green marketing | Eric Block On Responsible Branding

Greenhushing: Is Silence Hindering Sustainability?

24 09 2023

Unlike greenwashing, a quieter phenomenon raises concerns about transparency and authenticity. By Patricia Costinhas from impakter.com • Reposted: September 24, 2023

In the world of corporate sustainability, it’s not always about what companies proudly proclaim; sometimes, it’s the hushed secrets they keep that reveal their true shades of green. You’ve probably heard of greenwashing before, but now there is a subtler player lurking in the shadows: greenhushing.

While greenwashing wears its false eco-badges loud and proud, greenhushing prefers to stay in the background, quietly concealing its true colors. But make no mistake; silence can speak volumes. It raises questions about companies’ transparency, accountability, and their true sustainability efforts.

What is Greenhushing?

Though not a term that rolls off the tongue as easily as greenwashing, greenhushing has been growing in popularity. In essence, it revolves around companies deliberately opting to keep their environmental and social credentials discreet, almost as if they are hushing their sustainability efforts. Greenhushing involves downplaying or conveniently omitting mention of a company’s environmental initiatives.

Now, you might wonder, isn’t modesty a virtue? Indeed, in the realm of corporate sustainability, there is merit in humility. However, the practice of greenhushing raises a cause for concern when it comes to sustainability communication. Companies that embrace greenhushing may aim to convey that they are committed to sustainability without making a fuss about it. Yet, by choosing to remain vague and ambiguous, they can inadvertently give the impression that their environmental efforts are more substantial than they truly are.

his subtle approach to sustainability communication has its drawbacks, as it can obscure the reality of a company’s emissions and sustainability initiatives. Furthermore, it opens the door to sophisticated greenwashing tactics, which exploit this hushed narrative to create a façade of environmental responsibility.

Measuring Sustainability

Assessing a company’s commitment to sustainability in today’s corporate world can be a tough task. While financial metrics enjoy well-established and standardized criteria, the same cannot be said for sustainability metrics, which are often kept hidden.

Numerous organizations, frameworks, and industry groups within the business landscape have their own sets of reporting guidelines. This diversity of standards results in a fragmented sustainability landscape, making it challenging to compare how businesses fare in terms of sustainability targets and environmental credentials.

Then there’s the commonly designated ESG reporting field, a trio encompassing Environmental, Social, and Governance aspects. This reporting framework seeks to gauge a company’s commitment to sustainability, social well-being, and upholding ethical standards. However, it now finds itself in middle of growing scrutiny and criticism within the corporate world.

ESG Metrics and Growing Criticism

Quantifying social impact and ethical governance is no easy feat, and the absence of robust regulatory oversight has raised concerns about the relevance of ESG reporting. Many companies grapple with how to measure their environmental impact and fulfill their sustainability targets, adding to the complexity of the situation.

Last year, Tesla CEO Elon Musk made headlines by publicly denouncing ESG, going as far as labeling it a “scam.” This declaration came after Tesla’s removal from the S&P 500 ESG Index, a move that prompted Musk to voice his discontent on Twitter. He suggested that the integrity of the index provider had been compromised, pointing out the irony of oil giant Exxon Mobil retaining its top-10 position while his electric car company was removed from the list altogether.

Then there is the case of rampant greenwashing. Without clear-cut or standard sustainability reporting metrics, what we find is a breeding ground for corporations to exaggerate or falsify their initiatives.

The new EU CSRD Directive will make ESG reporting mandatory from January 2025. This means companies should start to collect their data from January 2024. Starting from larger companies and then later SMEs everyone will have to report on their sustainability efforts.

Motivations Behind Greenhushing

To truly grasp why organizations choose the path of greenhushing, we must first understand the driving forces behind it.

Resource Constraints

One significant factor in the greenhushing equation is resource constraints. Imagine a smaller company with limited manpower and budget resources. When they start trumpeting their sustainability achievements, they can quickly find themselves overwhelmed with demands for more data, additional proof, and numerous reports. These resource limitations can swiftly transform the green spotlight into a glaring interrogation lamp. Consequently, some organizations choose to maintain discretion as a shield.

Regulatory Costs

Navigating the labyrinth of regulations can be expensive, particularly for companies seeking to solidify their green credentials. The fear of incurring regulatory fines due to inadvertent missteps acts as a potent deterrent. Therefore, some organizations opt to remain under the radar until they are absolutely certain they can meet all regulatory requirements. Some companies prefer quiet, prolonged testing of their green initiatives before making grand announcements. This approach helps them avoid both the financial and administrative costs associated with compliance.

Shielding from Scrutiny

By selectively revealing their sustainability efforts, organizations can avoid intense scrutiny and accusations of greenwashing. Companies making exaggerated or false green claims not only risk reputational damage but also potential legal consequences. Thus, through greenhushing, firms can remain unnoticed by watchful eyes. An example is the recent accusation against global banking giant HSBC. They faced allegations of greenhushing when they downgraded funds exclusively invested in sustainable assets to those including environmental or social factors, without necessarily targeting a sustainable outcome. While the company claimed compliance with EU regulations, critics viewed it as an attempt to evade investor scrutiny.

Taking a critical stance on these motivations for greenhushing is vital. While resource constraints and regulatory costs are valid concerns, they should not excuse a lack of transparency. In an era where consumers and stakeholders demand responsible investment decisions, underreporting sustainability efforts can backfire. Some may inadvertently damage trust and credibility in their attempt to shield themselves from scrutiny.

The Sustainability Imperative

All things considered, sustainability rests on transparency and accountability. It goes beyond marketing or shielding from criticism. Despite ESG criticism, customers now focus on product carbon footprints, integral to their choices. This awareness drives firms to adjust emissions goals and prioritize strong sustainability credentials in their climate strategies.

Ultimately, the path towards sustainability is far from silent. By wholeheartedly embracing transparency and accountability, organizations can not only avert allegations of greenwashing but also make substantive contributions to the collective mission of combatting climate change and addressing environmental challenges.

To see the orignal post, follow this link: https://impakter.com/greenhushing-is-silence-hindering-sustainability/

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, EU CSRD Directive, green marketing, Greenhushing, Greenwashing, 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

Intrepid Travelers Can Now Understand Their Adventures’ Carbon Impacts

22 09 2023

Image: Intrepid Travel

From Intrepid Travel via Sustainable Brands • Reposted: September 22, 2023

Intrepid has launched one of tourism’s most comprehensive carbon-labeling initiatives, alongside new research that shows consumer demand for better transparency and understanding their personal impacts.

Today, Intrepid Travel unveiled carbon labels on over 500 itineraries, including its top 100 trips, with plans to continue measuring and disclosing the emissions of every trip. The labels, which appear on individual tour pages, will tell travelers the carbon footprint of each Intrepid tour — providing greater transparency as the company deepens its commitment to climate-conscious travel.

Joining the efforts of smaller tour operators including Adventure Tours UK and Much Better Adventures, carbon-impact information is now displayed on over half of Intrepid’s trip pages — showing the estimated CO2e of the trip per traveler, per day. Emissions are calculated by identifying the different components contributing to the overall carbon footprint — including accommodations, transportation, food provided during the trip, activities, the local operations’ office emissions and waste. A 15 percent contingency is then added to each trip’s total emissions, to account for anything unintentionally missing.

Intrepid’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory calculation process was developed in line with the best-practice requirements set by Climate Active — an ongoing partnership between the Australian Government and corporations to drive voluntary climate action in the private sector.

Carbon labeling informs consumers of the impact of a product or service on the environment by providing a CO2e kg number similar to a nutrition label, allowing customers to make better-informed decisions. Seen the most so far in the food industry – with brands including Chipotle, Just Salad, Oatly, Quorn, Strong Roots and more including carbon-impact data on their products — carbon labels can now also be found on everything from personal-care products to electronics, footwear and sportswear.

Intrepid’s new labels will help educate travelers on their own carbon footprint and make it easier for them to understand their impact. They will also be able to access information on how Intrepid is offsetting these emissions and compare the data with everyday activities. For example, 100kg CO2e is about the same as charging a smart phone 12,164 times or driving a gas-powered car about 399 kilometers.

Image credit: Intrepid Travel

As part of the debut, Intrepid commissioned new research from The Harris Poll that revealed 64 percent of adults worldwide have no idea what their carbon footprint is. 60 percent are more likely to book trips with a company that is transparent about their environmental impact; and yet only 38 percent find it easy to find that information. And more than 1 in 2 people globally say they would be more willing to alter their plans if they could easily see and understand the carbon impact of each travel option.

Carbon labeling is not only helpful for consumers — it may soon become the new normal as we see more scrutiny and stricter regulations on greenwashing. Intrepid hopes these efforts will encourage other businesses to take accountability and follow suit.

“Without higher government regulations or the need for ESG disclosure, it is nearly impossible to hold businesses accountable for reducing their emissions,” said Sara King, GM of Purpose for Intrepid Travel. “We cannot shy away from our impact, and we cannot effectively reduce what we do not measure. With carbon labeling, we can increase customers’ understanding of their footprint while advocating for this level of measurement and transparency to become an industry standard.”

In addition to the rollout of carbon labels, Intrepid continues to roll out lower-carbon itineraries: In 2024, the company says it will have approximately 4,000 fewer flights on trips (compared to 2023) and will be discontinuing all scenic flights.

To see the original post follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/intrepid-travelers-estimate-adventures-carbon-impacts

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

Moving Beyond Targets: The Time is Now for Climate Transition Action Plans

22 09 2023

Image credit: Karsten Würth/Unsplash

By Steven Clarke from Triple Pundit • Reposted: September 22, 2023

As the material business risks from climate change become increasingly clear, more than a third of the world’s largest 2,000 companies have set goals to reach net zero emissions by 2050 or sooner. Many companies have gone even further, setting emission reduction targets that are in line with what the latest climate science says are needed to meet the goals of the Paris Accords and limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. They are also disclosing information about the impacts of their business on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, water quality and scarcity, and nature.

This is tremendous progress and highlights that companies see opportunities to be had in tackling these risks. But awash with targets and goals, investors and other stakeholders still have one core question: What meaningful and measurable actions are companies taking today, and in the near-term, to meet these targets?

Climate transition action plans have emerged as a leading framework for companies to identify, plan, and implement strategies that reduce climate-related risks and maximize opportunities. These actions should be specific, time-bound and, if possible, quantified to detail the emissions reductions that companies expect to achieve.

While targets and disclosures are both deeply important, too often companies lack a forward-looking strategy that defines how they will work to achieve these targets in the next three to five years — both within and beyond their operations.

In fact, organizations that analyze and track climate action — such as the Science-Based Target initiative, Net Zero Tracker, Transition Pathway Initiative and CDP — have found that an alarming number of companies have yet to develop these plans. For instance, out of nearly 19,000 companies that annually report their climate impacts to CDP, only 13 percent have disclosed a sufficient number of indicators to be considered a credible plan — and only 0.40 percent of companies met all 21 of CDP’s key indicators.

Every company knows that delivering on a goal takes a plan. Just as companies set goals and develop detailed plans for driving sales, investing in new markets or recruiting talent, they also need a detailed climate action transition plan for delivering on their goals for slashing emissions and addressing their exposure to climate risk.

And the pressure on companies to deliver these plans is ramping up. In 2022, Ceres counted just nine investors asking companies they held to publish transition plans via shareholder resolutions. In 2023, that number jumped to 61.

Addressing the Ceres Global climate conference in March 2023, Mary Schapiro, vice chair for global public policy at Bloomberg and vice chair of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, said: “If 2021 was the year of mainstreaming net-zero commitments and 2022 was the year of target-setting and developing the frameworks to operationalize these commitments, we are now calling 2023 the year of transition plans.”

The momentum is building as investors are already implementing transition action plans to mitigate the risks climate poses to their portfolios. To help companies create and implement these plans to achieve their emissions reductions targets, Ceres’ Ambition 2030 initiative and our partners have developed action-oriented guidance and tools. At a high level, we outline four components for every transition plan:

Actions a company will take to reduce its Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, covering its entire supply and value chains, in line with limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Actions to identify, manage, and address climate risks and opportunities and incorporate these considerations into core business strategy and governance.
Actions to advocate for public policies that support and enable the achievement of corporate climate targets and economy-wide emissions reductions.
Actions to consider and support workforces, suppliers, customers, impacted communities and other stakeholders in the transition to a net-zero-emissions economy.

The time for action is now, and we encourage all companies to follow these guidelines as they develop the plans to make their targets a reality.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/climate-transition-action-plans/783621

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, reputation management, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

A Majority of Large U.S. Companies Adopting Ambitious Sustainability Goals

18 09 2023

By Boston Real Estate Times • Reposted: September 18, 2023

A new Veolia North America survey of 245 large U.S. companies shows that more than half will have ambitious goals addressing net zero carbon, zero waste to landfill, zero liquid discharge, and targeted increases in water efficiency, reuse, and waste recycling by 2025, with many firms already setting specific targets.

The survey shows reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are the top sustainability priority for most firms, but it is clear that priorities to address water and waste reductions are catching up.

While the commitments being made by firms are encouraging, the data in the new Veolia survey shows that the majority of companies have yet to identify specifically what the exact steps are to achieve their most ambitious medium- and long-term commitments.

Here are some highlights of the survey, which was conducted over the past year:

60% of firms identified specific projects and initiatives to achieve their short term sustainability goals (less than five years), while 37% had not.
40% of firms reported that reducing operational costs is a very important driver for pursuing sustainability goals.
While investments included in the landmark U.S. Inflation Reduction Act have gone far in providing firms with the financial support they need to convert to sustainable practices, it will not be enough to meet all their needs. Based on an analysis by the International Energy Agency and Boston Consulting Group, the overall transition to sustainable energy across U.S. industries will require at least $18 trillion in additional capital by 2030.

“This survey provides many important insights on how firms across America are responding to the growing concern around climate change, and why they are looking to reduce their impact on carbon emissions, waste streams and water use,” said Veolia North America President and CEO Fred Van Heems. “A large number of companies are genuinely committed to achieving sustainability objectives, yet they are not sure how to begin, which is keeping many of them from moving forward. The good news is there are solutions available to get them on track and help them sustain momentum.”

The survey findings point to the need for more urgency in clearing the way for industries to adopt more sustainable practices as soon as possible, according to Charles Iceland, Director of Freshwater Initiatives for the World Resources Institute, an environmental think tank based in the U.S.

“It’s clear from this survey that for large companies that are genuinely committed to operating on a more sustainable basis, more resources and data are needed to help them determine where their greatest needs are so they can take effective action,” Iceland said.

The survey found that a majority of companies are committing to sustainability goals primarily because of reporting requirements, regulatory compliance, cost savings and brand reputation. Of the firms surveyed, roughly one-third said the environmental risks to their operations were not a very important driver.

The survey findings are being announced one year after passage of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act, which was meant to kickstart the economy with investments in critical infrastructure, with a special focus on initiatives that will help meet sustainability goals for addressing climate change.

The survey found that many respondents are prioritizing sustainability initiatives because of the incentives and opportunities available in the IRA legislation and other factors such as regulatory requirements and investor focus on climate disclosures.

What remains a challenge, the survey showed, is that companies still lack the funding to support the transition and take the concrete steps necessary to achieve their goals. They also are struggling to achieve alignment of internal goals and responsibilities and easy access to data to understand where they are and track progress.

“Before firms can invest in reducing their impact on the environment and become more sustainable, they need information on their current baseline, such as data on their energy emissions, waste and water use,” said Patrick Schultz, President and CEO of VNA’s Sustainable Industries and Buildings division. “This will enable them to choose measures that can be immediately and easily implemented, and ones that may require a strategy to mitigate over time.”

Schultz added, “This kind of analysis is only effective if it is conducted holistically, taking into account each firm’s contributions not only to high-profile factors like greenhouse gas emissions, but also equally important considerations like reducing landfill waste and preserving water resources. This is what Veolia North America means by triple zero – achieving net zero goals for energy, waste and water.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://bostonrealestatetimes.com/a-majority-of-large-u-s-companies-adopting-ambitious-sustainability-goals/

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

Sustainability Is About Your Workforce, Too

18 09 2023

Javier Zayas Photography/Getty Images

By Josh Bersin from Harvard Business Review • Reposted: September 18, 2023

The EU has long been committed to improving worker well-being, claiming it wants to create more transparent and predictable working conditions for all its 182 million workers. Now, it’s moving ahead with this objective on a number of fronts:

Its Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions Directive, which member states were required to enact by August 2022, is geared toward improving employee protections and increasing labor market transparency.
Its Work-Life Balance Directive, which came into effect in 2019, aims to set minimum standards for paternity, parental, and career leave as well as flexible work arrangements.
Its Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) mandates that, starting in May 2024, any company with €40 million in net turnover, €20 million in assets, or 250 or more employees that trades in Europe publish detailed information about their efforts to address a range of sustainability challenges.

In recent years, many companies hired a chief sustainability officer and established a set of high-priority programs to reduce carbon emissions and the risk of global climate change. The enactment of these new regulations signals a new era in which it’s time to extend the concept of sustainability to include similarly critical issues with the workforce — an idea I call people sustainability.

People sustainability takes a holistic approach to corporate human capital practices, including diversity and inclusion, well-being, employee safety, and fair pay. It raises these human capital issues to the C-suite and obliges chief human resource officers to work with chief sustainability officers on these programs. It means that your employee well-being efforts are no longer delivered piecemeal, which was ineffective no matter how well-intentioned or resourced they might be.

The EU is essentially saying that all these “HR programs” are much bigger than HR: They now fall into the category of global citizenship mandates, and companies must treat and report them as such.

How to Integrate People Sustainability into Your Company

I’m talking to European and U.S. firms about how they are gearing up for the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and developing people sustainability metrics. Here are examples of how a few companies are approaching this:

Heineken has developed standard measurements of human rights, fair pay, and even living conditions for all its contract workers helping it deliver beverage sales around the world.
Enterprise software leader SAP has coupled its industry-leading diversity program to new pay equity and sustainability initiatives. For example, the company now openly publishes all pay bands so employees can see where they are and the pay scales for all new jobs posted. In parallel, it provides hiring and workplace support for neurodivergent employees. After undertaking a progressive gender pay equity analysis, it inaugurated a very aggressive program of promotions of women into senior leadership — all long-term “people sustainability” strategies.
Financial services firm Liberty Mutual sees people sustainability as a factor in limiting the global risks of its customers, partners, and employees in the face of accelerating climate change. Chief sustainability officer Francis Hyatt, who previously served as executive vice president of enterprise talent practices, oversees the integration of global climate issues in the firm’s risk management approach and promotes sustainability solutions for employees, resellers, and customers. The company promotes thought-through generational and gender equality programs, and Hyatt ensures that every employee understands how their long-term safety and success is part of the company’s overall sustainability strategy. In other words, this new job function unifies all the brand’s existing HR work into the context of sustainability and helping the planet.

What links all three of these major corporations is the way each separately discovered that when you frame human capital investment in the context of sustainability, it assumes even more importance than it did before.

If you see value in this approach, where should you start at your organization? Building on the European Union’s new detailed CSRD reporting requirements, leaders will need to address issues ranging from greenhouse gas emissions to gender pay across their own operations, as well as that of their suppliers and business partners. You should try to ensure sustainability becomes a pillar of operations as early as possible, as the compliance clock is ticking.

The real action is to get your HR team to start working as soon as possible with their ESG colleagues to get people sustainability metrics and strategies into your business goals. To drive this, bring together a team including your heads of HR, DEI, and ESG, as well as representatives from your corporate finance and legal teams, to design your people sustainability program. You’ll ultimately want to see these goals reflected in your annual report and other stakeholder communications, so that these programs are seen as a core part of company strategy.

A recent survey by PwC reveals that many CEOs anticipate climate risk will affect their cost profiles and supply chains in the next year. However, despite these challenges, 60% of the surveyed CEOs do not plan to reduce headcount, and 80% do not plan to decrease compensation, as they recognize the importance of retaining talented employees.

Data like this underlines how people sustainability has become an integral strategy for corporate growth. Investors will soon begin to measure the effectiveness of a company’s well-being initiatives as a key metric of overall performance as much as its P&L.

You don’t have to be directly affected by Europe’s new sustainability laws to see that bringing together previously disconnected efforts such as DEI, purpose, or L&D under the umbrella of “long-term organizational sustainability” makes a lot of sense. You might even see it as meeting the needs of the present without compromising your future: a measure of sustainability that certainly gets my support.

Josh Bersin is founder and CEO of human capital advisory firm The Josh Bersin Company. He is a global research analyst, public speaker, and writer on the topics of corporate human resources, talent management, recruiting, leadership, technology, and the intersection between work and life. To see the original post, follow this link: https://hbr.org/2023/09/sustainability-is-about-your-workforce-too

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

Consumers Demand That Governments, Brands And Retailers Do More To Ensure Packaging Is More Sustainable

14 09 2023

Image: Felins

From Two Side Europe • Reposted: September 14, 2023

The Trend Tracker Survey 2023, the latest consumer research from Two Sides Europe, seeks to understand changing consumer perceptions towards print and paper products, looking specifically at environmental awareness, reading habits, packaging preferences and attitudes towards tissue products.

Online Shopping – Good News For Paper Packaging
The shift to online shopping has accelerated dramatically in recent years. At the touch of a screen, consumers can search for a product, order and have it delivered to their door, sometimes on the same day. As consumers have come to appreciate the safety, speed and convenience of buying products online, they also are increasingly more concerned about how those products are packaged and delivered.

European consumers are demanding that retailers do more to ensure their packaging is widely recyclable, and 49% believe that paper-based packaging is easier to recycle than other materials. Recycling data reflects this belief: 82% of paper packaging is recycled, the highest recycling rate of any packaging material. Glass has a recycling rate of 76%, metal 76% and plastic just 38% (Eurostat, 2020).

71% of European consumers prefer products ordered online to be delivered in fitting packaging to reduce waste, up from 68% in 2021. 59% prefer products to be delivered in paper packaging, and perceive sustainable benefits of paper compared to other packaging materials, including glass, metal and plastic.

Consumers Demand Retailers Do More
Retailers play a crucial role in the innovation of product packaging and the use of recyclable, sustainable packaging materials. In response to increasing media and consumer pressure to perform and behave in a more sustainable way, retailers throughout Europe, particularly supermarkets, are improving and communicating their environmental credentials, commitments, and achievements. Even so, less than half of those surveyed (46%) believe that retailers are doing enough to inform consumers of their commitments and achievements related to sustainability.

The survey revealed that consumers would be willing to act if they don’t think a retailer is doing enough to become more sustainable. 41% would consider avoiding a retailer that is not actively trying to reduce their use of non-recyclable packaging, and 55% would buy more from retailers who remove plastic from their packaging.

Because consumers are concerned about the impacts that packaging waste has on our planet, they increasingly expect that governments and brands, as well as retailers, do more to ensure packaging is widely recyclable. When consumers were asked to rank who they believe has the most responsibility for reducing the use of non-recyclable single-use packaging, 39% believe that governments and local authorities are the most responsible, followed by brands, retailers and supermarkets (22%), packaging manufactures (20%) and the individual (19%).

To find out more about the Two Sides campaign, and how you can become a supporter, visit www.twosides.info

An executive summary of the Trend Tracker Survey 2023 was published in June and is available to industry stakeholders on request. Visit twosides.info/trend-tracker-2023 to register your interest in receiving this summary.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://whattheythink.com/news/116482-consumers-demand-governments-brands-retailers-do-more-ensure-packaging-more-sustainable/

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

A new approach to environmental, social and governance policies is needed before it’s too late

13 09 2023

Image: Wharton

By Daniel Tsai, Lecturer in Business and Law, University of Toronto and Peer Zumbansen, Professor of Business Law, McGill University via The Conversation • Reposted: September 23, 2023

This summer has proven how destructive climate change can be. We have been plagued by harrowing images of Maui, Hawaii in ashes, news about wildfires spreading smoke across Canada and the United States and record-breaking heat waves worldwide.

It’s clear we are facing a crisis on a planetary scale, requiring immediate political, social and economic action.

Corporations and governments have rushed to declare their commitment to environmental, social and governance (ESG) principles in response to the climate crisis. One of the issues with ESG is how difficult it is for investors, consumers and the public to assess how effectively companies have implemented it.

In addition, the lack of government leadership and the fragmentation of the ESG landscape has created uncertainty about its future. Many firms don’t know if they should lead by example or wait to follow the pack.

Several large investors and corporations in the U.S. — most notably BlackRock — have recently become targets of the “anti-woke” movement, adding further uncertainty and hesitancy to committing to ESG.

The public debate around ESG, stakeholder governance, sustainability and responsible investment continues to gain momentum in the midst of all this.

In response, McGill University’s CIBC Office of Sustainable Finance hosted academics and experts from 11 countries to confront the issues of ESG, climate change governance and democratic politics. The resulting impact paper proposes several policy recommendations for governments and corporations to work together to transform ESG standards into practice.

Increased transparency and accountability

Despite recurring financial crises and staggering socio-economic inequality, corporations find themselves conflicted by the need to maximize profits with ESG. But profit can still coexistalongside a significant business and investment shift towards sustainability.

A fully transparent and publicly available ESG and sustainability index for financial institutions and corporations would improve transparency, accountability and address the demand for ESG.

If large public corporations were required to report universal ESG metrics, it would lead to healthy competition among corporations to go above and beyond the minimum index requirements. This would allow investors and consumers to see how companies are actually implementing ESG policies, leading to increased transparency.

Meaningful disclosure will ultimately lead to a transformation of a company’s buying, production, selling and investing practices.

A glass-fronted building with the word Blackrock written across the front in capital letters — *The BlackRock investment company in the Hudson Yards neighbourhood of New York City on March 14, 2023. AP Photo/Ted Shaffrey*

Corporations and influential asset managers — such as BlackRock, State Street or Vanguard — must address stakeholder interests in ESG by changing their governance and investment practices in relation to their position of global power and influence.

A public index would provide a reference point for public and private behaviour to effectively address the causes of disastrous climate change. It would go beyond empty social media posts and corporate website statements by exposing companies’ shortcomings in across-the-board implementation of ESG policies.

Increased transparency would also help prevent companies from greenwashing by boosting their ESG ratings before quarterly or semiannual public disclosures.

In addition, a shared public commitment would not kill profits, as some have argued. Instead, it can mobilize people to think differently about gains, growth and what it means to run a successful business.

This forward momentum can lead to the integration of sustainability officers, who play a key role in ensuring effective ESG implementation, into businesses and organizations.

Incentivizing green investment

Another recommendation is for governments worldwide to offer incentives for green and purpose-driven investments, as Canada has done with green tax credits that were unveiled in the 2023 budget.

But these tax credits need to go further. For example, the government could provide tax credits to the oil, gas and mining sectors for investing in renewable energies. The government could also allow investors to deduct related corporate losses against their personal income.

That will help spur economic growth, investment and development in beneficial industries and technologies, as we have seen with the rise of the electric vehicle industry.

A row of windmills seen from across a river — *The West Pubnico Point Wind Farm is seen in Lower West Pubnico, N.S. in August 2021. Image: THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan*

The goal should be to encourage corporations to better integrate sustainable practices within their business models and create targeted investment that favours socially responsible investment. That way, governments can use their tax systems to support technologies and business models that address climate change.

The bigger picture

Governments need to take a longer view on the development of sustainability policies and push back against short-term criticism. One way world governments can do this is by publicly endorsing ESG initiatives. Government officials should also do more to promote ESG.

Governments can also help make the financial sector sustainable by providing favourable loans and financing for greener investment portfolios.

Governments, central banks and banking regulators can create regulations that require financial institutions to implement sustainability into their underwriting policies. This would involve placing higher interest costs on loans with poor ESG outcomes to encourage industries to invest in better ESG.

By setting transparent standards for ESG accountability, requiring corporations to participate in sustainability indexes and standards and offering economic incentives through tax reform, governments can have a transformative effect on businesses through ESG. But it requires effective leadership.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://theconversation.com/a-new-approach-to-environmental-social-and-governance-policies-is-needed-before-its-too-late-211473

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

We Asked Americans What They Think About the Term “ESG.” Their Answers Were Eye-Opening

13 09 2023

Image credit: blacksalmon/Adobe Stock

By Carol Cone from Triple Pundit • Reposted: September 13, 2023

The term ESG is fine, according to a recent poll of 1,000 Americans. Despite continued polarization related to the acronym, which stands for environmental, social and governance, the majority of Americans believe it’s the best way to describe a company’s approach to improve business, society and the environment. Before we get to the data, though, it’s important to understand why we asked this question in the first place.

How did we get here?

Over the past year, a rising chorus of conservative U.S. voices have claimed that ESG is “woke capitalism,” or corporate virtue signaling about social and environmental concerns which they see as beyond the bounds of business.

The issue drew President Joe Biden’s first presidential veto in March of this year, defending legislation related to ESG investing and bringing the issue into the national spotlight. ESG is facing such a significant backlash that BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, long one of the financial industry’s staunchest proponents for purpose and ESG, doesn’t even want to use the term — though BlackRock’s policies around society, the environment, and business governance remain unchanged.

It’s also important to establish that whatever you call them, sound ESG practices are not new, and are indeed vital to operating a responsible, ethical, and profitable business. As Fortune sustainability reporter Eamon Barrett observed, “major corporations documenting their environmental, social, and governance policies for investor scrutiny is actually a decades-old process.” At its core, ESG is a means to broaden the lens on what constitutes key drivers of business value, accompanied by efforts to measure and report on what matters for individual company operations via standardized reporting frameworks.

Americans say ESG is a-okay

We partnered with Purpose Collaborative member Reputation Leaders, a global research and thought leadership consultancy, to ask Americans what term they feel best describes “the approach companies take to improve business, society and the environment.”
ESG and sustainability are tied for the top, at 23 percent each. Corporate social responsibility is second, at 21 percent, followed by purpose (11 percent), corporate citizenship (8 percent), stakeholder capitalism (7 percent) and stewardship (5 percent).

ESG research statistics — public opinion

Across demographic groups, ESG and sustainability are the favored terms among men, while women prefer “corporate social responsibility,” a phrase that connotes a sense of obligation. ESG is also the top choice for younger audiences, particularly those aged 25 to 34, while consumers aged 55 to 64, prefer the term “sustainability.” There are regional differences, as well. People living in the Northeast prefer sustainability, while their Southern and Midwestern counterparts prefer ESG.

Reputation Leaders also analyzed the tone of media coverage related to Americans’ top three terms: ESG, CSR and sustainability. CSR garnered the largest share of positive sentiment at 37 percent, with sustainability in second place at 32 percent and ESG trailing at 20 percent. ESG was the only term to have a significant amount (10 percent) of negative sentiment.

What now?

This study can help support companies in exploring the terms they will use to discuss the impact their business has on society. It is important to develop a clear, shared perspective and take a long-term view.

From the United Nations to the World Economic Forum, global leaders are advocating for businesses to embed a net-positive approach into their operating models to accelerate innovation and impact. Increasingly, employees, customers, supply chain partners, and others are asking about the ESG commitments of the companies they work for or with. Business leaders need to have answers and a strong point of view on which issues are most important to their business, and why. Our best advice? Don’t worry about what you call it — stick to your organization’s long-term, strategic commitments to stakeholders, society and the environment.

When it comes to communications, here are three ways to help depolarize the conversation:

Be clear about the goals of ESG. ESG is not about imposing a set of values on business. It provides a framework for companies to assess and optimize their value and impact.
Increase transparency around ESG data and metrics. This will help to ensure that investors and other stakeholders are making informed decisions.
Embrace standardized reporting frameworks. This will make it easier to comparecompanies’ ESG performance — think: the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) or the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB).

Yes, the polarization will continue, especially as the 2024 presidential election nears. As the world continues to endure climate impacts from extreme heat and flooding to record-breaking wildfires, there also will be greater demand for businesses to address environmental challenges.

Scores of studies suggest that ESG — done right — drives sustainable competitive advantage and can accelerate organizational growth over the long-term. An impressive 80 percent of investors believe that companies with strong ESG practices can generate higher returns and make for better long-term investments, according to research from Morgan Stanley.

By continuing to show a link between ESG issues and the business, we can help to make the debate around ESG more constructive and less polarizing. This will ultimately benefit businesses, investors and society as a whole.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/americans-think-esg/783186

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, GRI, Purpose Collaborative, Reputation Leaders, responsible brands, SASB, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, TCFD, United Nations, World Economic Forum
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, responsible brands, sustainable branding

Business schools must step up on sustainable investing education

11 09 2023

Student-Managed Investment Funds provide students with experience managing real investment portfolios. But new research shows only. a small minority of funds include environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in their mandates. Photo: Shutterstock

By Lorin Busaan, PhD Student, Gustavson School of Business, University of Victoria and Basma Majerbi, Associate Professor of Finance, Gustavson School of Business, University of Victoria via The Conversation • Reposted: September 11, 2023

Sustainable investing takes into account environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors alongside traditional financial components. While this form of investing has existed for a long time, ESG has become a hot-button issue due to recent politicization and widespread public misconceptions around what it really entails.

ESG investing examines quantitative and qualitative non-financial data on companies. This includes environmental issues like carbon emissions, pollution and resource use; social issues like employee treatment and relationships with communities; and governance issues like diversity of corporate boards, business ethics and transparency.

Criticisms of ESG investing have been exacerbated by post-secondary finance programs that barely touch upon these issues, resulting in a significant shortage of qualified sustainable investment professionals.

Due diligence

A basic qualification for finance graduates is the ability to analyze the environmental, social or governance factors that create risks and opportunities for a given company and, in turn, affect investors’ returns.

Unfortunately, graduates often lack even this basic qualification, in addition to more advanced expertise required to assess the investment impacts on people and the planet.

Given the climate crisis and persistent inequality, business schools must urgently and immediately tackle the sustainability deficit in finance education. Formal instruction must be enhanced with experiential learning techniques that expose students to the complexity and nuances of sustainable investing.

Our research shows that Student Managed Investment Funds (SMIFs) — currently present at many Canadian universities — are an underused, hands-on learning opportunity for training the next generation of sustainable investment professionals.

ESG under fire

Despite the potential of sustainable investing to accelerate the net-zero carbon transition and support the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), it has come under fire in recent years.

A dark-haired man speaks into a microphone. — The head of the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System testifies before a Kansas legislative committee in March 2023 about a bill that would bar the pension system from ESG investing. (AP Photo/John Hanna)

Politically, sustainable investing has become a flashpoint for partisan conflict in America’s culture wars. Right-wing critics argue that including ESG considerations in investment decisions is intrusive moralizing and part of a “woke capitalism” agenda.

Counterparts on the left downplay concerns about economic transition costs or exaggerate the power of ESG investing to create a better world.

Recent studies also show that third-party ESG ratings are unreliable, leaving considerable room for greenwashing or, at minimum, “greenwishing” — when companies or investors have good intentions but fail to meet their sustainability goals.

Criticisms and politicization, combined with other factors, have curtailed flows to ESG funds. This is unfortunate given the urgent need to mobilize more financial capital to address climate change, biodiversity loss and inequality.

Reforming business schools

Developing competence in sustainable investing requires a serious revision in business school finance programs.

Core courses must include sustainable investing concepts and tools as part of mainstream financial education. This is especially important given fast-evolving ESG and climate-related regulations and rising global risks that pose new threats to companies and investors.

It’s also important that students learn the limits of different forms of sustainable investing to avoid falling into the trap of greenwashing.

Many ESG strategies primarily focus on risk mitigation with, at best, a marginal impact on people or the planet. Others, such as impact investing, focus on measurable social and environmental outcomes, often using the UN’s SDGs for their impact goals, alongside financial returns.

Impact investing could unlock much needed capital for critical sectors in the net-zero transition that would otherwise be underfunded when using traditional financial metrics.

In short, sustainable investing, in all its forms, requires additional skills that are currently lacking in finance education. Social and environmental impacts can be difficult to quantify and may require longer-term perspectives and qualitative judgements about potential impacts on many stakeholders.

A lecture hall with a man at the front delivering a lecture. — *It’s important that students learn the limits of different forms of sustainable investing to avoid falling into the trap of greenwashing. Image: Unsplash*

Student-managed investment funds

These skills are best developed through hands-on practice that supplements formal instruction. Student-Managed Investment Funds (SMIFs) provide students with experience working together to manage real investment portfolios under the guidance of faculty supervisors and industry professionals.

Canadian universities have established more than 30 funds that students oversee as portfolio managers, buying and selling stocks, bonds or other assets. The capital in these funds comes from a variety of sources, including donations from companies, philanthropic gifts from individuals or foundations, and in some cases from university endowments.

Unfortunately, our research shows that only a small minority of these funds include ESG considerations in their mandates.

Of the 31 Canadian SMIFs we analyzed (totalling $79.5 million managed by students), only five (16 per cent) have some level of ESG consideration. Since business schools have long used student-managed funds to train the next generation of investment bankers, financial analysts and other financial industry professionals, this is surprising — and disappointing.

a graph shows the number of smifs in canada with esg components. — Authors’ analysis of SMIFs in Canada with ESG components based on publicly available data from major Canadian business schools’ websites as of fall 2022. Impact Investing Hub, University of Victoria

The gap is even more pronounced for impact investing, which is barely mentioned in any of the funds in our sample, despite universities’ commitments to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.

a graph shows the size of smifs in canada with and without ESG components. — Authors’ analysis of the size of SMIFs with and without ESG components, based on publicly available data from major Canadian business schools’ websites as of fall 2022. Impact Investing Hub, University of Victoria

Sustainable finance education could benefit greatly when students work together to integrate financial, environmental and social factors in student-managed investment funds.

Learning by doing helps students develop important analytical skills, familiarizes them with key tools and data sources and helps them navigate the maze of ESG standards, frameworks and guidelines.

The role of universities

Including sustainability mandates in finance programs and student-managed investment funds will ensure Canadian universities train the next generation of sustainable investment professionals needed to accelerate the net-zero transition.

We encourage university administrators and finance educators across the country to immediately implement ESG policies for existing student-managed investment funds. In collaboration with industry and donors, new funds could also be established that focus on particular themes, like climate solutions or nature-positive investing.

One encouraging initiative in this regard is by Propel Impact, a non-profit that is collaborating with seven universities to run their own local student impact funds.

Through creative partnerships with investors, Propel has been supporting student training while benefiting local communities, with $750,000 directed by students toward 14 Canadian social enterprises over the past three years. We offer this program to University of Victoria students and hope it expands to more Canadian universities.

As we confront pressing social and environmental challenges, we can’t be discouraged by partisan sniping. Instead, we must build momentum for sustainable investing by training future financial professionals more effectively.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://theconversation.com/business-schools-must-step-up-on-sustainable-investing-education-208352

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

ESG at a Crossroads: Down, But Not Out

11 09 2023

Image credit: Justin Luebke/Unsplash

By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: September 11, 2023

With the 2023 proxy season in the rear-view mirror, financial analysts noted a sharp decline in shareholder support for environmental, social and governance proposals. However, anti-ESG proposals also failed to stick, and signs of an ESG resurgence are already beginning to emerge.

Mixed support in the 2023 proxy season

Most U.S. companies hold proxy sessions between April and June, enabling shareholders to vote on issues without being present.

Based on the outcome of the 2023 season, shareholders seem to be losing interest in ESG issues. In a June analysis, the firm FTI Consulting noted that “2023 has seen investors support significantly less environmental and social proposals than in past years.”

The question is whether or not the drop-off marks a permanent trend or a temporary reaction to current events. FTI attributed much of the decline to the “anti-ESG” agenda, explaining: “The scrutiny on institutional investor vote behavior…by the anti-ESG activists has caused institutional investors to support less environmental and social proposals in 2023.”

At the same time, anti-ESG proposals also failed to garner much support from shareholders over the past five years, the analysis found. FTI advised that other factors can also have a significant influence on ESG support. Analysts cited the 2022 proxy season, which also saw a drop in ESG support after a rules change by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The change fostered a spike in the number of prescriptive proposals to come up for a vote, and prescriptive proposals generally receive low support from shareholders regardless of their subject matter.

We don’t talk about ESG, but we do it

One area where the anti-ESG movement has clearly had an impact is in the way in which bankers, money managers and other financial stakeholders communicate. Many continue to put the principles into action while avoiding specific references to ESG, as shown by a recent Bloomberg survey.

“About two-thirds of respondents in a survey of roughly 300 Bloomberg terminal users said the anti-ESG movement that started in the U.S. last year will force firms to stop using those three letters in conversations with clients,” Alastair Marsh and Lisa Pham of Bloomberg observed last month. “However, they’ll continue to incorporate environmental, social and governance metrics in their business.”

Financiers under fire

The Bloomberg analysis is among those attributing ESG avoidance to an aggressive, partisan political environment of legislative and legal attacks on ESG investing.

Though the issue seems to have failed to gain traction among voters, fossil energy stakeholdershave been credited with motivating Republican office holders to act. Their efforts reportedly include model bills created by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which has established a right-wing reputation with an emphasis on protecting fossil fuels.

“The finance industry is now grappling with a second year of attacks on ESG by key members of the Republican Party, including threats of litigation from state attorneys general, as well as outright bans on the strategy in some U.S. states,” Marsh and Pham of Bloomberg noted.

The attacks prompted one of the highest-profile proponents of the ESG investing movement, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, to stop using the acronym altogether.

“I don’t use the word ESG any more, because it’s been entirely weaponized … by the far left and weaponized by the far right,” Fink told a gathering at the Aspen Ideas Festival last summer, as reported by Reuters. In the same speech, he reaffirmed BlackRock’s commitment to discussing decarbonization, corporate governance and social issues with the companies in its portfolio.

Financiers fight back

Despite the political headwinds, financial stakeholders continue to act in support of social and environmental principles. Part of the effort is happening behind the scenes, as financial stakeholders seek to convince legislators that anti-ESG bills will result in financial harm to their states.

In a recent analysis, S&P Global identified 12 states in which Republican legislators “successfully pushed anti-environmental, social and governance legislation across the finish line.” In all, 19 states now have one or more anti-ESG laws on the books.

That may seem like a substantial gain, but the legislative failures outweighed the successes. “Many anti-ESG bills introduced in 2023 … failed after chambers of commerce, banking associations and public pension officials raised concern over costs or free market principles,” S&P observed.

In addition, only four of the 25 new anti-ESG laws to pass this year remained intact by the time of the August analysis. The other 21 were substantially revised to protect state pension funds. S&P cited Indiana and Texas as examples, both of which would have faced billions in losses over 10 years without the revisions.

Taking it to the courts

Financial stakeholders are also taking their case to court. For example, last month the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) — an industry group that counts BlackRock among its members — moved to challenge new Missouri rules on ESG documentation.

The rules went into effect on July 30. As described by SIFMA, they stipulate burdensome documentation that no other state requires. SIFMA argues that the new rules put Missouri in direct conflict with the 1996 National Securities Markets Improvements Act, under which states cannot preempt standard federal record-keeping rules.

“Under existing federal securities laws, broker-dealers and investment advisers are already required to provide investment advice that is in the best interest of their customers,” the group argued as it announced the suit. “The Missouri rules are thus unnecessary and create confusion.”

The climate factor

New reporting rules established by the European Union may also motivate U.S. companies to continue making progress on ESG principles, regardless of what’s happening at home.

The new EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive became effective last January. “This new directive modernizes and strengthens the rules concerning the social and environmental information that companies have to report,” the European Commission’s website reads. The new rules cover large companies as well as small and midsized companies.

In June, the Republican-led ESG Working Group in the U.S. House of Representatives released an interim report that recommended protecting U.S. companies from “burdensome EU regulations.” However, Republican leadership will have a hard time reconciling protectionism with their party’s longtime support for free market principles.

The anti-ESG movement is also floundering on the national stage. Surveys routinely reflect public support for ESG principles. Moreover, high-profile Republicans aren’t helping the case.

The hapless presidential campaign of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is one example. Among other issues, the Republican governor has cultivated a reputation for opposing ESG investing, highlighted by a high-stakes legal feud with Florida’s top employer, Disney, over LGBTQ rights.

Another example is the looming impeachment of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a prominent anti-ESG Republican, on charges of corruption and bribery. His wife’s reported involvement with a shell company has raised additional questions about allegiance to the principles of fiduciary duty.

Looming over all this is climate change, a factor from which Florida, Texas and other anti-ESG states are hardly immune. With the exception of fossil energy stakeholders, the rising threat of climate risks will continue to influence and motivate corporate behavior regardless of the outcome of the upcoming 2024 proxy season.

Tina writes frequently for TriplePundit and other websites, with a focus on military, government and corporate sustainability, clean tech research and emerging energy technologies. She is a former Deputy Director of Public Affairs of the New York City Department of Environmental Protection, and author of books and articles on recycling and other conservation themes. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/esg-down-not-out/782776

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, ALEC, Anti-ESG, Bloomberg, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, responsible brands, S&P Global, SIFMA, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, social responsibility

Fairtrade: US consumers prioritise supply chain transparency

9 09 2023

By Lucy Buchholz from Sustainability Magazine • Reposted: September 09, 2023

The 2023 Fairtrade America Consumer Insights report reveals that 61% of Americans now identify the Fairtrade label, marking a 20% increase since 2021

The world’s most recognised label for social justice and sustainability, Fairtrade America, shared that recognition for the mark has more than doubled in the last four years – marking monumental progress.

According to the 2023 Fairtrade America Consumer Insights, 61% of American consumers now recognise the Fairtrade Mark, an increase of 20% from 2021.

The online study – which surveyed 2,000 American consumers and 11,000 from across 12 countries – disclosed that four in five consumers are willing to pay more for ethical and sustainability-sourced products, despite the cost of living crisis. Additionally, these findings demonstrate that shoppers are prioritising transparency amongst supply chains.

“Shoppers in the US are driving change with their purchasing power,” said Amanda Archila, executive director of Fairtrade America. “We are energised by these results and remain focused on increasing the US market for Fairtrade-certified products by meeting consumers where they are in their sustainable shopping journey and building strength with farming communities around the world.

Consumers demonstrate a growing trust in the Fairtrade mark

As trust in the Fairtrade label has steadily grown, 85% of US shoppers believe that featuring the label positively influences their perception of a brand.

In fact, two out of every three shoppers familiar with Fairtrade prefer retailers that stock certified products and globally, the Fairtrade mark remains the world’s most recognised ethical label, with 71% of shoppers having encountered it.

Among Fairtrade-certified products, coffee takes the lead with 48% recognition, and consumers are willing to pay up to 35% more for a bag of Fairtrade-certified coffee. Fairtrade chocolate closely follows with 43% visibility, and shoppers are ready to pay a premium of up to 55% for a Fairtrade-certified chocolate bar.

“We firmly believe that businesses can grow responsibly while ensuring that farmers and workers who grow our favourite foods including cocoa, coffee and bananas get a fairer deal,” Archila, adds. “And it’s clear that consumers are demanding the same.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainabilitymag.com/articles/fairtrade-us-consumers-prioritise-supply-chain-transparency

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

5 Ways To Demonstrate Your Brand’s Social Responsibility

9 09 2023

Photo: Shutterstock

By Maggie Ellison from myhfa.org • Reposted: September 9, 2023

Are you aware of your surroundings? In tune with movements, trends, and fads? Understanding of the dynamic shift of generational mindsets? Giving back in big ways? Sharing your commitment to good? Consumers practically demand brands to share a deep compassion for the community they serve.

In a world of increasing social awareness, today’s consumers seek more than just a product or service. They’re seeking brands that align with their values and are dedicated to positively impacting society. According to one study, 70% of consumers said it’s important for brands to take a stand on social and political issues. It’s no longer a question of whether consumers care about brands being socially conscious but how you can integrate community and caring into your business. When you demonstrate your brand’s social responsibility, it isn’t just a marketing strategy – it reflects your values and commitment to making a positive impact.

Here are five ways to demonstrate your brand’s efforts toward corporate social responsibility:

Foster Employee Engagement

A great place to start showcasing your brand’s dedication to the community and the world is by starting with your team. One study found that 60% of employees choose a workplace based on their beliefs and values. Establishing core values will help guide you and your employees and serve as a starting point for determining appropriate causes to support. Encourage your team to get involved with volunteerism and partake in discussions about company values to help them develop a connection to the cause your company is championing. A team that believes in its cause is most likely to amplify your brand’s positive impacts!

What can you keep doing or start doing to ask your employees what matters to them?

Advocate for Causes That Align with Your Company Values

Pick a social or environmental cause that resonates with your brand’s values and aligns with your audience’s interests. From climate change to social inequity, you can use your platform to raise awareness and showcase your brand’s dedication to current events. 58% of consumers will buy or advocate for a brand based on their beliefs and values. Word-of-mouth marketing like that builds trust and community around a brand that is difficult to replicate any other way. Include messaging on furniture tags highlighting the cause – did a tree get planted for every couch produced? Did a child in need receive a backpack of school supplies for every hand-crafted table made in an impoverished area? Let people know that. Signage, tags, literature, social media tagging, and marketing messaging are easy ways to translate what matters to your customers. Commit to the commitment.

How can you highlight in all marketing channels your commitment to a cause?

Partner with Charitable Organizations

Collaborating with established organizations will ensure your efforts have a lasting impact and provide tangible support to the cause you’ve chosen to promote. This is a powerful way to leverage your brand’s reach for a good cause. Allow the partner organization to host a table within your brick-and-mortar, include their messaging in banner ads on your website, provide a give-back option for your customers to round up, and provide those funds to a non-profit that aligns. Another terrific opportunity is co-branding products or services or offering a simple add-on for customers where a percentage or all proceeds benefit the cause. This plus-up can be powerful, and the impact is far-reaching. Building trust with your audience is vital to a brand’s success, and partnering with trusted organizations to make change happen will show customers that your dedication to social change is more than a marketing tactic. 40% of consumers believe the best way for brands to display social responsibility is to collaborate with a non-profit organization dedicated to that cause.

What can you do to amplify your chosen cause and provide impact?

Engage with Your Community

Engage with your community by sponsoring local events or supporting local charities to connect with your audience face-to-face. An experiential marketing campaign that directly engages with your audience about the causes your brand cares about can foster a sense of community and shared responsibility by educating attendees and encouraging them to participate in problem-solving actively. Experiential marketing campaigns can boost your brand awareness and create loyal customers. 74% of consumers said engaging with experiential activations made them more likely to buy the promoted product. Also, 98% of consumers create social content from their experiences, and 100% share the content they create. Highlighting a social issue that resonates with your brand during community events can foster a stronger connection with your audience.

What can you step up to sponsor, or what events can you showcase your brand that impacts the community?

Be Transparent and Authentic

Throughout it all, communicate with transparency and authenticity to naturally build customer trust. By clearly articulating your brand’s core values and mission, your audience will understand what you stand for and develop a deeper relationship with your brand. In 2022, 60% of consumers said that trustworthiness and transparency were the most important traits of a brand. Consumers want to know that their money is going to a trustworthy company that will use its power to improve the world. This is why it’s important to regularly showcase your company’s steps to contribute positively to society, like charitable partnerships, co-branded products, advocating for products that are making a difference, and community engagement. By continuing to promote a social cause relevant to your brand, your audience will come to trust you for what you provide and what you stand for as a company.

How is your brand speaking to the public? Is it authentic?

Integrating social responsibility into your brand identity goes beyond superficial gestures – it’s about creating a meaningful and lasting impact. Whether through sustainable practices, ethical partnerships, educational campaigns, or community engagement, every step your business takes can contribute to a better world and deeply resonate with your customers. By aligning your brand’s core values with meaningful action, you’re building a loyal fan base and driving positive change. Remember, when you demonstrate a socially responsible brand it is more than a label; It’s a catalyst for change, and consumers today demand commitment.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://myhfa.org/5-ways-to-demonstrate-your-brands-social-responsibility/

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

Emerging tech will empower conscious consumers

8 09 2023

Image: Maskot/Getty Images

By Ken Moore from Fast Company • Reposted: September 8, 2023

Most consumers today want to buy from brands that align with their values—it’s more important to them than cost and convenience, brand loyalty, or product functionality. They will pay more for products and services that tangibly support their social, ethical, and environmental objectives—and abandon those that don’t. This sentiment has strong roots in the youngest consumers: An extraordinary 84% of teens told researchers they strive to buy based on their beliefs.

There is mounting evidence that companies benefit when they heed this message: A study from South Korea, published in January, found that food and beverage companies with strong reputations for their environmental and social initiatives generate more consumer trust and positive word-of-mouth. Unilever’s purpose-led Sustainable Living brands have grown more than the rest of its business. And new research from McKinsey found that products that made claims about their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance outsold products that did not.

This seems like a simple equation: Consumers will reward companies with convincing ESG stories, and those brands thrive. There is a problem, however. Only 4 in 10 consumers say they have adequate data to make sound sustainable purchasing decisions. This may explain the complaint that customers say they support green, ethical, socially responsible companies with their wallets—but often don’t. They lack the information they need to follow through.

In fact, most businesses struggle to present a thorough, compelling story detailing their environmental impact: Only 13% can map their end-to-end supply chain and four out of five have no visibility beyond their immediate suppliers. Executives surveyed by IBM acknowledged that inadequate data is the biggest obstacle to their ESG efforts.

DATA-DRIVEN INSIGHTS

This will change over the next 5 to 10 years as companies deploy emerging technologies that unlock data to enable smarter supply chains and measure their end-to-end carbon footprint, organic production, recycling track record, and other outcomes. These include:

Connected supply chains that link fragmented systems, technologies, and networks
Visibility technologies that provide a complete picture of supply chain operations, from procurement of raw materials to shipment and use of end products
Blockchains to create an immutable audit trail that tracks the provenance and the movement of goods and include verified information regarding suppliers
Internet-of-things networks that improve supply chain transparency, and collect data supporting ESG compliance
AI, machine learning, and predictive analytics to extract insights from supply chain data. Generative AI has the potential to do the same with unstructured ESG data.
AI, blockchains and open data frameworks to enable Scope 3 emissions reporting

DELIVERING THE MESSAGE

Companies with stellar sustainability results will presumably be the first to leverage these technologies to establish their credibility with consumers and other stakeholders including regulators, shareholders, and current and potential employees. If the population of value-driven consumers is as large and committed as it appears to be—particularly millennials and Gen Z—other companies will follow suit and new ESG reporting expectations will be set. Conscious consumers will be empowered to vote with their wallets.

Enterprises will also turn to emerging technologies to share this information with consumers precisely when, where, and how they want it—online, in the store, via QR codes printed on product packaging, through smart glasses and virtual reality (VR) goggles, or at the point of sale (digital or physical.) “With AR (augmented reality), brands can turn products, packaging, and places into digital discovery channels, surfacing their sustainability efforts through a humble QR code,” notes Zappar, an AR studio in Scotland.

Indeed, there is evidence this is an effective way to engage customers. Using AR to inform purchase decisions increases consumer confidence in the product, increases sales, and reduces returns.

CLOSING THE PERCEPTION GAP

Three-fourths of executives surveyed by IBM said their stakeholders understand their companies’ ESG objectives and performance, but there is a disconnect. Only about 40% of consumers said they have enough information about corporate sustainability to make purposeful decisions about what to buy and where to work.

That’s a problem. It’s no time for business leaders to assume their value-driven customers are on board, because consumers have made it clear they will jump ship for a competitor that can demonstrate strong ESG credentials. As we approach an era in which all companies will have the means to do that, leaders can seize a competitive advantage by providing conscious consumers with information that empowers them to do what they find difficult today—make purchase decisions that reward companies that align with their values.

Ken Moore is the chief innovation officer at Mastercard and expert-in-residence at Harvard Innovation Labs. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.fastcompany.com/90948629/emerging-tech-will-empower-conscious-consumers

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, DEI, ESG, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding

The Wisdom Of Failure On The Path To Better Business

6 09 2023

Photo: Getty

By Tara Milburn, Forbes Councils Member via Forbes • Reposted: September 6, 2023

Failure stings, and when we feel we’ve done something wrong, we respond accordingly in order to diminish the chances of repeating the error. Nothing stings more than making the same mistake twice; we know this and usually do anything to avoid it.

Failure in our corporate system works in the same way. When things go wrong, the collective recruits resources to reduce the risk of a repeat. As it stands, 69% of consumersare actively concerned about climate change. Only 50% of executives feel their organizations’ strategies are reflective of their purpose, according to a study by Harvard Business Review and EY. The health of our planet and the purpose of our work are too important to get wrong twice; somewhere, our collective brain is recruiting some serious resources.

The impact of those resources is already taking effect. The twin crises of meaning and climate have quickly changed how we do business, and stakeholders are rewarding the effort. Companies that have established that clear, shared purpose within their organizations are seeing success—a 10% increase in growth in three years, according to the same HBR and EY report.

Similarly, consumers, investors and employees have all turned climate anxiety into action. According to findings from Gartner, 85% of investors prioritize ESG factors in their due diligence. Moreover, 66% of consumers pay more for responsible and sustainable products. Sixty-six percent of Gen Z employees opt for lower-paying jobs at more ethically and environmentally responsible companies.

Failure motivates us, and our societal shortcomings motivate profound and meaningful change in our businesses. Failure is a painful education, but finding these solutions could be worth every second. Here are a few ways business owners can follow the wisdom of failure toward a better way of doing business.

P&L&G: A New Kind Of Corporate Accounting

As business owners, we’ve learned to let the numbers do much of the talking. Profit and loss statements guide most of our decisions from hiring to business development to pricing. But stakeholders are making it clear that our “giving” is just as consequential to our corporate accounting, and it’s no longer just the thought that counts.

Before they make a purchase or an investment, individuals and institutions evaluate the social efforts of organizations. They’re looking for transparent ESG metrics, developed reporting, evidence of social impact and substantial long-term goals. Internally and externally, stakeholders hold organizations to higher sustainability standards, ESG transparency and social responsibility. They’re expanding the old definition of success as shareholder value; it makes good business sense for companies to take these fundamentals as seriously as they take their profit and loss (P&L).

Stronger internal cultures, heightened purchase motivation and improved long-term loyalty are proven outcomes of well-developed corporate impact programs. We can add better profit to that list; 82% of consumers“prefer a brand’s values to align with their own.” The support and the cause can take different forms. Many giants—Patagonia and TOMS come to mind—have made corporate responsibility famous with campaigns like 1% for the planet and “buy one, give one.”

Giving can also mean improving compensation and benefit structures, donating time to your immediate community, and supporting sustainability efforts across your supply chain.

Thoughtful Products Can Speak Louder Than Pledges

As companies put more resources into corporate responsibility, the impact will come from their actions. Stakeholders know it’s not what we say but what we do that matters. Small and actionable fixes reflect the larger aims of the corporation.

Employee gifts, customer outreach, and promotional products embody a company’s values. Opt for sustainable products, support small businesses and partner with thoughtful suppliers to walk the walk.

Sharing The Sharing: How Busy Teams Find Meaning

With a plan for giving and gifting, it’s time to delegate. Sharing the lift reduces the chances that a campaign is sidetracked. More importantly, delegation empowers your team to make the difference they want to see.

Choice-based gifting—offering your team ahead-of-time selection for their onboarding or holiday packages—can decrease waste and extend the chance to have a hand in supporting sustainable suppliers, small businesses and ESG leaders. Similarly, a recent study shows 86% of employees want to weigh in on their company’s corporate giving strategy by self-selecting charities or collectively deciding on the focus of a more extensive campaign.

When we make a mistake, we mobilize; we naturally make every effort we can to do things differently next time. In the same way, the failures of our societal and corporate structures are directing our next steps, showing us the improvements we can make. If we pay attention, the natural selection of our stakeholders could reduce our chances of committing the same collective errors and put us all on the path to a better kind of business.

Tara Milburn is the founder of Ethical Swag, a B Corp that helps brands source sustainable swag for employee and client gifting. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2023/09/05/the-wisdom-of-failure-on-the-path-to-better-business/?sh=161ed9e77ed6

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

Creating a Greener Future: The Role of Strategic Partners in Sustainability

6 09 2023

Graphic: accelerationeconomy.com

By Janet Schijns from accelerationeconomy.com • Reposted: September 6, 2023

The U.S. recently pledged to cut agriculture sector emissions by 50% by 2030. The sector accounts for over 10% of the overall emissions, making it a great first target. Once thought of as a “nice-to-have,” sustainability has now become a must-have not only for agriculture but also for businesses across every sector due to consumer expectations, climate change pressures, and numerous policy changes. This shift to the main stage underscores the importance of technological collaboration in formulating and executing responsible strategies that emphasize energy efficiency, carbon reduction, and waste management. This is where great partnerships can ease the burden for firms by helping them make sustainability matter.

Model Sustainability Partnerships

The Accenture Technology Ecosystem is an example of an ecosystem play in this arena. With more than 350 partners and suppliers, each selected for its exceptional, market-relevant offerings, Accenture leverages comprehensive industry insights and data-driven analytics to determine potential strategies to future technological needs. The Accenture Technology Ecosystem strives to lead in sustainability through its integrated approach.

Another example is how Microsoft, in partnership with Accenture and Avanade, is making significant strides towards a more sustainable future. This partnership is proving its worth as it embraces green software development principles, sustainable cloud migrations, and digital twin technology adoption. These efforts drive stronger performance, competitiveness, and progress toward their decarbonization goals and the journey to net zero emissions. Its joint sustainability efforts, particularly its pivotal role in the Green Software Foundation, showcase a collective commitment to constructing a trusted ecosystem that supports environmentally responsible software development.

Finally, Chrome OS demonstrates an exemplary commitment to sustainable computing. Through its cloud-first platform, which prioritizes energy efficiency, Chrome OS has created a progressive method for more sustainable computing. Collaborations with partners, including Insight Enterprises and CDW, further the goal of systemic change, enhancing efficiency across various operational areas.

Sustainability Across Industries

Sustainability extends across diverse industries, each with distinct applications and benefits that can be brought to the market by a variety of partners:

Automotive Industry: Manufacturers can utilize advanced tracking mechanisms to monitor their sustainability efforts. By setting and continually evaluating targets, they can enhance their performance in reducing environmental impact, focusing on energy consumption, waste production, and water usage. IoT partners are helping those in this industry adapt their processes and systems to utilize their technologies for sustainability gains.

Banking Industry: Green bonds and loans symbolize the integration of sustainability into financial practices. Data analytics enable banks to identify and invest in environmentally friendly projects and reduce their carbon footprints. Fintech-friendly tools from independent software vendors (ISVs) are helping to make this banking industry future a reality today.

Energy Sector: Embracing renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power, energy companies are utilizing data analytics to optimize operations and decrease environmental impact. But these efforts require a multitude of partnerships to develop software and equipment as well as do installations and service.

These are just a few examples — the widespread adoption of sustainability across various sectors reveals a transformation in corporate values and operations. Companies are not merely adopting sustainability as a trend but are integrating it into core business practices. They are guided and supported by technology partners who drive innovation and efficiency.

Finding the Right Partner

So, just how do you understand what will make a great partner for your business? Let’s explore that a little more here:

Identify the Right Partner

In the quest for sustainability, choosing the right partner is akin to finding the perfect piece in a complex puzzle. An ideal partner should have a shared vision and commitment to sustainability, backed by tangible actions and track record. Assessing a potential partner’s corporate values, technological capabilities, industry expertise, and alignment with the specific sustainability goals is essential. Conducting a thorough due diligence that includes their previous sustainability initiatives, compliance with environmental regulations, and cultural fit with your organization ensures that the collaboration rests on a foundation of common purpose and integrity.

Structure a Clear, Comprehensive Agreement

A partnership for sustainability requires a clear and comprehensive agreement, a legal tapestry weaving together shared goals, responsibilities, and performance metrics. Defining specific roles and responsibilities for each party, along with setting measurable objectives, timelines, and key performance indicators (KPIs), is essential. The agreement should also encompass financial arrangements, resource allocation, governance structures, and conflict resolution mechanisms. Furthermore, incorporating flexibility to adapt to changing regulations, market conditions, or technological advancements ensures that the partnership remains resilient and responsive to evolving sustainability landscapes.

Ensure Collaboration and Continuous Improvement

An effective sustainability partnership transcends contractual obligations and enters the realm of true collaboration and innovation. Regular communication, transparency, and joint decision-making fortify the partnership, making it more than a mere transaction. Implementing a robust monitoring and evaluation system to track progress, coupled with a commitment to continuous improvement and innovation, cultivates a dynamic collaboration. Encouraging creativity and fostering an environment where both partners can contribute ideas, insights, and strategies ensures that the partnership thrives, continually advancing towards sustainability goals with mutual respect and shared success.

Final Thoughts

By carefully selecting a partner with shared values, meticulously crafting a well-structured agreement, and fostering a culture of collaboration and continuous improvement, organizations can set the stage for a successful and enduring partnership for sustainability. It’s more than a business transaction; it’s a collective journey towards a greener and more responsible future.

Sustainability represents a complex, multifaceted challenge for modern enterprises. The collaboration between technology ecosystem partners and various industries is forging a path toward a more responsible and sustainable future. This movement is no longer confined to isolated initiatives but is manifesting as a comprehensive approach to business, reflecting a profound shift in corporate responsibility and ethical governance.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://accelerationeconomy.com/cxo/creating-a-greener-future-the-role-of-strategic-partners-in-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, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

We Can Eat Our Way Out of the Climate Crisis

4 09 2023

Image: UCLA

By Antony Yousefian via Sustainable Brands • Reposted: September 4, 2023

Applied to food supply chains, ambient IoT allows farmers, distributors, grocers, regulators and consumers to know where food came from, how far it traveled, how it was transported and stored, and what condition it’s in — in real time.

The world can’t count on carbon offsets to deliver us from the climate crisis. As helpful as it may be for corporations to offset some of their emissions, the greatest force for good is the everyday citizen. Specifically, it’s the well-informed, carbon-savvy grocery shoppers who buy sustainably grown produce — not just because they know the carbon footprint of bananas, zucchini, or beef; but because it’s also clear which farmers are regenerating the land to support a healthy planet.

How on earth can shoppers know? By tracking everything, everywhere, all the time.

My time in the financial markets drew me to climate tech startups and the importance of impact investing. Indicators from our planet were signaling code red. At the same time, the increased frequency of supply chain disruptions from biodiversity decline and climate change was hitting corporate profitability.

Investment funds focused on environmental, social and governance (ESG) commitments were ballooning; but I struggled to quantify or have visibility into exactly which corporations, or their products, were actually “doing good.” Quantification of the E in ESG was a real problem; and it was a multitrillion-dollar opportunity that made sense on all levels.

Since then, I’ve been involved with various innovative companies committed to tackling the issue head on — from carbon removal in supply chains to restoring biodiversity in soils. The latter led me to agriculture technology (AgTech) and the cutting-edge field of the Ambient Internet of Things(IoT) — a system of ubiquitous Bluetooth tags and cloud-based software that makes anything traceable and intelligent.

One of my first ventures into AgTech was to leverage IoT to measure leaf temperatures, soil conditions and root health — all key to driving sustainable farming decisions. It gave food producers the tools to see or digitize their risks in real-time, make improvements, and share the results with the supply chain. But the cost to acquire the data was high, which hindered scalability.

Ambient IoT changes the whole calculus because it’s based on ultra-low-cost, battery-free, stamp-sized computer sensors that can go anywhere and communicate wirelessly with existing systems or off-the-shelf, standardized network devices. Applied to food supply chains, ambient IoT allows farmers, distributors, grocers and even regulators to know where food came from, how far it traveled, how it was transported and stored, and what condition it’s in — and not only back when the food was harvested, packed or put on a truck; but in real time.

Taken together, ambient IoT data — location, time-in-transit, temperature, humidity and more — provides crucial primary data to calculate the carbon footprint not just of the food companies involved but of every individual product on a supermarket’s shelves. It’s a chief sustainability officer’s dream. Armed with this information, we as citizens can be given a choice to select food products that make the planet healthier — to do our part by eating sustainably.

Carbon visibility and trust

In a recent study by the Boston Consulting Group, 77 percent of consumers said they were concerned about the sustainability of the food they buy; 63 percent said they were trying to shop more sustainably. Their challenge? Acting on their concern.

There are a couple of reasons it’s hard for consumers to shop for sustainable food (or for that matter, sustainable clothes, cosmetics or household supplies). First is that they don’t always know which groceries are, in fact, sustainable. Second is that they’re not sure who they can trust.

In stores, consumers are bombarded by signs and food labels touting “local,” “organic” or “sustainable.” But when it comes to climate impact, such messaging can be confusing, if not misleading. Locally grown vegetables may have been stored in carbon-hungry refrigeration or cultivated in greenhouses that emit more carbon than a slow boat from another continent. And those organic fruits may have been grown with regenerative practices on a different continent and flown (then, driven miles) to the store. Yet each product does, indeed, have an individual carbon footprint that can be traced.

But in the absence of product-level carbon data, consumers look to brands for guidance, seeking those committed to “net zero” or other pledges to protect the climate. These are laudable efforts but susceptible to what the public and regulators have come to identify asgreenwashing — an act of climate fraud best combatted with credible, real-time data.

Not to mention, even responsible companies can only report on their sustainability commitments annually or quarterly — whenever a report is finished. Even monthly reporting falls short of what should be the standard for carbon tracing in the food chain: real-time, product-level carbon visibility. And only the ambient IoT can achieve that.

Real-time carbon data

Consumers have become skeptical, with some justification. Recently, a Dutch environmental foundation — in association with other food groups — reported on the pervasiveness of greenwashing in the food supply chain, which experts say contributes one-third of global emissions.

In response, regulators have taken it upon themselves to require producers of all kinds to prove sustainability claims through data. The best way to do it reliably and consistently is through meaningful, real-time metrics delivered through a credible medium.

Consumers live in a real-time world of social media feeds, fitness trackers and generative AI. Carbon visibility should be the next killer app — not only as it relates to what people eat but what they wear, where they vacation, and more.

Whether on people’s smartphones or via smart, digital shelf signage, supermarkets can use ambient IoT data to deliver carbon visibility the same way they engage shoppers in points clubs, digital coupons, and other social media-style promotions. Yes, gamification can help save the planet when it leads to more sustainable food consumption.

Unlocking the benefits of ambient IoT

Real-time carbon visibility is just part of the ambient IoT equation. Companies that deploy an ambient IoT infrastructure can solve other challenges, some that further support their climate goals and others that align the planet with profitability.

In addition to tracking the carbon footprint of products in their supply chain, companies can use ambient IoT data to capture missed revenues and reduce food waste. Ambient IoT can collect environmental data on elements such as temperature and humidity, even in stores and trucks, which determine freshness and shelf life. And it produces data to comply with new supply chain regulations and ensure food safety. Until now, most compliance checks have been manual, expensive and ad hoc. Ambient IoT automates compliance and cuts costs because now every product effectively shouts its status (i.e., sends data packets) on the way to supermarket shelves.

But ambient IoT is capable of even more. In the long run, to combat climate change, we must use it to restore biodiversity and put carbon back into the ground. The food system can achieve these goals through regenerative agriculture, which improves the health of soil and creates healthy plants and nutrient-rich food. There is already an ecosystem of innovative solutions to help measure the process of regenerative agriculture and accelerate its adoption. Ambient IoT has a role in that measurement.

Ultimately, ambient IoT will help mobilize data about the land and nature’s status. It can determine whether that next meal is traceable to a healthy, sustainable, regenerative source. Already, major initiatives like the EU’s regulation on deforestation-free products and the USgovernment’s Food Safety Modernization Act will require companies to prove they know where food comes from. This is a game-changer because it requires visibility into the flow of goods and materials and the ability to identify who is contributing to regenerating the land.

I’m confident that when citizens are turned onto this level of visibility, we’ll see them over-consume delicious, healthy meals. That’s how we eat our way out of climate change.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/defining-the-next-economy/eat-our-way-out-climate-crisis

Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: accountability, AgTech, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, l0T, loT, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding
Categories : Climate Change, DEI, ESG, responsible brands, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Beyond Buzzwords: A Concrete Model For Driving Business Sustainability

4 09 2023

Image: Getty

By Kumar Vijayendra, Forbes Business Council via Forbes • Reposted: September 4, 2023

In today’s business landscape, sustainability has emerged as a core component of successful strategies. With growing concerns about climate change, social responsibility and environmental impact, organizations are increasingly integrating sustainable practices into their operations.

However, despite the abundance of sustainability strategies and environmental, social and governance (ESG) reports, there remains a lack of comprehensive assessment criteria. This gap makes it challenging for businesses to develop and formulate functional sustainability strategies that can adapt to new problems or prompt innovative solutions to existing problems.

In order to address this issue, the following is a proposed assessment model for driving business sustainability and measuring impact and effectiveness.

1. Identify the key performance indicators.

The first step in developing an effective assessment model is to identify the KPIs specific to sustainability. These KPIs will serve as measurable metrics to provide insights into the success of sustainability initiatives. By defining and monitoring these indicators, organizations can assess their performance and progress towards sustainability goals.

KPIs may include energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, waste reduction, water usage, employee engagement and social impact. Sustainability Magazineactually listed five widely utilized KPIs: carbon footprint, consumption of energy, supply chain miles, waste reduction and recycling rates and social impact.

The bottom line when it comes to KPIs for sustainability strategies continues to be the ESG impact that an organization has. So, in addition to the suggested KPIs, it is essential that as a business owner, you draw up your own parameters that help you assess the environmental and social impact your business has.

2. Establish baseline data.

Before implementing sustainability strategies, it’s crucial to establish baseline data. This represents the starting point against which progress can be measured. It provides a reference for organizations to assess the impact of their initiatives and determine the extent of improvement achieved.

Baseline data can include historical records of energy consumption, waste generation, carbon footprint and other relevant parameters. This data serves as a benchmark and enables organizations to track their progress over time.

A broader set of baseline data could contribute to more effective goal-setting in terms of sustainable planning and a more actionable strategy since you have the silhouette of a goal in sight. Baseline data can also be different for different sectors.

3. Set targets.

Setting clear and ambitious targets is a key component of any effective sustainability strategy. Targets provide a sense of direction and purpose, helping organizations focus their efforts towards achieving specific environmental and social objectives.

Align your targets with global sustainability goals, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). You should aso ensure your goals are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART). By setting targets, your organization can strive for continuous improvement and drive meaningful change.

4. Implement sustainability initiatives.

Once the KPIs, baseline data, and targets are established, it’s time to implement sustainability initiatives. These initiatives can range from energy-efficient practices and waste reduction programs to social impact projects and supply chain optimization.

The implementation phase requires collaboration and coordination across various departments within your organization. Effective communication, training and engaging employees are essential to ensure the successful execution of sustainability initiatives.

Your implementation should not mirror that of a competitor—or any other company—but should be unique to the way your organization will reap the maximum benefits.

5. Monitor and evaluate progress.

Continuous monitoring and evaluation are vital to assess the progress of sustainability strategies. Organizations need to track identified KPIs regularly and compare them against the established baseline and targets. This monitoring process provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of implemented initiatives, identifies areas for improvement and enables data-driven decision-making.

Regular evaluations help your organization identify potential challenges, address gaps and make adjustments to strategies to ensure long-term sustainability success.

Evaluating sustainability performance is a challenging task, but researching organizations in your industry and geography can help as you study the trajectory of their strategies and achievements, or lack thereof.

6. Strive to continuously improve.

Sustainability is an ongoing journey, and organizations must strive for continuous improvement. The assessment model should promote a culture of learning and innovation, encouraging organizations to constantly seek new opportunities and approaches to enhance their sustainability strategies.

Feedback loops, stakeholder engagement and external benchmarking can help organizations identify emerging trends, best practices and areas where they can push the boundaries of sustainability. By embracing a mindset of continuous improvement, organizations can remain adaptable and resilient in the face of evolving sustainability challenges.

It’s essential to recognize that this assessment model is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Organizations should customize it based on their unique circumstances, objectives and stakeholders. The model serves as a starting point, providing a structured approach to evaluate sustainability strategies.

By leveraging the core components of this model, organizations can identify gaps, measure successes and continually refine their strategies and policies. Creating a sustainable culture in this way allows them to drive meaningful change and contribute to a more sustainable future.

Kumar Vijayendra is an author and speaker in small business transformation. He is also the President at Footsteps LLC. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2023/09/01/beyond-buzzwords-a-concrete-model-for-driving-business-sustainability/?sh=6076f414369e

Commons App Informing, Facilitating Mass Shifts in Climate-Influenced Consumer Living & Spending

1 09 2023

Image: Commons

Highlighting the impact of individual purchases and their associated emissions output, the app — fresh off a large funding round — is evolving to meet the daily spending directives of its users. By Geoff Nudelman from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: September 1, 2023

There’s a lot of emphasis being placed on consumer spending as a real way to drive measurable impact in the fight against climate change; but for many everyday consumers, it remains one of the most confusing avenues of action. There are dozens of standards and certifications to understand, along with a never-ending stream of data connected to purchases (both good and bad).

That’s where the potential of consumer spending/emissions measurement app Commons comes in. The app — which was launched in 2019 as Joro and relaunched this March under its current name — allows consumers to connect credit cards, bank accounts and other financial information to a system that measures the emissions output of every purchase; and it offers multiple ways to reduce impacts — whether through simple switches, more involved spending transitions or via the purchase of verified offsets.

“We learned a lot about what people were actually looking for,” Commons founder Sanchali Pal told Sustainable Brands®, noting that the app began primarily as a carbon tracking and offsetting platform. “It’s more about the spending choices we make — and that this is not one person’s responsibility, but the collective’s.”

The app is only a few years old; and while the company doesn’t share full user data, Pal said users are in the “tens of thousands.” Commons is currently available in the US and Canada(with most users in the former), and mostly used in large cities by the 25-55 demographic. So far, the app has raised $13.5 million — the company says investors include Sequoia Capital, Norrsken, entrepreneurial platform Incite, climate investors Amasia; and the founders of Headspace, Fitbit, Candy Crush and Nest; as well as public figures including actor Maisie Williams, Incubus’ Mike Einziger and Arrive, (the VC arm of Jay-Z’s Roc Nation empire).

Like a lot of tech companies and apps, the leverage is in the collected data — and the trends and spending shifts that the data show. Commons’ demographic, which is likely somewhat affluent (Pal shared that most users have a credit or debit card), offers a small snapshot of how these changes can drive impact in large, urban areas in the US and Canada. It also helps users understand the realistic impact of their purchases.

“Something that people don’t realize is that the goods and services we buy also have a footprint,” Pal says. “People are quite surprised by something like a t-shirt and how that compares to the footprint of eating a burger, for example — or how driving can have a similar footprint to buying makeup. Products and services having that footprint is a novel idea for many people.”

Pal notes that one area where the app is noticing a larger shift is in buying secondhand. The number of Commons users shopping secondhand grew 48 percent between 2021 and 2022; and Pal says content on the app and website associated with shopping “more sustainably” for apparel is some of its most popular.

There are also broader shifts happening in the ways Commons users get around. According to its 2022 Impact Report, 40 percent more Commons users took public transit in 2022, compared to 2021; and users already taking public transportation did so 75 percent more often. App users also bought 63 percent less gas than the average US consumer in 2022 and 36 percent less gas than in 2021. Lastly, it’s no surprise that Commons users also use EV stations at a high clip.

According to Pal, in 2022 the average user reduced their emissions by 20 percent and saved $200 a month via all the app has to offer.

To provide realistic updates on the impact of a particular purchase, Commons updates its data daily, monthly, quarterly or annually — depending on the specific metric. Pal notes the example of gas prices, which the company analyzes daily since the price per gallon regularly fluctuates; and the numbers Commons uses also needs to reflect inflation and other economic movers. In other cases, the movement isn’t enough to measure more than once every few months (for something such as more expensive durable goods).

Education a key component

Almost anywhere you move inside the Commons app, there’s an opportunity to learn. Whether it’s about the impact of taking one less flight or comparing your footprint to those of other users; there’s no shortage of measurable, comparable and, most importantly, actionable advice.

“Users may be looking for the kind of thing they didn’t know how to act on before using our products,” Pal says. “They may have been interested in what could have the most impact in their lives but didn’t know where to start. We have found that folks who are quite educated (on sustainability) still find the product useful.”

I was rather impressed by this once I linked up my own credit card and saw my spending data populate through the app. The home page shows a graph estimating the emissions output of all my purchases on that card in the current month and compared to prior months of my choosing.

One of the app’s newest features is breaking down purchases under a “sustainable purchases” category — which singles out specific purchasing categories such as public transit, rideshare, renewable energy and more. Under Commons’ classifications, I make few “sustainable purchases” — which I’m not particularly sure I agree with, but I would assume that category will continue to be refined.

I also appreciated a level of transparency and discussion around Commons’ choices of offsets. The company’s Offset Portfolio operates under four pillars, and users can take a rather deep dive into understanding the value and impact of each offset under each pillar. Inside the app, I was prompted to pay a certain amount each month to support these offerings (somewhat commensurate with my estimated emissions output) — which, if I took the time to sift through all of the information, I’d likely find a compelling way to reduce my personal impact.

Of course, only having “tens of thousands” of users as the sample population is ultimately a small slice of the entire consumer pool — but certainly enough to potentially influence some changes within a certain, finally comfortable section of the spending public. I could see myself making some small changes based on seeing the data there in plain sight. Once you have the graphs and metrics nicely laid out in front of you, it becomes clearer to see how the collective impact in how and where we spend could make a big difference.

“One of the advantages of what we’ve built so far is that we can connect with you no matter where you spend money,” Pal says. “Ultimately, we’re trying to shift spending behavior and show how money matters.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/behavior-change/commons-app-shifts-climate-influenced-consumer-living-spendinghttps://sustainablebrands.com/read/behavior-change/commons-app-shifts-climate-influenced-consumer-living-spending

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

Human Resources most influential’s top priorities: sustainability, ESG and achieving net zero

1 09 2023

By Matt Gitsham from Human Resources Magazine UK • Reposted: September 1, 2023

This year’s HR Most Influential (HRMI) survey found that there was a strong view that responsibility for environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) sits with everyone in the business – but that HR has a vital role to play, alongside leadership as supporter, partner and educator.

Approximately 65% of survey respondents said their organisation had a formal strategy for improving performance on ESG/sustainability.

In most cases, it appeared that this strategy was being driven either by the board or some kind of central ESG function.

HR practitioners were, however, playing a key role in supporting the strategy from a people perspective, with a particular focus on inclusion and diversity, working conditions, fair pay, wellbeing and ethical business practice.

“Sustainability, ESG and helping businesses go net zero are now crucial components of business and people strategies,” said one respondent.

“HR needs to be at the decision-making table and influence from there,” said another.

“To make HR the ‘owner’ would run the risk of these important topics being ‘HR projects’. ESG/sustainability needs to be a belief system and not just a process.”

Educating the workforce

Survey respondents also felt HR had an important role to play in educating the workforce, with 52% saying leadership development on ESG/sustainability was being offered across the business.

“HR can help people unlock their understanding of how to embed this in day-to-day work”, and “HR has a key role in the education of the workforce, to ensure they understand ESG/sustainability and the impact of their decisions,” were among the comments.

There was a recognition among HR professionals that a focus on ESG could be a competitive advantage when it comes to recruitment, retention and brand reputation.

Employees were increasingly looking for organisations that support this agenda, and were voicing a desire to work for companies with strong values and a proactive commitment to fighting issues such as climate change and inequality.

“Ultimately, people are voting with their feet and basing consumer and employment decisions on the sustainability actions of companies,” said one respondent.

Developing sustainable leaders

It is good to see this growing recognition among HR professionals of the important role they have to play in both championing and supporting ESG efforts.

At Hult International Business School, we have been conducting research specifically into how leadership roles need to change in response to the critical environmental, social and human rights challenges facing us all.

Our findings underline the need for innovative learning and development interventions to help leaders, managers and future talent navigate the sustainability transitions that are happening right now.

Building literacy on sustainability and ESG issues is of course an important starting point, but our research suggests that first hand experiences are at the heart of what it takes for leaders to build the emotional connection and commitment to put the sustainability agenda front and centre in their work.

For the leaders interviewed in our study, this might have meant experiences such as engaging with people living in poverty, personal experience of the impact of climate change, or experience of the changing interests of key partners and stakeholders.

Influential mentors and participation in professional networks focused on ESG had also been formative experiences for many of our interviewees.

This has implications for the design of learning and development, as well as for the way HR approaches the wider task of managing talent and succession planning programmes.

Leadership development activities need to be structured to create opportunities for current and future senior leaders to have precisely these kinds of personal, first-hand experiences, through powerful experiential learning.

HR professionals also need to value these kinds of life experiences when making decisions about recruitment, career development and succession planning, and make sure they are embedded in the HR processes that underpin these.

As one survey respondent said: “It’s time for HR to contribute and view this as an opportunity to strengthen a purpose-led EVP just as much as an opportunity to help save our planet.”

The next stage of our research will look at the evolving role of HR in sustainability, surveying what kinds of activities HR departments are increasingly engaging in in relation to sustainability and ESG, and what they are learning about what works.

Matt Gitsham is director of the sustainability research lab at Hult International Business School. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/content/features/hr-most-influential-s-top-priorities-sustainability-esg-and-achieving-net-zero/

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

The Global Rise of Healthy Building Policy

30 08 2023

From the International Well-being Institute via CSR Newswire • Reposted: August 30, 2023

The past few years in the United States have seen remarkable progress in the adoption and implementation of healthy building policies. The U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) has issued two unanimous policy resolutions, one in 2020 and another in 2022, endorsing healthy buildings as a powerful tool to advance public health and an essential defense against future health threats. Heeding the call, cities like Miami, Jersey City and Oklahoma City are now leading by example, scaling the WELL Health-Safety Rating across a portfolio of municipal buildings. The Biden Administration too has shined a bright light on healthy buildings with the first ever White House Summit on Indoor Air Quality and the launch of the Clean Air in Buildings Challenge, not to mention CDC’s recent guidance on ventilation and GSA’s efforts to drive healthy building research and promote the Health in Buildings roundtable.

It’s clear that, increasingly, governments at all levels are stepping up to help create spaces that support health and well-being. And just as the momentum continues to build in the U.S., a similar trend is unfolding in other parts of the world, reflecting a universal demand for healthier spaces.

In the United Kingdom, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) in July announced efforts to increase uptake of occupational health services in the workplace. The policy effort encourages employers to ramp up these services to help employees access vital mental and physical health support at work, particularly for those working in small and medium-sized enterprises.
In the United Arab Emirates, The Dubai Land Department (DLD)’s Real Estate Regulatory Agency (RERA) has officially adopted the WELL Health-Safety Rating and is encouraging organizations to align with the program in jointly owned properties (JOPs) and enhance investor confidence.
In the European Union this past spring, the EU Parliament passed its Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD), a key legislative tool to set and implement building decarbonization goals. The approved EPBD included an important healthy building provision, Article 11a, titled, “Indoor Environmental Quality,” which says, “Member States shall set requirements for the implementation of adequate indoor environmental quality standards in buildings in order to maintain a healthy indoor climate.”
In Australia, the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee, the national government’s top health protection committee, announced that it was making indoor air quality a national priority. “Today is about putting this on the agenda, on the map,” said Member of Parliament Dr. Michelle Ananda-Rajah, a longtime advocate of prioritizing IAQ and who, earlier this year, also hosted a Clean Air Forum earlier this year.
In Singapore, the National Environmental Agency recently issued updated guidance on improving ventilation and indoor air quality in buildings to better support an healthy indoor environment.

Globally, healthy building policies are shaping more than just urban landscapes, they’re transforming how our indoor spaces protect and enhance our health. As the global understanding deepens about the pivotal role healthy buildings can play in improving public health, there’s a mounting urgency to utilize policy to accelerate spaces that advance human health and well-being. Together, these global policy efforts will help accelerate the healthy buildings movement, enabling their benefits to reach more and more people around the world.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/782271-global-rise-healthy-building-policy

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Clean Air in Buildings Challenge, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, GSA, Healthy Buildings, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, USCM
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG, reputation management, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Could AI Root Out the Greenwash Marring Sustainability Communications?

30 08 2023

Image: University of Michigan

By Tom Idle from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: August 30, 2023

It’s about to get more costly for companies that exaggerate environmental and social claims in their communications. But what if artificial intelligence could eradicate greenwash forever?

As anyone working in sustainability communications is well aware, the risks associated with greenwashing are multifaceted and go well beyond mere marketing deception. Making wild claims can genuinely hamper sustainability progress, erode consumer trust, undermine regulatory efforts and mislead investors. To foster true sustainability and responsible business practices, there must be a collective effort to expose and curb greenwashing — promoting transparency and holding companies accountable for their environmental claims.

Legislators and advertising standards authorities are only too well aware of this and are imposing stricter regulations on how products and services are marketed. The US Federal Trade Commission’s new guidelines on how brands should use terms such as ‘eco-friendly’ and ‘biodegradable’ were warmly welcomed. In France, companies can face fines of up to 10 percent of their annual turnover for deceptive environmental marketing; and the UK is set to adopt a similar deterrent. In Australia, consumer protection laws have beenstrengthened, with the Competition and Consumer Act prohibiting false or misleading representations about environmental benefits.

It’s about to get more costly for companies that fall into the trap of over-egging environmental and social claims in their marketing and communications. But what if the answer to eradicating greenwash forever could be solved by artificial intelligence (AI)?

AI is being used to solve all manner of challenges. It is revolutionizing healthcare by improving diagnosis accuracy and treatment effectiveness — IBM’s Watson for Oncology is a great example of how AI can analyze patient data to suggest personalized treatment options for cancer patients. The Nature Conservancy is using it to study satellite data and predict illegal fishing activities to protect marine ecosystems. AI algorithms are scanning social media posts and satellite images to map disaster-affected areas and aid rescue and relief efforts. In cities, AI is helping local authorities become smarter and more efficient, with urban planners using AI simulations to address traffic problems and make the air cleaner. And companies are even using it to craft more effective sustainability strategies.

Now, a company called Greenifs has come up with a solution that it hopes will enable firms to avoid the common pitfalls associated with greenwashing — using the versatility of AI technology to transform ESG communications.

The platform lets you copy and paste written content into a form (currently limited to a social media post length of characters) and have it scanned by robots for any potentially misleading and unsubstantiated messages. In a matter of seconds, it then creates a fully automated analysis of the content — highlighting where the writing might have veered into greenwash territory. Finally, it serves up a series of recommendations as to where the writer might need to add more information, provide evidence and be clearer in what’s being said.

Image credit: Greenifs

Speaking on Zoom from his base in Lithuania, Greenifs founder and CEO Vytautas Sabaliauskas is excited about the possibilities for his new creation: “We’re taking the human error and human labour out of keeping track of the latest green marketing regulations,” he tells Sustainable Brands®.

He shares his screen so that I can explore the platform. We share a few examples of recent social media posts that have caught our eye and plug them into the platform — changing the region, according to where the business is located; this is a defining criterion that will alter the AI results served up.

As we await the aggregated analysis and recommendations, Sabaliauskas acknowledges that his new product might be somewhat ahead of the legislation. But he is buoyed by the changing regulatory landscape, which has created a gap in the market. Companies could really use his AI tool — as “a lot of money will be burned,” he says. “Brand reputation is very hard to gain; and companies can make simple mistakes. Our AI gives them a second opinion and allows them to understand what might be missing.”

The idea for Greenifs.ai came while Sabaliauskas was working on other brand projects — and a realisation that there isn’t a single online source of information that highlights companies’ sustainability credentials. There are plenty of rankings and benchmarks, of course; but no one way of exploring or verifying green claims.

“We started playing with AI and wanted to explore where we could have a big impact. We thought that this type of product could be crucial for brands, with big fines coming and the harm that could be done by greenwashing,” he explained.

For all the good AI is bringing to sectors everywhere, there is a risk the technology might fuel certain problems. Could the use of AI in marketing and communications teams actually be contributing to greenwash in the first place?

“We’re not concerned about how companies create their messages; we just want them to make claims they can prove,” says a defiant Sabaliauskas. “AI is there to help — but decisions are still made by people.”

The greenifs.ai platform is available to try out — users can analyse five posts as part of a free trial.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/marketing-and-comms/ai-root-out-greenwash-sustainability-communications

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

Introducing Resilience Science: A Visionary Shift for Corporate Strategy and Reporting

29 08 2023

By Luke Heilbuth via Sustainable Brands • Reposted: August 29, 2023

Climate resilience is the ‘resilience of a company’s strategy and business model to climate-related changes, developments and uncertainties.’ This language is worth reflecting on, as it brings the concept of resilience science into mainstream business thinking.

Background

In June, the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) issued its inaugural standards — IFRS S1 and IFRS S2. The Standards create a common language for companies to report on how sustainability and climate-related risks and opportunities affect their prospects. They reflect what investors want, and will form the basis of mandatory climate-related reporting requirements in many advanced jurisdictions (aside from the United States).

This article explores the most interesting part of IFRS S2: the climate-resilience assessment. Building on the TCFD — which IFRS S2 has now supplanted — climate resilience is defined as the “resilience of a company’s strategy and business model to climate-related changes, developments and uncertainties” [emphasis added]. This language is worth reflecting on, as it brings the concept of resilience science into mainstream business thinking.

Tipping points and ignorance

Invented by Canadian ecologist C.S. “Buzz” Holling in 1973, resilience science explains how human-natural systems (the interconnected relationship between humans and the environment) do not exist in a fixed state — but are instead characterized by constant change and tipping points.

This is not how businesspeople usually think. Instead, they assume that a complex system — like an organisation — is stable, isolated, measurable and linear. Take COVID: Most of us thought things would be disrupted for a time before ‘bouncing back’ to normal. The mistake is right there in the language. Post pandemic, we didn’t go back. The way we live and work changed.

A better understanding of the world acknowledges that systems go through adaptive cycles of growth, decay, restructuring and renewal. As business leaders, we must acknowledge our lack of certainty and control. We should reimagine our actions, plans and strategies as experiments that, as in science, must be constantly re-evaluated.

As author Nassim Taleb says in Fooled by Randomness, probability is “the acceptance of the lack of certainty in our knowledge and the development of methods for dealing with our ignorance.”

That’s why IFRS S2 is not the dry reporting standard it appears at first view, but something quite visionary — it embraces uncertainty and consents to our ignorance. It asks us to see through the ‘illusion’ of the pristine, perfectly self-contained balance sheet — where the ledger is always squared, and all things are known.

Focus on the process

To explain the “changes, developments and uncertainties” that arise from the physical and transition risks and opportunities of climate change, a company is required to use scenario analysis. This is not meant to predict what might happen in the future — but to offer up ‘what if’ scenarios to help your business better think through its options and plan accordingly.

IFRS S2 says you must disclose the “inputs and key assumptions” used in your scenarios — not just the result. In other words, your explanation of the process is essential. This is because investors want to test the quality of your thinking, rather than simply reading a claim that your business is resilient.

Staying practical

The method of scenario analysis you employ is up to you, and should be “commensurate with your circumstances.” For most businesses, an expensive, quantitative-modelling exercise is not required or even the best option. The authors of IFRS S2 recognize the burden that companies face in complying with a science-based approach to climate change.

As a result, they have sought to navigate a practical approach that requires the use of “all reasonable and supportable information” (the floor of the effort required) available at the reporting date without “undue cost or effort” (the ceiling). The concept is explained by ISSB Vice Chair Sue Lloyd in this webinar. The IPCC, IEA and PRI all provide publicly available scenarios which provide the basis for a useful, cost-effective and strategic approach.

Finally, your company is not required to perform a scenario analysis as part of the reporting effort each year. The minimum requirement for updating your scenarios is whenever you review your corporate strategy as part of the strategic planning cycle. That said, each year you must revisit the assumptions that underpinned your analysis and consider whether any changes affect the assessment of your company’s climate resilience. The IFRS refers to this annual update as a “resilience assessment.”

Scenario analysis done well will ultimately help you fine-tune your overall strategy and business model — enhancing your business’s prospects and resilience against the vagaries of an uncertain future.

In recent years, investor portfolios have grown too big to avoid systemic risks such as climate change. Recognizing their vulnerability to black swans, institutional investors have pushed investee companies to prioritize resilience over short-term cost optimisation; the IFRS Standards reflect the trend. As Taleb says, the defining characteristic of change is that it cannot be predicted: “This is the central illusion in life — that randomness is a risk — that it is a bad thing.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://sustainablebrands.com/read/new-metrics/resilience-science-shift-corporate-strategy-reporting

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, climate resilence, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, IFRS s2, ISSB, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, green marketing, reputation management, social responsibility, sustainable branding

Climate Finance Must Combat Climate Prisoners

29 08 2023

A demonstrator shows support for climate justice at an Earth Day rally in Washington, D.C. earlier this year. Image credits: Victoria Pickering/Flickr and Markus Spiske/Unsplash

By David Hunter from Triple Pundit • Reposted: August 29, 2023

Early next month, representatives from more than 500 banks from around the world will gather to explore how to promote sustainable development and “align financial flows” with the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Participants in the upcoming Finance in Common Summit account for 12 percent of global investment annually with $23 trillion in assets combined, allowing for enormous potential impact.

Not surprisingly, financing energy transitions will be central to the discussions, including Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs), or creative financing packages to support developing countries’ transitions away from coal. Four JETPs have been announced so far with South Africa, Indonesia, Vietnam and Senegal. India is next in line. G7 countries and development banks are instrumental to financing these initiatives.

But like anything that requires a massive infrastructure shift, transparency and accountability are essential to ensure that the billions of allocated dollars are actually used for their intended purpose. In the case of the JETPs, this means moving toward renewable energy to benefit all communities. Such transparency and accountability is only possible where local NGOs and civil society experts can participate freely and fully in public discussions, provide independent monitoring of social and environmental impacts, and support communities to advocate for their rights.

This is what the “just” aspect of the just transition is all about — which is why financial institutions should be paying very close attention to the situation of civil society voices in the countries they are prioritizing.

Take Vietnam as an example.

Two development banks — the International Finance Corp. and the Asian Development Bank — joined forces with the U.S., U.K. and other G7 nations to finance a $15.5 billion JETP with Vietnam. Meanwhile, in the last couple of years, the Vietnamese government has arrested and detained five of the country’s most prominent climate leaders who should be at the forefront of this process. The charges all relate to “tax evasion,” but ample evidence, including multiple declarations from U.N. experts and treaty bodies, point to these vague laws being used to silence environmental defenders in Vietnam.

One of the climate justice heroes currently serving a five-year prison sentence in Vietnam is Mr. Dang Dinh Bach (“Bach”), whom I know personally both as a former student and as a partner in a U.S.-funded law reform project. His work centered around protecting vulnerable communities from pollution, including plastic waste, asbestos and coal-fired power plants. I was impressed with his strong sense of values, always respecting the Vietnamese legal system and speaking highly of the government. He’s still in jail despite numerous high-level calls for his release and a U.N. opinion that found his imprisonment a “violation of international law” in the context of a “systemic problem with arbitrary detention” of environmental defenders in Vietnam.

Just a few months ago, another climate champion in Vietnam, Obama Foundation ScholarHoang Thi Minh Hong, was detained on similar charges, continuing this highly concerning trend. The U.N. and several governments, including the U.S. and the U.K., have all released statements calling for her release, but to no avail.

Internationally-renowned climate leader and Goldman Environmental Prize Winner Ms. Nguy Thi Khanh was recently released after serving 16 months in prison on similar tax-evasion charges. Environmental groups continue to face threats, and many have shut down in reaction to this chilling situation.

For all banks that will be participating in the upcoming Finance in Common Summit, these arrests should be a red flag. Even more so for the International Finance Corp. and the Asian Development Bank, as they have recognized the link between dissent and sustainable financing, having adopted specific policies protecting those who voice opinions about the projects they fund.

The World Bank, of which the International Finance Corp. is a part, has a zero-tolerance policyaround reprisals and retaliation against those who openly share their views about projects it funds, stating: “Any form of intimidation against people who comment on Bank projects, research, activities and their impact, goes against our core values of respecting the people we work for and acting with utmost integrity.” The Asian Development Bank’s policy similarly says that civil society participation in its projects “fundamentally supports good governance, citizenship and accountability of the state.”

Both development banks must know that funding a JETP in Vietnam while the government is punishing those who argued for this precise transition violates the spirit of their policies and undermines the ultimate effectiveness of their JETP investments.

Banks should not be supporting JETPs in any country where advocating for clean energy is treated as a crime under the guise of tax fraud. If Bach, Hoang and Khanh can be arrested for taking reasoned positions against coal-fired power plants or other projects that exacerbate climate change, then anybody is at risk of being arbitrarily imprisoned in Vietnam for supporting the goals of the JETP in the future. Each of these individuals worked within the system and was eager to help monitor and implement the JETP on behalf of impacted communities.

To achieve a truly just energy transition in Vietnam, financing of the JETP must be contingent upon the urgent release of Bach, Hoang, and the other environmental defenders serving harsh and unjust sentences. In addition, civil society must be able to safely and freely contribute to the work needed for Vietnam to meet its net-zero emission target by 2050 and the JETP commitments without retaliation or threat of imprisonment. The same should be true for all countries receiving billions of dollars to meet the Paris Agreement goals.

At this year’s Finance in Common Summit, I urge the participating banks that finance JETPs or any other type of climate-forward initiatives to do their due diligence and make sure their money will actually be used to fund truly just energy transitions.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/climate-finance-climate-justice/782171

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

Consumers Already Care About Sustainability, and Signs of Economic Recovery Could Shift Preferences Further

25 08 2023

Image credit: Jacob Lund/Adobe Stock

By Andrew Kaminsky from Triple Pundit • Reposted: August 25, 2023

Indicators suggest that the worst of the economic strain is behind us. And while this doesn’t mean consumers will enjoy unabated shopping sprees any time soon, it may hint that more people will consider factors beyond the price tag when selecting a brand.

In tight economic times, consumer decision-making is generally limited to factors of price and quality — in other words, how do I get the most bang for my buck? When the grip on household spending loosens, though, and consumers find themselves with more disposable income, they have more room to consider other factors in their decision-making.

The U.S. Consumer Price Index for June 2023 saw the smallest monthly increase since 2021, signaling that inflation may have plateaued and offering consumers a bit of reprieve from the previous years’ bank account blitz.

In 2022, U.S. food prices had their largest annual increase since the 1980s, and per-capita disposable income fell by 6.6 percent. Now, food prices are beginning to stabilize, and the forecast for 2023 indicates that disposable income will start to see a small climb. Meanwhile, the global economy is also beginning to recover from disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

If consumers find economic relief in the near future, they’ll enjoy more freedom to choose products and services based on preferences beyond simply finding the best price.

What does the data say about purchase drivers?

Data from Glow, a consumer data research company, shows that U.S. consumers consider price and quality as the most important factors when selecting goods or services in any industry. Given the state of the economy as of late, this isn’t much of a surprise.

Alongside price and quality, other purchase drivers include ease of use, customer support, availability and convenience, features and benefits, and sustainability. The final factor there, sustainability, is already top of mind for many consumers — and its relevance is quickly growing.

So, what really goes through consumers’ minds when they consider making a purchase? In industries where the price-quality combo is comparable between brands, consumers are more likely to look to the next set of drivers to aid in their final decision-making, said Mike Johnston, managing director of data products at Glow.

When we look at the Glow data for sustainability as a purchase driver across industries, it features as a top-three driver for 40 percent of U.S. consumers when it comes to energy providers, as well as 31 percent in the auto industry. The industry that sustainability ranked lowest in, convenience stores, still saw 20 percent of consumers ranking it as a top-three purchase driver.

“If there is a factor that is important to 1 in 5 consumers, or more, this is significant for any business as it can have a material impact on whether their brand is selected,” Johnston said.

Why is sustainability demand on the rise?

The whole spectrum of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues is gaining traction with a large share of consumers. Granted, some consumers stand firmly in the “anti-ESG” camp, but a significant portion of shoppers are shifting their purchase drivers to prioritize sustainability.

Based on a recent study by NIQ, 69 percent of global consumers say that sustainability and ESG concerns have increased in importance to them over the last two years. It’s no surprise that the climate crisis has prompted many people to reevaluate their buying habits, but that’s only part of the reason why sustainability issues are playing a more prominent role.

“There are a mix of reasons for the growing importance of sustainability across consumers,” Johnston said. He points to the growing exposure in society of social issues, corporate scandals and the global climate crisis, as well as the changing demographics of the consumer base, as to why sustainability demand is on the rise.

“Sustainability and ESG issues are routinely seen to be more important with younger consumers,” Johnston said. These younger consumers, like millennials and Gen Z, are growing in importance quickly and increasingly occupying a larger share of the market.

‘Young’ consumers drive the sustainability surge

We can call them young, but there’s a good chunk of millennials who are closer to retirement than they are to high school, and they aren’t getting any younger. The dynamics of the market are changing as baby boomers and Gen Xers scale back their market influence.

For millennials, 61 percent say that sustainability and ESG issues have increased in importancefor them in the last 12 months. Across all categories, sustainability is a top-three purchase driver for 33 percent to 50 percent of these consumers. Aside from convenience stores, at least 10 percent of millennials ranked sustainability as the top purchase driver in all categories.

On the other side of the coin, baby boomers are least concerned about sustainability when making a purchase, according to Glow data.

Sustainability has to work in tandem with other purchase drivers

It’s growing in importance, but sustainability hasn’t yet reached the level of a standalone purchase driver in most cases. Depending on the product, price or quality has the ability to settle decisions single handedly.

It’s not uncommon to think or hear a shopper say, “I don’t care, just give me the cheapest one you got,” signaling price as the sole purchase driver. Or, likewise, “I don’t care what it costs, I just want the job done right,” meaning quality trumps everything else.

Consumers who care about sustainability are often willing to pay more and possibly even make a sacrifice on quality or convenience. But how much more will they pay, and how much else will they sacrifice? The answers to those questions vary depending on the product, industry, and consumer but are generally something like, “A little bit, but not too much.”

“There are many studies that show that consumers are willing to pay a premium for sustainable products,” Johnston said. In particular, Gen Z and millennials are more eager to pay those premiums.

Businesses that embrace the sustainability surge and can find that sweet spot between price, quality and sustainability will position themselves to attract a large share of the growing market for more sustainable products.

This article series is sponsored by Glow and produced by the TriplePundit editorial team. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/consumers-sustainability-purchasing-driver/782061

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Consumer preferences, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Glow Research, green marketing, NIQ, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Rethinking Growth: Is Degrowth The Answer To A Sustainable Future?

22 08 2023

Is continuous growth compatible with our sustainable development goals? Photo: GETTY

By Nils Rokke, Contributor via Forbes • Reposted: August 22, 2023

The word “degrowth” might be unfamiliar to many ears, but its meaning has never been more critical to understand. Our current economic model’s foundation lies in a presumptive flaw—the continuous belief in infinite growth. But what happens when the pillars of this belief crumble?

For years, experts warned of the impending limitations of continuous growth. The groundbreaking 1972 book, “Limits to Growth,” spotlighted our planet’s sustainable boundaries. This work evaluated how population, living standards, and resource utilization converge and affect sustainability.

Almost four decades later, Professor Jorgen Randers, one of the book’s authors, published an update titled “2052.” Here, he highlighted a critical turning point: our economic model becomes flawed when equity becomes central, and justice prevails.

Consumption and wealth continue to define strategy

Western countries often equate a happy life with high resource consumption and wealth. However, Bhutan offers a contrasting model. It introduced the “happiness economy,” where the nation prioritizes citizens’ happiness over economic growth, suggesting that happiness can be decoupled from resource-intensive activities.

Yet, the growth principle continues to dominate global strategies, evident in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Target number 8, for instance, emphasizes “decent work and economic growth.” Recent Holberg Prize awardee, Professor Joan Martinez-Alier, has openly criticized this, arguing that such a goal might be incompatible with other SDGs.

Introducing degrowth and demand reduction

“Degrowth” is a term that advocates for a deliberate, socially just, and equitable reduction in the scale of production and consumption. The goal of degrowth is to achieve better well-being and improved ecological conditions, reducing the size of the global economy to fit within the planet’s biophysical limits.

There are several key principles to degrowth, including sustainability, social well-being, equity, direct democracy, and localized economies.

Understanding degrowth also requires us to examine the concept of demand reduction. This can be categorized into three intertwined yet distinct components:

Efficiency: Maximizing output while minimizing resource use. It’s about doing more with less.

Sufficiency: Re-evaluating the amount of production and consumption truly necessary for human well-being.

Behavioral Change: Shifting societal habits towards sustainability, wherein society collectively and willingly opts for less consumption.

Demand reduction is usually only discussed in policy debates regarding a short-term response to the energy crisis, and rarely as a prerequisite to reaching net zero.

Sometimes the term degrowth is confused with post-growth, a common designation of the various paths we can take when growth has stopped or declined. This gives more freedom to choose paths that allow a continuation of some practices at a smaller scale, whereas degrowth is a clear strategy to decrease growth. Degrowth is therefore one specific pathway in the post growth concept.

Degrowth requires a mindset shift

Jason Hickel, an economic anthropologist from the University of Barcelona, is a staunch advocate for degrowth. At a recent Brussels conference attended by top EU officials, Hickel emphasized the urgent need to reconsider GDP growth as our benchmark for societal success.

He critiqued the western world’s continued exploitation of global resources, effectively maintaining a colonial economy. His take: the real focus should be on meeting human needs, not just growth. However, this suggests a more dominant role for state governance, a model reminiscent of eco-communism, which has been criticized in the past.

Timothy Parrique from Lund University echoed these sentiments. He refuted the idea of producing more while using fewer resources, highlighting the necessity of a complete decoupling to stay within planetary boundaries.

Challengers to degrowth

However, the degrowth principle isn’t without its challengers. How, they argue, can we meet the energy and food demands of a growing population without growth? How can we simultaneously tackle climate change, poverty, and other pressing challenges without the momentum that growth provides?

Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz raises an essential consideration: while sacrifices may be necessary, ensuring they’re fairly distributed is crucial. The core challenge with degrowth lies in this equity—how can we ensure everyone gets a fair share?

We must also consider if degrowth is genuinely a viable economic model. It could be argued that if our growth-centric model continues unchecked, it may simply stagnate and consequently ‘degrow’ on its own. But what repercussions would such organic degrowth have on our socio-economic structures?

The heart of the matter isn’t just about stopping growth but ensuring that any model adopted, whether growth or degrowth-oriented, satisfies people’s real needs in a manner that is considered fair and transparent.

Exceeded sustainable limits

Professor Johan Rockström of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, introduced and spent years analyzing the “planetary boundaries” principle. The findings are alarming: we’ve exceeded sustainable limits in various critical areas, from nitrogen cycles to extinction rates.

Moreover, while technological advances push for efficiency, there’s no evidence to suggest that increased efficiency results in decreased resource use. Instead, it seems to enable more people to use these resources, which again poses the question: how can we truly embrace degrowth?

Looking at unsustainable economic activities brings the issue into sharp focus. For instance, the sight of massive cruise ships and leisure boats at picturesque sites serves as a reminder of our high-resource consumption habits.

Infinite growth in a finite world is, by definition, unsustainable. Yet, as a society, we seem trapped in this growth mindset because we haven’t found an alternative. More research, discussions, and debates on these concepts are crucial.

The UN’s latest review on SDGs called for a “wholesale reform of our morally bankrupt financial system.” While such an acknowledgment is a step forward, the commitment to GDP growth as a primary measure persists. It’s high time for a global debate on the sustainability and equity of our growth principles.

Nils Rokke is Executive Vice President in SINTEF, Norway’s largest research institute. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/nilsrokke/2023/08/21/rethinking-growth-is-degrowth-the-answer-to-a-sustainable-future/?sh=23fda7203ba5

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

Sustainability Drives Consumer Choice For Travelers

19 08 2023

Photo: Getty

By Richard Razgaitis, Forbes Councils Member via Forbes • Reposted: August 19, 2023

Travel contributes a disproportionate amount of greenhouse gas emissions into our atmosphere, and a powerful and growing movement has emerged within the travel and hospitality industry to show a commitment to environmentally friendly practices.

Consider that the 2,000-room New York Hilton Midtown now runs on a cogeneration plant that reduces its carbon footprint by over 30%, or that Royal Caribbean cruise ships use purification systems that remove 97% of sulfur dioxide emissions from their exhaust. Not satisfied with incremental steps, the Hotel Marcel in Connecticut is the country’s first net-zero energy hotel and generates all of its power needs through solar panels.

While it would be nice to believe that brands were making these choices for purely altruistic reasons, the reality is that these businesses are responding to consumer demand. For example, a survey commissioned by my company found that nearly 6 out of 10 travelers would prefer to stay at hotels that prioritized eco-friendly practices such as eliminating single-use plastics. That same study found that 30% of travelers would be willing to pay more to stay at hotels with green amenities, including available EV charging stations.

And while it’s true that this survey represents just one data point, it is consistent with the numbers we’ve seen in other research. A 2021 sustainability survey by Virtuoso found that 78% of luxury travelers prefer doing business with companies with strong sustainability policies, while a 2022 survey found that 75% of travelers would pay more for eco-friendly options if they knew how those funds were being used. And in the U.K., 61% of electric vehicle drivers consider EV charging stations a key factor when booking a hotel.

Whatever study you look at, one trend is abundantly clear: Demand for sustainable options and policies from the travel industry is not only strong but continuing to grow year after year.

It’s also worth noting that while many of these travel operators are making changes based on consumer preference, some are also responding to a growing number of laws meant to accelerate the trend. California and New York have both passed bills banning single-use toiletry bottles in hotels. To get ahead of this trend, mega-hotel chains such as Marriott and Hyatt enacted policies to remove all single-use toiletries from their properties.

Meanwhile, hotel chains and resorts as diverse as the Four Seasons, Hyatt and Disneyland have all launched initiatives to include water refill stations throughout their properties. In an interview with the New York Times (subscription required), Janet Redman, the climate and energy director for Green Peace, stated: “The travel world isn’t ignoring the severity of climate change. Many are even trying to find a way to slow it down so that tourism can keep thriving.”

How Hospitality Leaders Can Take Action

So what can hospitality leaders do to bring their businesses up to this new standard of sustainability that consumers expect? Here are a few options to consider.

• Decarbonize. Embracing energy efficiency and lowering your carbon footprint is appealing to guests and can also serve as a potential cost-savings where renewable energy sources, such as solar panels, are available and affordable.

• Reduce single-use plastics. Instead of offering guests single-use plastic water bottles, provide them with purified water through refill stations (full disclosure: my company offers these services, as do others.) Likewise, single-use plastic toiletries can be replaced with refillable bottles or recyclable packaging. Replacing plastic utensils with biodegradable bamboo ones can also give your guests a positive impression of your sustainability efforts.

• Reduce water usage. Installing water-efficient fixtures, such as flow regulators on showerheads or self-closing faucets that can shut off if inadvertently left on, can provide significant water savings. Even forgoing the use of pressure washers for cleaning can reduce the amount of water your property uses.

• Go car-free. Provide your guests with alternatives to driving their cars. Bikes and electric golf carts are excellent transportation in isolated areas. If you’re in an urban location with mass transit, provide guests with maps, schedules and guides to help them navigate your city’s trains and buses.

Remember that while many sustainability practices require an upfront investment, they can quickly pay for themselves by reducing waste and energy usage. In travel, good for the Earth is also good for business. If your hospitality brand isn’t prepared to adapt to this new reality, you could be increasingly out of step with your customers’ needs.

Rich ‘Raz’ Razgaitis co-founded FloWater in 2013 with a singular mission to put an end to single-use plastic water bottles. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2023/08/18/sustainability-drives-consumer-choice-for-travelers/?sh=f90b27c273f5

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

Why Sustainability Is A Strategic Imperative, Not An Option

19 08 2023

Graphic: Getty

By Shane Price, Forbes Councils Member via Forbes • Reposted August 19, 2023

So much of business goes on behind the scenes. A million and one factors go into building a company, selling a product and marketing a brand. But increasingly, there’s one issue that’s been at the crux of consumer behavior: Not how good the product or service is but how good it is for the planet.

Sustainability is more than just a buzzword, it’s the backbone of decision making for many consumers, particularly the up-and-coming generation. Comprising roughly a quarter of the world’s population, Gen-Z are expected to account for 40% of U.S. consumers once they come of age. Their motivations are drastically different from previous generations—they’re less brand loyal, they’re the first digitally-immersed cohort in history and they currently command a whopping $360 billion in purchasing power.

Beyond those dramatic differentiations, they’re also the driving force behind a tectonic shift in consumer priorities. Approximately three-quarters of them make their buying decisions based on sustainability, not brand name.

Let that sink in. No matter how good your product or reputation is, a huge subset of consumers will put that on the backburner if your company isn’t doing its part to lessen its environmental impact. From reducing your carbon footprint to implementing sustainable packaging to CSR strategies that contribute to global change, there are a lot of ways companies across all industries and verticals can make a difference. So, why aren’t more doing it?

Going green hasn’t always been a big part of the national identity, let alone consumer drive. In the 1960s, only 7% of all waste in the United States was recycled or diverted from landfills. Today, that number is closer to 35%, a 5x increase. That seems like great news until you look at that figure alongside the amount of waste produced. In the 1960s, the U.S. generated approximately 88 million tons of garbage. Today, that amount has more than tripled to 292 million tons.

More sustainable solutions are critical to the health of the planet. Gen-Z’s focus on environmentalism is a welcome change from the previous “waste not, want everything”ethos. But sustainability solutions are also critical to the health of your business. According to a joint study from McKinsey and NielsenIQ, products making environmental-, social- and corporate-governance-related claims averaged 28% cumulative growth over a five-year period, versus 20% for products that made no such claims.

The need is evident, but action isn’t universal. Although 90% of business leaders think sustainability is important, only 60% of companies have a sustainability strategy. For some, defining and measuring sustainability is a challenge. Others may be duped by an “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality. But for many, fitting eco-friendly practices into their business case is simply too daunting a prospect and the benefits too far a reach. Being sustainable does often come with a significant cost, whether in materials, packaging or practices, but the long-range benefits are clear.

The McKinsey NielsenIQ study found that 60% of respondents of any age would pay more for a product with sustainable packaging. And they’ll keep coming back for it. A recent report found that 77% of consumer products and retail organizations saw that sustainability leads to a significant uptick in customer loyalty.

What’s more, sustainability can actually help make your business run better—companies with strong sustainability programs have higher employee morale (55% higher in companies with strong sustainability programs) and increased employee loyalty (38% higher). Increased motivation and morale, in turn, can help reduce absenteeism and boost productivity.

To recap: Sustainability can attract new customers, boost your bottom line, create a loyal customer base, foster a better employee culture and, last but certainly not least, help the planet thrive.

If you’re at the helm of a business and haven’t implemented sustainability into your organization, the time is now. Here are a few ways you can get started:

• Find your champions: In your business, who cares deeply about sustainability in their own lives? Who can help you lead the charge? Sharing the buy-in can help shepherd initiatives from the idea stage through the implementation process.

• Pick one big goal: Although there are many ways to become sustainable, focusing on one big, bold goal can help define your efforts and keep you from getting overwhelmed in the process.

• Be transparent: There will be challenges along the way, but sharing successes, failures, roadblocks and big wins internally and externally is a great way to be both accountable and authentic (two of Gen-Z’s favorite things).

• Partner up: You don’t have to do this alone. No matter your industry, chances are someone has a service, product or approach that can help you start and sustain these practices.

• Brag for the brand: Adopting sustainable solutions is a huge positive step, and people deserve to know. Make your team and customers a part of your success by celebrating your wins.

Being sustainable isn’t always easy, but it is worth it. We now know that without a healthy ecology, we will not have a healthy economy. By marrying the two, you can make sure your business doesn’t get left behind.

Shane Price is the Founder & CEO of Green Circle Salons. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2023/08/18/why-sustainability-is-a-strategic-imperative-not-an-option/?sh=67c9ddee74ab

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, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Franchise Concepts With a Purpose: Exploring Socially Responsible and Impactful Business Models

18 08 2023

By Robert Brown from Global Trade Daily • Reposted: August 18, 2023

Franchise owners can make a significant impact on the world. Their collective teams and resources kickstart movements to help people and the environment, depending on which industry the owner enters.

These are some of the best franchise concepts because they’re socially responsible, impactful and profitable.

Sustainable Seafood Companies

Many consumers assume seafood is a better industry for future franchise owners because it doesn’t use the same business processes as beef farms. Although sustainable fishing supplies are readily available, corporations sometimes rely on methods like trawling to keep up with high demand.

Trawling drags large nets across the ocean floor. They pull up thriving coral communities and plant life without guaranteeing a full catch of the intended fish species. Trawlers also create significant amounts of carbon dioxide, contributing to the issue of global warming.

Entrepreneurs can mitigate this issue by opening sustainable seafood companies, like a franchise with Shuckin’ Shack. The brand works with a sustainable seafood supplier, recycles its oyster shells and has multiple approvals from ocean-focused environmental groups like the Plastic Ocean Project. By working with a brand such as Shuckin Shack, the franchise owner’s corresponding eco-friendly business models would rely on similar production methods to avoid harming endangered plant and marine animal species.

Plant-Based Meat Brands

Cultures transform meats with widespread arrays of recipes, but it’s not the best ingredient for the environment. Livestock industries contribute 12–18% of greenhouse gas emissions globally. Becoming part of a franchise that tries to reduce that statistic is a significant way to create positive change for the planet.

Home Care Businesses

While mainstream companies focus on catering to younger generations, entrepreneurs can enter the socially responsible home care industry. The demand for in-home assistance is projected to rise by 29% through 2024, leading to a higher demand for more home care service providers throughout the U.S.

There are numerous reasons why people prefer to age at home. They may not be able to afford an assisted living facility. Some people live in rural areas that don’t have those facilities or have health conditions that require specialized care.

It’s especially beneficial if the prices for those home care services match the economic abilities of older adults in the surrounding area. When patients and their loved ones don’t have to go into additional medical debt to access health care, franchise services become humanitarian efforts.

Junk Removal Trucks

Municipal solid waste is a challenge wherever people live. Based on the most updated research, it contributes an average of 35 million tons of garbage to landfills, but it doesn’t all belong there. People often throw out reusable or recyclable goods, not realizing those options are available or have them nearby.

Junk removal franchises are a socially responsible way to fight this ongoing issue. Gone for Good is one brand to consider that donates whatever goods it can while recycling leftover materials from client pickup sites. It’s a convenience consumers appreciate because it makes their lives easier while keeping landfill waste from polluting the environment.

Learning Center Brands

Daycares help parents return to work, but only if they can afford it. The average parent pays between $5,357–17,171 annually for childcare. It’s a significant financial burden, but learning center franchises can solve this systemic challenge.

Learning centers provide daycare for young kids while combining their daytime activities with learning opportunities. Each parent’s monthly payment becomes an investment in their child’s academic success. Kids can learn custom curriculum lessons that help them later in life and prepare them for grade school.

The key is matching the daily, weekly and monthly care costs with the economic abilities of families in the surrounding area. Discounts also make learning centers more affordable by merging socially responsible business models with what people can comfortably manage.

Solar Panel Franchise

Social and environmental responsibility merge with solar panel installation franchises. They allow homeowners to reduce their monthly utility bills by harvesting solar energy from their rooftops. Saving money is why 92% of homeowners who installed solar panels went through with the purchase or seriously considered it.

Using less electricity from power plants also helps the environment. The plants don’t have to produce as much electricity for surrounding areas, leading to fewer carbon emissions per plant.

Entrepreneurs with green values can open a business with franchise brands like Solar Grids. The company provides the training and management resources a new business owner needs to launch a successful enterprise. Solar Grids also assists with training installation specialists so every newly installed panel works at peak efficiency.

Green Landscaping Companies

Landscaping is a foundational part of many neighborhoods, but it’s not always helpful for the planet. Sprinklers use excessive water to keep plants alive, while chemical-based products kill insects and leak into surrounding habitats.

Nearby clients would ensure the environment benefits from organic fertilizers, chemical-free pesticides and recommended plant choices to reduce water usage. Expert team members could also provide landscape design appointments to pitch ideas like hardscaping. Utilizing rock formations, fire pits and patios would make any yard better for the environment while making the homeowner’s yard-care routine more manageable.

Urgent Care Clinics

Prioritizing the health of a community through a franchise is one of the most socially responsible and impactful business models. Research shows over 100 rural hospitals shut down between 2013 and 2020, forcing people to travel an average of 20 miles farther for essential services.

Urgent care franchise locations can assist with this issue. Entrepreneurs often reach out to companies like American Family Care to open clinics in medically underserved areas like rural communities.

The brand helps new owners navigate the legal steps of providing new medical services while streamlining the location’s success with tailored marketing and developmental plans. The centers become crucial to the region’s medical infrastructure, guaranteeing long-term success and positive social impact.

Franchise owners can also look into providing services for affordable rates based on the average wage in the surrounding city or zip code. Gallup polling shows 38% of Americans skipped medical care in 2022 due to the rising costs of essential services. Meeting a community’s needs with affordable medical treatments at an urgent care venue would merge humanitarian and franchising opportunities.

Open a Franchise With a Purpose

Humanitarian needs range from a healthy planet that provides a long-term home to affordable medical services. Franchise owners can fill those gaps, depending on the type of franchise they open. Entrepreneurs must consider these impactful business opportunities to start the career they desire while making lasting positive changes in their communities.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.globaltrademag.com/franchise-concepts-with-a-purpose-exploring-socially-responsible-and-impactful-business-models/

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

Plant-Based Plastics Gain Favor as Companies Pursue Sustainability Goals

18 08 2023

Eastman Chemical has more than $1 billion in sales annually from bioplastics made from cellulose acetate. PHOTO: EASTMAN CHEMICAL/REUTERS

Bioplastic production is growing at a record clip amid strong demand from fashion and food-packaging companies, in particular. By Dieter Holger from the Wall Street Journal • Reposted: August 18, 2023

The future is more plastic. Plant-based plastic, that is.

Plant-based plastics, or bioplastics, have accounted for just 1% of the world’s plastic production for well over a decade, according to a review of more than 100 companies by research organization nova-Institute. Bioplastics haven’t taken off largely because they are typically 50% to 80% more expensive than traditional fossil-fuel-based plastics, but their production is now growing 14% a year, putting them on track to reach up to 3% of the plastics market in the next five years.

Bioplastics are expanding faster than recycled plastic in some cases, such as in Asian countries like China and Japan that are mandating more ecologically friendly materials, nova-Institute founder Michael Carus said. Even if global plastic recycling rates someday reach 70% compared with around 9% today, bioplastics alongside materials made from captured carbon dioxide will have a big role to play as the world transitions away from fossil-fuel-based materials, he said.

“Not one of them can do it alone,” Carus said, referring to the sustainable materials that will drive the green transition. Regional share of biobased polymerproduction, usually for plastics, in 2022Source: nova-InstituteAsiaEuropeNorthAmericaSouthAmerica0%1020304050

Bioplastics’ benefits

Bioplastics are usually derived from plants rich in starch, sugar or pulp, such as corn, wheat, sugar cane, wood and cotton, which makes them costlier than plastics made from fossil fuels because crops need fertilizer and other resources such as water. However, the environmental benefits of plant-based plastics are increasingly appealing to companies promising to use more sustainable materials by the end of the decade.

Plants absorb the atmosphere’s carbon dioxide, which cuts the greenhouse-gas emissions from making bioplastics to at least half that of fossil-fuel-based plastics. Bioplastics can also sometimes cause less pollution when they degrade in the environment.

Broadly, there are two types of bioplastics: Materials that have similar performance to plastic, such as pulp-derived cellulose acetate found in eyeglasses and textiles, and bioplastics that are chemically identical to conventional plastics, such as a polyethylene, polyester and nylon. Around half of today’s bioplastics are biodegradable, according to nova-Institute, meaning they break down more naturally and are less harmful to habitats. Still, many of these bioplastics require industrial composting facilities to degrade and aren’t designed to be thrown away in a home garden.

*A Lululemon shirt containing plant-based nylon. PHOTO: LULULEMON ATHLETICA INC.*

Some of the earliest adopters of bioplastics are fashion companies, including Lululemon, which has a goal to replace the majority of oil-based nylon with plant-based nylon by 2030. A big selling point for the sportswear company is using plants to make chemically identical nylon that can be easily switched in, but still cuts emissions by nearly half.

The strongest demand for bioplastics is currently from fashion and food-packaging companies, but interest is also rising from companies in cosmetics, electronics and more durable goods such as tools, Eastman Chemical’s Chief Technology Officer Chris Killian said.

Eastman, formerly a division of Kodak, earns more than $1 billion of its $10 billion or so in yearly sales from bioplastics made from cellulose acetate, a material it has produced for more than 70 years. Cellulose acetate, which Eastman makes from cotton linters and wood pulp, was first used in Kodak film in the company’s early days, but it is now expanding into packaging, textiles and other applications. In 2022, Eastman signed an agreement withWarby Parker for the material to be used in eyewear. Share of produced biobased polymers byproduct type, in 2022Source: nova-InstituteFibersPackagingAutomotiveandtransportBuilding andconstruction0%102030

“It has a great deal of legs,” he said of the cellulose acetate-derived plastics.

Challenges ahead

Plant-based plastics remain a tough sell because fossil-fuel-based plastics are much cheaper, but prices could fall if companies continue to buy more bioplastics and governments encourage their use. This year, the Biden administration called on the federal government to assess the potential for biomaterials, including for plastics, fuels and medicines. And last year, the U.S. Defense Department said it would invest $1.2 billion in biomanufacturing. The European Union is also considering mandating bioplastics under packaging rules that are being discussed.

In the U.S., there is government support at the state and federal level to convert biological raw materials into fuels such as ethanol, but that level of support doesn’t yet exist for plant-based plastics, said Manav Lahoti, chemical giant Dow’s global sustainability director, olefins, aromatics and alternatives.

“The market is ready to take off on the demand side,” he said. “But to make the economics work, there is some regulatory support that is required.”Global biobased polymer production, whichusually is for plasticsSource: nova-Institute2018’19’20’21’220123456million metric tons

Another hurdle to scaling up bioplastics is what happens at their end of life. Only plant-based plastics that are chemically identical to fossil-fuel–based versions can enter the existing and growing recycling infrastructure. The world’s limited amount of feedstock, which often goes to feeding cattle and other livestock, also presents challenges to using more bioplastics.

One answer: turning agricultural waste into recyclable plastics.

This year, Dow struck an agreement with biomass refinery startup New Energy Blue to buy bioethylene made from the stalks and leaves of corn grown in Iowa. Dow will then make conventional and recyclable plastics from the material and sell to companies in transportation, footwear, and packaging.

Dow is already providing bioplastics for Crocs shoes and LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton’s perfume packaging, and sees demand outstripping supply, said Haley Lowry, Dow’s global sustainability director for packaging and specialty plastics.

“We are trying to find more sources,” she said. “The demand from our customers is there; it’s really finding the sources of biofeed that makes sense.”

Write to Dieter Holger at dieter.holger@wsj.com. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.wsj.com/articles/plant-based-plastics-gain-favor-as-companies-pursue-sustainability-goals-b0ea7dd8

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

Just in time for back-to-school shopping: How retailers can alter customer behavior to encourage more sustainable returns

17 08 2023

Retail returns have become big business for UPS. AP Photo/Toby Talbot

By Christopher Faires, Postdoctoral Researcher in Supply Chain Management, Iowa State University and Robert Overstreet,Assistant Professor of Supply Chain Management, Iowa State University via The Conversation Reposted: August 17, 2023

Back-to-school sales are underway, and people across the country will be shopping online to fill up backpacks, lockers and closets – and they’ll be taking advantage of free returns.

Making it easy for customers to return items at no cost started as a retail strategy to entice more people to shop online. But it’s getting expensive, for both retailers and the planet.

In 2022, retail returns added up to more than US $800 billion in lost sales. The transportation, labor, and logistics involved raised retailers’ costs even higher. Product returns also increase pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and waste in landfills, where many returned products now end up.

So how can retailers fix this problem and still provide quality customer service?

We conduct research in reverse logistics, focusing primarily on the intersection of retail returns and customer behavior. Here are some insights that can help reduce the abuse of free returns and lower costs without losing quality.

https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/V7yOA/1/

Nudging: In-store vs. shipped returns

Where a product is returned makes a difference. Items returned to the store can be restocked an average of 12 to 16 days faster than those that are mailed. Mailed returns also cost companies more: The difference between the most expensive shipped returns and least expensive in-store returns is $5 to $6 per item. That adds up quickly.

Studies show that customers may be willing to change their return behavior – with a little help.

Behavioral nudges are a technique used in decision-making to steer a person toward a specific behavior. Putting candy at eye-level at the grocery store checkout counter to encourage impulse purchases is an example, or making employee participation in a 401(k) savings program the default option. Another type of nudge involves providing more information.

If you’ve ever shopped online and seen statements like “10 out of 10 customers recommend this product” or “Only 2 items left in stock,” you have experienced the use of information to influence your decision. Nudges emphasizing sustainability may also appeal to customers and have a positive impact on return behavior.

A man hands a slip of paper to a woman a returns desk at Saks Fifth Avenue. — *Returning items to a store can avoid extra transportation, shipping and packaging, saving money and avoiding waste and emissions. AP Photo/Mark Lennihan*

In a recent survey, 94% of merchants said customers were concerned about sustainability, according to a report from Happy Returns, a logistics firm that works with retailers.

However, a much lower percentage of customers actually make sustainable return decisions. That suggests that customers do not fully understand the environmental impact of their return choices – and it offers a way for retailers to help.

Our research found that when customers were given information about the environmental impact of the different return options, they were nearly 17 times more likely to choose an in-store return rather than returning an item by mail. Nudges like this offer a simple and inexpensive way for retailers to alter customer behavior in favor of sustainability.

Picking up returns to speed up the process

Some customers request to return an item but then wait weeks before mailing it. It’s known as customer procrastination, and it also has a cost. The longer these products remain unprocessed, the more value they can lose.

High-priced electronics, such as laptops and tablets, have short product life cycles and lose value quickly, sometimes at a rate of 1% per week. Seasonal items, such as back-to-school supplies or winter coats, become more difficult to resell if retailers get them back on shelves after demand has bottomed out. A returned item’s resale value determines its destination: It can end up back on store shelves, sold to liquidators for pennies on the dollar or sent to a landfill.

A worker carries an Amazon box as another checks over a box and address. — *Transportation is a large expense for retail returns, for both companies and the planet. AP Photo/Mark Lennihan*

A home pickup service for time-sensitive returns could reduce delays in a way that is also useful to the customer. A small number of pickup vehicles collecting returns from customers could avoid multiple shipments, reducing total miles traveledand cutting vehicle emissions, while also avoiding the need for each return to be individually packaged.

Our research found that a pickup service could help retailers collect returns faster and reduce product value loss, particularly for high-priced products and products that lose value quickly, such as consumer electronics.

How to change policies without losing customers

While several retailers have stopped offering free returns or changed their return policies over the past year, our research suggests that changes affecting all customers might not be the best choice.

Broad policy changes that affect everyone might involve limiting the number of returns per customer, charging a fee for returns or shortening the window for returns. An alternative is a targeted return policy that applies only to people who abuse the system. For example, retailers can restrict free returns for people who repeatedly buy more items than they intend to keep, knowing they can return the rest.

A woman standing a computer terminal checks boxes on an assembly line. — *Offering free returns carries a cost for retailers, but ending return policies can also turn off customers.Johannes Eisele / AFP via Getty Images*

We conducted two studies to explore how customers would view changes to a retailer’s return policies.

In the first study, 460 participants were significantly more likely to speak negatively about the retailer – a fictitious company, in this case – when the retailer’s returns policy change applied to everyone and affected everyone equally.

Our follow-up study asked 100 online customers about their thoughts regarding generalized versus targeted policy changes. When the return policy change targeted customers who abused returns, 44% of the participants expressed positive emotions, and only 13% expressed negative emotions.

Those positive emotions included comments like, “I would feel proud of the company for taking action against people who try to cheat the system.” Such responses indicated that participants understood that cheaters were increasing the price paid by everyone.

But when the return policy change applied to everyone, 64% of the participants expressed negative emotions. Nearly half indicated they would speak negatively about the policy change to family and friends, and 42% said they would shop at another store.

Other ways to help customers make better decisions

Retailers can also change the online shopping experience before the customer makes a purchase to avoid the need for returns.

One way is to obtain detailed customer feedback on returns and use that to provide better product descriptions to customers. Another is to avoid incentivizing the wrong behavior. Well-intentioned free shipping on orders over a set dollar amountcould encourage customers to overpurchase and later return products.

Posting videos of items for sale can help buyers spot problems that photos might hide. Virtual fitting rooms that use an avatar of the customer to try on clothes virtually can help customers choose the right size the first time.

There is no doubt that managing retail returns is a difficult task. To make the process more sustainable, retailers need to help customers make choices that limit the need for a return or that minimize the impact of a return on the environment and, of course, the retailer’s bottom line.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://theconversation.com/just-in-time-for-back-to-school-shopping-how-retailers-can-alter-customer-behavior-to-encourage-more-sustainable-returns-206164

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, Happy Returns, responsible brands, Retail Returns, Shipping returns, Supply chain Management, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : Climate Change, corporate social responsibility, ESG, green marketing, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Busting Myths About ESG and Sustainable Investing

17 08 2023

The Manhattan Skyline: Photo: Patrick Tomasso/Unsplash

By Mary Mazzoni from Triple Pundit • August 17, 2023

“Anti-ESG” rhetoric on political campaign trails and cable news breeds misinformation and creates misunderstanding about the use of environmental, social and governance factors in business. This week we’re breaking down some of the most common myths we see out there about ESG and what it means for businesses and investors, with insight from Andrew Behar, CEO of the shareholder advocacy organization As You Sow.

Myth: ESG is just a big greenwash. Companies aren’t really improving.

Back in 2019, the CEO-led Business Roundtable — which represents executives at some of the largest U.S. companies — issued a statement revising the “purpose of a corporation.” After decades of saying companies should make all of their decisions based on maximizing short-term shareholder profit, the executive group proclaimed the private sector has a duty to all of its stakeholders, including employees, customers and communities. That means considering things like environmental sustainability and social equity alongside profit — in other words, adopting ESG principles.

Those are big words from a lobbyist group that includes executives from major financial companies like BlackRock and JPMorgan Chase, and many onlookers weren’t convinced. Environmental and social advocates said businesses weren’t living up to what they put on paper, and — particularly as the anti-ESG narrative took hold — politicians, pundits and social media warriors took aim at companies for the mere mention of considerations beyond the bottom line. The result? Companies got quieter about their work in ESG, a trend known in sustainability circles as “greenhushing.”

“Five years ago, companies were doing nothing and taking a victory lap,” Behar said. “Right now we have companies doing stuff — and I can tell you, it’s with greater intensity, with greater depth — but they do not want to take the victory lap. It’s a better situation, because they’re actually changing their policies and practices, but it’s the greenhushing. They want to be quiet, because there are too many trolls out there.”

Behind the scenes, companies are spending more on new programming tied to sustainability and social impact. They’ve also agreed to gather more information about things like diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in their workforces and the ways climate change impacts their supply chains — and disclose that information to investors and shareholder groups like As You Sow.

“When the declarations were made in 2019 about the new purpose of a corporation, that was really the moment where all of the companies said, ‘Okay, if we want to outperform, if we want to succeed, we’re going to be shifting our fundamental philosophy,'” Behar told us.

In this sense, anti-ESG critics are about four years “late to the party,” he said. “There’s no question in my mind that we are well along this implementation phase of a new purpose of a corporation and this transformation to a regenerative economy based on justice and sustainability. The extractive economy is winding down. And it’s just a question of how fast and how much pain they’re going to cause everybody else in the process.”

Myth: ESG and sustainable investing are anti-business.

Many far-right critics characterize ESG as something brand new, a symptom of the “wokeness” and “cancel culture” they say grip modern society. But ESG isn’t new. The term was coined back in 2005. And even before the Business Roundtable’s 2019 statement, thousands of professionalswere working as “ESG analysts” across the mainstream financial sector.

For investors, ESG is primarily a risk management and long-term growth mechanism. By understanding how companies manage their supply chains, source their ingredients and treat their workers, investors can better understand which companies are prepared for the future. Likewise, companies leverage ESG principles to manage and mitigate the risks they face.

“Overall, what we’re seeing here is just basic good business practices being demonized for political ends and people spending a lot of money to do it. And a lot of that is trying to stop what we see as market forces that have already happened — this is way over,” Behar said. “The companies that have adopted justice and sustainability are the ones that people want to put their money in, because they know those companies are going to succeed over the next five, 10, 20 years.”

Myth: If companies embrace ESG, goods and services will become more expensive.

Many individual products that are marketed as “sustainable” do come at higher prices. Critics often use this point to argue that the more companies consider ESG principles, the more expensive goods and services will become across the board.

But this misses critical context around the state of modern global supply chains. Social inequality and environmental crises already make it more difficult — and more expensive — to do business. ESG principles offer a way to manage and reduce that risk, which stabilizes prices over the long term.

Take climate change as an example and what Behar refers to as “climate inflation.” His team at As You Sow aggregates news articles that cover increasing commodity prices tied to climate change. They’ve noted a clear upward pattern over recent years, with the spring heatwaves in Europe that all but decimated Spain’s olive industry among recent examples.

“They had no olives, so olives are more expensive,” Behar explained. “Coffee‘s more expensive, chocolate‘s more expensive, cotton‘s more expensive. Cereal‘s more expensive. The boiling of the planet is really having some impacts on global commodity prices.”

Myth: You can’t invest sustainably unless you’re rich.

Indeed, institutional investors like asset managers, endowments and foundations increasingly use ESG factors to decide where to invest their money. ESG-focused institutional investment is projected to increase by 84 percent by 2026, making up around a fifth of all assets under management.

But you don’t have to be rich to invest sustainably, or to leverage your voting power as a shareholder in support of ESG. Last month, we outlined some simple ways for any and everyone to get involved with sustainable investing if they have the interest — from voting their proxies on individual stocks, to voicing their support for ESG in their 401(k) plans.

“We know we’ve got this vast majority of folks who actually want to vote to get corporations to provide a livable planet,” Behar said. “It’s a matter now of just getting people to talk about it.”

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/busting-myths-esg/781471

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

Can Sustainable Practices Generate Business?

12 08 2023

Photo: Getty

By Yusuf Amdani, Forbes Books Author via Forbes.com • Reposted: August 12, 2023

While 90% of executives state that sustainability is important, not as many are acting on green policies, according to the report “Investing For a Sustainable Future” which appeared in the MIT Sloan Management Review. Only 60% of companies have sustainability strategies in place. Without a green vision at the top, operational levels run the risk of using more resources than needed in everyday practices.

It may be a question of time: the world’s population grew from 2.3 billion in 1937 to 7.8 billion in 2020, per the Green Business Bureau. With more people, the carbon in the atmosphere has increased from 280 parts per million to 415 parts per million during that same timeframe. Globally, organizations are recognizing the need and searching for a solution to become more earth conscious.

Those interested in funding businesses are just as interested in sustainable solutions, with 85% of investors considering environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) factors as they make decisions, according to Gartner research. Among banks, 91% monitor ESG performance of investments. These groups see that consumers are asking for green strategies and that sustainability can lead to long-term profitability and performance.

Setting the tone for both current and future generations begins with effective, ongoing efforts that coincide with the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals. These outline actions for all countries—both developed and developing—to carry out in a global partnership. When businesses step up and implement changes, others will take notice and be ready to join in.

Here are some of the proven sustainable practices that can generate business:

1. Opting for Renewable Energy

In developing countries, the infrastructure may not support 24/7 electricity in every town and village. For companies that depend on uninterrupted processes and timely deliveries, putting in a solar-powered system could be the answer. Drawing from the sun’s rays to produce and circulate energy, operations can continue while simultaneously lowering electricity costs. Companies that lean into renewable energy will also benefit from the opportunity to show shareholders and customers that they are actively working to reduce their carbon emissions.

2. Sourcing Recycled Materials

Switching from ready-made supplies to recycled fibers in a textile plant can have a significant impact. Waste is reduced, products are manufactured with repurposed materials, and customers can join the cause by purchasing finished items. Among Gen Z shoppers, the up-and-coming consumer demographic, 73% are willing to pay more for sustainable products, per a report from FirstInsight. Looking for ways to recycle materials within a plant can lower manufacturing expenses and enable companies to prepare for upcoming regulations.

3. Promoting Plants and Nutrients

By 2030, the Amazon rainforest is predicted to be downsized to such an extent that it will not provide enough water to support its plant life, as reported by the Green Business Bureau. While companies can certainly fund reforestation campaigns, they can also start their own—right in their backyard. Industrial parks may have spaces where they can plant new trees and house a nursery. New flowers and trees could be distributed among the community. Organizations can also look for an area to carry out composting efforts like the Bocashi method, which yields organic fertilizers that can be used on plants.

4. Measuring Sustainable Metrics

Tracking sustainability programs and efforts can help staff members see progress and allows investors to gain insight into a company’s long-term objectives. This starts with choosing metrics to measure and certifications to obtain. From LEED to ISO 14001, TRUE (Zero Waste), and Great Place to Work®, there are many paths to pursue to implement sustainable processes and systems. Issuing a report every year creates a synergy that the company can build on and helps further share ESG objectives and achievements with interested parties.

Sustainable practices that deliver results, including reduced costs, greater efficiencies, and higher levels of well-being among workers, will be the drivers of tomorrow’s companies. To be prepared for heightened awareness and regulations surrounding ESG, organizations will do well to start today. Looking at what can be done and taking small steps can lead to long-term results and a lasting presence.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbooksauthors/2023/08/11/can-sustainable-practices-generate-business/?sh=33bffd205879

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, green marketing, LEED, 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 Join Forces to Protect Nature: Empowering Local Fishermen for Cleaner Waters

5 08 2023

Photo : Jeremy Bishop from Pexels

By Kirstie McDermott from Nature World News • Reposted: August 5, 2023

In an inspiring initiative to protect the environment and promote sustainable practices, leading brands have teamed up to make a significant difference in nature protection. This collaborative effort, named Bravo for Oceans, aims to hire local fishermen to clean up local bodies of water from debris and waste, and consumers can actively support this cause simply by making a purchase from one of the participating brands. Through this innovative approach, these brands are demonstrating their commitment to corporate social responsibility and fostering positive change in their communities.

Empowering local fishermen for cleaner waters

As concerns about environmental pollution and its impact on ecosystems continue to rise, businesses are increasingly recognizing their role in making a positive impact on nature protection. In a joint effort, several brands have come together to support local fishermen in their mission to clean up water bodies, such as lakes, rivers and coastal areas, from accumulated debris and waste.

By collaborating with local fishermen, who possess a deep understanding of their surrounding ecosystems, the initiative harnesses their expertise and knowledge to restore the health of these vital water sources. The fishermen are empowered to carry out clean-up activities in a responsible and sustainable manner, ensuring that aquatic life and habitats are protected throughout the process.

Consumer support through responsible purchasing

Consumers now have a unique opportunity to contribute to this meaningful initiative simply by making a purchase from the brands participating in this nature protection project. Each transaction made with these brands will directly support the hiring of local fishermen and enable them to take effective action in cleaning up water bodies, preserving natural beauty and conserving marine life.

By choosing to support these brands, conscious consumers can actively play a role in environmental conservation and invest in a greener future. Each purchase becomes a powerful statement in favor of sustainable practices and the protection of our planet’s invaluable water resources.

Bravodeal.com’s role in the initiative

Among the prominent brands actively participating in this noble initiative is Bravodeal.com. Founded in 2018, Bravodeal.com is a renowned coupon site that specializes in providing discount codes for users looking to save money on online purchases. The platform offers a wide selection of coupon codes, deals and promotions that can be used across major online retailers.

With an extensive network of partner brands, Bravodeal.com is committed to supporting sustainable initiatives and driving positive change. By initiating the idea and partnering up with an organization to carry out the hiring and cleaning, they are leveraging their platform to encourage responsible shopping choices that positively impact the environment.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/57771/20230804/brands-join-forces-to-protect-nature-empowering-local-fishermen-for-cleaner-waters.htm

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Bravo for Oceans, Bravodeal.com, cleaner waters, conscious consumers, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ecosystems, ESG, green marketing, Nature World News, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, sustainable fisheries
Categories : corporate social responsibility, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

A Changed World: The Rise Of Retail Sustainability

5 08 2023

Image: Getty

By Carl Rodrigues, Forbes Councils Member, Forbes Technology Council via Forbes • Reposted: August 5, 2023

It’s no secret that the past few years have created seismic changes in the retail industry.

Economic and supply chain issues have made it harder for consumers to shop. In fact, 88% of global consumers experienced availability, pricing and shipping issues. Retailers have responded by adding serious muscle to their e-commerce capabilities and expanding their BOPIS (buy online, pick up in store) capabilities.

To boost the productivity of associates and make their jobs easier, retailers have turned to handheld digital devices. This technology changes everything, from how employees conduct inventory and re-stock to having more information available.

Even with this additional technology, the retail industry continues to suffer from a chronic worker shortage. Retailers have far more unfilled job openings than the availability of unemployed workers with retail experience.

Unfortunately, 2.6 million tons of e-commerce returns end up in landfills since it is cheaper to dump returns than process and resell them. In the U.S. in 2020 alone, shipping returns from online orders pumped 16 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions into the atmosphere—equivalent to the emissions generated by powering 2 million homes for a year.

Moreover, the handheld devices retailers rely on are prematurely ending up in landfills, too. According to the Global E-Waste Monitor 2020, the U.S. produced roughly 6.9 million metric tons of e-waste in 2019. A U.K. government report says, “New software updates are often not supported on older hardware, meaning it becomes necessary to replace the hardware despite the physical product still working.”

Our research report found that enterprises are aggressively chasing new upgrades and fresh hardware rather than maintaining, updating, diagnosing and fixing devices they already have. For example, 60% of IT decision makers said their ruggedized devices, tablets, laptops and wearables are being discarded unnecessarily.

How To Get To A More Sustainable Retail Future

Retailers can encourage their IT departments to use an enterprise mobility management (EMM) solution that can extend the lifecycle of handheld devices. So, instead of investing in new hardware prematurely, an investment in an EMM solution will allow the IT department to remotely monitor, diagnose and repair devices to expand their lifecycles.

Modern retailers leverage rugged devices that enable smarter supply chains, logistics, warehousing, distribution and inventory management. But handheld devices are powered by batteries, and batteries can begin to fail after a number of charging and discharging cycles. As a result, IT teams routinely discard entire sets of batteries to avoid the downtime that unexpected battery failures can cause.

Monitoring of battery life needs to be a core component of the e-waste conversation. Retailers need to predict battery failures before they occur and replace only those batteries that are predicted to fail. With an EMM that provides intelligent battery analytics, the lifespan of batteries can be prolonged, keeping them out of landfill sites as well as reducing costs by avoiding unnecessary battery replacement.

A more sustainable approach is vital, especially as retailers augment their capabilities with drones and autonomous vehicles. A reduce-reuse-and-recycle mentality will enable retailers to make better, more sustainable choices that make the most out of every investment.

Retailers have the potential to shrink their overall carbon footprint and provide better real-time data to consumers—but getting the best results will require changes.

Sustainability is what consumers want, and investors are taking note, too. As BlackRock CEO Larry Fink put it in a recent letter to CEOs, “Sustainable investments have now reached $4 trillion. Actions and ambitions toward decarbonization have also increased. This is just the beginning—the tectonic shift towards sustainable investing is still accelerating.”

Getting to a more sustainable future means thinking more about the long term. Retailers should whiteboard out their use cases and think about where they can gain efficiency. With the right technology in place, retailers can easily manage their fleet of mobile devices across multiple locations and employees under a single pane of glass.

Retailers need to begin thinking about their businesses as a set of data flows. They need to optimize how they use data all the way from the retail floor back into the extended supply chain, considering how and where data is collected and making sure all those connections are rock-solid.

Pilot carefully, learn and only then roll out.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2023/08/04/a-changed-world-the-rise-of-retail-sustainability/?sh=342c8da329af

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Global E-Waste Monitor, green marketing, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

Powerful Ways Everyday People Can Counter ‘Anti-ESG’ Campaigns That Target Sustainable Investing

4 08 2023

An estimated 7.6 million young people have taken part in Fridays for Future protests in support of climate action, like this 2019 demonstration in Zürich, Switzerland. But protesting isn’t the only way for people to make their voices heard. Photo: Tom Seger – Upsplash

By Mary Mazzoni from Triple Pundit • Reposted: August 4, 2023

The anti-ESG movement, led primarily by a small set of right-wing politicians and pundits, continues to target the use of environmental, social and governance factors in investing. The pushback against ESG and “woke capitalism” is set to be central in the next U.S. presidential election cycle, with critics ramping up the discourse in advance.

Still, the public appears uninspired by the far-right’s latest bogeyman, with only about 35 percent of U.S. voters viewing “woke ideologies as a ‘major threat’ or a ‘very important’ issue when thinking about their 2024 vote,” according to July polling from Morning Consult.

Those growing tired of the anti-ESG discourse don’t have to resign to simply tuning it out. We spoke with Andrew Behar, CEO of As You Sow, a nonprofit foundation that promotes shareholder advocacy, about powerful ways everyday people can voice what they really think about ESG and the shift toward more sustainable and socially responsible ways of doing business.

Take action: Counter anti-ESG narratives by learning and sharing

The much ado about anti-ESG may not have the effect critics intended. While the majority of the public remains ambivalent, anti-ESG criticism has also sparked new conversations where there were none before. “The good news is there are tens of millions of people who’d never heard of ESG who now have heard of it. They’d never heard of sustainable investing — they didn’t know you could invest sustainably,” Behar said. “Now they’re aware their investing has an impact. And actually a lot more people are coming to ESG investing because of it. I think it’s really backfiring.”

Still, anti-ESG narratives can create confusion about what ESG criteria are actually meant to do. Last year, As You Sow launched the AmplifyESG content library to counter the misinformation about ESG online. It’s curated by an editorial review board that includes representatives from business and both U.S. political parties, Behar said.

Hosted on Hootsuite, the library is updated at least a few times a week with articles, quotes, videos and other resources about ESG, which users can easily share across their social media platforms as they choose. Shares from AmplifyESG have reached nearly 3 million people over the past year, and anyone can get involved in driving more evidence-based conversations about ESG in business.

Take action: Leverage your right to vote

No, we don’t mean at the ballot box. Of course that’s important, too, but in this case we’re talking about the proxy voting rights afforded to everyone who owns shares in a publicly-traded company. “If you’re an individual who has bought shares on E-Trade or Schwab or Robinhood or whatever, you have the right to vote — even if you own just one share,” Behar said. “And that vote is very, very important.”

An estimated 25 percent of all shareholders do not exercise their proxy votes, he explained. “If those 25 percent decided to get off the bleachers and get on the playing field, that makes a big difference. That makes the difference between a majority vote or one that’s just under the majority line.”

But exercising the right to vote by proxy is traditionally not a user-friendly process for individual shareholders. “It’s always been difficult,” Behar said. “Generally you get an email that says, ‘Time to vote.’ But when you look at the ballot, there’s 20 or 30 decisions to make. Who’s on the board? How much do the executives get paid? Who’s the auditor? What about all these shareholder resolutions? It’s very complex.”

As You Sow has published annual proxy guidelines for decades, outlining votes they deem to be aligned with ESG principles. Three years ago, it automated the process by embedding its guidelines into Broadridge Financial Solutions’ ProxyEdge platform for institutional investors. The paid service allows institutions like asset managers, endowments and foundations to vote in an ESG-aligned way in only a few clicks. They can also customize their votes from As You Sow’s defaults as they choose.

This year, As You Sow went a step further with a free service for individual investors at AsYouVote.org. “You can now redirect that email so we will automatically fill in the ballot,” Behar said. “It’ll all be filled out in an ESG-aligned way, and you can make adjustments.”

This simple shift allows individual shareholders to move from being overwhelmed by proxy voting emails to automating the process of voting with their values, with the option to customize if they’d like. “I think a lot of people feel guilty. They see all these proxy statements piling up in their inbox and they think, ‘I just can’t deal with it.’ What you’ll get instead is, ‘Thanks for voting.’ You’ll feel great about yourself, and it takes literally two minutes to set up.”

Take action: How mutual fund and 401(k) investors can make their voices heard

Traditionally, people who invest in funds rather than individual stocks have a much harder time making their voices heard come proxy season, but this is beginning to change thanks to new technology.

“If you own shares in a mutual fund, you have the right to vote. Right now, you have abdicated that right to Vanguard or BlackRock or State Street or whoever, and they’re voting on your behalf. They’re probably not voting the way you like,” Behar said. “You might want to vote for a livable planet. You can demand that. You can say, ‘I want that vote,’ and they will give it to you. It’s very new. The technology is just unfolding.”

Technology advancements mean that individual mutual fund investors can vote their own proxies, with the fund manager voting in alignment with the aggregated results at a company’s annual shareholders meeting. This is known as pass-through voting.

In April, As You Sow linked up with the cloud management company Iconik to make this option available to investors in an S&P 500 mutual fund. Hundreds of investors have already taken advantage of it, Behar said, with more funds on the horizon. “We’re now in conversations with every other proxy voting service,” he said. Broadridge Financial Solutions, a major tech provider for institutional investors, is among those working with fund managers to make this option available to their customers. Get in touch with your fund manager to see what options you have.

Similarly, those who invest in 401(k) plans through their employers also have the right to vote by proxy, but they need to reclaim it from the fund managers associated with their plans. “If you’re in a 401(k) plan — where you probably own a target date fund, which is a fund of funds — you’re going to need to go to your plan administrator and say, ‘I want to vote.'”

If employees band together to ask for their vote, the employer can decide to work with the fund manager to make the option available. As You Sow is in talks with employee-organized groups at companies including Google and Microsoft, who want to leverage the voting power associated with their 401(k)s.

The bottom line: You have more power than you think

Counter to the anti-ESG narrative, most people want to see business operate sustainably, with 99 percent of millennial investors, 82 percent of women and 72 percent of people overall saying they would choose to vote their proxies with sustainability in mind, according to polling from As You Sow.

Where market forces are already driving business closer to ESG principles, everyday people realizing and claiming the power they hold could open the floodgates.

“People abdicate their power. The way people give away their private personal information to Facebook, they abdicate the power of their money to Vanguard, State Street and BlackRock. It’s amazing. People give away all their power and all their information for nothing,” Behar said. “We have a culture where people look at things like climate change and think, ‘There’s nothing I can do.’ No. You have so much power. You just choose not to use it.”

To see the original post, follow tis link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/counter-anti-esg-campaigns/780366

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

Three Ways Eco-Conscious Brands Can Transform Sustainability Into An Advantage

4 08 2023

Image: Getty

By Sai Koppala, Forbes Councils Member from the Forbes Communications Council • Reposted: August 4, 2023

Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard captured headlines and received accolades last year when he announced that the outdoor retailer would begin donating nearly the entirety of its profits to fighting climate change. In that same vein, an October 2022 IBM study found that 73% of respondents considered sustainability when shopping.

Both of these speak to broader trends in the way consumers are viewing corporate responsibility, particularly when it comes to environmental concerns.

How can companies respond to shifting consumer values to get ahead of both competitors and economic headwinds? Based on the 3 P’s of sustainable businesses(planet, people and profit), brands need to demonstrate transparency around ongoing sustainability efforts, engage customers in genuine conversations about what matters to them and craft engagement-based loyalty programs that recognize and reward shared social values. Here are three ways brands can accomplish this.

Communicate Tangible Impact On The Planet

Consumers don’t just want to hear “sustainability” as a buzzword. They want to see the concrete actions companies are taking to achieve it.

Brands like Cotopaxi provide a template to follow. Rather than hiding behind the vague “greenwashing” language media-savvy consumers know all too well, the company provides transparency into its sourcing partners and factories globally as well as the sustainability efforts at these factories and carbon offsetting for bulk shipping.

Brands still in the midst of their own sustainable transformation can also highlight the actions they’re taking to achieve the environmental objectives consumers value. Athletic wear brand Allbirds, for example, notes on its website the sustainability goals the company aims to meet by 2025, how Allbirds falls short of them now and the steps the brand is taking to meet them by its own self-imposed deadline.

Much like many companies themselves, consumers are going through their own green transformations and understand that such efforts take time. Rather than penalizing brands with less-than-ideal carbon footprints, consumers will likely reward transparent companies making an earnest effort to attain sustainability—even if they’re not there just yet.

Engage Customers In Sustainability Conversations

Rather than waiting for consumers to come to them, brands should attract the sustainably minded with content that speaks to their needs and goals.

Proactive sustainability brands can create informative and entertaining content that educates and engages consumers by leveraging the full power of their digital marketing channels. Patagonia uses an interactive webpage to illustrate the negative impact the clothing industry has on the environment and showcase the actions it’s taking to remedy it—including recycling materials, growing its own organic cotton and selling used gear at a discount to keep it out of landfills. As a result, consumers gain a clear understanding of how the company aligns with their values and what Patagonia is doing to achieve its sustainability goals.

Brands that engage their customers in conversations about sustainability are able to clarify the ecological topics consumers care about while also proactively guiding them toward products that align with their values. By taking an active role in their sustainability education, companies can establish trust with consumers and reinforce their own sustainable value proposition as they work to change old purchasing habits for good.

Reward Customers For Shared Values

As consumers set their sights on companies and products that share their environmental values, brands that reward them for their sustainable purchases have the chance to attract—and retain—both new and old customers.

One of our customers, Back Market, has developed a business model that not only drives sustainability and circular economy but also drives profits with the Gen Z audience that cares about reuse.

With the constant emergence of new technologies and the consumer desire to always have the latest and greatest device comes many gadgets that end up in a landfill. Back Market was created to help reduce all this e-waste. Sellers can quickly and easily get rid of the “old” gadgets they don’t want anymore, and buyers can grab gently used, high-quality gadgets for a great price.

Loyalty programs tied to sustainable purchases encourage consumers to make the shift toward eco-friendly products and provide an incentive to keep doing so in the future. Customers also develop a greater sense of commitment to the brand, which they see as a reliable vehicle for attaining their own sustainability goals. By rewarding customers for making purchases that align with their shared values today, companies become trusted partners they’ll turn to when making more in the future.

Through marketing efforts that reflect consumers’ identities and reward them for acting on their values, brands can form meaningful bonds with customers and turn them into lifelong patrons. As consumers continue to positively interact with the brand, they encourage others in their network to do so as well and foster new customer relationships—creating a virtuous cycle.

Through targeted rewards programs, brands can ensure the health of not only their bottom line but the planet as well.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescommunicationscouncil/2023/08/03/three-ways-eco-conscious-brands-can-transform-sustainability-into-an-advantage/?sh=5e5903185e0c

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, green marketing, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands

The space industry has a sustainability problem

2 08 2023

Image via Shutterstock/Blue Planet Studio

Privatizing space could bring immense benefits to humanity, but is the industry thoughtfully considering the impact of emissions, space debris and employee well-being? By Vartan Badalian via Greenbiz.com • Reposted: August 2, 2023

In 1962, President John F. Kennedy gave one of his most historic speeches as he catapulted the U.S. into the space race against Russia. His words still hold immense passion and foresight today: “We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained and new rights to be won… We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.”

In the short time humans have focused on space, we have landed humans on the moon, studied the deepest parts of the galaxy and privatized the industry. Right now, you can even pay as low as $257,000 on SpaceX’s website to ship your cargo to space.

Putting aside futuristic plans of space tourism, traveling to Mars and mining for minerals on asteroids, space exploration has practical benefits for humans today. The ability to track humanitarian issues and the impacts of climate change from space are just two reasons humans must keep looking to the stars.

At the same time, however, this great desire for space exploration is driving concern over short-term environmental and social impacts.

The problem with space

The sustainability challenges associated with space exploration and other commercial activities fall into three categories:

The emissions produced from launching spaceships;
The space junk that is quickly increasing and floating in Earth’s orbit; and
Potential harm to known or unknown species, along with human/employee rights concerns.

The space industry is truly different when it comes to measuring or assessing issues such as these, according to Paul Holdredge, director of industrials and transport at consultancy BSR.

“The industry is talking about sustainability, but they’re not yet using the same language that you and I might use,” Holdredge told me. “Many of the ESG rating systems, questionnaires, methods of evaluating companies — they frankly don’t apply to the space industry.”

The launch emissions

Consider the process of sending rockets into orbit. “There are a great number of launches forecasted, and the impact of those emissions in the upper atmosphere from various rocket chemistries is still not well understood,” Holdredge said.

While the percentage of fossil fuels burned by the space industry is 1 percent of what is burned by aviation, the fear among experts is that the emissions impacts of launches on the upper atmosphere and ozone layer are still widely unknown, especially as the frequency of launches increases. Also concerning is the fact that emissions have a tendency to linger longer.

Commercial space companies are driving a $500 billion industry right now, growing about 9 percent per year. That puts the sector on a path for about $1 trillion by 2040, according to Holdredge. This growth will bring an increase in spaceship launches, across both the private and government sectors. In 2022, 180 successful rocket launches happened, 44 more than in 2021. Much of this growth is led by Elon Musk’s company SpaceX, which launched a rocket once every six days on average. That doesn’t account for the impact of launches by two other high-profile private space companies, Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic.

Emissions reductions could come in the form of less carbon-intensive fuel chemistries — but that will take ongoing research and development. Other solutions that could help decarbonize the industry include a carbon nanotube space elevator that stretches into space, allowing for a more cost efficient and less energy intensive way to travel. Almost like a transit system but into space. But as this article points out, by the time we are able to build a space elevator, it might not be necessary given how quickly commercial space exploration is evolving.

Littering in space is the status quo, for now

A big concern beyond emissions is orbital litter. More than 25,000 pieces of space junk and debris larger than 10 centimeters are floating in Earth’s orbit, according to the World Economic Forum.

This junk includes anything from components left behind during launches to decommissioned satellites to other objects and chunks of material caused by asteroids hitting satellites or satellites hitting each other. Over time, this debris builds and floats in orbit, a concept known as the Kessler Syndrome. The fear is that this growing cloud of stuff could pose a danger to launches over time. Last year, SpaceX had to issue a statement amid concern by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration that SpaceX’s Starlink satellites might cause a collision with the International Space Station.

The solution to space waste? Several companies and early-stage startups such as OrbitGuardians and ClearSpace focus on debris retrieval and removal. The work of the Space Sustainability Rating, launched by the World Economic Forum and developed by a group of industry players including the European Space Agency and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is also a source of potential solutions.

The system offers recommendations for how aerospace companies can improve the long-term sustainability and longevity of their launches and satellite design, as well as address debris mitigation. The rating is based on a four-badge system from bronze, silver, gold and platinum.

Other aspects of sustainability

Aside from environmental factors, Holdredge said companies must increasingly consider the human impacts of space exploration. Among the concerns they’ll need to consider: how to take care of employees working in space; how to feed them; howto care for their waste; how to protect them from radiation; and more. These issues fall under the umbrella of human and employee rights.

As we colonize other planets, what rights must we consider for other potential life — known or unknown?

Human-driven climate change is causing the extinction of species on Earth that we have little knowledge about. We should strive to avoid bringing about the same harm to other planets.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/space-industry-has-sustainability-problem

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, BSR, ClearSpace, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, ESG, green marketing, OrbitGuardians, responsible brands, space tourism, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands, World Economic Forum
Categories : Climate Change, ESG, reputation management, social responsibility, sustainability

How To Make E-Commerce Sustainability Commercially Viable

2 08 2023

Photo: Getty

By Zohar Gilad, Forbes Councils Member, Forbes Technology Council via Forbes • Reposted: August 2, 2023

According to Forrester, most U.S. consumers place the responsibility of protecting the environment on companies. Two-thirds want more transparency on business practices. And study after study shows that consumers want to be more environmentally responsiblein their buying habits.

Why, then do most e-commerce sustainability efforts fail to put a dent in the problem?

Decades of rapid e-commerce growth have taught us that consumers want to consume, and merchants are more than happy to feed them goods for revenue and profit. There’s a lot of lip service around sustainability, but at the end of the day, the desire to get more things faster often overcomes many of the best sustainability intentions of both shoppers and merchants.

Why? Because e-commerce sustainability is impossible unless it is commercially viable.

For sustainability to work, it must be good for the business, desired by the consumer and good for the planet. Here are some practical—and commercially viable—ways for e-commerce brands to improve their environmental footprint.

Start with packaging.

More than 40% of consumers get one to two packages a week—just from Amazon. Today, businesses can choose from many sustainable packaging alternatives to reduce weight, make customers feel good and create an immediate environmental impact.

That said, research shows that most consumers are misinformed about what is actually recyclable and misunderstand recycling practices. Merchants need to educate consumers on how to recycle or compost packaging to make sure it happens. There’s also an opportunity to promote programs and practices with branding and clever marketing on the packaging itself.

Improve data analytics to stop overproducing.

According to the United Nations, the fashion industry alone accounts for 2% to 8% of global carbon emissions, and textile dyeing is the second largest polluter of water. Tastes and desires are fickle, and so much of what is produced (clothing, food, etc.) is ultimately wasted or sold for pennies on the dollar. Industries like fashion have long over-produced in efforts to have “everything they might need” to meet this fickle demand.

The fashion industry is just one example of how quick it is to manufacture goods but how hard it is to understand and meet demand. With more advanced AI, analytics and personalization technologies, however, it’s possible to better understand consumption. Accurate demand forecasting is one of the best things you can do to improve every aspect of your business (scale, cost, lower returns, etc.) and reduce environmental waste.

Ensure the price is right.

For years, data has shown that consumers are “willing” to pay more for sustainable products. But dig a little deeper, and you’ll see just how powerful decades-old commercial forces can be in hindering sustainability.

With the arrival of the recession, the number of consumers willing to pay more for sustainable products shrunk by 16%. Quality and price still lead consumers’ considerationswhen making purchasing decisions in good times and bad. Both are twice as influential as sustainability in making purchases. The price has to be right for the quality of the goods provided, regardless of operational practices.

Elevate the product with sustainability.

If price and quality are more than twice as influential as sustainability in buying decisions, then use your sustainability practices to elevate the quality of your goods and the brand behind them.

Outstanding goods capture a premium price, attract new shoppers and build brand loyalty. Patagonia is a great example here. It’s a “gold standard” in outdoor clothing and quality and also happens to be environmentally sound.

Tesla is another great example, with a premium-priced electric car that has excellent range, has better performance than the average gas vehicle and is supported by a great charging network. Remember that Tesla launched a luxury sports car, which set the tone for the brand. Consumers expect Teslas to provide a superior driving experience that they can feel good about.

Share your sustainability story.

Online searches for sustainable goods have increased by 71% between 2016 and 2021, and influencer mentions of sustainable fashion have boomed in recent years. Sustainability is now a critical ingredient of a good brand story, especially for younger buyers. Integrate this into your marketing and build it into your brand story.

But if you’re not actually doing some of the things I’ve outlined above, then you’re just greenwashing, and that storytelling goes from a strategic advantage to a liability. Buyers won’t hesitate to post your bad practices across their channels.

Create a personal and frictionless experience for shoppers.

Far too often, companies dedicate a lot of resources to sustainable practices, only to mess up the last mile. Getting traffic and buyers is the first step, but you have to make it easy for consumers to find what they’re looking for, especially with a younger, more environmentally aware audience.

I’ve written about removing friction from e-commerce in the past, and that applies to all aspects of buyer intent, including sustainability. Promote the products clearly. More importantly, incorporate sustainability with all the other data points (geography, referral site, device, time, weather, etc.) for a full, accurate and personalized journey.

So many environmental efforts come to the table with the best intentions, only to be tripped up by the realities of commercial operations. By adding a commercial lens to your sustainability endeavors, you do what’s good for the planet and what’s good for your pocket. And that’s good for everyone.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2023/08/01/how-to-make-e-commerce-sustainability-commercially-viable/?sh=560642fbff81

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

How the Healthcare Industry Can Confront the Climate Crisis Through its Supply Chain

1 08 2023

Photo: Boston Scientific

By Kathryn Unger from Triple Pundit • Reposted: August 1, 2023

As Earth’s temperatures continue to rise, it has become evident that protecting the planet will require global cooperation and direct action across every single industry. The healthcare industry is no exception. Indeed, the connection between environmental health and human health underscores the importance of the medical community’s role in reaching net zero carbon emissions.

The healthcare sector contributes an estimated 4.5 percent of global emissions. Some of these greenhouse gases are produced from healthcare facilities; others are the result of the industry’s supply chain of goods and services. Yet when it comes to climate change, the healthcare industry must go beyond focusing on treating the health conditions resulting from environmental degradation — and increasingly, we’re seeing industry starting to shift toward helping to prevent those health conditions by addressing climate change itself.

Boston Scientific is among those medical technology companies working to reduce emissions. Our ambitious effort will involve reevaluating every aspect of business and making changes to support achieving net-zero emissions along the company’s entire value chain. This work represents a considerable challenge, and one whose time has come.

“Climate change will affect almost every human disease in some way,” says Dr. Kenneth Stein, chief medical officer. “For those of us in the healthcare industry, who are dedicated to improving health and patient outcomes, that’s a worrisome thought. But we can apply our considerable innovative skills toward becoming part of the solution.”

Fortunately, we have a couple of important factors working in our favor. They are ingredients which, I would suggest, every company needs to succeed in meeting its ESG goals: A thoughtful, realistic, and science-based sustainability plan in development, along with full-throated support for our initiative at every level of our organization.

Making the business case for sustainability in healthcare

Within the medtech sector, some sustainability changes involve tracing products back through the supply chain to reimagine the way those products are sourced, manufactured, packaged and shipped. Doing so is a significant undertaking – so much so, that if an organization doesn’t have a clear understanding that its sustainability goals are in line with a clear mission to improve health outcomes, it might shy away from the challenge.

Paudie O’Connor, senior vice president in charge of Boston Scientific global supply chain, points out that for that reason, it’s important to dispel myths that there is tension between the two goals. “There is no reason why we can’t further healthcare to help decrease the plight of human suffering, and work to improve the environment at the same time,” he told me.

In fact, Boston Scientific was the first medical device company to commit to carbon neutrality within its manufacturing network, as well as to receive approval for its net zero target by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), an international organization that provides clear guidance for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in line with the latest climate science.

Already, we’ve made progress toward carbon neutrality goals by shifting our electricity sources in the U.S. and Europe to 100% renewable electricity – contributing to 76% renewable electricity across our global manufacturing and key distribution sites – putting us on track for 100% renewable electricity worldwide by 2024 in our manufacturing and key distribution sites. All are important milestones on the path to achieving the company’s net zero emissions target across the entire value chain by 2050.

However, some sustainability goals are more complicated. For instance, physicians and patients need medical products that are sterile, safe and reliable – and those standards are highly regulated. Now, teams must consider the environmental footprint of products at every life cycle stage, from design, sourcing, production and distribution to waste disposal and recycling.

“We spend a great deal of time thinking about how we can structure our supply chain to support growth and environmental sustainability,” O’Connor says. “For example, thinking of ways to reduce packaging, digitize instructions for use, target sterilization practices and use strategic modes of distribution.”

Shipping is a good example. Medical device manufacturers have long shipped products to their destinations by air as a matter of convenience and, importantly, speed, so that devices are always available for patients who require immediate intervention. “Our supply chain has a purpose statement: ‘delivering for patients,’” says O’Connor. “Getting high-quality products to patients when they need them.”

Rail and maritime transport are far more carbon-efficient than air transport, but take longer; for example, a product that takes four days to get from Costa Rica to Boston by air may take 14 days by boat and rail. Thus, in switching to moving products by land or sea to key distribution hubs, a company must carefully reexamine the timetables by which products are sent and adjust them accordingly. Mapping out such thoughtful, deliberate changes can result in meaningful carbon reduction, making the effort well worthwhile.

Tackling environmental challenges for better health

This is one of the biggest challenges that the global population has faced, let alone the healthcare industry. But by viewing environmental sustainability as a step toward improving human health, the goals of both the medical community and those of global supply chain teams can come together as one. I believe that such a holistic view is precisely the way to frame the important sustainability work ahead of the healthcare industry. Dr. Stein agrees: “To reduce healthcare disparities, we can’t ignore how environmental and climate changes will affect health, especially for society’s most vulnerable.”

There is so much more work to do to continue to advance our collective efforts to contribute to a healthier planet. Regulations are increasing and evolving. Customer expectations are evolving. Science is constantly evolving and changing the things that we can accomplish for our customers and patients. But the industry is making meaningful changes — and by holding ourselves and each other accountable, we can accelerate progress and achieve more together.

This article series is sponsored by Boston Scientific and produced by the TriplePundit editorial team. To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2023/healthcare-industry-climate-change/780166

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: accountability, Boston Scientific, corporate social reponsibility, corporate social responsibility, CSR, ESG, Global supply Chain, green marketing, healthcare, responsible brands, sustainability, sustainable branding, sustainable brands
Categories : corporate social responsibility, DEI, ESG, social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable branding

Sustainability report shows importance of affordability and convenience

1 08 2023

A new study finds three-quarters of consumers wish to live more sustainably, with convenience and affordability the main impediments. By Tom Joyce from fruitnet.com • Reposted: August 1, 2023

Nearly three-quarters of consumers want to live more sustainably, according to a new report commissioned by Alibaba Group, but inconvenience and high costs were seen by shoppers as the biggest barriers.

NL CREDIT Albert Heijn TAGS plastic bags sustainability net reusable recycling

The Sustainability Trends Report 2023, which polled more than 14,000 consumers from 14 countries across Asia, Europe and the Middle East, found that convenience (53 per cent) and affordability (33 per cent) were “critical for driving behavioural changes on consumer sustainability”.

Businesses, the report concluded, could make it easier for consumers to make sustainably conscious choices.

“Making sustainable products more affordable (61 per cent), making fewer products using single-use plastics and packaging (55 per cent) and a wider selection of sustainable products and services (47 per cent) are the top three ways consumers say businesses can promote consumer sustainability,” it stated.

However, it showed that businesses faced a challenge in earning consumers’ trust concerning sustainability claims, especially in Europe, where 23 per cent of respondents said they did “not trust very much” the sustainability claims made by businesses.

A lack of information on how products are sustainable (48 per cent) and the high price of sustainable products (45 per cent) were cited as the main barriers for consumers to make more sustainable purchases.

The research found 76 per cent would welcome more advice on how to be more sustainable, with the proportion highest in the Philippines (93 per cent), Indonesia (91 per cent) and the UAE (90 per cent).

However, over half of those surveyed said that they would only make sustainable choices if they were convenient, with a third saying that living sustainably was unaffordable.

To see the original post, follow this link: https://www.fruitnet.com/eurofruit/sustainability-report-shows-importance-of-affordability-and-convenience/255269.article

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

Eric Block On Responsible Branding

Search

Links

Contact Us

Inspiring Experiences

Our Partners

Reliable Resources