sustainable practices is not just about catering to a niche market but resonating with a broad, bipartisan consumer base.

We are in a unique position to drive this change. By leveraging advanced analytics, AI and collaborative tools, we can optimize resource use, reduce waste and ensure products are designed with their entire lifecycle in mind.

Businesses that are unsure where to start must first turn their attention inward. One important variable is your current supply chain. With a direct line of sight into the development and creation of your products, you can easily track sustainable business processes. If you don’t include your supply chain practices currently, it’s time to make that change. It’s only when companies can see every aspect of their internal and external processes that they can have a complete understanding of their practices to meet consumer expectations as they relate to sustainability.

Conclusion

The consumer mandate is clear: Sustainability is not a partisan issue but a universal value that guides purchasing decisions. As we navigate this election year, let us remember that the most powerful votes are often cast outside of the ballot box through the choices we make as consumers and the products we develop, market and sell as business innovators.

It’s time for us all to respond to this call to action by embedding sustainability into our DNA and, in doing so, securing our place in a future where environmental stewardship and economic success are inextricably linked.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2024/03/29/consumers-vote-with-their-wallets-the-unspoken-consensus-on-sustainability/?sh=6c5d352d6132

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, OnePoll, PwC Survey, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

The path to embedded sustainability

27 03 2024

Image: IBM

From IBM • Reposted: March 27, 2024

Businesses seeking to accelerate sustainability initiatives must take an integrated approach that brings together all business and technology functions. Sustainability is no longer the responsibility of only the chief sustainability officer (CSO). It is not managed by a single department in a silo. Driving true sustainable impact, at scale, takes place when an enterprise is fully aligned to that transformation. To scale progress in combating climate change, this alignment and collaboration must happen across value chain partners, ecosystems, and industries.

Sustainability and ESG: An opportunity for synergy

Sustainability and ESG are not synonymous. While ESG seeks to provide standard methods and approaches to measuring across environmental, social and governance KPIs, and holds organizations accountable for that performance, sustainability is far broader. ESG can serve as a vehicle to progress sustainability but it can also distract from the urgent need of combating climate change and working toward the 17 UN SDGs.

As we have seen with any sort of external reporting liabilities, this type of accountability does drive action. It’s our responsibility to ensure we don’t just do ESG reporting for the sake of reporting, and that it doesn’t impede actual progress in sustainability. We must ensure ESG progress and sustainability are driving towards a common goal. The reality is companies might be ready to fund ESG initiatives, but not as ready to fund ‘sustainability’ initiatives.

If designed intentionally, these do not have to be separate initiatives. When something is ‘regulatory,’ ‘mandatory,’ or ‘involuntary,’ companies have no choice but to find a way. A pre-existing sustainability office may find resources or funds shifted to ESG, or a reprioritization of targets based on ESG measurements. However, to capture both the business value behind ESG compliance as well as its ability to drive impact, it requires a holistic approach that strategically captures these synergies.

We are helping our clients maximize those investments, leveraging the requirements of ESG to drive compliance as well as sustainability. Our clients are improving their ability to measure and track progress against ESG metrics, while concurrently operationalizing sustainability transformation.

Maximizing value with a holistic strategy

The first step in maximizing that dual value is upfront due diligence. It is necessary to assess the current state of reporting readiness, the alignment between ESG requirements and voluntary sustainability initiatives, and any consideration on how to drive acceleration with future-proofed solutions. Questions might include:

Where is the organization relative to its required and voluntary sustainability goals?
Have the sustainability goals evolved in response to recent regulation or market shifts?
How aligned is the sustainability strategy to the business strategy?
Is ownership of delivering sustainability goals distributed throughout the organization or is every leader aware of how they are expected to contribute?
How is sustainability managed—as an annual measuring exercise or an ongoing effort that supports business transformation?
What regulations are owned by specific functional areas that may contribute to a broader ESG roadmap if viewed holistically?
Are there in flight business or technology initiatives where I can embed these requirements?

Up until recently, sustainability was most likely handled by one central team. Now, functional areas across the organization are recognizing their role in measuring ESG progress as well as their opportunities to help make their company more sustainable.

Similar to a company executing any corporate strategy, progress is made when the organization understands it, and employees are aware of how they play a role in bringing it to life. All leaders must enable teams and departments to understand how sustainability is part of the corporate strategy. They must provide the enablement and tools so these teams can integrate the overarching sustainability purpose and objectives within the corporate strategy into their respective roles in accelerating sustainable outcomes.

I see a clear shift in companies becoming more aware that they must work across departments to drive sustainability. A company cannot report on scope 3 category 7 of employee commute without employee data from HR or facilities management data, or without the technology platform and data governance to have an auditable view of that data. Businesses cannot prove there is no forced labor in their supply chain without working with procurement to understand their supplier base, where they are located, and what might be high risk, and then solution to embed proactive risk management in vendor onboarding.

Embedding sustainability in practice

Accountability is where an enterprise can ensure that sustainability is embedded and activated. The idea of embedding is integrating it into the day-to-day role. It’s enabling employees to make informed decisions and understanding the climate impact based on that decision. Any business or investment decision has a profit lever, a cost lever, and sometimes a performance lever, such as an Service Level Agreement (SLA). Now, sustainability can be a lever to truly embed impact into everyday operations. Employees can make more sustainable decisions knowing the tradeoff and impact.

A recent study from the IBM Institute for Business Value surveyed 5,000 global C-suite executives across 22 industries to find out why sustainability isn’t generating more impact for organizations. The study found companies were just “doing sustainability,” or approaching sustainability as a compliance task or accounting exercise rather than a business transformation accelerator.

Executives recognize the importance of data to achieve sustainability objectives; 82% of the study’s respondents agree that high-quality data and transparency are necessary to succeed. However, a consistent challenge they encounter in driving both ESG reporting and sustainable transformation is the shared reality is that companies cannot manage what they cannot measure.

Data not only provides the quantitative requirements for ESG metrics, it also provides the visibility to manage the performance of those metrics. If the employees of a company don’t have the data, they cannot publish financial grade reporting, identify opportunities for decarbonization, or validate progress towards becoming a more sustainable company.

One point addressed in our study surrounds the data specific challenges that can come with sustainability. Findings revealed that “despite recognizing the link between data and sustainability success, only 4 in 10 organizations can automatically source sustainability data from core systems such as ERP, enterprise asset management, CRM, energy management, and facilities management.”

When clients embed the right processes and organizational accountability across ESG reporting and sustainability, they can make sure they are getting the right information and data into the hands of the right people, often system owners. Those ‘right people’ can now make more informed decisions in their respective roles and scale transformation from one team to the entire organization while also incorporating these needs of ESG data capture, collection, and ingestion for the sake of both reporting and operationalizing.

The study found organizations that successfully embedded sustainability approached the data usability challenge through a firmer data foundation and better data governance. The criticality of a clear data strategy and foundation brings us to our final topic: how generative AI can further accelerate sustainability.

Utilizing generative AI to embed sustainability

There are many different applications for generative AI when it comes to embedding sustainability, especially when it comes to filling in data gaps. The data needed for ESG and sustainability reporting is immense and complex. Oftentimes, companies don’t have it available or have the correct protocols to align their data and sustainability strategies.

Most clients, regardless of the size of the company, have sustainability teams that are stretched, trying to manually chase data instead of focusing on what the data is saying. Generative AI can unlock productivity potential, accelerating data collection and ingestion reconciliation. As an example, instead of sustainability teams manually collecting and reviewing paper fuel receipts, technology can help translate receipt images into the necessary data elements for fuel-related metrics. This allows these teams to spend more time on how to optimize fuel use for decarbonization, using time for data insights instead of time chasing the data.

By spending all your time on reconciling invoices or collecting physical fuel receipts, how are you or others in your organization going to have the time to understand the data and in turn make changes to drive sustainability? If time is spent collecting data and then pulling together reports, there is little time left to garner actionable insights from that data and enact change. Systems and processes must be in place so that an organization can drive sustainability performance, while meeting ESG reporting requirements, and not use all of its resources and funding on data management that provides eventual visibility without the capacity to use it for impact.

As mentioned in the study, generative AI can be a “game changer for data-driven sustainability, enabling organizations to turn trade-offs into win-wins, identify improvement opportunities, and drive innovation at speed and scale.” It is little wonder why 73% of surveyed executives say they plan to increase their investment in generative AI for sustainability.

To truly leverage the power of generative AI tomorrow, companies must first understand their data readiness today. Then, we can prioritize how generative AI can improve existing data for visibility and use that data for performance insights.

Companies can identify immediate opportunities for generative AI to help them move faster, while concurrently ensuring that the core data collection and management is established to support current and future reporting needs. We want our clients to focus on leveraging ESG reporting to have a return on investment (ROI) financially, as well as in driving sustainable impact. While external mandatory requirements will be a driver for where an organization’s budget is allocated, organizations can intentionally embed sustainability as a part of those initiatives to capture the full value of their transformation efforts.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.ibm.com/blog/the-path-to-embedded-sustainability/

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

Eco-Friendly Marketing: A Guide to Sustainable Branding in the Age of Climate Consciousness

27 03 2024

Image: Brand Equity

By MN4U Bureau • Reposted: March 27, 2024

As climate awareness has become imperative, promoting sustainable marketing is more than a pattern; it’s an impression of evolving consumer values and environmental consciousness. Brands presently face the crucial need to deliver products as well as to exemplify sustainability in their identity and messaging. Sustainability in branding, offering actionable insights and navigating the landscape of eco-conscious marketing. The transformative power of sustainable branding in shaping consumer perceptions and driving brand loyalty.

The Era of Sustainable Marketing

The rise of words such as “sustainable,” “eco-friendly” and “green” demonstrates a profound shift in consumer preferences toward ethical and environmentally responsible brands. Customers today invest not just in products but in values and sustainability as well. A recent report by Metricstream revealed that 35% of customers are willing to pay up to 25% more for sustainable products. And 76% of consumers intend to switch from one company to another if sustainability practices are not performed. This surge highlights the necessity for brands to perform sustainable marketing and align with eco-friendly practices as soon as possible. Moreover, it has also been observed that 86% of employees are willing to work with companies that care about sustainability.

Advantages of Sustainable Marketing

An Increase in Reputation: Brands who embrace sustainable marketing techniques often benefit from an enhanced brand perception with environmentally-minded consumers, who appreciate these initiatives.
Greater Consumer Loyalty: Environmental initiatives foster strong ties with customers, leading to more loyalty from clients and increased support from them.
Cost Savings: Engaging in sustainable practices may bring long-term cost reductions through energy-saving operations or waste-reduction strategies.
Administrative Compliance: Companies that implement eco-friendly processes position themselves well for compliance with any future environmental regulations.

Strategies for Sustainable Branding

As businesses embark on their sustainability journeys, adopting strategies that resonate with eco-minded customers is critical to growth and differentiation.

Authenticity in Sustainability Efforts- A key principle of sustainable branding lies in authenticity. Brands must not simply claim they practice sustainability; rather, they should embody it at every operational level. From eco-friendly packaging to carbon-neutral shipping shipments, their actions should speak louder than words when it comes to sustainability marketing efforts.
Educational and Informative Campaigns – Today’s consumers increasingly expect to be informed rather than sold on products or services. Effective green marketing strategies involve sharing a sustainable story through storytelling, engaging consumers in your brand journey, and informing them of its positive environmental impacts through purchasing decisions.
Integration of Sustainability into Brand Identity – Sustainable branding goes beyond product promotion; it involves developing a brand identity rooted in environmental and social responsibility. Aligning values with eco-friendly practices enables brands to attract conscious consumers while making an impactful statement about themselves to society at large.

Integrating Sustainability Through Different Marketing Channels

Integrating sustainability into various marketing channels offers brands unique opportunities to connect with eco-conscious consumers while building brand loyalty and standing out in the marketplace.

Incorporating Sustainability Into Content Marketing

Businesses looking for sustainable strategies have numerous options at their disposal when it comes to engaging their eco-conscious consumers, building loyalty, and standing out in an overcrowded marketplace. Content marketing for sustainability provides one such avenue – it plays an essential role in driving sustainable practices while raising consumer awareness of them.

Infographics: Infographics provide consumers with digestible sustainability data.
Case Studies: Companies can highlight environmental initiatives and carbon reduction efforts through case studies.
Video Content: Provide updates regarding sustainable production practices or conservation initiatives.

Social Media for Sustainable Practices

Social media platforms provide powerful platforms for building brand loyalty and advocating sustainability, providing immense potential to engage customers in eco-friendly activities or challenges. Consider:

Campaigns & Challenges: Engaging customers in eco-friendly activities or challenges.
User-Generated Content: Encouraging customers to post about sustainable initiatives they support as well as company updates in social media posts or through blogging platforms such as Medium.

Sustainable Email Marketing

To implement effective and sustainable email marketing strategies, consider:

Opt-In Approach: Build a database of subscribers who actively opt-in for your emails.
Eco-Friendly Email Service Providers: When selecting email service providers, prioritize those that emphasize sustainability and renewable energy as a priority.
Optimize Email Contents: To promote sustainability through education, develop useful, educational emails.

The role of influencers and social media in promoting sustainable brands

Besides the various channels of marketing, social media influencers play an integral part in spreading sustainable practices by spreading information and shaping norms about green living. Non-green influencers have the power to reach a wide audience and promote sustainable consumption; however, they may face credibility challenges when discussing eco-conscious practices. Research indicates that adopting credibility-enhancing strategies such as citing expert opinions and showing passion for sustainability can increase influencers’ perceived credibility when posting about sustainability. Moreover, study participants delved into the effect of various credibility-boosting strategies on social media posts by fitness/lifestyle influencers advocating the reduction of single-use plastics like PET bottles. Results highlighted the significance of credibility-building tactics as an effective means for non-green influencers to promote sustainability by engaging their audiences in eco-friendly practices and increasing credibility with viewers.

Shining Examples of Sustainable Marketing Success

To demonstrate the effectiveness of sustainability in marketing, take a look at some inspiring case studies of renowned companies that have successfully incorporated sustainable marketing into their strategies.

1. Patagonia

The outdoor clothing brand Patagonia is renowned for its sustainability philosophy, which is at the forefront of every aspect of its business. The most memorable campaigns, such as “Don’t Buy This Jacket,” emphasize the brand’s dedication to sustainability while connecting with the public, presenting sustainability as a financially profitable and beneficial option.

2. IKEA

The brand is recognised for its commitment to climate change IKEA’s advertising campaigns promote a circular economy and sustainable living principles. Initiatives such as those in the “Fortune Favours the Frugal” campaign demonstrate the brand’s commitment to sustainability and are a great way of attracting customers and building brand loyalty.

Sustainable Branding and Consumer Awareness

Consumer awareness plays an integral influence on a brand’s reputation and positioning in the market. With the rising demands for sustainable and ethical products from consumers, companies should incorporate sustainability into their brand’s identity and messages to remain up-to-date as well as competitive. By aligning marketing efforts with sustainability concepts, companies can boost positive perceptions of their brands and also create long-term value.

Sustainable marketing has become an essential aspect of modern society’s climate-conscious mindset. Integrating sustainability into branding improves a company’s image and customer loyalty, but it can also shape a greener future. However, authenticity, transparency, and innovation must remain core components of sustainable branding practices for their success.

Authored by Mohan Gohade, Digital Marketing Head, SRV Media. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.medianews4u.com/eco-friendly-marketing-a-guide-to-sustainable-branding-in-the-age-of-climate-consciousness/

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

Uber’s ‘Emissions Savings’ Feature Shows Riders Benefits of Lower-Emission Transport

26 03 2024

Image: Uber

From Sustainable Brands • Reposted: March 26, 2024

Uber users will now see two ratings in the app — their ‘Emission Savings’ score, alongside their rider rating.

This week, Uber unveiled a new feature that enables riders around the world to track and learn more about the carbon impact of their rides. The company’s new Emission Savings feature gives riders data on the amount of carbon emissions avoided if they opt for electric vehicle and hybrid options, as well as how much CO2 might have been produced by the same journey in an UberX or Uber Comfort. Emissions savings will be shown for each trip and as a cumulative total.

Uber hopes that the feature will further nudge riders towards using Uber Green — a low-emission ride option that connects riders with drivers of hybrid and fully electric vehicles, as part of its broader mission to make it effortless for Uber riders to embrace a low-emissions lifestyle.

“We believe that knowledge is power. Just like we popularized rider ratings in an effort to promote respectful behavior during Uber rides, we’re excited to launch this new feature to both celebrate your impact and encourage greener choices when using Uber,” CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in a post.

Uber’s Emission Savings feature adds to the growing arsenal of tools dedicated to helping consumers understand the environmental impacts of their lifestyle and purchasing choices — including shopping platforms such as Karma Wallet, the growing number of food and apparel companies carbon-labeling their products; and Doconomy’s growing cache of resources that gives consumers insight into the climate, plastic and water impacts of their purchases.

Now, Uber’s Emission Savings feature allows riders to:

Tap a button, see your impact: In the Account section of the Uber app, tap “Estimated CO2 saved” to see the amount of emissions saved by taking Uber Green and Uber Comfort Electric.
Make sense of emissions savings: The feature includes a graphic that shows what riders’ CO2 emission savings are comparable to.
See how emissions are calculated: The emission savings for an Uber Green or Uber Comfort Electric trip represents the estimated amount of CO2 emissions avoided, on average, when a rider takes Uber Green instead of an UberX or when a rider takes Uber Comfort Electric instead of an Uber Comfort trip of the same distance (see here to read more on the methodology).
Get teens to go ‘green’: Among Gen Alpha and Gen Z, the environment is a top concern. So, Uber is also making the Emission Savings feature available for Uber teen account holders; and in select cities* throughout the US & Canada, it now offers Uber Green and Uber Comfort Electric for teen riders, providing them with a way to be part of the climate solution when they ride.

In 2020, Uber set a target of being a zero-emissions platform in the US, Canada and European cities by 2030. But hitting those goals would mean a huge decrease from current levels — and it’s only partially under the company’s control, as cars are privately owned. But Uber offers various incentives for driver EV use and charging, including a 10 percent earnings boost per trip, and has partnered with companies such as Hertz to make EVs available for its drivers across the UK and Europe.

Uber says it plans to add more dimensions to the emissions-saving feature, such as tracking the impacts of all-electric autonomous rides, using UberX Share, and e-bikes and e-scooters booked on the app.

*Availability – Uber Green for teen accounts: Austin, Boston, Calgary (Canada), Chicago, Denver, Edmonton (Canada), Montreal (Canada), Nashville, New Jersey, New York City, Orlando, Ottawa (Canada), Portland, San Antonio, Seattle, Tampa Bay, Toronto (Canada), Vancouver (Canada), Winnipeg (Canada)

Availability – Uber Comfort Electric for teen accounts: Atlanta, Austin, Dallas, Las Vegas, Minneapolis – St. Paul, Montreal (Canada), Nashville, New Jersey, New Orleans, Orlando, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Portland, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Seattle, Tampa Bay, Toronto (Canada), Vancouver (Canada)

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/uber-emissions-savings-lower-emission-transport

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, Emmision Savings, ESG, green marketing, Greenhouse gas emissions, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, Uber
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Investors Are Pushing More Big Brands to Disclose and Reduce Plastic Use

26 03 2024

Image credits: Brian Yurasits/Unsplash and Erik Mclean/Pexels

By Joseph Winters from Triple Pundit • Reposted: March 26, 2024

This story was originally published by Grist. Sign up for Grist’s weekly newsletter here.

Wealthy investors and asset managers wield a lot of power over the major companies whose stock they own or control. Every year, shareholder advocacy groups hope to exert that power for good by filing shareholder resolutions — 500-word proposals that might ask companies to voluntarily reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, or to disclose more information on their resource use.

Shareholders typically vote on resolutions between April and June during a period known as “proxy season,” named after the proxy statements that companies distribute to investors ahead of their annual shareholder meetings. These votes aren’t binding, but they can influence companies’ decisions and generate press around a particular issue.

This year, activist investors are notching wins even before the beginning of proxy season. Shareholder advocacy groups have already extracted a handful of plastics-related concessions from major companies — including the entertainment behemoth Disney, the food processing giant Hormel, and Choice Hotels, one of the largest hotel chains in the world. The companies’ new commitments include reporting on and reducing the amount of plastics they use in their packaging, as well as more closely monitoring hazardous plastic additives.

Activist investment firms like Green Century Capital Management — which manages over $1 billion in assets — must make a business case for environmental action. Douglass Guernsey, a shareholder advocate at Green Century Capital Management who helped negotiate the agreements with Disney and Choice Hotels, said the new commitments show that companies are waking up to the threat that single-use plastics pose to their bottom line. Between the prospect of more stringent state regulations, new lawsuits against plastic producers, and a global plastics treaty being negotiated by the United Nations, plastics are facing some potentially severe regulatory and reputational prospects over the coming years.

“It’s unnerving investors,” Guernsey said, and the scale of the problem is “just starting to dawn on corporate managers.”

The companies’ pledges also shed light on the shareholder advocacy strategy, which is not necessarily to sway companies through voting on shareholder resolutions, but to use the prospect of a vote as a negotiating tool. According to Guernsey, shareholder advocates almost always prefer to reach an agreement with companies through dialogue — they only file a resolution if they feel that it’s needed to keep the conversation going. In some cases, after a resolution is filed, companies agree to make some kind of commitment in exchange for the resolution’s withdrawal.

That’s essentially what happened with Hormel. A nonprofit shareholder advocacy organization called As You Sow started talking to the company last fall, asking them to take more responsibility for plastic packaging after their products are sold to customers. As You Sow organizes investors and asset managers around a range of social and environmental issues, and it persuaded investors holding nearly $2 trillion in shares to vote for the 48 resolutions it introduced in 2023. Kelly McBee, As You Sow’s circular economy manager, said she had “productive conversations” with Hormel, but she still wanted to see more support for laws that make companies financially responsible for the trash they produce (known as “extended producer responsibility,” or EPR, laws), as well as more investment in plastic collection and recycling infrastructure.

“That’s when we moved into the shareholder resolution phase,” McBee said. After As You Sow’s filing, Hormel came back to the table offering some additional plastics commitments, including a pledge to reduce its cumulative packaging use by 10 million pounds by 2030. It also agreed to form an industry working group to advance policies that make packaging more recyclable or reusable, and to publish by the end of 2024 a report on ways for Hormel to become a more circular company, meaning one that minimizes waste. As You Sow withdrew its shareholder resolution in response to the new commitments.

“Hormel was pretty great to work with, they seemed genuinely motivated,” McBee said. Back in 2021, As You Sow had given the company an F grade on its plastic pollution scorecard, in part due to a lack of transparency around its plastics use and poor support for plastic waste collection and management.

The commitments secured by Green Century followed a similar arc. After talks with Disney and Choice Hotels, Green Century filed shareholder resolutions and then withdrew them in exchange for corporate pledges to measure, report, and set new targets for reducing their plastics use.

Disney had already been “ahead of the curve,” Guernsey said, with commitments to eliminate single-use plastics on its cruise ships by 2025 and to achieve zero-waste in its theme parks by 2030. But more measurement and reporting will increase transparency around the company’s progress. Choice Hotels had already committed to phase out single-use polystyrene foam packaging by the end of 2023 and transition to bulk shampoo and other amenities by 2025. But an organization-wide plastics inventory will now allow the chain to set its first overall reduction goal by early next year.

Other commitments recently secured by Green Century and other investors include one from the retail chain Costco, which agreed in October to report plastics use across its Kirkland-branded products, and another from the beverage conglomerate Keurig Dr. Pepper, which agreed in January to restrict its suppliers from using certain bisphenols — a family of plastic additives linked to hormone disruption. Green Century is planning to unveil more plastic commitments — largely related to increasing disclosure and reducing plastics use — from about a dozen more companies in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, As You Sow has filed plastic-related shareholder resolutions at at least 14 other companies.

Not all negotiations between companies and shareholder advocates result in a mutual agreement, and resolutions that go to a vote can’t force a company’s hand. A 2023 resolution asking Amazon to reduce its plastic packaging, for instance, was largely ignored by the company despite receiving support from nearly half of its shareholders. “All votes on shareholder proposals are nonbinding,” McBee explained. “So even if 100 percent of shareholders vote on something, the company doesn’t have to take that action.”

Votes can still have indirect influence, though. If a company ignores the will of its shareholders, McBee said, they can sell their shares, reducing its valuation and access to capital. Companies that disregard shareholder resolutions might also make potential investors think twice about sinking their money into the company, or perhaps inspire lawmakers to write legislation forcing companies to take steps they won’t take voluntarily.

Still, many advocates question the power of shareholders to effect systemic change. Even after their most recent pledges, companies like Disney and Hormel will likely continue to be large plastic polluters — not to mention their other environmental impacts, like the emissions associated with Disney’s fossil fuel-powered cruise ships and Hormel’s industrial meat products. Some environmental groups pressure major investors to sell their shares in polluting companies rather than to try to change them from within. Others favor advocating for more stringent government regulations.

“[R]elying on shareholders to make corporations more accountable and socially responsible is misguided,” wrote Warren Staples, a former lecturer in social procurement at the University of Melbourne, and Andrew Linden, an corporate governance researcher at RMIT University, in a 2019 essay. “There are far more direct and systemically effective measures available to do that.”

Choice Hotels, Costco, Disney, Hormel, and Keurig Dr. Pepper did not respond to Grist’s request for comment.

Even shareholder advocates acknowledge their strategy’s limitations, including on plastics. Globally, two garbage trucks’ worth of plastic enter the ocean every minute, and plastics and petrochemical companies are planning to make even more of the material over the coming decades. To rein in the plastics problem, Guernsey said, “overall regulation is going to be important” — especially standardized requirements for companies to disclose and report their plastics use, as well as more EPR legislation and bans on particular types of plastic.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2024/shareholder-advocacy-plastic-waste/797731

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

Climate Action and the Case for Voter Engagement

22 03 2024

Image: Phillip Goldsberry/Unsplash

By Tina Casey via Triple Pundit • Reposted: March 22, 2024

Business leaders who support voting rights face a difficult challenge. Aside from overcoming new partisan laws that make voting more difficult, they need to overcome a chronic undercurrent of voter apathy in the U.S. However, now that communities in many parts of the country are feeling the impacts of climate change firsthand, voting rights supporters have a new opportunity to engage voters and encourage them to choose leadership on climate action.

On climate action, who’s elected matters

“It makes no difference who is elected president,” is the reason cited by 53 percent of voting-age adults who decided not to cast a ballot in 2020.

In terms of the climate crisis, though, the differences are all too real. Former U.S. President Donald Trump changed the game with one stroke of the pen shortly after taking office when he summarily pulled the U.S. out of the landmark Paris Agreement on climate change.

U.S. business leaders quickly allied with labor unions to advocate for the Paris Agreement and reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Ongoing federal programs also continued to support progress on decarbonization, despite the efforts of Trump appointees to the contrary.

Still, without strong White House support for climate action, the U.S. lost a key opportunity to provide global leadership at a time of looming crisis.

“While the US now represents around 15 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, it remains the world’s biggest and most powerful economy,” BBC environment correspondent Matt McGrath observed in November of 2020. “So, when it becomes the only country to withdraw from a global solution to a global problem, it raises questions of trust.”

The leadership pendulum swings both ways

That trust cannot be restored in a single election cycle, but the current administration took a giant step in the right direction. Newly elected President Joe Biden took office in 2021 with a focus on leveraging government resources and private-sector investment to accelerate decarbonization.

In a new analysis, Carbon Brief credits President Biden with implementing new policies that bring the U.S. closer to meeting its near-term goal to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, highlighted by climate provisions in the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.

In the analysis dated March 6, Carbon Brief notes that the Joe Biden administration has brought the country “close to meeting its 2030 target range.” If Biden is reelected in 2024, “emissions would fall to around 43 percent below 2005 levels” by 2030, Carbon Brief projects, though existing policies fall short of where the country needs to be to reach net-zero two decades later.

Conversely, the alternative — a second term in office for Trump — would once again turn back the clock: “In total, the analysis suggests that U.S. greenhouse gas emissions would fall to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 if Trump secures a second term and rolls back Biden’s policies — far short of the 50 to 52 percent target.”

By way of visualizing the difference, Carbon Brief projects that Trump’s second term in office would wipe “all of the [emissions] savings from deploying wind, solar and other clean technologies around the world over the past five years” off the books, twice over.

Rolling back the Inflation Reduction Act would have catastrophic consequences

Though advising that other variables may impact the actual results, Carbon Brief anticipates a negative outcome for a second Trump term based largely on his pledge to roll back the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

“The IRA accounts for the most significant part of the emissions reductions expected as a result of Biden’s climate policies to date,” Carbon Brief authors led by deputy and policy editor Simon Evans explained. “This has been called the largest package of domestic climate measures in U.S. history.”

“It offers incentives covering a broad swathe of the economy from low-carbon manufacturing to clean energy, electric vehicles, ‘climate-smart’ agriculture and low-carbon hydrogen,” they added. “Regardless of the precise impact, a second Trump term that successfully dismantles Biden’s climate legacy would likely end any global hopes of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.”

The shield of apathy may be cracking

A newly published study from the University of Colorado at Boulder indicates that climate change already impacts voter behavior, providing some basis to believe that the Inflation Reduction Act — and President Biden — will prevail for another four years.

“We find that climate change opinion has had a significant and growing effect on voting that favors the Democrats and is large enough to be pivotal to the outcomes of close elections,” the researchers concluded. “We project that climate change opinion probably cost Republicans the 2020 presidential election, all else being equal.”

Signs of growing voter engagement emerged in the 2022 midterm elections as well. Business leaders who value both the environmental and the bottom-line benefits of the IRA can help make sure that it survives into 2025 and beyond by seizing the momentum, building on their voter registration programs, and keeping climate action front and center in the national conversation as Election Day comes closer.

Tina writes frequently for TriplePundit and other websites, with a focus on military, government and corporate sustainability, clean tech research and emerging energy technologies. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2024/climate-action-election-trump-biden/797491

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, accountability, Carbon Brief, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, Inflation Reduction Act, Paris Agreement, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, Voter Engagement
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

How nature-based knowledge can restore local ecosystems and improve community well-being.

20 03 2024

Regenerative agricultural strategies can reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from food production, restore local ecosystems and enhance community well-being. Photo: Shutterstock

By Saeed Rahman, Assistant Professor of Strategy and Sustainability, University of The Fraser Valley and Natalie Slawinski, Professor of Sustainability and Strategy, University of Victoria via The Conversation • Reposted: March 20, 2024

Organizations in the food and agriculture sector have been looking to nature for inspiration to improve soil health, maintain water quality and foster local food security in the places where they operate.

The evidence is clear that our current food and agriculture systems are severely impacting global greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater usage and deforestation.

In response to these issues, activists, policymakers and corporate executives have been exploring new strategies for making our food systems more resilient and sustainable.

Regenerative agricultural strategies, in particular, can reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from food production, restore local ecosystems and enhance community well-being in specific geographical locations.

But they also require a foundation of nature-based or ecological knowledge in order to be effective. Our recent research sheds light on how organizations can gain and make use of this knowledge.

Regenerating local communities

In the face of current global ecological challenges, there is a need to explore how organizations can help revitalize local communities and ecosystems. Our research on farming organizations on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, aims to explore this.

We studied nine certified organic farming organizations to examine how they were harnessing and using ecological knowledge. Certified organic farming involves business operations that are “sustainable and harmonious with nature.” In B.C., farms are awarded certification annually after a rigorous evaluation process.

Piles of strawberries and cherries on sale at an indoor market. — *Consumers have been increasing demand for locally sourced, pesticide-free and certified organic products. Photo: Shutterstock*

Unlike conventional farming practices that prioritize short-term gains through the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and monocropping, organic farms focus on long-term health and ecological balance.

The farms we studied were actively engaged in community initiatives aimed at conserving nature and strengthening local food and nutrition security.

Through a series of in-depth interviews with farmers, owners and other key decision-makers, we found these organizations were helping regenerate their local communities by committing to environmental stewardship, and pursuing, acquiring and applying new ecological knowledge.

Environmental stewardship

The leaders and decision-makers of the farming organizations we interviewed were strongly committed to environmental stewardship. Environmental stewardship refers to actions and decisions that prioritize the conservation and enhancement of ecosystems and biodiversity, and the interests of future generations.

This commitment was evident through two main factors. First, decision-makers demonstrated a genuine appreciation for nature, leading them to feel strongly about safeguarding it from harm.

During our interviews, one farmer described how the goals of building sustainable communities and healthy ecosystems influenced her business’ long-term goals. She said:

“In the long term if you don’t have a really solid, values-based business, then you’re going to disappear anyway. [We] put our values behind our environmental footprint and [our efforts to make] this community a better place.”

Second, these leaders had a deep understanding of how their organizations relied on the health of the surrounding ecosystems. The farming practices adopted by them were based on building mutually beneficial relationships between their organizations, local ecosystems and communities.

One board member we interviewed emphasized their reliance on the surrounding ecosystems in an interview, stating that:

“By enhancing biodiversity, we can bring back beneficial ecosystems that directly benefit our farmers. We recognized the importance of pollinators and took steps to increase biodiversity by reintroducing native bees.”

A close-up of a bumble bee on a purple flower. — *Organic farming organizations are strongly committed to environmental stewardship practices that improve biodiversity. Photo: THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld*

This dedication to environmental stewardship led decision-makers to seek out ecological knowledge about the local ecology to help them foster the creation of healthy and diverse ecosystems.

Restoring local ecosystems and well-being

The decision-makers we interviewed decided to seek out new knowledge to improve their organization’s performance and promote long-term social and ecological well-being. They often did this in response to rising demand from customers and community members for locally sourced, pesticide-free and certified organic products.

Organizations acquired ecological knowledge by collaborating with scientists, academics and non-profit organizations through knowledge exchanges. In our study, for example, some farmers integrated scientific knowledge with their farming methods, resulting in improved crop yield and quality.

Organizations then put their newly acquired ecological knowledge into practice by transforming it into manuals, reports, operating procedures or other similar formats. This allowed the knowledge to be accessed easily and updated as necessary. Applying new knowledge required flexibility, a hands-on learning approach, and the willingness to discard outdated practices.

Once organizations fully integrated new ecological knowledge, they were able to contribute to regenerating their communities, which enhanced financial and ecological sustainability.

A growing urgency

With the world’s population projected to reach 10 billion by 2050, there’s even more of a growing urgency to address environmental impacts and ensure community well-being, ecosystem health and food security, particularly in vulnerable places.

As businesses navigate today’s complex social and environmental challenges, the importance of turning to nature for inspiration is becoming increasingly evident.

Businesses, in particular large corporations, have the responsibility to address the environmental impacts of the food system by committing to promote regenerative farming practices.

By situating themselves within their communities and prioritizing ecological knowledge, businesses have the potential to not only improve their own sustainability, but also to ignite positive change within the communities they operate in.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://theconversation.com/how-nature-based-knowledge-can-restore-local-ecosystems-and-improve-community-well-being-224832

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

This Platform Turns Your Branded Video Content Into Support for Nature Conservation

20 03 2024

By Tom Idle from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: March 20, 2024

With Ecoflix — a nonprofit streaming platform on a mission to be the ‘Netflix for nature’ — brands can produce compelling sustainability content that also helps protect nature and wildlife.

In 2016, filmmaker Mark Downes was in the South of France for the annual Cannes Lions Festival. As a seasoned ad-video producer, he had been to the event many times before — but that year, something happened that changed his life.

“I had my ‘purpose turn,’” he tells Sustainable Brands®. “I happened to be in the room when Ban Ki-moon came on stage to deliver a keynote about something called the Sustainable Development Goals — and my mind was just blown, totally blown.”

Downes’ chance encounter with the South Korean diplomat, who was the UN Secretary-General at the time, encouraged him to quit his job and pursue a career dedicated to using brand communications to turn the dial on sustainability. Since then, he has graduated from the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, conceived an animated series to help teach children about sustainability, and picked up a regular gig tutoring for AdGreen — helping his peers understand climate science and what it takes to create commercial films in alow-carbon-impact way.

Then, 18 months ago, he joined the team at Ecoflix — a nonprofit streaming platform on a mission to be the Netflix for nature-, wildlife- and environment-themed movies and documentaries. Backed by philanthropist and retired litigator David B. Casselman, it was borne out of his frustration at the difficulty in distributing documentaries about nature — a subject close to his heart; Casselman has dedicated much of his life to animal-welfare causes, with pro bono legal work to help protect wildlife.

With Ecoflix, he has created a subscription platform giving people access to “science-based, positive storytelling to try and inspire people,” as Downes puts it.

“The main mission is saving animals and the planet,” he explains. “We have around 70 NGOs on board as our partners. While they are amazing, they’re also underfunded and understaffed. But they have great access to incredible content. They’ve got hard drives of great stuff, but they don’t know how to craft a film. So, we’re using our skillset to help craft their stories.”

On sign-up, subscribers can choose which NGOs or charities to support: “If you’re crazy about elephants, you can support Tusk. And we will make sure they get your subscription money each month.”

The content featured on the self-described “Netflix for nature” is not intended to be binged as with most streaming services. And the films are not designed to highlight environmental doom and gloom — there are no shots of animals in distress, for example. And the filmmakers ask themselves whether a five-year-old would be frightened if they saw their film: “If the answer is yes, we edit it accordingly.”

But Ecoflix is keen to tell stories beyond its own online platform. It’s new ‘thing’ is Ecoflix Media — a new commercial arm to the organisation that is designed to make films for brands that will not only realise the benefits of working with great filmmakers, but also be encouraged knowing their investment is flowing back into nature and wildlife conservation.

“We want to work with sustainable brands, but we don’t want to sell their products,” Downes asserts. “We’re not interested in creating adverts; we want to tell the story about who they are, what they do, their essence, their positivity, and how they celebrate that internally or externally. Ultimately, we want to tell inspiring stories. And the brands can choose which NGOs they want to support. Most already have charities they work with, anyway.”

In the face of threatening greenwash (“we need to be careful we’re not a magnet for people who want to use us to greenwash their claims, because we’re squeaky clean”), Downes is keen to tell the stories of not only the leaders, but also the companies who might be at the very start of their sustainability journey to “turn the ocean liner around.”

“A lot of people are afraid to start talking about [sustainability] out loud until they’ve figured it all out. They’ve locked in how they’re going to do it, and then they will shout about it. But, actually, the initial stage of that journey is really fascinating and inspiring — because nobody’s doing it perfectly. You’re more likely to inspire other people to start that journey by watching a film like that, rather than somebody who’s doing it perfectly and winning awards. You know what I mean?”

Right now, there are more than 16,000 production companies in the UK alone. It is a crowded market, but Downes — Ecoflix’s Head of Sustainability — is confident the organisation can stand out. Alongside him is COO Aimée Anderson (“a powerhouse of ideas and energy”), Head of Content Peter von Puttkamer (“a three-time Emmy judge”) and Head of Conservation Ian Redmond OBE (“an amazing character who’s currently in Kazakhstan at an animal migratory conference”).

Downes is infinitely inspired to keep things positive in his storytelling because of his young children. Whenever he takes them to the supermarket, they always pick up products to check the labels for things such as palm oil, he says. It’s not something he’s ever mentioned to them; they’ve just picked it up from school.

“They’re militant. We’re doing this for the right reasons — not for my kids or their kids. It’s for seven generations down the line.”

It is this ethos that drives the filmmaker’s passion to find new narratives and cinematic techniques to drive awareness and education.

“That’s the thing that really bugs me about sustainability. If we didn’t have solutions, we’d be in a right pickle. But the fact that there are solutions, means it’s just an awareness and education thing. That’s where my positivity comes from.”

Tom Idle is founder of storytelling strategy firm Narrative Matters — which helps organizations develop content that truly engages audiences around issues of global social, environmental and economic importance. To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/branded-video-content-nature-conservation

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

Brands risk losing sales for failing to demonstrate support amid rising ethical consumerism, says GlobalData

16 03 2024

Photo: Investopedia

From Global Data • Reposted: March 16, 2024

Consumers are purchasing more ethical products because they align with a set of values they believe in, including social causes, human and animal welfare, fair trade, and health awareness. With companies being held to a higher level of accountability regarding their position on social issues, failing to take proactive measures puts brands at risk of being boycotted, given the rising activism and consumer-facing messaging, says GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.

Meenakshi Haran, Lead Consumer Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “Consumers are increasingly making decisions based on responsibility towards ethical and social issues, driving the need for companies and brands to continually set measures to create and develop genuinely responsible products and services. As many as 31% of Middle East & African^ consumers and 29% of Asian consumers admitted that they find it essential for products to be ethical or support social causes^*.”

The Israel–Palestine conflict, for instance, has led to leading global brands facing blowback, especially from Muslim-majority nations in Southeast Asia as well as across West Asia. According to UNRWA, the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, the conflict has displaced over 1.9 million Palestinian civilians following Hamas’ attack on Israel in October 2023. While Unilever acknowledged its fourth-quarter sales declined by 15% in Indonesia, McDonald’s admitted that the backlash was stronger in the Middle East with the company putting off any expansion plans.

Isha Varma, Middle East Business Development Manager at GlobalData, adds: “By being heavily influenced to buy a product and its attributes, consumers are sending a clear message to manufacturers and producers about what they are looking for and what their priorities look like.”

Haran continues: “The Middle East with its high spending ability and Asia with its surging population offer formidable growth potential for food & beverage companies. As such, brands operating in this market need to send a clear and transparent message about their commitment to ethical and social responsibility to mitigate any loss of reputation and revenues.”

Varma concludes: “Amid the evolving geopolitical landscape, brands are faced with tough market conditions, especially around nuanced social and economic issues, which threaten their ability to do business if left unaddressed.”

^GlobalData 2023 Q4 Consumer Survey – Middle East and Africa, published in December 2023, 2000, respondents

*GlobalData 2023 Q4 Consumer Survey – Asia & Australasia, published in December 2023, 6,000 respondents

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.globaldata.com/media/consumer/brands-risk-losing-sales-failing-demonstrate-support-amid-rising-ethical-consumerism-says-globaldata/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, DEI, ESG, GlobalData, green marketing, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding

Impact Entertainment: Reflecting Climate Issues in the World We Live in

13 03 2024

Image: Good Energy

By Demitri Fierro via Sustainablebrands.com • Reposted: March 13, 2024

Good Energy helps writers and other entertainment professionals address the climate crisis with confidence and make climate storytelling a mainstream narrative for all audiences.

Nonprofit storytelling consultancy Good Energy — which believes that Hollywood is uniquely positioned to shift the conversation on climate change — serves as a hub for entertainment professionals and climate experts looking to meaningfully represent the climate crisis on-screen across all genres and mediums.

A glaring question

“Why is the climate crisis largely absent from our screen?” Good Energy founder and CEO Anna Jane Joyner pondered as she noticed the pattern within the entertainment industry, in which mentions of climate change have been largely nonexistent in scripted entertainment. The industry itself has been responsible for pivotal societal changes — from popularizing the now common term “designated driver” to significantly increasing diversity, equity and inclusion practices both on and off-screen.

Joyner explained to Sustainable Brands® that while storytelling centered around our environment had been done before, it was mostly in the form of documentaries such as An Inconvenient Truth (2006); or apocalyptic narratives, such as The Day After Tomorrow (2004) or Snowpiercer (2013). This led to a long, deep-listening tour throughout Hollywood, during which Joyner heard that many creatives — including producers, directors and executives — were eager to discuss and convey the reality of the climate crisis, but understandably feared polarization or backlash if the subject was not presented with complete scientific accuracy.

Joyner founded Good Energy in 2019 to help writers and other entertainment professionals address the climate crisis with confidence and make climate storytelling a mainstream narrative for all audiences. The agency believes climate change is a generative lens (it coined the term, “Climate Lens”) through which to imagine any aspect of a story.

Bringing Good Energy for good storytelling

In 2022, Good Energy and the USC Norman Lear Center’s Media Impact Project released Glaring Absence: The Climate Crisis Is Virtually Nonexistent in Scripted Entertainment — a first-of-its-kind analysis of 37,453 TV and movie scripts from 2016-2020 — which found that less than 3 percent of scripted TV and film acknowledges climate change. In the survey of 2,000 US adults, more than three in four (77 percent) reported learning about social issues from fictional TV or film, at least occasionally; however, only 25 percent say they hear about the climate crisis from fictional TV or films.

Joyner says the study helped Good Energy develop resources to facilitate the integration of ethical and accurate climate representation in media narratives. It now offers workshops, consulting and its principal resource, The Playbook for Storytelling in the Age of Climate Change — a comprehensive, open-source, digital tool launched in April 2022 that helps creative teams develop climate narratives — which is now being used by industry partners, screenwriters and students.

Good Energy has worked with clients including Apple TV+, CBC, CBS, Showtime and Spotify; and been featured on nearly 50 media outlets within the last two years.

Climate narratives in society

To quote Dorothy Fortenberry, the acclaimed writer and producer behind the dystopian Apple TV series, “Extrapolations”: “If climate isn’t in your story, it’s science fiction.” The effects of climate change are occurring more frequently and severely every day — from record-breaking heat waves to catastrophic wildfires and storms, to dwindling glaciers and ice caps, the relevancy of climate change grows every day. Good Energy identifies that everyone on Earth has a climate story now — and seeing characters that reflect our reality on screen can help viewers may feel less alone and even inspired; rather than anxious or hopeless.

Stories have been used to change society in the past; and when it comes to climate, society is in desperate need of a unifying guide for addressing the problem. Every living being and every corner of the earth will be impacted by climate change; so, climate isn’t just “another” issue — it’s a universal backdrop to our lives. This backdrop provides fodder for countless stories that reflect society as it is today — stories with the power to change the world for the better.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/impact-entertainment-climate-issues#:~:text=In%202022%2C%20Good%20Energy%20and,of%20scripted%20TV%20and%20film

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Good Energy, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, USC Norman Lear Center’s Media Impact Project
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

What Does the New SEC Climate-Risk Reporting Rule Mean for Brands?

13 03 2024

Graphic: ESG Enterprise

By Tom Idle from Sustainablebrands.com • Reposted: March 13, 2024

While the new mandate was scaled back from what was originally proposed, US companies must now prepare to join many markets around the world in the climate-risk disclosure game.

Finally, we have a decision from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on mandatory climate-risk disclosure for businesses — described in many quarters as a “landmark decision.”

The final ruling means that all public companies will have to include information in their annual reports setting out the climate-related risks to their business, and what they are doing to manage those risks — including material climate targets and goals and governance processes. The mandatory rules kick in for all annual report issued for the year ending next Decembers.

The final SEC decision — which the organization’s Chair Gary Gensler said would give investors “consistent, comparable, decision-useful information” — has been scaled back from what was originally proposed after receiving “record levels” of feedback. The biggest shift is the fact that companies will not be forced to disclose their difficult-to-assess Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at all.

Companies are also being given a bit more time to get themselves prepared and organized for compliance. Large companies have almost two years to provide most disclosures, three years to organise their GHG emissions information, and six years to obtain assurance over their GHGs.

So, what does all of this mean to brands? Well, there are lots of complex components to the requirements that company executives will need to read up on, understand and prepare for when it comes to disclosing certain information. Much of the information being asked for will be familiar to large businesses (separately reporting Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHGs, for instance), and some of it will be new. For example, firms will need to understand how severe weather might impact their income — providing details of investments being made to protect facilities and assets against, for example, hurricanes, sea level rises and flooding; and what sort of losses might be incurred should the company be negatively impacted. Companies will also need to show how their Board of directors and management team is structured and able to oversee the management of climate-related risks.

According to Deloitte, 97 percent of Fortune 500 companies mentioned climate change in their latest annual report. So, firms are much more aware of their relation to the climate crisis — but, by and large, current reporting focuses solely on risk factors such as increased regulation and reputational risk. The new SEC rule will demand much more expansive reporting and many companies will need to up their game and invest in their reporting teams and capabilities.

Of course, new reporting demands are good news for investors. In a statement, the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR), which represents 300 investors with more than $4 trillion under management, celebrated the SEC ruling. It also applauded the “sustained commitment” of the Commission, which has spent two years bringing “standardization of climate reporting to financial filings,” as CEO Josh Zinner put it.

Elsewhere, others lamented a missed opportunity for companies to start addressing their Scope 3 emissions — which account for the vast majority of a firm’s carbon footprint. Including supply chain emissions reporting in the rule would have increased data availability and highlighted the importance of tackling Scope 3, said William Theisen, CEO of EcoAct North America — a consultancy that helps brands with their GHG reporting: “Scope 3 emissions are a pivotal aspect of understanding a company’s environmental impact. Despite concerns about the consistency of Scope 3, this would have led to accelerated improvement in greenhouse has accounting.”

The move to drop Scope 3 reporting requirements was “not ideal; but not surprising, given the politically charged atmosphere at the moment,” according to Scope 3 collaboration guru Oliver Hurrey. But there are plenty of ways companies can begin to tackle Scope 3, regardless, he says: “There has been a big push emerging in the last few weeks by business and procurement leaders to co-develop a methodology for adding carbon pricing into the commercial evaluation criteria for tenders and supplier selection. This will create a significant competitive-advantage incentive for suppliers to baseline and decarbonize.”

As with many new pieces of regulation, the business world must brace itself for potential legal challenges to the final rule. As with most ESG-related policy, the SEC decision has become something of a political hot potato across the US — with some arguing it is simply another example of progressive politics interfering with business.

However, many commentators have said that this new rule is not significant at all, considering policy development in other parts of the world.

US companies operating overseas (or in the state of California) will be familiar with the numerous voluntary and mandatory climate and ESG disclosure schemes that have come about in the last two years. The IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards, and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and related European Sustainability Reporting Standards have had the most airtime. The SEC’s final rule has taken much of what already exists in disclosure frameworks such as the GHG Protocol and the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) as its foundation. Having said that, the SEC’s requirements only relate to climate-related reporting, as opposed to wider ESG issues.

“The ruling, more or less, is pointless — because, regardless, disclosure is coming,” says Ed Gabbitas, founder of ESG consultancy EVORA Global. “Regardless of the SEC’s ruling, firms shouldn’t hesitate to draw up an action plan around sustainability reporting — especially amid growing global mandates from the EU and Asia. More and more investors are expecting to see climate disclosures; and the US rule will now raise the bar for entry.”

So, it’s time to prepare for enhanced climate-risk disclosure in the US — something that, Gabbitas adds, will require a “multi-fold strategy that may take months of preparation to establish.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/sec-climate-risk-reporting-rule-brands

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, ICCR, responsible brands, SEC Climate Risk Reporting, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Newsweek Green Rankings Reveal Companies Making Sustainability a Priority

11 03 2024

A light display created using drones is performed before the city skyline and United Nations headquarters as part of a campaign to raise awareness about the Amazon rainforest and the global climate crisis ahead of the 78th United Nations General Assembly and Climate Ambition Summit, in New York City on September 15, 2023. Newsweek has analyzed the top publicly traded U.S. and global companies based on their overall environmental performance. Image: ED JONES/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

By Jason Daniel Nuckolls , Editor from Newsweek.com • Reposted: March 11, 2024

Newsweek Green Rankings, one of the world’s foremost corporate environmental listings, rank the top publicly traded U.S. and global companies based on their overall environmental performance. The project is driven by an environmental focus across Newsweek‘s regular rankings features, in particular the 2024 ranking of America’s Greenest Companies and America’s Most Responsible Companies, the latter of which has a large focus on sustainability.

Here’s how those rankings weigh companies’ moves to help the environment.

For America’s Greenest Companies 2024, Newsweek partnered with data analysts Plant-A and GIST Impact to identify the top 300 U.S. companies based on environmental sustainability. The candidates, which all had publicly disclosed sustainability data, needed a minimum market capitalization of $5 billion to be considered.

The Greenest Companies were scored on more than 25 parameters in four categories: greenhouse gas emissions, water usage, waste generation and sustainability data disclosures and commitments. Some of the 25 individual parameters included things like percentage of energy use that is from renewable sources, efforts to reduce waste generation and frequency of disclosures.

Sixty-two companies of the 300 achieved a perfect five-star rating. Household names like Apple, Mastercard and Pfizer were all ranked with the the top score.

Apple was also the largest company featured in the ranking, based on revenue, followed by UnitedHealth, which achieved four and a half stars, and CVS, which received five stars. IT services—which includes things like cloud technology—was the most represented industry on the list.

In her introduction to the Greenest Companies ranking, Newsweek Editor-in-Chief Nancy Cooper highlighted how it complemented the recent launch of Better Planet, a Newsweek platform “where we highlight innovators and innovations making the world healthier and safer.”

Better Planet’s mission is to highlight the ways that individual actions can help the environment, because, as its homepage says,”the first step in making a difference is recognizing that we can make a difference.” That point-of-view that could also, arguably, be attributed to many of the companies featured on Newsweek‘s Most Responsible Companies ranking.

The ranking of America’s Most Responsible Companies 2024, done in partnership with data-gathering specialist Statista, focuses on a holistic view of corporate responsibility that considered, among other criteria, the three pillars of ESG: environment, social and corporate governance.

For the ranking, several dimensions of environmental data were analyzed, including waste, emissions, energy use, water use and long-term performance.

Within those categories, various KPIs were examined. These included things like a company’s amount of recycled waste versus its total waste, its Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions versus its revenue, and the amount of renewable energy it uses versus its total energy usage.

The overall highest-ranked company was pharmaceutical manufacturer Merck, which achieved a score of 91.98 out of 100, which was a combination of an environmental score, a “social concerns” score that considered factors like leadership diversity and employee safety, and a governance score that incorporated disclosure and transparency. “For every metric ton of product we put out,” she said, “we seek to take a metric ton back.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.newsweek.com/newsweek-green-rankings-reveal-companies-making-sustainability-priority-1877468

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, America's Greenest Companies, America's Most Responsible Companies, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, Newsweek Green Rankings, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Sustainability Has Gone Mainstream Across Industries

11 03 2024

Photo: Getty

By Jia Rizvi, Contributor & Entrepreneur And Documentary Filmmakervia Forbes • Reposted March 11, 2024

In recent years, sustainability has emerged as a central theme across various industries, transcending boundaries and becoming a key focus for businesses globally. In 2022, 75% of organizations had increased their investment in sustainability, according to Deloitte. As the world grapples with environmental challenges and social responsibilities, industries are recognizing the need to adopt sustainable practices.

Companies in industries such as retail, food, fashion, and tech are finding innovative ways to push sustainable practices that benefit the environment and provide a better experience for their end customers.

Eco-Friendly Supply Chains In Retail

Consumers are becoming more mindful of where their goods come from. Restaurants, grocery stores, and food manufacturers are responding by sourcing ethically and locally whenever possible. This reduces transportation emissions, promotes fair labor practices, and supports local farmers. “As the global population continues to grow, the need for sustainable food systems has never been more pressing. Aquaculture offers a promising solution to impending food shortages, while also creating opportunities for economic growth and innovation across the industry. Our goal is to provide the world with healthy and nutritious food from the ocean, all while ensuring the well-being of our planet and communities,” says Ivan Vandheim, CEO of Mowi, supplier of farm-raised salmon and sustainable protein producer.

Transparency is equally crucial, allowing stakeholders to trace product origins and assess environmental and social impacts. By integrating sustainability into supply chains, businesses mitigate risks and contribute to a more resilient and responsible world. “We need to reimagine supply chains for transparency, efficiency, and less waste,” says Ola Brattvoll, COO of Mowi. “Vertical integration helps in offering pre-packed solutions directly to retailers and online. Additionally, innovative logistics reduce spoilage and environmental impact.

The Circular Economy And Fashion

The idea of a circular economy is gaining traction in retail. Instead of the traditional linear model (produce, use, discard), retailers are exploring ways to extend product lifecycles. This includes repair services, recycling programs, and encouraging customers to resell or donate items.

For example, fashion enthusiasts are turning to upcycled and vintage clothing. Upcycling involves transforming old garments into new designs, reducing waste. Vintage pieces not only add uniqueness but also extend the lifecycle of clothing. “The most sustainable garment is the one you already own,” explains Orosla de Castro, co-founder of Fashion Revolution, a nonprofit organization promoting a sustainable fashion industry. Fashion brands are increasingly embracing other ethical practices. They prioritize fair wages, safe working conditions, and transparency in their supply chains. “Ethical fashion is the recognition that there are human beings behind the clothes that we wear,” says Elizabeth Joy, founder of Conscious Life & Style, a digital media company focusing on fashion sustainability. Companies like Stella McCartney and Eileen Fisher champion sustainable fashion using organic fabrics, recycled materials, and cruelty-free production methods.

Energy Efficiency In Tech

As digital services expand, data centers consume vast amounts of energy. Tech giants like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft are investing in green data centers powered by renewable energy. They are also exploring cooling solutions that use less water.

Tech companies are also investing in building sustainable cities. Smart grids, efficient transportation systems, and IoT-enabled waste management help reduce energy consumption and enhance urban living. “Tech companies could be key drivers in advancing clean technology and sustainable practices. However, their actions can also be detrimental to the energy transition and Net Zero objectives, depending on how they invest the vast technology, skills, and resources at their disposal,” says C.J. Obikile from Duke FUQUA School of Business.

Sustainability Is The Standard

Sustainability is not an optional choice for businesses anymore – it’s a strategic imperative, shaping the practices and priorities of industries worldwide. Consumers, now more environmentally conscious, are demanding sustainable products and rewarding brands that prioritize eco-friendly practices. From retail and food to technology and fashion, businesses understand the significance of adopting sustainable strategies to ensure long-term success and a long-lasting environment.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jiawertz/2024/03/09/sustainability-has-gone-mainstream-across-industries/?sh=2eb3afa21ba7

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

The SEC Climate Disclosure Rule is Public: Here’s What Companies Need To Do Now

8 03 2024

(Image: Tim van der Kuip/Unsplash)

By Joe Sczurko via Triple Pundit • Reposted: March 8, 2024

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has finalized its long-awaited ruling that will require thousands of companies to disclose climate risks and data. Some stakeholders see the SEC ruling as going too far, while others say it has not gone far enough to address pressing climate issues. Whatever your view, now is the time to solidify plans for compliance. Here are five steps you can take to prepare now.

1. Refine climate governance

With climate disclosure now the purview of the SEC, companies should review current governance approaches and identify opportunities to strengthen them. This may include increasing corporate board oversight as well as board competency in climate-related matters.

It also could be helpful to review the role and composition of the committees tasked with climate governance, ideally ensuring C-suite representation and active subject matter experts who can provide practical insights into corporate targets, progress and potential exposure.

Companies will also benefit from engaging with external experts who can share best practices and provide a candid third-party perspective on how corporate commitments, plans, timelines and actions may be perceived externally.

2. Build agility in tracking, reporting and assurance for greenhouse gas data

It’s all about the data! Companies should take steps to minimize potential unknowns, gaps, and vulnerabilities around their tracking and reporting. Review what you are tracking and how you are tracking it. Consider questions such as: Who is on point for ensuring data quality? Do they have the experience to deliver against rising expectations for data quality and integrity? What is the basis for our company’s climate-related calculations?

Coming requirements for enhanced levels of third-party data assurance — shifting from limited to reasonable assurance — means companies should plan now for the additional time and budget involved with data compilation and management. It’s also a good time to explore what it would take to implement use of a climate disclosure framework, such as the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), or how to level up initial efforts to align to external standards. Doing so can strengthen your overall reporting efforts and reliability of disclosures.

3. Review your emissions reduction plans

Tracking and reporting are at the heart of the SEC requirements, and stakeholders will invariably measure and compare climate performance among corporations. To prepare for likely peer comparisons by external stakeholders, companies need to proactively conduct (or refresh) peer benchmarking of this fast-moving space.

An audit of the climate-related questions or expectations in requests for proposals and competitive tenders is a relatively basic first step. Along with other information, this audit can provide context to help the corporate climate governance committee re-evaluate current goals and progress. Progress reviews will likely become a regular practice, as climate considerations are increasingly incorporated into standard business planning and budgeting processes.

To minimize potential accusations of greenwashing, consider submitting corporate emissions goals for approval by the Science Based Targets initiative. Whichever emissions reduction goals and targets you set for your company, provide transparency in the efforts to achieve the goals, as well as provide timely, accurate updates on progress and barriers to achievement.

4. Evolve your approach to risk

With this ruling, the SEC is confirming what some prominent investors have been saying for years: climate risk is business risk. While climate risk management and disclosure are akin to longstanding financial disclosure requirements, in many ways, climate action is more challenging and subject to interpretation.

Companies familiar with preparing TCFD-aligned reporting have already begun to see how the business community is expected to address climate-related issues as both material and ongoing business concerns and investment concerns. By now, companies need to be working to integrate climate risk assessment and mitigation efforts into their overall enterprise risk management process. Participating in relevant industry, corporate, and/or location-based groups can also help to provide perspective and illuminate emerging risk issues.

5. Look ahead

Looking ahead, companies need to see this SEC ruling as the beginning — not the end — of climate-related disclosure fueled by regulation. Now is the time to re-evaluate potential implications of additional frameworks and requirements such as the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the California Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, and the United Kingdom’s Climate-related Financial Disclosure (CFD) regulations, to name a few.

A unified approach to alignment with multiple regulations can reduce risks and compliance costs. More strategically, companies must look ahead at their business — including their customer expectations, growth strategy, geographic footprint, value chain, production model and vulnerabilities, investments, supply chain, and other factors that need to be considered with the SEC ruling.

The SEC ruling affirms that business strategy and climate strategy engage similar stakeholders — including shareholders and the broader investment community, regulators, top management, current and prospective employees and customers, and the media, among others. Those audiences are watching closely.

Today, effective climate management and disclosure must be a part of overall corporate strategy. Companies need to continue to evolve governance and disclosure of climate-related risks and performance not only to prepare for SEC requirements, but also to find new sources of competitive advantage and to realize opportunities while meeting evolving stakeholder expectations in a rapidly changing world.

Joe Sczurko is president of Earth and Environment at WSP USA, a leading environmental, engineering and professional services consultancy. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2024/sec-climate-disclosures-prepare/796596

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: climate risk disclosure, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, responsible brands, SEC, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

The business value of social sustainability

8 03 2024

Photo: RIDOFRANZ IStock

By NTT from CIO.com • Reposted: March 8, 2024

Social sustainability is good for business. It can help to unlock new markets, attract and retain customers, build trust and credibility, and spark innovation. And companies are taking it seriously: a recent NTT reportfound that more than 40 percent of executives surveyed said social sustainability is a top imperative for their C-suite and Board of Directors.

The United Nations defines social sustainability as, “Identifying and managing business impacts, both positive and negative, on people.”

Directly or indirectly, companies affect what happens to employees, workers in the value chain, customers and local communities and it is important to manage impacts proactively.

NTT’s report, based on a ThoughtLab survey of 250 senior executives with a combined revenue of $2.2 trillion, underscores the financial advantages of prioritizing social sustainability. These firms collectively unlocked more than $177 billion in additional revenue due to their social sustainability endeavors. That’s an average of $710 million in revenue per company.

Benefits of social sustainability

Businesses are investing to build momentum in their social sustainability efforts. Those companies defined as beginners (about 22 percent of those surveyed) reported spending about $5.3 million on average on social sustainability, while those considered leaders (also about 22 percent of those surveyed) invest nearly four times as much, at $19.5 million on average.

More than 60 percent of firms surveyed said they plan to increase their spending over the next two years.

The benefits are clear. Companies reported financial, strategic, and operational improvements, which only grow as they move further along in their social sustainability journeys.

Businesses that invest the most in social sustainability reported an increase in revenue of up to 9.6 percent and a boost in employee productivity of up to 11.4 percent, showcasing the transformative power of sustainability initiatives on workforce efficiency.

Issues around social sustainability – such as lack of opportunity and deep-seated inequalities – can have a substantial impact on local economies.

For instance, the World Bank estimates a $160.2 trillion loss in human capital wealth from gender inequality. That is why it is important that the NTT report found social sustainability initiatives not only bolstered individual firm revenues but also contributed significantly to the broader local economy.

The study estimated that social sustainability unlocked nearly $675 billion in GDP across eight regions (U.S., Canada, Mexico, Germany, UK, Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore) and five industries (Manufacturing, Telecoms & Tech, Retail & CPG, Financial Services, Healthcare & Life Sciences). A strategic shift towards further sustainability leadership could unlock a further $115 billion in GDP.

Social sustainability and the future of business

NTT’s report shows that companies are making progress towards their social sustainability goals, and approximately one-quarter are integrating those goals into their products, services and business models. More than 50 percent of those surveyed said over the next two years they expect their social sustainability endeavors to improve productivity and support economic growth, boost jobs in local economies, and lead to higher quality education.

By aligning social and business values, these companies at the forefront of social sustainability drive top-line and bottom-line growth, enhance reputation, and bolster shareholder value while also contributing to long-term sustainability for the wellbeing and prosperity of all.

Learn more about the business case for social responsibility. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.cio.com/article/1312267/the-business-value-of-social-sustainability.html

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

Greenhushing:World’s Biggest Brands Leaving Billions on the Table

5 03 2024

[Source Image: DragonTiger/Getty Images]

From Sustainable Brands • Reposted: March 5, 2024

Brand Finance finds the world’s biggest brands are missing out on billions of dollars of potential value by failing to properly communicate their sustainability achievements and progress.

The latest edition of the Sustainability Perceptions Index — produced by London-based brand-valuation consultancy Brand Finance, in association with the International Advertising Association (IAA) — indicates that the world’s biggest brands are missing out on billions of dollars of potential value by failing to properly communicate their sustainability achievements and progress.

As sustainability claims are more widely scrutinized, by both the public and regulators, companies may be tempted to stop talking about their efforts altogether, for fear of greenwashing accusations. But the risks of brands avoiding the topic to protect their reputation have much farther-reaching implications than they may think.

“We see this as an incredibly potent tool to incentivize action that aligns with the UN SDGs and wider aims of the UN Global Compact,” says Dagmara Szulce, Managing Director at IAA Global, says of the Sustainability Perceptions Index. “By highlighting the financial value that is contingent on sustainability perceptions, we hope to harness businesses’ profit motive — moving them past the point where they see sustainability as a ‘hygiene factor’ to a point of rapid, concerted action.”

Last summer, Brand Finance released its Sustainability Gap Index — which exposed whether public perceptions of a brand’s sustainability performance align with its actual performance, and the substantial financial risks associated with any gap. Now, the latest Sustainability Perceptions Index — based on a study of over 150,000 respondents across 40 countries — digs further into these risks. Key findings include:

the brands that global consumers believe are most committed to sustainability
the financial value of a reputation for sustainability
the value at risk, or value to be gained, arising from a gap between sustainability perceptions and performance.

Standout brands

According to the report, Apple has the highest sustainability perceptions value of any brand — at US$33.3 billion. This huge sum is driven by a combination of Apple’s financial scale and supportive consumer perception. Actual sustainability performance aside, the research shows that consumers have clear confidence that Apple is committed enough to minimizing its negative impacts for them continue buying and paying a premium for its products.

Microsoft has the second highest total value (US$22.7billion) — along with the highest “gap value” of any brand in the index at US$3.2 billion. The tech giant has engaged extensively in sustainability initiatives — including committing to becoming carbon neutral, water positive, and zero waste by 2030; and erasing its 45 years’ worth of carbon emissions by 2050. Yet its communication of its commitment and progress has been somewhat muted. According to Brand Finance’s calculations, with concerted effort to communicate its sustainability achievements more effectively, Microsoft could add over US$3 billion of value for shareholders.

Microsoft is not alone in leaving value on the table in this way: According to the Index, 85 brands have a positive gap value of over US$100 million, totalling US$25 billion.

At the other end of the spectrum is Tesla — well known as a pioneer of the electric vehicles and battery technology aiding in the transition to a lower-carbon economy. This image has carried across into the sustainability perceptions held by global consumers. In several countries, including Mexico and the UK, Tesla is regarded as the brand with the greatest commitment to environmental sustainability. However, the strength of this perception creates its own risk; whilst Tesla performs fairly well on perceived sustainability, it falls significantly short of peer average on sustainability performance. As a result, Tesla has US$1.54 billion of value at risk.

“Brands have to strike a fine balance when communicating about sustainability,” explains Brand Finance’s Strategy & Sustainability Director Robert Haigh. “Consumers are now rightly attuned to potential greenwashing; in response, brands are becoming too precautionary and restrictive in their approach to sustainability communications. This greenhushing could reduce the incentive for competitors to improve their performance, slowing progress industry-wide. Just as importantly, these brands are letting financial go to waste — short-changing shareholders and other stakeholders in the process.”

Check out the full report for the full ranking, additional insights, charts, and more information about the methodology.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/greenhushing-brands-leaving-billions-table

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

Sustainable Brands Are Worth $44 Billion to U.S. Consumers, New Study Finds

29 02 2024

(Image credit: .shock/Adobe Stock)

By Mary Mazzoni from Triple Pundit • Reposted: February 29, 2024

We often hear that consumers are looking for sustainable products and brands, and that many are even willing to pay more for them. But it’s often difficult for brand leaders to pin down just how much of an impact sustainability really has on consumer purchasing, making it harder to tie investments in sustainability to the bottom line. A new piece of research out this week puts a dollar figure on consumer affinity for sustainable brands for the first time — and it’s big enough to make leaders take notice.

A $44 billion prize is up for grabs as consumers switch from brands they perceive as less sustainable to brands they perceive as more sustainable, according to the analysis from the research technology firm Glow, in partnership with TriplePundit, our parent company 3BL and panel partner Cint.

“We wanted to really understand: If it’s important, can we see it in the data? Can we show a link between business performance and the investment in sustainability from a consumer perspective?” Glow CEO Tim Clover said during an on-demand webcast we hosted about the research. “The key point here is that the opportunity is quantifiable.”

Consumers are voting with their wallets, and now we know how much that’s worth for sustainable brands

The notion that businesses acting responsibly is somehow controversial has crept into the fringes of the U.S. cultural zeitgeist over the past few years. But there’s little evidence the public is on board, and our research is the latest to prove this out.

More than 85 percent of U.S. consumers consider it important for businesses to act responsibly with regards to society and the environment, compared to only 3 percent who don’t, according to our survey of more than 3,000 U.S. adults conducted in November 2023.

“In this study we show, as has been shown previously, that this issue is almost universally important to consumers,” Mike Johnston, data product leader at Glow, said during our webcast interview. “We also show there’s an expectation for businesses to act on these issues.”

consumers think it is important for businesses to act responsibly - study on consumer perception of sustainable brands

That expectation increasingly translates into how people spend their money. As part of the report, we asked consumers about the level of influence sustainability has on their choice of products and brands across 12 industries. About a quarter of respondents said they stopped doing business with a brand in 2023 because of its social or environmental behavior.

The rate of sustainability-driven brand switching is even higher in some sectors. In the food and grocery sector, 33 percent of consumers said they switched from one brand to another because of sustainability last year, while 31 percent said the same about pension fund providers and airlines.

“In a sector like food and grocery, this might be expected,” observed TriplePundit contributor Andrew Kaminsky, lead author of the report. “Think about how often consumers make food and grocery purchases, and how easy it is to try a different product. Pension funds, on the other hand, are much less transitory, and consumers need to go through considerable efforts to make sustainable changes.”

Still, 22 percent of consumers say social and environmental issues are “the single most important factor” in choosing a pension fund provider, according to the report. A finding like this is significant “not just for pension fund managers, but for all companies nationwide,” Kaminsky noted. “As pension funds invest in a wide range of companies across sectors, the high priority placed on sustainability means that companies that want to attract investors will have to improve their sustainability credentials.”

Interest in sustainability as a purchase driver is increasing - study about consumer perception of sustainable brands

Brand switching and preference for sustainable brands is only increasing

Even as the rising cost of living reaches crisis proportions across the U.S., people are still interested in sustainable brands and products. Of course price is an important factor for consumers, but it’s far from the only thing they’re looking for in a company they patronize — and most told us that sustainability will only play a bigger role in their buying patterns over time.

More than half (58 percent) of consumers say social and environmental considerations are more influential today than they were a year ago, and half expect this influence to continue growing in 2024.

“We hear a lot of talk about, ‘People say sustainability is important, but they won’t act.’ Well, that’s not what the data says,” Clover told us. “What it says is that there are cohorts of people in the population who are very well-educated around key issues for particular categories and industries, and that they will often act. And that cohort of people is growing.”

The fact that sustainability plays such an important role alongside other purchase drivers like price and product quality — enough to put it in a top-three rank or higher for many industries we analyzed — may be surprising to some. But Johnston cautions brand leaders to pay close attention to findings like these and not fall into the trap of prioritizing price above all else.

“This kind of report does two things. One, it really gives the rationale and the economic viability to act now because there is payoff, but it also shows that there’s a future imperative,” Johnston said. “As cost of living starts to reduce for certain cohorts of the population — and it will — those that have ignored sustainability while it’s been growing in importance in the background will be playing catch-up. And you don’t want to be in that position with something that is going to continue to be of increasing importance to how customers make their decisions.”

which channels most influence consumer perception of sustainable brands

The communication opportunity for sustainable brands

Consumers have to know what sustainable brands are doing in order to reward them for it. Our research shows many are actively seeking more information about what brands do when it comes to society and the environment, presenting a golden opportunity for sustainable brands to reach consumers with effective messaging and score new sales.

“If we don’t communicate, we can’t educate people about where we are and why we’re investing and taking the pathway we’re taking,” Clover said.

Around a quarter of consumers said the reason sustainability didn’t factor more into their purchase decisions is because they “don’t know enough” about brands’ sustainability credentials to make an informed purchase.

“Price and lack of information are the leading reasons why consumers don’t consider sustainability more in their purchases,” Kaminsky noted in the report. “While the need to pay more for products that are responsibly managed might be unavoidable, lack of information is certainly within a brand’s control.”

The report explores in detail how to best reach various audiences with effective messaging on the platforms where they gather to learn more about sustainability, but the top-line message is: A growing segment of people want to learn more, and if brands don’t tell their own sustainability stories in a way that reaches and resonates with these consumers, others will tell that story for them.

“There are ways to discuss sustainability in an accurate and informative way, without falling prey to ‘greenhushing’ or retreating to the sidelines,” Kaminsky wrote in the report. “It’s fairly straightforward, but it’s something that brands and their marketing teams struggle to do effectively.”

The type of messaging that stands out is keenly focused on the issues consumers care about, backed up by evidence and, ideally, confirmed by third parties like media partners, researchers and influencers who consumers look to and trust.

Mary Mazzoni has reported on sustainability and social impact for over a decade and now serves as executive editor of TriplePundit. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2024/sustainable-brands-consumer-purchasing/795941

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

Businesses Embedding Sustainability Outperforming on Profitability, Talent Attraction: IBM Survey

29 02 2024

Submitted Photo

By Mark Segal from ESG Today • Reposted: February 29, 2024

Companies that embed sustainability into their operations are likely to experience significant benefits over their peers in areas including revenue growth, profitability and talent attraction, even without spending more on their sustainability efforts, according to a new global survey of senior executives released by IBM.

For the new study, IBM’s Institute for Business Value (IBV), in collaboration with Oxford Economics, surveyed 5,000 C-suite executives across 22 countries and 22 industries, examining the progress, investments, outcomes and key challenges facing organizations in their sustainability efforts.

The survey results indicated that senior executives globally anticipate deriving significant value from their sustainability initiatives, with 75% agreeing that sustainability drives better business results, and 72% saying that it can be a revenue enabler rather than a cost center. Similarly, 76% reported that sustainability is central to their business strategy, and 69% said that sustainability needs to be a higher priority in their organizations.

Despite the consensus view on the business benefits of sustainability, however, the study found that nearly half (47%) of executives surveyed reported that they struggle to fund sustainability investments, and only 30% said that they have made significant progress in executing their sustainability strategies – although this is up significantly from only 10% in a prior year survey.

One of the key insights from the study highlighting the difficulties companies are facing in their sustainability efforts and investments is a focus on compliance over strategy, with IBM’s research finding that companies’ spending on sustainability reporting exceeds spending on sustainability innovation by 43%.

Along these lines, the survey indicated that one of the greatest factors influencing the impact of sustainability on business performance was the extent to which companies embedded sustainability across their organizations. Companies identified by the study as “embedders,” meaning that sustainability had been integrated across business units in core functions and workflows rather than treating it as a functional silo or compliance requirement, were likely to see significant business value, including a 16% higher rate of revenue growth, and 75% who were more likely to attribute revenue growth to their sustainability improvements. Similarly, embedders were 52% more likely to outperform their peers on profitability, and 56% more likely to outperform on talent attraction.

Interestingly, “embedders” were more likely to demand better financial outcomes from their sustainability initiatives, with 53% of these companies reporting that business benefits are essential to justifying sustainability investments, and only 17% saying that meeting sustainability objectives alone justified investment. Similarly, these organizations were not found to be spending more on sustainability than their peers, and did not pursue larger sustainability programs, but rather benefited from the incorporation of sustainability into their core operations, according to the study.

The study also examined some of the key challenges facing businesses to embedding sustainability, with “data usability” emerging as one of the top barriers. While a large majority (82%) of respondents agreed that high-quality data and transparency are necessary to achieve sustainability outcomes, only around 40% reported that their organizations can automatically source sustainability data from core systems such as ERP, enterprise asset management, CRM, Energy Management Systems, or Facilities Management systems. According to the report, however, generative AI may be a ”game changer” for sustainability, with 64% of executives saying that generative AI will be important for their sustainability efforts, and 73% planning to increase investment in generative AI for sustainability.

Other key challenges included skill-building, with nearly 40% of executives reporting a lack of requisite skills as the top barrier to sustainability progress, and the limited integration of sustainability into core business functions, although respondents reported that they expect significant increases in the level of sustainability integration in several areas over the next few year, with the greatest improvements anticipated in areas including finance, energy management and enterprise asset management.

Oday Abbosh, Global Managing Partner, Sustainability Services, IBM Consulting, said:

“An organization’s approach to sustainability may be holding it back. There is no quick fix. Sustainability requires intentionality and a shared corporate vision. Sustainability needs to be part of the day-to-day operations, not viewed only as a compliance task or reporting exercise. By embedding sustainability across their business, organizations are more likely to drive internal innovation, attract and retain skilled talent, and be better positioned to deliver both positive environmental impact and financial outcomes.”

Click here to access the study. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.esgtoday.com/businesses-embedding-sustainability-outperforming-on-profitability-talent-attraction-ibm-survey/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, IBM, Oxford Economics, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

The anti-ESG backlash is not just an American phenomenon as Europe waters down its sustainability agenda

24 02 2024

Farmers protest outside the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Feb. 6. A wave of farmer protest has erupted across Europe, demanding an easing of the EU’s environmental policies. Photo: FREDERICK FLORIN – AFP – GETTY IMAGES

By Camille Fumard from Fortune • Republished: February 24, 2024

A wave of discontent over sustainability policies is sweeping across the Atlantic, making green growth harder and putting the leaders and financiers who are fighting to implement environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies under pressure. And the upcoming U.S. election will not make life any easier for the companies that are navigating the powerful currents of anti-ESG lobbies.

In Europe, the ardor for ESG regulations has somewhat cooled. The strong polarization around ESG criteria has not waited for the result of the U.S. election. It is lurking in the undertones of financial and standardization talks. The dynamism of U.S. President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act is still having ripple effects and unforeseen consequences as the IRA compels Brussels to adapt. This trend can be seen in the significant changes in July to the last draft of the new European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). One of the major changes made by the EU Commission to the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group’s (EFRAG) proposals was to align the ESRS standards with the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) to ensure international interoperability. The die is close to being cast in the European battle over accounting standards–in favor of the ISSB’s softer financial philosophy.

The prospect that truly sustainable finance may be unable to preserve itself looms large over 2024. The idea of a comprehensive fair transition of the economy seems to be morphing into a niche approach to sustainable finance.

Poorly devised communications around ESG investing have contributed to weakening the movement toward a responsible and forward-looking economy. Faced with angry farmer protests, the EU has given up on its goal of halving pesticide use by 2040. Financially illiterate environmental activism is also having a chilling effect on companies. For example, a parliamentary inquiry in France is scrutinizing the environmental commitments of energy giant TotalEnergies. With accusations of “greenhushing,” “greenwashing,” and “woke capitalism,” the three letters “ESG” have become synonymous with backlash.

The rhetoric is simple if one wishes to undermine economic decisions that encourage ethical behavior as a primary concern. It plays upon the fears of Western democratic public opinion amidst growing disquiet in the face of deepening inequality and the fragmentation of the world. Essentially, this rhetoric benefits from the misfortunes of the population. For example, in France and Germany, the far right is cynically capitalizing on the anger of the farmers who have to contend with European Green Deal policies as well as the increase in energy prices. All of this is happening because farmers are being caught up in the middle of the geopolitical reality of an exporting industry with a short-term high exposure to the green transition.

In the long term, however, Europe’s companies, economy, and people will be the ones paying a high price for the policies of cynicism that have no set agendas or tangible projects for the future.

Nevertheless, the green breeze is still blowing gently across Europe. At Davos, French President Emmanuel Macron used his trump card: “at the same time.” It’s a reference to the Paris Agreement formula, “for people and planet,” and the IRA’s philosophy. Indeed, a united Europe can achieve growth and decarbonization “at the same time.” By providing renewed hope for the middle classes and with the help of a sustainability agenda that encourages investments in Europe, Brussels can bolster its mandate.

As the hustle and bustle of the upcoming U.S. elections continues to captivate and sway the opinions of European political leaders, companies in Europe that have always remained neutral in the past, following the customs of the Old Continent, might have to change their way of doing business. They must be more vocal–or 2024 may be the year in which they find themselves trapped by the politics of cynicism.

Camille Fumard is a special advisor on strategic affairs to C-suite executives at European boutique communications agency JIN and the author of a book on leadership in the XXIst century. To see the original post, follow this link: https://fortune.com/europe/2024/02/22/anti-esg-backlash-america-europe-waters-down-sustainability-agenda-environment-politics/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, lack of trust, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Unleashing the secret power of marketing and HR collaboration

24 02 2024

Source Photo: Ashkan Forouzani/Unsplash

By Ron Johnson from Fast Company • Reposted: February 24, 2024

There are certain pairings that just seem custom-made for each other. Macaroni and cheese, fish and chips, cookies and cream, and, of course, peanut butter and jelly. There’s just something about these pairings—a sense of culinary synergy where the presence of each individual ingredient enhances the taste of the other. Or, as philosopher Aristotle would say, makes the sum of the whole greater than the sum of its parts. The same principle applies in business. Some roles just seem to complement each other—like marketing and HR.

As Dwayne Weiser, a former HR Process Consultant, notes: “Marketing and human resources are two departments in organizations with common points of interaction. The success of each organization depends on how these departments work together for a common purpose. Efficient marketing starts with investing in your employee experience. If you develop a team that’s passionate about the firm’s purpose, values, and mission, you can come up with an influential group of marketers and create a more holistic and consistent brand experience.”

This move toward branding and HR integration is driven primarily by two trends. The first trend can be summarized by what HR veteran Rajeev Bhardwaj describes as the transformation of HR “from an administrative overhead to the fountainhead of innovative solutions to cultivate and nurture talent.” The second trend involves changes in the world of branding where brand professionals are taking a more holistic, experiential approach to branding rather than relying solely on advertising—a move that requires modern marketers to look inwards towards employees to support their branding initiatives as much as they look outwards to engage customers.

As a result, marketing and HR often end up collaborating on projects that were previously “owned” by only one of these two important groups of professionals. Here are five reasons why marketing and HR go together like PB&J:

BOTH ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRAND POSITIONING

Modern HR professionals are joining their marketing peers in the brand positioning arena—admittedly in a slightly different way. While marketing professionals use brand positioning tools to influence the perceptions of consumers and influence them to buy their organizations’ products and services, HR professionals focus their efforts on positioning their organizations as great places to work.

However, there are times when marketing and HR work collaboratively on positioning their brands. Research carried out by i4cp, an organization focused on “next practices in human capital,” found that “a partnership between HR and marketing is 6x more likely to be in place in high-performance organizations, which are also more likely to constantly market (internally and externally) themselves as great places to work.”

MARKETING AND HR ARE BOTH RESPONSIBLE FOR ENGAGEMENT

Modern HR professionals use many of the same engagement tools that their marketing peers have used for decades, but they have repurposed these tools for a slightly different outcome. While marketers use their skill sets to engage customers, modern HR professionals use their skills to engage employees and to inspire them to become brand ambassadors who are excited about helping their organizations to achieve their branding and business goals. In order for organizations to win the battle for talent, HR professionals need to engage employees as effectively as their marketing peers engage customers.

BOTH ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRAND STORYTELLING

The world’s most successful marketers tell (and retell) compelling brand stories that help them to become more known, liked, and trusted by customers. But modern companies recognize that as much as they need to tell compelling stories that help customers feel connected to their brands, they also need to use strong storytelling principles to help drive employee performance, demonstrate empathy towards their team members, and build a sense of belonging throughout their organizations.

And that’s where HR comes in. At many companies, HR professionals are taking the lead in identifying inspiring stories of outstanding employee performance and remarkable customer experience from across the organization and packaging those stories for internal consumption. They are also taking the lead in using these stories to help employees feel recognized and appreciated by their organizations, and to keep them updated about major developments in their organizations. By sharing resources and by having marketers and HR professionals work together to identify, package, and distribute inspiring stories for consumption by both internal and external audiences, companies are finding that they can greatly improve the effectiveness of their storytelling efforts.PRESENTED BY STARBUCKSThe power of positivityFor Giant Spoon’s Ian Grody, gratitude is essential to unlocking creativity

MARKETING AND HR ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRAND LOYALTY

You’ve probably heard the saying that it is less expensive to keep an existing customer happy than it is to acquire new customers. This saying speaks directly to the importance of customer brand loyalty—the tendency for customers to keep on buying from you again and again, even if your competitors offer similar products and services. Customer brand loyalty is the holy grail that all businesses aspire to develop and hold on to—and both marketing and HR are responsible, to some degree, for helping their organizations to achieve this all-important goal.

Some may even argue that HR professionals bear more responsibility for brand loyalty than marketing professionals do. Sure, marketing may bring customers through your doors, but even the most clever marketing, advertising, or social media campaign can be completely derailed by disengaged employees delivering service. If you want to have consistently high levels of customer brand loyalty, you must first have consistently high levels of employee brand loyalty. And who better to develop and lead employee brand loyalty than your HR team—the individuals most likely to be responsible for your company culture, employee engagement, and employee experience.

BOTH CAN BETTER “SELL” THEIR IDEAS IF THEY WORK TOGETHER

David Ogilvy, considered to be the father of modern advertising, once said, “In the modern world of business, it is useless to be a creative, original thinker unless you can also sell what you create. Management cannot be expected to recognize a good idea unless it is presented to them by a good salesman.”

Marketers are certainly no strangers to having to sell what they create. Most marketing departments and agencies frequently have to “pitch” their ideas to a group of decision-makers before their final campaigns ever see the light of day. While Ogilvy’s advice about selling what you create is most often applied to the marketing industry, his sage words could easily be applied to the creative, original thinkers in the world of HR.

When HR and marketing work together to sell their ideas as a single, cohesive strategy for both internal and external implementation rather than as separate, individual ideas, both groups of professionals have a better chance of having their projects approved by their organization’s decision-makers.

Modern companies understand that brands are built from the inside, not the outside. And, if brands are built from the inside, your HR team needs a seat at your marketing table so they can support your marketing team from the inside out. If you want to build a stronger brand and a stronger business, consider combining marketing and HR in the same way that culinary enthusiasts combine peanut butter and jelly. You just might be pleasantly surprised with the powerful organizational synergies that come about when your marketing and HR teams work more closely together.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.fastcompany.com/91030096/unleashing-the-secret-power-of-marketing-and-hr-collaboration

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

Companies Can Advance Social Justice and Do Good Business: Here’s How

23 02 2024

Demonstrators gather for a Black Lives Matter rally in the summer of 2020. (Image credit: Ying Ge/Unsplash)

By Harriet Gardner from Triple Pundit • Reposted: February 23, 2024

Only a few years ago, companies and organizations were scrambling to build diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programming, hiring new staff and implementing programs. Fast-forward to 2024 and many of these same companies are pulling their efforts back publicly. Some because of increased attacks by politicians and the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action, some because they believe this is a cost center that can be cut.

Yet the work is as important as ever. As leaders, we must continue to invest in DEI and social impact efforts and reaffirm that it not only is legally sound to do so, but also imperative to combat misinformation. In fact, employees and customers expect brands to make meaningful investments in advancing social justice.

Put simply, now is not the time for companies to back down, but rather stand out by strengthening their commitment to social justice and by leveraging their time, money and influence. This may not be easy to do, but these strategies can move us forward, increase employee and customer engagement, and strengthen business practices.

Connect social impact work to core business efforts

Social impact work should not stand alone. It must be integrated into every aspect of a company’s core business. This way it is not seen as an “add-on,” but instead is a key piece of success.

For example, Google.org launched its Cybersecurity Clinics Fund in 2023 to support colleges and universities by increasing access and opportunities for hands-on, real-world training for students interested in pursuing careers in cybersecurity. Through this opportunity, Google is not only providing support through grantmaking, but it is also offering free access codes to its Google Cybersecurity Certificate courses, in-kind products, and mentorship from Google employees. This commitment addresses a need to invest in the future cybersecurity workforce and offer affordable cybersecurity services to under-resourced community organizations, while also aligning with Google’s business and technical strengths.

By closely connecting social impact strategies to their business, companies create a business case where sustained philanthropic support makes operational sense since, in addition to funding, for-profit companies may have products and expertise to directly support social impact projects.

Engage employees and customers

Social impact programs are a critical component of attracting and retaining top talent. These programs reflect the values of the company and of many of its employees. A recent poll by Benevity found that 80 percent of U.S. employees believe “it is the responsibility of company leaders to take action in addressing racial justice and equity issues.”

In this area, Sephora models what a consistent, cross-organizational commitment to progress on racial equity can look like. The beauty retailer took the 15 Percent Pledge to ensure at least 15 percent of the products on its shelves come from Black-owned brands — a move that doubled the number of Black-owned brands available at Sephora stores.

Meanwhile, the company has been building a diverse workforce that more accurately reflects its diverse consumers. Black leadership increased by 7 percent across Sephora since 2021, while Latinx leadership grew by 10 percent, according to its latest DEI report. The company also says it trains store employees to better serve diverse clients and their beauty needs.

Invest in community-led organizations

Investing in organizations with proximate leaders — that is, leaders who share the identity, lived experience, and/or geography of the community they serve — is a highly effective way to drive impact and improve relationships with the communities that a company seeks to support. Communities and their leaders know what they need to thrive, and there is growing evidence that nonprofits led by and for people closest to a community or issue are more innovative and better problem solvers.

However, only 4 percent of U.S. philanthropic dollars go to organizations led by people of color who are most impacted by systemic inequity. For companies, this means that there is an opportunity and an obligation to stand out by supporting under-resourced and highly effective grassroots organizations. Tides’ approach to supporting companies with their philanthropic strategy is rooted in the belief that this work must be connected to the lived experience of the communities they seek to benefit, as our partner Kate Spade New York demonstrates with its On Purpose Fund.

Practice trust-based approaches

Trust-based philanthropy addresses inequality by shifting power from donors to those doing the work on the ground. By reducing reporting requirements, giving unrestricted funds, and reducing barriers to resources, companies can alleviate the burden on grantees and community organizations. Simply put, trusting your grantees to deliver impact benefits both organizations and the shared impact that you seek to create.

For example, the software development company Unity engages in trust-based philanthropy by offering grants to projects and organizations that align with its mission of empowering creators. Unity’s grantmaking approach emphasizes collaboration and innovation, supporting initiatives that leverage technology and creativity for social impact. For example, the Unity for Humanitycreator program provides mentorship and community to creators using their skills for good. Unity partners closely with Tides by fostering a community-centric model that seeks to build long-term relationships with grantees and that emphasizes mutual trust and flexibility through general operating support grants.

The bottom line: Supporting social justice is good for business

Corporate giving is a powerful way for companies to demonstrate their purpose and commitment to the people who have invested in them: their employees, their customers, and the communities they serve.

By staying the course during these challenging times and supporting diverse communities, companies can join a movement to advance social justice while seeing a real impact on their own business goals. And that’s just good business.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2024/companies-social-justice-good-business/795566

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Benevity, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, responsible brands, Social Justice, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Eric Block On Responsible Branding

Search

Links

Contact Us

Inspiring Experiences

Our Partners

Reliable Resources