Search

Op/Ed: Sealed Air Named to CDP Climate Performance A List

3P Author ID
100
3P Special Series
Primary Category
Content

 

By Ron Cotterman, VP Sustainability, SealedAir

We are excited to announce that Sealed Air’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and mitigate the risks of potential climate change have been recognized by CDP. As stated in this year’s CDP 2015 Climate Change Report, Sealed Air was named to the Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) A List and also received a 100 percent Disclosure score, earning a position in CDP’s S&P 500 Climate Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI), for the second consecutive year.

CDP is an international, not-for-profit providing the only global system for companies to measure, disclose, manage and share environmental information. Through the global system of CDP, companies are better able to mitigate risk, capitalize on opportunities and make investment decisions that drive action towards a more sustainable world. Measurement, management and disclosure of GHG emissions and climate change data are increasingly important aspects of sustainable business practice.

An integral part of Sealed Air’s sustainability strategy is focused on GHG reductions, reducing operating costs and risk, and generating value through solutions that reduce waste, conserve energy and water, and optimize the use of raw materials for its customers. Earlier this year, the Company announced its 2020 Sustainability Goals, which are an aggressive set of targets and commitments to drive the continued strategy for mitigating the risks of climate change.

Sealed Air achieved the maximum score and A rating by reducing its energy intensity and GHG emissions while maintaining customer value and cost competitiveness. Sealed Air teams are actively sharing footprint reduction best practices in sustainability projects across all sites. In 2014, 39 projects to reduce energy & GHGs were implemented, with an estimated reduction of more than 30,000 metric tons of CO2. Projects include lighting, upgrades to compressed air systems, boiler upgrades, replacement of chillers, recovery & use of SF6 (a highly potent GHG), low carbon energy installations, and behavioral change programs.

Our recognition on the CDP Climate Performance A List and the CDLI is important not only to internal stakeholders but our customers and external partners as well. “We are developing products with lower energy and GHG impact when in use, which is critically important to many of our suppliers and customers, and assists them in achievement of their own goals. In 2014, some examples of those new innovations with lower energy and GHG impact for customers included Freshness Plus, Darfresh On Tray, and Smart Mix Pro Series.

Sofitel Mumbai, a luxury hotel in India’s Mumbai business district, is just one customer that has benefited from some of the work featured in Sealed Air’s CDP submission. The hotel, situated in a region of extreme water scarcity, partnered with Sealed Air’s Diversey Care in an effort to reaffirm its responsibility to sustainable development and environmental efficiency. After switching to the Company’s Clax Advanced® laundry solution, the hotel immediately noticed cleaner, whiter linens on the first wash with less energy consumption in the process. After studying the results during one year of use, Sofitel Mumbai realized 42% reduction in water consumption (7.8 M liters) and 28 Tons reduction in CO2 emissions over their previously used laundry solution.

The work that Sealed Air is doing in climate change mitigation also has a broad impact for the world and the local communities the where the Company operates. In addition to on-site business practices and new innovations, Sealed Air actively partners with Trade associations and third parties to conduct research and to advocate and influence climate legislation. Some of those groups include WWF EUROPEN, AMERIPEN, BIER, CGF, and GEMI.

This year, approximately 2,000 companies reported to the CDP Climate questionnaire. Company disclosures to CDP are scored on a scale of 0 - 100 for completeness and data quality. This year, Sealed Air scored 100 for Disclosure and achieved an A rating on the Climate List, one of only 113 companies accounting for the top 5% of those reporting. High scores indicate that companies provided robust climate data and conveyed a strong understanding of corporate climate-related issues. Companies in the top 10% for Disclosure scores are awarded a position on the CDLI.   CDP Disclosure scores are provided to investors and other decision makers through various channels, including Bloomberg terminals, to help them assess corporate preparedness for changing market demands, current and future emissions regulations, as well as current and future physical risks and opportunities associated with climate change.

 

For more information on Sealed Air’s sustainability commitments, visit our website.

CDP’s annual global climate change report, along with the climate scores of all companies publicly taking part in CDP’s climate change program this year, is available on CDP’s website.

In his position as Vice President, Sustainability, Ron Cotterman is responsible for Sealed Air’s company-wide sustainability strategy. In this global role, Ron leads initiatives in operational excellence, delivering customer value and achieving Sealed Air’s vision to create a better way for life.

 

3P ID
228976
Prime
Off

FDA Takes Bolder Action on Fresh Produce Inspection

3P Author ID
367
Primary Category
Content

 

The U.S. government has long encouraged Americans to eat more of many things—depending, of course, on who is in power and which lobbying groups have had the timeliest influence in Washington, DC. We have been lectured about the square meal and the food pyramid, often with dubious results, most notably in the country’s disturbing obesity rates. But to the government’s credit, some programs have found success, such as the “5 a Day” campaign to boost the consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables in our diet.

The emphasis on fresh food, however, has had its own pitfalls. E. coli outbreaks affecting fresh produce have become an annual occurrence, most recently with the recent closure of Chipotle outlets in the Pacific Northwest. The evidence suggests Americans are eating more fresh produce, but much of it is in the form of packaged vegetables, especially salad greens, to which consumers gravitate because of convenience and clever marketing. But the more that bunch of chopped arugula passes through more hands, as in from farm to packing plant to its cellophane packaging and finally, to supermarket shelves, the greater the odds are that something can go wrong.

To that end, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the federal government agency tasked with food inspection but in recent years has avoided much of it thanks to politics, is taking more aggressive action in order to prevent these foodborne illnesses that have turned many a benign meal into a public health threat.

The FDA is trying to address this problem of contaminated produce by enacting final steps in the implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2011. The agency has developed new rules that third-party auditors must follow when conducting food safety inspections of facilities outside of the U.S. Rules on produce safety also give growers and food processors more clarity on what is needed to guarantee the safety of fresh produce, from employee hygiene to water quality. Some of these rules cover what many of us would assume would be common sense—as in how close domesticated and wild animals can come in contact with produce grown on farms.

In sum, instead of the FDA waiting for a widespread illness to wreak havoc, these new rules behoove farmers, food producers and packing houses to take action and prevent such outbreaks of E. coli and salmonella from occurring in the first place. The FDA says it has arrived at these rules after a long public comment period during which hundreds of farm visits, public meetings and “listening sessions” were organized.

Whether this will all make a difference remains to be seen. After all, the final execution and enforcement of these rules are subject to the 2016 federal budget. Can food safety survive the quadrennial presidential election cycle in order to make a difference and ensure citizens that the fresh products they buy are safe? Or will more people continue to become ill, or even die, from illnesses that could have easily been prevented by a combination of common sense and timely inspections?

Image credit: Leon Kaye

3P ID
228965
Prime
Off

Madoff Ponzi Scheme Judgments Slam 'Gatekeepers' Ernst &Young

3P Author ID
8579
Primary Category
Content

More than six years after former stockbroker Bernard Madoff was convicted of fraud, the cost of the Ponzi scheme is still being tallied. This week, a jury in Seattle, Wash. found the auditing firm Ernst & Young guilty of negligence in its auditing of a feeder fund that ultimately directed funds to Madoff's firm. The feeder fund was managed by FutureSelect Portfolio Management, Inc. for its clients. Ernst & Young was found liable for an estimated $200 million that FutureSelect said it invested ion behalf of its investors.

The finding comes on the heels of  an announcement by Securities Investors Protection Corp. CEO, Stephen Harbeck that most of Madoff's investors would be getting a complete reimbursement of their investments. Those who had invested up to $1,161,000 in Madoff's Ponzi scheme would be fully reimbursed. Those who had invested more would get less -- about 61 cents on every dollar invested.

“Coming out of a Ponzi scheme with 61 percent of what you started out with is a major victory,” Harbeck told reporters in a statement.

In October a motion was filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court asking for an increase in the amount paid out to victims. Approximately $7 billion  of the $11 billion that officials have been able to find were recovered from the accounts of Madoff's deceased partner, Jeffrey Picower. Only $4 billion of the estimated $17 believed to have been swindled out of investors were recovered from Madoff.

And while this is not the first time that Ernst & Young has been accused of fraud, it is far from the only company that has appeared  recently on court dockets related to the Madoff's fraud. In August, Citco Group reached a settlement of $125 million for its part in the fraud. Like Ernst & Young, Citco has been accused of failing to monitor and properly assess funds that were invested in a feeder fund through a secondary company, Fairfield Greenwich Group, which then funneled monies to Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Until this month, the Citco settlement was believed to be the largest of its kind related to losses sustained by the Madoff investment fraud.

 

Image credit: R/DV/RS, Flickr

3P ID
228930
Prime
Off

Increasing Demand for Wood-Based Biofuel Threatens U.S. Forests

3P Author ID
100
Primary Category
Content

 

By Anum Yoon

Every year, European countries import millions of tons of wood pellets to burn as fuel. Wood-based biofuel is a rapidly-growing industry driven by the demand for alternatives to fossil fuels.

At first glance, wood seems like an excellent energy source: It’s less scarce than oil and leaves a smaller carbon footprint than coal. As demand grows, though, we have to carefully consider how this popular fuel is impacting the environment.

The Rise of Wood-based Biofuel

The demand for wood pellets in Europe has increased dramatically since the introduction of the European Union’s 2009 Renewable Energy Directive. However, forestry is strictly regulated in Europe, so European countries have turned to the southeastern U.S. to supply their rapidly-growing demand for biofuel.

In 2014, the U.S. exported 4.4 million metric tons of wood pellets to European countries. The U.K. is by far the biggest importer — last year they received 73 percent of U.S. wood pellet exports. Another 19 percent went to Belgium and the Netherlands.

The demand just keeps growing. Some estimates predict that five years from now, Europe will be importing as much as 70 million metric tons of wood to burn. Is it possible to keep up with this astronomical demand without damaging U.S. forests in the process?

Where Does the Wood Come From?

Not all wood-based biofuel comes from sustainable sources like sawdust and tree trimmings. There’s simply not enough of this remnant wood to go around.

Many wood pellet mills in the southeastern U.S. source from mature bottomland hardwood forests. Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia are among the states most impacted. Often, multiple pellet mills will harvest from the same patch of forest, creating a hot spot of logging pressure in that area.

Bottomland hardwood forests are a unique type of wetland ecosystem that grows around rivers and streams. They’re dominated by deciduous trees — like oaks, gums and bald cypress — which thrive in frequently-flooded conditions. Due to their broad floodplains, these wetland systems are an essential part of the watershed. They provide a variety of important ecosystem services, including flood control and water purification.

These forests are also an important habitat for a variety of threatened species, including the red wolf, the critically endangered Roanoke logperch and numerous freshwater mussels. They’re also an important migration route for many birds.

The Threat to Forests

Bottomland hardwood forests have already suffered great losses at the hands of agriculture, urbanization and the timber industry, and rising sea levels are an emerging threat to these freshwater swamps. Because only 10 percent of southeastern bottomland forests are fully protected from commercial logging, these habitats are extremely vulnerable to the wood-based biofuel industry.

Mature forests like these can take centuries to regrow, and they may not be the same when they return. Harvesting mature forests does more than just temporarily remove trees — these harvests can change the soil and water quality in an area, which in turn impacts the kinds of species that can inhabit it.

The degradation and removal of forests, especially highly productive wetlands like these, can also have huge and sometimes unpredictable impacts on the carbon cycle. Europe’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions may simply be disrupting the carbon cycle in new ways.

Better Biofuels

Not all biofuels are created equal. We need to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, but we have to be conscious of what we’re replacing them with and how those new energy sources are impacting the environment.

“It’s not a fossil fuel” shouldn’t be our only criterion for selecting a fuel. No energy source is perfect, but we can do better than harvesting wood pellets from mature forests.

Image credit: Universal Pops

Anum Yoon is a writer who is passionate about personal finance and sustainability. She often looks for ways she can incorporate money management with environmental awareness. You can read her updates on Current on Currency.

3P ID
228934
Prime
Off

Business to Government: Do Something About Climate Change

3P Author ID
367
Primary Category
Content

The COP21 climate talks in Paris are less than two weeks away. Will this United Nations-led conference result in a truly binding global agreement, or will this just be another week of pricey hotel stays with wining and dining that will offer little more than just platitudes and finger pointing? Indeed, more organizations are making noise about what many analysts believe will lead to a make-or-break moment for worldwide consensus on mitigating climate change. A recently released study reveals that the business community, long seen as resistant to any environmental policy, may be taking the potential threats of climate change more seriously than ever before.

A survey completed by the UN Global Compact (UNGC) and Accenture sheds new light on the evolving attitudes on climate change held by chief executive officers across the world and throughout various industries. Teams from both organizations conducted two surveys. First, CEOs of companies that participate in the UN Caring for Climate Business Forum were interviewed. In addition, executives from 750 companies, from over 150 countries and within 41 industries, were polled about their beliefs on how serious a threat climate change is and what the private sector can do about it.

The results reflect—and in fact, even amplify—the growing market trends we have seen here at Triple Pundit the past few years. More business leaders increasingly view climate change not just through the lens of a threat to their business, but as a real concern and an economic opportunity. Over 70 percent of respondents surveyed by Accenture and UNGC believe climate change policies can lead to tangible business opportunities, and 69 percent agree that investment in climate change-related goods and services can actually create a competitive advantage for their companies.

What is interesting about this survey is where the greatest sense of urgency lies. For example, the mining and metals industry executives surveyed all believe that climate change is “a significant and urgent priority.” However, only 35 percent of those same individuals surveyed think their sector is making a sufficient enough effort to limit global warming to less than two degrees Celsius. A similar disconnect can be seen in the energy, chemicals and financial sectors. The only industries in which a majority of executives showed confidence that their sectors were making a difference in climate change were within communications and industrial engineering. Overall, while over 90 percent of business leaders felt climate change was an urgent priority for the private sector, only one-third of them believe actually progress is being made on this front.

As a result of all these interviews, the UNGC-Accenture survey identified five leadership behaviors that identify companies making a real effort to address the challenges of climate change:


  • Provide proactive and constructive input for governments so that they can create effective climate policies

  • Work with industry peers to build leadership and foster innovation

  • Develop and invest in low-carbon technologies (obviously)

  • Take measurable steps that demonstrate climate resilience

  • Establish science-based emissions targets that meet the oft-cited 2°C threshold

The big question, as this report indicates, is how business leaders can close the gap between ambition and actual execution. Countless publications, including Triple Pundit, are full of stories about companies setting targets and creating goals related to climate change. The actual results, however, are often in question. And while the private sector insists that governments need sound policies, whether they include a carbon tax, cap-and-trade markets, or other sustainability-related regulations—the reality of politics is a huge barrier to the implementation of what is needed to create a genuinely low-carbon economy.

It is easy for an executive to speak his or her mind about what the government should do and how industry can support such an agenda. Of course, such support often changes when a new law affects the operations of an individual company—which is why Washington, DC is the global capital of lobbyists. Nevertheless, the business community is ready to be engaged on climate change, and it is up to the negotiators in Paris to come up with a climate agreement that will motivate the private sector to back up copious words with action.

Image credit: Leon Kaye

3P ID
228952
Prime
Off

HR Directors Must Sell CSR To Win Millennial Job Candidates

3P Author ID
307
Primary Category
Content

New research by Global Tolerance found that 62 percent of surveyed millennials “only want to work for an organization that delivers social and environmental impacts.” Rosie Warin, CEO of Global Tolerance, describes this as a values revolution in millennial generation recruiting. It is the Green Economic Revolution reshaping how HR directors win and keep millennial generation work associates! Warin's warning to all companies is that failing to live up to the CSR or values expectations of millennials can mean “only having access to one-third of the millennial generation talent pool.“

How millennial generation’s values now drive recruitment


The millennial generation is distinct in how they appraise a company around corporate social responsibility. They expect CSR to be integrated into core business functions. Even more, they expect CSR to be integrated into their job.

These are the three CSR criteria that millennials use in evaluating a company, a job and job offer:


  • How does the candidate job position directly link to achieving CSR goals?

  • How does CSR goals align with every job and activity within the company?

  • How authentic is the company’s commitment to CSR?

HR Director’s expanded business role


The millennial generation's focus on CSR is transforming the HR director’s role. HR Directors must be able to achieve the following three steps to successfully recruit top millennial generation talent:

  • They have to have a strong command of the company’s CSR story

  • They must believe in the company’s CSR commitments

  • The HR Director must be able to personally articulate their participation in achieving the company’s CSR commitment.

As Warin describes it, HR Directors must be able to know the story, believe it and make it “my story.”

Four steps to increased millennial generation recruitment success


In this expanded role the HR Director will need to initiate and engage their company in activities that increase the authenticity of a company’s CSR commitment to millennial generation recruitment targets. Example steps include:

Find each job function’s CSR passion. Millennials prioritize values and work-meaning over money. They have increased motivation when their jobs align with their passions. Aligning with the millennial generation’s passions for sustainability and social responsibility will require outreach across business functions to identify such values in each job function. For example, millennial generation engineers will be attracted to manufacturing operations that deploy zero waste best practices that are an emerging business norm at Dupont and GM.

Offer collaborative and energy efficient work environments. By now most companies have figured out that the millennial generation expect to work collaboratively. In response they have adopted more collaborative space designs. These more collaborative space designs are often more energy efficient because they use sustainable building design best practices like natural lighting. Their higher occupancy per square foot typically results in increased energy efficiency. The interior designs that use repurposed fixtures go even further in aligning with the millennial generation’s focus on sustainable use of resources and their affinity for a sharing economy. Offering work space that is “cool with a purpose” is a HR recruiting best practice for winning millennial generation work associates.

Timely and transparent communications. This is the generation that drove the success of Twitter and Facebook. They expect communications to be personal, authentic, succinct and transparent. For example, vague HR cliches like “we will be in touch” fail in being transparent on the candidate's real potential for winning a job. Leaving a voice mail message appears old fashion. Providing millennial generation job candidates a brochure about the company’s CSR department looks like propaganda. What does work in recruiting millennials is to provide them access to work associates that are making a difference through their jobs.

Feed them sustainably sourced food. The millennial generation is very focused on food. It is a point of social engagement. It fulfills their desire for diversity. Food grazing is their eating norm. Their diets are typically foreign to most company’s boomer generation senior officers who could benefit from their best practices for controlling their weight. Offering the millennial generation free food and the opportunity to graze in the work environmentis hugely attractive to potential millennial generation job candidates. Even more so when this food is sustainably sourced and promotes healthy living.

Exclusive video interview with Rosie Warin from Global Tolerance


The following edited 3-minute video interview with Rosie Warin was conducted at the Sustainable Brands 2015 conference. It is a must watch video for HR directors. She offers great ideas for how HR directors can be more successful recruiting millennial generation job candidates. If you are a CSR director then schedule a time with your HR director to show them this video. You two have more in common than you thought!

 

Image credit: Samuel Mann, Flickr

3P ID
228938
Prime
Off

Is America Recycles Day Obsolete?

3P Author ID
100
Primary Category
Content

 

By Magdalene Sim

For nearly twenty years, Americans have been coming together each November 15 to mark America Recycles Day. If you missed it this past Sunday, it is the one day dedicated to educating and motivating friends, family and colleagues about the importance and impact of recycling. Today, recycling has become such an integral part of American life that almost everyone recognizes that iconic chasing arrows recycling symbol, which we see everywhere. So do we really need one day set aside to promote recycling?

If you read John Tierney’s much-talked about October article in The New York Times, “The Reign of Recycling,” you would know that the answer is yes. We still need America Recycles Day because there are still a lot of misconceptions and misstatements about recycling.

Tierney’s argument for landfilling over recycling prompted a very public outcry. Our response to Tierney's article, along with numerous other passionate counter-arguments in the media, reveals a strong and continuing need for education about the real value of recycling. This is necessary to prevent rollbacks on any investments and progress made in recycling over the years.

Even for those already convinced of the necessity of closing the loop, there is often a disconnect between wanting to recycle and knowing how and what to recycle.

Let’s come back to that ubiquitous recycling symbol for a moment. In general, we all know that the symbol represents recycling. But it can also be found in various forms on various products, where it can mean various things. For example, on many different plastic containers, you may see the chasing arrows symbol used with different numbers. Does that mean the items are recyclable? Or that they contain recycled materials? The short answer is no. (For a more detailed answer, see this TriplePundit article.)

Like plastic, the vast variety of paper presents a similar problem. There’s waxed paper, colored paper, magazine paper, receipts, envelopes and more. What type of paper can be recycled?  This is one of the most common questions we get asked. With paper making up the largest percentage of the municipal solid waste stream in the U.S., and over 80 percent of office waste (along with cardboard), you can see how big a problem this confusion can be. And if you are still wondering what type of paper can be recycled? Watch this 30-second recycling tip video to find out.

https://youtu.be/lcLeGDGdv0E

While America Recycles Day offers a crucial opportunity for much-needed recycling education, it is also important for another reason - the human element.

America Recycles Day still matters because it brings people together in thousands of community and workplace events organized across the country. And this has incredible power to move the needle on recycling.

"Having an individual or a community group take the time to organize an event in their community – whether it is at a school, one’s workplace, a government office or even in front of your local grocery store – where they can share information about what is recycled in their community with their friends and neighbors, can leave an indelible impression," explains Brenda Pulley, senior vice president of recycling at Keep America Beautiful, the organization responsible for America Recycles Day.

"This peer-to-peer, personal 'nudge' is one of the most effective ways to encourage the act of recycling.”

Indeed, studies have shown that bringing people together to raise environmental awareness encourages group action and a shared sense of responsibility.

Even the simple act of signing an online recycling pledge can have a positive effect.

"There is research indicating that the act of taking a pledge makes individuals more likely to take the desired action," notes Pulley. "We commissioned a literature review, report and recommendations on our 'I Will Recycle' pledge approach. In a post-pledge survey, participants self-reported that they were recycling more (34 percent) and encouraged others to recycle as well (32 percent)."

And finally, America Recycles Day also provides an opportunity to expand the conversation beyond recycling, to talk about how to deal with items that are not commercially recycled, such as air filters and candy wrappers, which can be upcycled into new and unique products through custom programs.

So yes, we still need America Recycles Day because it affects what we do the other 364 days of the year.

We need that one day to clear misconceptions about the value of recycling, to teach people how to recycle properly, and to bring people together to make a difference. With the current U.S. recycling rate hovering around 34 percent, about half the rate of Austria, the world’s top recycler at 63 percent - there is still much room to grow.

Magdalene Sim is Director of Communications, at Great Forest Inc., a leader in sustainability consulting for over 20 years. Great Forest spearheads sustainability solutions and provides project management expertise to clients nationwide, ranging from Fortune 500 companies to educational institutions, hotels, retailers and property management companies.

Image credit: Gary Anderson, Wikipedia 

3P ID
228776
Prime
Off

Gender pay gap 'stubborn' despite women's progress in education

Primary Category
Content

Women working full time are paid less than men in 90% of sectors, with those working in financial and insurance sectors among the worst affected, research shows.

Opportunities and outcomes in education and work: Gender effects, published by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES), examines the impact of gender on a range of education and employment outcomes.

The research finds that male workers are paid on average 19% more than female counterparts in almost all areas of the workforce.

Women working in financial and insurance sectors, as well as other professional roles, are worst affected by the gap in pay – with some earning almost 40% less than men.

Similarly, large pay gaps also exist within the energy sectors and scientific and technical occupations – roles where women are already chronically under-represented.

The stark findings on pay are further compounded by the fact that female students outperform males at all levels of education, from GCSEs and A-Levels, through to University and post-graduate studies – making them more likely to be highly skilled and qualified.

Dr Vicki Belt, assistant director of UKCES said: “This research brings home the bleak reality of gender inequality at work in the UK. In spite of women’s real achievements in education, the gender pay gap stubbornly remains.

“Our research shows that occupational segregation is a key factor at play here. Women are under-represented in a range of sectors and occupations that offer higher paying roles - for example fewer than 10% of British engineers are female. As almost a quarter of women work part-time, they are also disproportionately affected by the low quality, and poor progression opportunities offered by much part-time work.

“It is welcome that the government is moving to bring more transparency here, by introducing a requirement for the public sector and larger firms to publish information on gender pay differences.

“However, there is clearly more that could be done by employers, education providers and careers advisers to create more and better opportunities for women and tackle patterns of occupational segregation.”
 

Prime
Off
Newsletter Sent
Off

Sea Level Rise: Who Should Take Responsibility in Silicon Valley?

3P Author ID
8579
Primary Category
Content

Sea level rise is becoming a dominant theme as communities plan for climate change. On the East Coast of the United States, the eroding shorelines of Miami and the projected loss of billions of dollars of upscale homes has come to symbolize personal loss that is now at risk from global warming. For many of us, it is the storms and the catastrophic destruction that places like New Jersey (Hurricane Sandy, 2012) and South Florida have experienced that we think of when it comes to the implications of rising seas.

In the San Francisco Bay Area, however, sea level change presents a more insidious threat - one that isn't limited to the loss of select homes with million dollar views. Rising seas threaten the very land mass that houses the Bay Area's famed tech industry and the infrastructure that supports it. Dozens of companies like Yahoo, Google, Intuit, Dell, Cisco and Oracle sit either inside, or on the edge of the South Bay's most vulnerable, predominately flat coastline. Other companies, like Facebook, NASA, Citrix and Intel sit outside the immediate flood zones or have thoughtfully placed their facilities above the shoreline, but would still be affected by flooded streets, accessways and airport facilities. Sea level change is a risk that affects not just the South Bay, but larger metropolises north of the region like San Francisco and Oakland, also home to California's tech titans.

And flood zones aren't always limited to those strips of land that overlook the Bay. Palo Alto's San Franciscoquito Creek and other low-lying areas are subject to flooding from sea level rise as well, putting essential infrastructure like Highway 101, a key corridor that cuts through much of the Bay Area, at risk.

And then there are the king tides, naturally occurring high tides that have prompted concerns as sea waters continue to rise. These long tidal waves that sweep into the mouth of the San Francisco Bay can add unpredictable conditions to dominating El Nino weather patterns.

Sea level change: No longer a distant problem

"The Silicon Valley has a number of coastal areas that are susceptible to sea level rise and have come to see more frequent flooding over time," Emilie Mazzacurati told TriplePundit. Mazzacurati is the CEO of Four Twenty Seven (427), a climate consultancy company based in the San Francisco area. And that loss of land mass is not far off. "We are talking decades," she said.

Aleka Seville, 427's director of Advisory Services, added that businesses are often under the impression that sea level changes is a "far away problem." In fact, she said, a recent update of the Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals Science suggests that the window to address sea level changes is much shorter than that. "They make it pretty clear that has to be done in the next 10 years."

That window isn't just based on what it will take to prevent irreversible changes to the area's diverse and rich habitat, but recent data that suggests that sea level changes aren't as slow and gradual as they were in the 20th century. The phenomenon is speeding up, owing in part, to rising temperature and associated phenomenons like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.  That means that businesses sitting in projected yearly flood warning zones and even those at risk for the "100-year storm" need to factor climate risk into their business planning.

But how do businesses address sea level changes if state and local businesses have yet to define their role?

Defining the local business role

Earlier this year, the Santa Clara Civil Grand Jury conducted an investigation to determine whether local governments within Santa Clara county (home to Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale and other tech titan cities) were taking steps to prepare for and mitigate against sea level change. Armed with a concise list of issues they felt defined what cities needed to do as a minimum in order to prepare for sea level change, jurors interviewed city administrators and compiled a list of the steps each municipality had (and had not) taken to prepare for rising tides. Wastewater treatment plants were reviewed, dikes were examined and municipal and county offices were interviewed in length to determine what steps could be taken to lessen the county's climate risk. Cities were also asked what they had done to "educate private landowners who were at risk of flooding from sea level rise."

Interestingly, one entity that wasn't addressed in the conversation was Santa Clara's vibrant business community. How were businesses going to address rising sea levels at their property edge? What steps, guidance and education were being offered to businesses to help them understand the implications of floods that might not reach their door, but could still eat into their business revenue?

Mike Mielke, senior vice president of energy and environment for the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, said this was an issue that his organization was working to address with its members.

"Folks will do certain things," he said. "They will put their facility up on a pad. And they will make sure that they are basically sort of hardened to deal with something like an acute event," such as a catastrophic storm or major road closures. But that mitigation effort would be short-lived, he said, if the business isn't able to open its doors. "It doesn’t matter if your facility is up on a pad if all the public infrastructure around you is at risk. Because employees need to be able to figure out how to get to work. Everyone needs to be able to flush their toilet and have clean drinking water."

Mielke said he doesn't feel that there is enough information coming from local and state governments to guide businesses in how to address sea level change and ensure that their facilities were protected. But he also felt that public-private partnerships, such as projects that would help reconstruct and protect wetlands (vital in slowing coastal erosion and limiting infrastructure damage as well as habitat preservation) and funding arranged through ballot measures and other steps were valuable mechanisms for addressing sea level rise.

Judith Kleinberg, CEO and president of the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, said that public-private partnerships were a vital way to for her members and organization to address environmental issues as well. She noted that most of their focus is on "energy issues rather than environmental," like a wastewater plant, subsides for business adaptation strategies and transportation issues. She said the chamber "has not adopted a policy" on sea level risk, but is waiting for the city to finish a comprehensive plan that would in part, address those concerns.

Framing the conversation around climate and responsibility

But obtaining enough information from government agencies about the real risk that Mielke said many likened to "a frog in a slow pot of boiling water" isn't the only challenge that businesses face.

"I think we still find both social and cultural barriers in talking about climate change in the business world in the US.," said Mazzacurati. She said 427's goal is in part, to help businesses deal with that very conversation in context with their business planning. "[There] are a lot of companies where it is hard for a sustainability director to go to the boss and say, 'Look: I think climate change is serious and I think we’re going to have a problem.' There are a lot of places where that conversation is not taking place because it is not OK to talk about climate change."

She said there were also "a lot of impacts over diverse geographies," that needed to be understood; "lots of time frames, lots of uncertainty and the pathways by which climate change might impact business processes is not always clear in peoples’ minds."  So it is often difficult for senior managers to make the business case that sea level risks need to be factored into business strategies.

"Right now, looking at climate change risk falls somewhere in the middle between sustainability and risk management," said Mazzacurati. " And I think when companies really start realizing the impact, it will more likely become a risk management issue," that can huge implications for communities whose land values are ultimately affected by vulnerable coastlines.

Still, said Seville, the conversation defining what responsibility companies should comprehensively take in addressing sea level risks "have not really happened yet." She suggested that while businesses should still be expected to address climate change in their business planning, local governments, "do have a responsibility to say, hey, we need you, or we want you to do X, Y and Z" and to clarify expectations so companies can appropriately address risks.

Without that guidance said Seville, "it's just a big question" for many businesses who are still wrestling with the concept of rising seas and the unforeseen economic costs of a changing climate.

Image credits: Greeninfo Network/Flickr and Avi Naim/Unsplash

3P ID
228884
Prime
Off

General Mills and Annie’s: One Year In

3P Author ID
109
Primary Category
Content

 

When the Annie's acquisition was announced in September of 2014, no one on staff at Annie’s was prepared for the onslaught from concerned consumers. “The internet threw up,” explains industry analyst and food advocate Robyn O’Brien, “This big guy has just come and taken our sweet Annie’s.” Customers were worried that the acquisition was a sell out and that Annie's commitment to organic, healthful, natural ingredients would be abandoned.

“Within 4 days we had 30,000 consumer comments on social and via customer relations by phone and email,” Keely Fadrhonc Senior Marketing Communications Manager at Annie's Inc. told me. Most of them expressed concerns about what the acquisition would mean for the brand.

 

From the beginning, Annie’s has been a brand for moms. Annie’s customers' passion are part of what make the brand successful – these moms care deeply about the ingredients in their children’s food, especially artificial dyes and flavors and GMOs. While Annie’s saw the acquisition as a “win win win” because it would allow the small potatoes food manufacturer to grow, expand new lines and bring its products to new customers through mainstream outlets like Target and Walmart. Customers didn’t exactly see it that way. They  had a reason to be concerned. When General Mills bought another beloved brand -- Cascadian Farms -- the sugar content of a product tripled.

But Annie's had no plans for changes. The Annie's team knew they needed to show rather than tell to really assuage the worried customers. "We realized the anger was coming from a place of love," explained Foraker. In the past year, the company has been hard at work on integration. The team is now just starting to come up for air and describe how the aquisition will further Annie's goals.

As O’Brien succinctly puts it, “Here everyone was saying Annie’s was selling out, but what if General Mills was buying in?”

In a vision document Foraker created with Steve Young, Vice President - Annie's at General Mills -- his main liaison at General Mills -- the two outline the current food landscape and how this partnership will help deliver healthful, organic products with limited preservatives that today’s customer wants to buy.

As for the partnership? It's a rousing success. Foraker says, “We have not been asked to compromise one single thing with ingredients, values or sourcing.” The parent and child companies even agree to disagree about GMO labelling.

Changing customer landscape

The appeal of this acquisition was the chance for General Mills to capitalize on the “seismic shift” in food preferences rolling out across the country: More interest in fresh food, health, nutrition and a concern about ingredients, preservatives and dyes. General Mills has a history of successfully adapting to the changing needs and desires of customers. Young, a 20-year veteran of the firm, says, "What has kept General Mills successful over the last century is its ability to pivot. We’re good at keeping our ear to the ground, giving consumers what they want. You can’t not see the interest in transparency and cleaner food." Given the shifting customer interest, the $820M acquisition makes great business sense and General Mills is wise to avoid messing too much with the success Annie’s has created.

For Annie’s the acquisition meant more product lines, more outlets, more happy customers, and  more kids eating healthful food they love. Foraker was adamant, “We’re not going to compromise. The goal is to expand impact and bring our products to more people. If you believe we’re going to screw up, I honor that, but watch us, hold us accountable."

As the integration moves forward, Foraker spends more time in Minneapolis and Young in Berkeley. The goal is to shore up the Annie’s team and help them with resiliency, while increasing opportunities for the team to educate folks working on other brands in the General Mills portfolio.

What’s next? To make this a billion dollar brand, one of only a handful of such unicorns in General Mills portfolio. This would reduce the cost of organic staples which would create ripples throughout the agriculture industry. With organics making up only 5 percent of the food market, they have a way to go, but General Mills is not taking things lightly. They’ve committed to doubling the number of acres of organic they purchase (from 5 million to 10 million) by 2020.

If you see Annie's take a misstep Foraker would like to hear about it -- find him on LInkedIn -- but don't tease him too badly about the bunny ears. He's just keeping Annie's weird.

Image credits: Mike Mozart, Flickr, Facebook screen grabs, Annie's Inc.

3P ID
228837
Prime
Off