Search

By Mehmood Khan, PepsiCo

Water scarcity is one of the greatest risks facing humanity and the global economy. Water shortages—from the U.S. to Peru to India—are impacting every facet of our society, including our global food supply. The UN estimates that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will live in countries or regions in which water is scarce, and approximately two-thirds of the world’s population could soon be living under water-stressed conditions. With ratification of the UN Sustainable Development Goals just days away, governments, as well as business leaders must take action to meet these challenges.

Water is a fundamental human right, and water stress has distinct, deep consequences in communities around the world. It is the responsibility of every company, government and public institution to develop solutions that meet acutely local needs, and scale those with widespread applicability to drastically improve water availability and efficiency.

The food and beverage industry, for example, must redouble its focus on innovation and collaboration, to do more with less. This work includes product reformulations, sustainable agricultural practices and manufacturing and operational efficiencies, all of which can lead to water efficiency gains.

This is not simply good for society. Promoting water stewardship is also a strategic investment in long-term business resilience and sustainability. PepsiCo for example, decreased its absolute water use by approximately one billion liters last year and achieved cost saving of approximately $17 million in 2014 alone from reducing our water use per unit of production. Overall, we have reduced our water use per unit of production by 23% since from 2006 to 2014, already exceeding our public target of a 20 percent reduction by the end of 2015. We report on these efforts in our newly released 2014 Sustainability Report and at the sustainability micro-site HowWillWe.com.

All industries are being impacted by the realities taking shape today, including droughts and extreme weather, and we applaud other companies that share our commitment to addressing this issue and contributing to meaningful solutions. Diageo is a great example.  It has recently released its Water Blueprint, a strategy that outlines how the company will protect and manage its water resources globally, especially in the water-stressed areas where a third of its production takes place.

We can also learn from pioneering startups and benefit from cutting-edge technology. PepsiCo is developing an innovative approach to farming potatoes used to make our Lay’s chips and Walkers crisps. Working with farmers and academic partners in the U.K., including Cambridge University, we are deploying technologies through our “50 in 5” program to reduce the carbon footprint and water used to grow potatoes by half over a 5-year period. We have made great progress so far, enabling growers to decrease water use by 31 percent by the end of 2013 and cut their carbon footprint by 42 percent by the end of 2014, and we are on target to reach both our water and carbon footprint goals by the end of this year.

Partnerships are crucial, because global value chains are so large and involve many interconnected players. The public, private and non-profit sectors must work together. We have embraced this spirit of collaboration to reduce water usage in our operations and help to provide access to safe water in communities where we do business. For example, through the PepsiCo Foundation and in partnership with non-profit organizations, such as Water.org, Safe Water Network, Columbia Water Center, the Inter-American Development Bank, China Women’s Development Foundation and 2030 Water Resources Group, among others, we are helping local communities in Brazil, China, Columbia, India, Jordan and Mexico to provide access to safe water for millions of people through initiatives that include water conservation, distribution, purification and hygiene. It is through these kinds of collaborations that we have reached our goal to provide access to safe water to six million people in developing countries one year ahead of our target.

Systemic changes across sectors and among competitors will encourage innovation and wider adoption of proven tools and practices. To make an impact, we must look at the entire water use system, from end to end and embed sustainable water use into our products from the start. And while business has the ability and the responsibility to do more to address global water issues, governments should also promote and incentivize smart water use with tools such as research and development tax credits, matching funds and regulatory reforms to create a legitimate “enabling environment” that frees capital and stimulates sustainable, holistic water solutions.

Only by working together and rethinking our approach to global water stewardship—just as we have begun to shift our thinking on the issue of carbon emissions—can we enable water to be a resource that is abundant and flexible enough to meet the world’s needs in coming decades.

Dr. Mehmood Khan is PepsiCo’s Vice Chairman and Chief Scientific Officer, Global Research and Development and chair of the company’s Sustainability Task Force.

Image credit: davebloggs007, Flickr

To mark its first anniversary, the Institute of Corporate Responsibiity and Sustainability (ICRS) has announced its first honorary fellows.

They are: Philippa Foster Back, director of the IBE (pictured left), Sir Ian Cheshire, chair of the Prince of Wales’ Corporate Leaders Group on Climate Change and former CEO of Kingfisher plc, Dame Julia Cleverdon, vp of BITC and chair of the National Literary Trust (pictured right); Professor David Grayson, director of the Doughty Centre at Cranfield University; Helena Morrisey, ceo of Newton (Asset Management), chair of the Investment Association and Founder of the 30 Percent Club and Jonathon Porritt, co-founder of Forum for the Future and former chair of the Sustainability Commission.

Claudine Blamey, chair of the ICRS (pictured centre), said: “In appointing our first honorary Fellows we wanted to recognize those who have an a transformative impact on business and wider society while also demonstrating a genuine commitment to the development of the profession.

"Those who are being honoured today have played a leading role in implementing one or more of the Institute’s Guiding Principles. As such, they are more than worthy recipients and will act as powerful advocates and ambassadors for the Institute in the years ahead.”

In addition to welcoming the six honorary Fellows, the Institute has also announced that applications for fellowship will be opened to ICRS Members from mid-October.

Blamey added: “Fellowship sets the bar for excellence in terms of contribution, service and leadership. There is a huge pool of talent within our profession and we’re very much looking forward to receiving applications from those Members who are keen to take the next steps in their careers.”
 

It's the fourth day of Climate Week NYC, and the big corporate commitments keep rolling in. On Wednesday, nine Fortune 500 companies pledged to meet 100 percent of their electricity needs using renewable sources. Later that day, nine more linked up with the World Resources Institute and WWF to spur progress on renewables.

The firms -- Amazon, DuPont, Equinix, Etsy, Intuit, Microsoft, Sealed Air, Starbucks and Starwood -- signed on to the Corporate Renewable Energy Buyers’ Principles, developed by large energy buyers as a way to advance renewables and add their perspective to the future of the U.S. energy system.

But, along with going 100 percent renewable, sustainability leaders are asking politicians and the business community to consider another number: zero.

Adding to the growing momentum at Climate Week, five global companies pledged to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. For those unfamiliar with the term, net zero refers to limiting global carbon emissions to the point where they balance the world’s ability to absorb that CO2. In the context of business supply chains, this involves measuring emissions released against emissions saved through things like renewable energy projects, reforestation and offsets. It's a goal they call bold but necessary if we are to limit temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius.

These corporate leaders hail from different sectors and span five continents. Western readers will likely recognize consumer company Unilever and international investment group Virgin, but the rest may be unfamiliar: Chinese construction company Broad Group; African telecom Econet; and Brazilian cosmetics manufacturer Natura (which some may know as the largest publicly-traded B Corp).

But these firms do have one thing in common: They're all associated with the B Team, a nonprofit launched in 2013 by Sir Richard Branson and Jochen Zeitz with the aim of doing better business for both people and planet.

The path to net zero

These corporate pledges are part of a broader effort by the B Team to kickstart a net-zero economy. A few months after the U.N. met for COP20 in Lima, Peru, last year, the nonprofit called on world leaders to adopt an international net-zero target. Now with COP21 -- and the promise of an international climate agreement -- only a few months away, the group is doubling-down on its calls to action.

The initial trajectory laid out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) called for net zero emissions by 2070. But the panel noted that this target would still only give us a 66 percent chance of staying beneath the 2-degree threshold.

“That’s not a gamble we would take in our businesses or our personal lives – why are we risking the planet?” Richard Branson, co-founder of the B Team and founder of Virgin Group, said in a statement.

The group ultimately landed on a target year of 2050, a goal it hopes will be part of the political process at COP21, Keith Tuffley, managing partner and CEO of the B Team, told TriplePundit.

"The one thing we're really trying to get through [to COP21 delegates] is: Business requires and has been looking for an ambitious, action-oriented long-term goal out of Paris," Tuffley said. "The idea of an intellectual 2-degree threshold or a parts per-million is no longer enough. We actually know what we need to do to get there -- and we need to get to net zero."

Calling other climate action groups like RE100 and We Mean Business "key enablers" in the low-carbon transition, Tuffley said the B Team hopes early actors will spur a larger wave of corporate commitments on climate change.

It seems some already have the same idea: On Tuesday, global industrial giant Siemens announced plans to cut its carbon emissions in half by as early as 2020 and to be carbon neutral by 2030. And it's willing to shell out more than $110 million over the next three years to make it happen.

Are businesses for real?

Some may be skeptical of business commitments -- and even more skeptical of general "calls-to-action" that appear to put the onus on other groups (like government or NGOs) to take action. Just this week, as firms lined up to announce their shiny new Climate Week commitments, London-based nonprofit NGO InfluenceMap released a study revealing that 45 percent of the world's largest companies actively obstruct climate legislation.

The stark contrast between the leaders and the laggards is only becoming more pronounced. Businesses at the forefront are not only recognizing climate change risks within their supply chains, but also acknowledging climate action as a business opportunity too great to ignore.

As Branson put it: "Taking bold climate action now has the potential to unleash the full power of business and lift millions of people out of poverty. We're the first generation to recognize this and the last generation to have this opportunity."

Of course, the laggards will always be close at hand -- especially in business where profit is king. Therein lies the role of government and the importance of COP21. By creating an international standard, even slow-movers will be forced to step up, if for no other reason than to maintain regulatory compliance.

"The key piece that the government can help create is a race to the top, rather than a herd languishing and waiting for leadership to appear," Tuffley told us. "Leaders throughout business are appearing anyway ... despite the lack of a very clear long-term goal at a global level.

"[But] we're hopefully giving governments the message: 'Business is operating ahead of current political consensus. So, please create certainty to let more businesses effectively create the low-carbon economy.' The more certainty they can provide on the long-term goal, the more business and investors are going to do it for themselves."

Is net zero the future? Only time will tell. But with top firms getting bullish about the benefits of climate action -- not to mention divesting from fossil fuels to the tune of $2.6 trillion -- the potholes on the road to a bold agreement in Paris seem to be filling fast.

Image credit: Flickr/David Burke

Earlier this week, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton officially, finally, and definitively stated her opposition to the proposed Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline. The news comes amid a huge week for renewable energy in the U.S., coinciding with Climate Week 2015 in New York City and a visit from climate activist and global leader of the Catholic faith, Pope Francis, who will address the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25.

The Clinton statement also comes at a particularly bad time for the controversial Keystone XL pipeline. The proposed project has been limping to the finish line of a long approval process marked by an epic fail in terms of stakeholder engagement, and its chances of receiving the necessary White House approval have been fading by the minute.

Evolving on the Keystone XL pipeline

Clinton's position on the Keystone XL pipeline has certainly evolved since her tenure as Secretary of State. As a project crossing the border between the U.S. and Canada, Keystone requires State Department approval, and back in 2010, then-Secretary Clinton provided an unscripted rationale for approving the project.

As reported in Mother Jones, her comments provoked an outcry from environmental groups, though in the full transcript Clinton clearly articulated a position that dependency on "dirty oil," regardless of the source, is a fact of life in the U.S. "until we get our act together" for renewable energy.

In fact, Clinton immediately followed up that line by suggesting that projects like Keystone would continue to be necessary precisely because of the U.S. Senate's failure to pass legislation in support of clean energy -- legislation that she and President Barack Obama strongly favored.

Be that as it may, the pushback was so strong that Clinton never made another comment about the project as Secretary of State. Even as a presidential candidate, she refrained from taking a position despite repeated requests over the summer.

The breakthrough finally came at a campaign stop in Iowa earlier this week. As reported by NBC News, Clinton had this to say about Keystone XL:

"I think it is imperative that we look at the Keystone XL pipeline as what I believe it is: A distraction from the important work we have to do to combat climate change, and, unfortunately from my perspective, one that interferes with our ability to move forward and deal with other issues.

"Therefore, I oppose it. I oppose it because I don't think it's in the best interest of what we need to do to combat climate change."

Now, the Obama administration dropped the other shoe. Yesterday, Reuters reported that White House spox Josh Earnest was asked to respond to Clinton's Keystone statement, and he stated back that "there was nothing 'widely reported' about Clinton’s comments that he would 'strenuously disagree with.'"

According to Reuters, Earnest also reminded the press that the president was "skeptical" of claims by Keystone supporters that the project would have a significant impact on job creation and economic growth.

Cost of solar falling down

The Senate still hasn't gotten its act together in support of national clean energy legislation, but since 2010 the Obama administration has been pulling the levers of its executive authority to steer federal agencies in the direction that Clinton pointed to.

According to the Energy Department, the cost of solar is already competitive with conventional sources in 14 states, and the latest report from the U.S. Energy Information Agency paints a picture of spectacular growth in solar generation across all 50 states.

Last week, the Energy Department announced a new $102 million package of funding for solar projects focused on cost-cutting, including next-generation concentrating solar power technology aimed at the utility market.

This week, the Energy Department also doubled down on the small-scale, distributed solar market with the launch of its new Race to 7-Day Solar challenge. The friendly competition between five teams, including heavy-hitters SolarCity and Sunrun, is aimed at streamlining an often cumbersome permitting process for rooftop solar installations, enabling property owners to get the whole thing done in a week, or even less.

Cost of wind energy falling down

This has also been a big year for wind energy. In January, for example, the Interior Department okayed a building permit for a massive new 515-mile wind energy transmission line for Arizona and New Mexico. And over the summer, Rhode Island celebrated the first "steel in the water" for what will become the first offshore wind farm in the U.S.

Even without offshore assets, according to an Energy Department report, last year the U.S. was leading the globe in wind energy production. The report further notes that utility-scale wind is already competitive with conventional fuels in many markets across the country, and another Energy Department report demonstrates growth in the small-scale, distributed wind energy sector.

Getting back to the Keystone pipeline: Over the summer, rumors were flying around the Canadian press that President Obama would put the kibosh on the project as early as this past Labor Day, and with campaign frontrunner Clinton firmly in the "no" camp, it looks like the White House could be reserving its own final statement for the right time.

Image (screenshot): via Clinton campaign issues, climate.

By Anum Yoon

During the Industrial Revolution, and for some time after it, the focus of many businesses was growth and development. Rapid expansion took place without regard to long-term stability, fair practices or sustainability. Being the biggest and best was most important; the rest was in the details.

Lately, there’s been a cultural shift, especially in the business world. The model of growing fast and wiping out whatever stands in the way is becoming dated. Today’s focus? Sustainability. Below are a few of the trends that are creating the next wave of sustainable business models.

Superlinear scaling

Nature published a study in 2010 which found that, when a population of a city doubles, per-capita economic productivity increases by around 130 percent on average. It’s logical that productivity would increase when the number of people in a city increases, but why on a per-capita basis?

One answer, proposed by the MIT Media Laboratory’s Human Dynamics Lab, is superlinear scaling. This theory – also referred to as social-tie density – states that increases in population density in urban settings allows more face-to-face interaction for residents.

According to Alex “Sandy” Pentland, director of the Human Dynamics Laboratory at MIT: “When you pack people together, something special happens … This is the sort of thing that Adam Smith wanted to explain. He explained it through specialization: People were able to narrow what they did to get better at it and because they were nearby, they could trade with each other.”

Put simply, the more interactions individuals have on a daily basis – face-to-face, digitally or otherwise – the more productive they’re able to become. This enables a new focus and push for sustainable business practices as more individuals become conscious of their impact on the world and take the time to choose the right company to service their needs.

Non-location dependent connections

In the past, to connect with others, a certain level of travel and scheduling was required. This slowed growth and prohibited many potentially valuable connections in the business world.

With the rise of digital technology, social networking, telecommuting and other practices, connections can form regardless of locations. These connections allow for easy communication and the sharing of ideas, similar to the effects of superlinear scaling. In fact, at many newer, more innovative companies, the percentage of employees that telecommute in one way or another ranges from 30 to 45 percent.

When employees are able to connect at any time, from any location, they are able to communicate with ease and to focus on factors other than the standard “getting to the office and checking off today’s to-do list.” This means that business practices come to the forefront and that sustainability becomes more important than it was in the past. The rise in social technology has a direct impact on sustainable business models.

Enlightened leadership

While other, more balanced business models are growing in popularity, many still retain a certain level of the “top-down” style. When an idea comes from leaders at the top, it requires fewer checks and balances, has fewer channels to travel through and is more likely to take effect. When leaders become more enlightened and more focused on sustainability, change is more likely to happen.

Today, more businesses are looking for ways to use their influence to start conversations and actions relating to value, purpose and class – all important aspects of sustainability. When management and top leaders at big companies – like Nike and Starbucks – begin to look at the bigger picture, change is more likely to take effect. This starts with enlightenment and a focus on change.

The rise of the sharing economy

In the past, consumers and businesses alike were focused on bottom-line purchases. Once a home was sold, it was designed to be used as a primary residence. When there was a need for a household appliance that receives little use throughout the course of the year, or a child’s toy that would be built once and forgotten, it was purchased, then likely stored away for an indeterminate amount of time. Object permanence was in; the idea of sharing was out.

Today, the idea of a sharing economy is rising. Websites like Airbnb, that allows homeowners to rent out rooms or their homes on their own, or Pley, that allows parents to rent out otherwise expensive Lego sets for their children to build, then return, are on the rise. The idea that objects can be borrowed at a lower cost and in a more practical manner is growing.

This change in thought and business practices creates a direct path toward sustainability. Use what you need, when you need it, then allow someone else to do the same. This trend thrives because of the increase in digital technology and connectivity, and is an important driver in the movement toward sustainable business models.

Today’s focus on business sustainability, coupled with emerging technological and social trends that have not been possible in the past, means that real change is happening. It’s exciting to consider what the future holds as these trends continue to take hold and grow in a global manner.

Image credit: Life of Pix under Creative Commons license 

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.

Editor's Note: This post originally appeared on EWG's Enviroblog.

By Elaine Shannon

If you’re looking for environmental heroes – and who isn’t – take a look at mine: Peter Mock, Europe managing director of the obscure but well-informed International Council on Clean Transportation, and John German, a senior fellow at the council.

Mock and German smelled a rat – actually, nitrogen oxide, a sugary-smelling but dangerous air pollutant – belching out of Volkswagen diesel engines made for the European market. Engineering clean diesel is no drive in the park – scrubbing out nitrogen oxide can cut drastically into fuel economy, according to Spectrum, a professional engineering journal. But when nitrogen oxide is released, it contributes to forming smog, accelerates climate change and exacerbates respiratory diseases such the current asthma epidemic, which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates to affect 23 million Americans, including 6 million children.

According to a detective fiction-worthy account in Bloomberg Business News, Mock and German assumed that the VW diesels manufactured for the more rigorously regulated U.S. market would test cleaner, so they contracted with West Virginia University’s Center for Alternative Fuels, Engines and Emissions to test a bunch of them. Their goal was to convince European regulators to tighten up their emissions standards. If VW could make clean diesel for America, why couldn’t it do the same for Europe?

Mock and German are not whistleblowers, nor are the WVU researchers who wielded the instruments. All were astonished and disturbed when the made-for-the-U.S. VW diesels scored acceptably low for emissions during tests BUT spewed noxious pollutants on long road trips.

The West Virginia University researchers made their study public at a forum in San Diego in May 2014, with officials from the EPA and the tough California Air Resources Board present. Those officials started talking to VW and running their own tests. According to a technical but devastating notice of violation and timeline released by EPA last week, VW officials obfuscated for months and only recently, confronted by the regulators with smoking-gun evidence, admitted the whole scheme. They confessed that the company had deliberately installed a “defeat device” in diesel vehicles sold worldwide from 2009 to this year. The device was really a bit of software coding expressly engineered to spoof standard emissions testing instruments and evade the federal Clean Air Act and related state rules. Exactly who in the company’s front office authorized the plan remains to be discovered.

All of this became public last Friday as the EPA and California officials announced that they had opened investigations of the company for rigging emission controls. EPA also ordered a recall of nearly 500,000 vehicles sold in the U.S. between 2009 and 2015. Yesterday, the disgraced company, which branded its diesel-powered vehicles as clean, simple, affordable “people’s cars,” expanded the recall to a mind-boggling 11 million cars worldwide. It also said it would set aside half a year’s profits of about $7.3 billion to fix the cars, pay fines and settle customers’ lawsuits.

That cost could turn out to be far greater, in terms of money and corporate agony: the U.S. Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division is opening a criminal investigation, which means that FBI agents will soon be flashing badges at VW plants in the U.S. and asking their counterparts for help at the company’s main office in Wolfsburg, Germany.

German, European Commission and Korean officials have indicated that they, too, may open investigations, and two Congressional panels may hold hearings, Bloomberg Business News reported Monday.  Other U.S. and foreign government bodies may spearhead separate investigations. And as Philip E. Ross of Spectrum magazine wrote, “Even after VW pays the multibillion-dollar bill to refit its diesel cars to meet EPA standards, its customers will have to pay a price, too. Because their cars will get worse mileage, they will command a lower resale price.”

VW officials know what’s in store for them all too well. On Monday (Sept. 21), Michael Horn, head of the Volkswagen Group of America, groveled before a star-studded audience assembled at what was supposed to have been a glorious launch of the company’s popular, redesigned 2016 Passat.

“Our company was dishonest, with the EPA and the California Air Resources board and with all of you, and in my German words, we have totally screwed up,” Horn said. “We must fix those cars, and prevent this from ever happening again, and we have to make things right – with the government, the public, our customers, our employees, and also very importantly our dealers.”

“Millions of people across the world trust our brands, our cars and our technologies,” company chief executive officer Martin Winterkorn said in a video message yesterday, according to the Associated Press. “I am endlessly sorry that we have disappointed this trust. I apologize in every way to our customers, to authorities and the whole public for the wrongdoing.” Winterkorn stepped down today. The stealthy software was created on his watch.

This is a 21st-century take on the old David-and-Goliath story: a $12 million-a-year nonprofit and a land grant university’s $4 million program – with all of seven faculty members, five engineers, five technicians and 30  M.S. and Ph.D. candidates – have forced the world’s largest automaker  (market capitalization $126 billion, annual sales $269 billion, 593,000 employees, according to Forbes) to its knees.

Perhaps the most heartening aspect of the story is that unmasking VW’s grand deception wasn’t done with the most sophisticated technology or by the most celebrated engineering institutions. Mostly, it took moral energy, meaning, sheer guts and grit, qualities to which we can all aspire.

Mock holds a doctor’s degree in engineering from the University of Stuttgart.  He spent some years at the German automaker Daimler’s global environmental protection department and at the Institute of Vehicle Concepts of the German Aerospace Center.

German has a bachelor’s degree in physics from the University of Michigan and, his bio says, “got over half way through an MBA before he came to his senses.”  He spent most of his career working on fuel economy for Chrysler, managing environmental and energy analyses for American Honda, toiling in EPA’s Office of Mobile Sources lab in Ann Arbor and writing a book on hybrid vehicles. And, oh, yes, while at Honda, he was the first recipient of the Barry D. McNutt award, presented annually by SAE International (formerly the Society of Automotive Engineers) for Excellence in Automotive Policy Analysis.

So it was just a couple of guys with a lot of life experience who knew how to ask exactly the right questions and who wouldn’t quit asking, teamed with some highly competent and independent-minded university scientists and engineers. As Wired, the online technology news outlet, headlined its story, “VW Could Fool The EPA But It Couldn't Trick Chemistry.” The Wired piece reported that the software signaled the catalytic converter to scrub emissions vigorously whenever the car was being tested but to ease off – and burn less fuel – when the car went on the road. How did the chip in the car know it was being tested?  Probably because the steering column wasn’t moving but the wheels were, Wired reported. Smart and very hard to crack, but now VW’s scheme – and image -- are shattered.

The heroes of this saga aren’t done.

“We need to ask the question, is this happening in other countries and is this happening at other manufacturers?” German told The Guardian newspaper. “Some part of our reaction is not even understanding what has happened exactly.”

Any CEO of any automaker who doesn’t take these fairly humble comments seriously, triple-check his company’s emissions-testing software, recode it if warranted and tell the EPA and Justice before they come calling – is living on Pluto.

Image credit: Flickr/Kārlis Dambrāns

Elaine Shannon is Editor-in-Chief & Publisher of EWG.

Cargill is serious about stopping deforestation in its supply chain. The company recently issued a new policy on forests, which it describes as a “comprehensive approach” to ending deforestation.

The new policy piggybacks on what Cargill has already done. Last September, Cargill endorsed the New York Declaration on Forests at the U.N. Climate Summit where the company pledged to cut deforestation in half by 2020 and end it in 2030. Cargill has worked with the Nature Conservancy since 2004 on reducing deforestation in its supply chains. The same year, the company joined the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO).

The new policy is truly comprehensive, as an overview of it shows:

• Uses a multi-stakeholder approach. Cargill will work with farmers, suppliers, government and civil society organizations and customers to find ways to protect forests.


• Evaluates future capital investments based on the policy’s forest protection principles.


• Continues efforts to ensure a sustainable palm oil supply chain in Indonesia and Malaysia, the two countries that produce most of the world’s palm oil.


• Evaluates strategic sourcing of fiber-based packaging and performs a risk analysis of its corrugated, paper bag and folding carton supply chains.

“Deforestation is a global issue, but a local challenge. We’re committed to working with farmers, government, business, advocacy organizations and consumers to help craft and implement solutions tailored to the diverse landscapes we seek to protect,” said Paul Conway, Cargill’s vice chairman, in a statement. “Our policy on forests is one of the ways we are working to feed a growing population while also sustaining vital forest ecosystems for generations to come.”

Cargill released an update on progress toward its goal of achieving 100 percent sustainable palm oil supply chains by 2020, a goal it is on track to meet. Cargill is also on track to meet its goal of achieving 100 percent traceability to the mill level by December 2015 and to provide palm oil that is 100 percent traceable to sustainable plantations by 2020.  

Late last year, Cargill acquired a new plantation called Poliplant Group in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. The company is working with the environmental consultancy firm Daemeter to bring the plantation in line with Cargill’s forest policy, with the goal of achieving RSPO certification.

Palm oil is used in many products we use daily, including personal care products. Worldwide demand for palm oil is expected to double by 2050. Palm oil plantations are expanding in Indonesia and Malaysia, and so is deforestation. About 55 to 60 percent of palm oil expansion in both countries from 1990 and 2005 caused the loss of virgin forests, according to estimates by Princeton University and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Palm oil plantations are the leading cause of rainforest destruction in both countries.

Given the widespread loss of forests in Indonesia and Malaysia, Cargill’s no-deforestation policy is an important one. It is one that can lead the way for companies to create a palm oil supply chain that is free of deforestation.

Image credit: Rainforest Action Network via Flickr

By Raminder Chowdhary

The saying goes – what you don’t measure you cannot manage.

Investors globally (individual and institutional) are showing a growing interest in supporting environmentally responsible companies and building sustainable investment strategies, which is in stark contrast to the paucity of corporate reporting on green house gases (GHG) emissions.

Measuring Sustainability Disclosures: Ranking the World's stock exchanges, a study released in October 2014 and sponsored by AVIVA, S&P and ACCA, highlighted that only 37 percent of the largest 4,969 corporations disclosed GHG emission data in 2013. These figures are dismal considering that the companies trading on these exchanges are at the vanguard of quantitative sustainability reporting.

Regulators seem to have conveniently left investors in the dark with respect to information on corporate GHG emissions. Disclosure is one of several sustainability indicators and may not be the A-to-Z of sustainability, yet it is the most significant part. The thought is simple – mandatory disclosure requires companies to be transparent about what they emit, which places them in a better position to address their environmental impact and helps in speeding up strategies to reduce GHG footprint.

There is broad market awareness around sustainability, and it is time regulators stepped in and seek mandatory disclosure of sustainability indicators and the best place to start would be GHG emissions.  At the Rio +20 conference in 2012, the U.K. was the first country in the world to make it mandatory for all listed companies to disclose emissions data in their reports.  All of FTSE 100 companies now disclose this data. DEFRA, (the U.K. Deptartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) estimates that such reporting will contribute to saving over 4 million tons of CO2 equivalent emissions by 2021.

This is a call-to-action for all finance ministers, stock exchanges and corporate leaders around the world to work with regulators and ensure that the investing community is not denied information that is vital to decarbonize their portfolios and the planet. The $250 trillion firepower of global capital markets should not be underestimated in its ability to finance new technologies in key areas like energy, transportation, building and industry  and expediting implementation of  GHG emissions reduction or removal strategies with existing technology.

The time to act is NOW.

Image credit: Flickr/Salim Virji

Raminder Chowdhary: He earned two Master's Degrees in Economics and Business Admn. and worked for MNC's around the World as a supply chain specialist. He is the founding member of One Earth Foundation - an NGO focusing on conservation of natural eco-systems, preservation of ancient wisdom and environmental education.  He is based in India and is a regular speaker on various regional and national forums promoting the need for higher levels of corporate social and environmental participation and responsibility. In 2014 he was awarded the Metro AG Community Silver Star (India) for his efforts. Raminder has initiated and successfully implemented numerous projects in the sectors of TK & TCE preservation, special needs groups, livelihood challenges for indigenous communities, water, large scale forest and lakes clean up campaigns, engaging students in ecological initiatives, etc

By Aidan Carrie Ganzert

After the FAO Livestock’s Long Shadow report was released in 2006, the dairy industry found itself at ground-zero for criticism as a major sector contributor to climate change. Less than a decade later, thanks to the efforts of the Global Dairy Agenda for Action, the sector is poised to be a leader in sustainability. How did this happen, and where are the other livestock groups?

The wake-up call from the FAO report caused a shift in industry thinking. In 2009, the Global Dairy Agenda for Action (GDAA) was created by the international dairy industry with the specific objective of addressing climate change concerns. The dairy sector acknowledged that change was needed. But change didn’t come quick enough, and for many years following the report, the sector solely focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions throughout the dairy value chain, without considering other facets of sustainability.

Then came the innovation.

The governors of the GDAA realized through stakeholder conversations that greenhouse gas emissions weren’t the only impact associated with dairy production. The sector announced that, if the industry was to survive and thrive in the future, sustainability needed to be explored through environmental, social and economic lenses.

That set off the effort to build a robust platform that was recently announced – the Dairy Sustainability Framework (DSF). The DSF is truly a framework from which mitigation initiatives can be continuously developed, rather than permanently set in stone, with the goal of measuring impact on a list of strategic intent criterion.

The criteria are comprehensive and include animal welfare. The 11 sustainability criteria in the DSF include: greenhouse gas emissions; soil nutrients; waste; water; soil; biodiversity; market development; working conditions; product safety and quality; and animal care.

The first annual report of the DSF was released this month, and the industry is reporting projects and initiatives currently being undertaken under each criteria. From research on soil compaction and aeration, to water use measurement and control program, to the conversion of processing plants to utilize environmental fuel – the international dairy industry in under a decade now has a comprehensive list of sustainability projects in place around the globe.

Though the DSF is new, and measurement factors for the impacts have yet to be identified, there are several notable themes to follow:

• The DSF is a holistic list of sustainability criteria, recognizing that greenhouse gases are important, but so is soil, water, waste and other impact areas.


• The DSF is voluntary and global, and the framework can be adopted for anyone in the entire value chain – from the dairy farmer in India to the large milk producer in the Netherlands.


• The DSF is a public facing exercise and quite transparent. The governance model leads the effort, indicating that the industry is committed to making sustainability a non-competitive issue.

For those individuals committed to eliminating or greatly reducing the livestock industry’s footprint, these efforts are seen as greenwashing. However, what we see is that the industry is responding to a serious threat responsibly, with transparency, and with a commitment to building a better world. The DSF seeks to be as flexible as our own planetary systems, and it is because of this that it will find success in translating the sustainability agenda across the globe.

A question remains for the other livestock industries: As the DSF further develops its model, where is the sustainability framework for the global swine and poultry industry?

Image credit: Flickr/Marc Dulmulder

Aidan Carrie Ganzert is a former international climate change researcher, currently developing innovative solutions for environmental issues in the intersections of economy and society. She will graduate with a MA in Sustainability at Wake Forest University in 2016.

Tony Sabatier of Friends-International warns that corporate philanthropy can sometimes be misguided.

Across Cambodia, orphanages are proliferating. Although it is a country with a recent past haunted by conflict and genocide, the last 10 years have, however, seen rapid development alongside general calm and stability, allied to a huge increase in tourism. They have also seen the number of overseas funded orphanages in the country more than double during that time.

We know from years of research that institutional care is harmful to children. What adds to the disturbing nature of this increase is the shocking fact that these orphanages are primarily being run as businesses, set up to attract the foreign dollars that flood in from well-meaning individuals and companies. In order to function effectively in attracting those donors, they need something to ‘sell’, and that something is children. Almost three quarters of the children who are currently in institutional care in Cambodia have living parents and most institutions where they are living have no child protection policies or standards of practice in place.

Families are often pressurized into giving up their children into orphanage care, despite the existence of laws in Cambodia which prioritize family and family based care over institutional care.

Donors from the business and private sectors however, continue to pledge support to organizations that in many cases are actually causing additional harm to children, and feeding the growth of an industry that far from helping children, actually exploits them.

The ChildSafe Movement campaign, ‘Don’t Create More Orphans’, launched in February 2015, seeks to raise awareness of these issues with orphanage supporters, and urges them to redirect their support to the many organizations working to keep families together and children out of unnecessary and harmful orphanage care.

ChildSafe has ten years of experience in child protection initiatives and campaigns – they have reached over 35 million people with their child protection campaign messages to date - and is powered by Friends-International, a child welfare organization that for over 20 years has saved lives and built futures for children and young people who lack opportunity.

ChildSafe’s campaign links into the concerted partnership work going on in Cambodia to strengthen families, and keep children out of institutions. Partner organizations across the country support vulnerable families and children through education and vocational training projects, and run income generation projects for parents and care takers, so they can afford to look after their children and send them to school.

Please visit http://www.thinkchildsafe.org/thinkbeforedonating/. If you or your business currently supports orphanages, please think again. Please, reconsider. Look at the list of alternatives that the website suggests. You will have a long term positive, and what’s more, a sustainable, impact, by shifting your support toward organizations which are working to strengthen families and helping them to keep their children.

Please, #THINKfamilies , not orphanages.

 

Picture credit: © Power970 | Dreamstime.com