Search

As more women make it clear that it has been long past time for the advertising industry to welcome diversity and inclusion, more organizations are responding in kind. To that end, Unilever recently announced that it will further push advertising agencies to redefine what to many people have become tired and clichéd definitions of beauty.

The latest extension of this work is the Dove brand’s announcement that it will promote more inclusivity in the wider advertising sector by subsidizing the costs of talent if other brands rethink their definitions of what a “model” should be.

Dove’s corporate site in South Africa noted studies finding that as much as 70 percent of women don’t see themselves in advertising and media. “We know from research that if women don’t feel represented, it can hold them back from reaching their full potential,” Sophie van Ettinger of Unilever said in a public statement. “The effects are vast, negatively impacting health, career and relationships. As an actionist brand that continuously challenges narrow beauty ideals, it is our duty to help others to represent all beauty in their advertising.”

The work started two years ago when Dove launched Project #ShowUs in partnership with Getty Images and the creative network GirlGaze. Together, the organizations collected over 10,000 images of women who comprise a “more inclusive vision of beauty,” and made them available for any media and advertisers. These photos have not been altered or airbrushed in any way.

Now, Dove South Africa says it wants to take this movement further. The brand describes the effort as hacking the advertising industry from the inside. Models offered a simple message to casting directors: “If you choose me, and show me as I really am, Dove will cover the cost of my appearance fee.”

Brands that have made the decision to work with these models include the French cleaning products company Cif, donut chain Krispy Kreme, ice cream maker Magnum, and South African financial services firm Nedbank.

“There is different kinds of beauty, all of it deserves to be shown, all of it deserves to be represented in the right kind of way,” said Mpho, one of the models who participated in this initiative and who ended up working with Magnum on one of its ad campaigns.

The offer to not only work with these aspiring models, but even pay to have them appear in other companies’ campaigns builds upon additional recent work by Dove and Unilever on this front. For example, Unilever announced earlier this month it would remove the word “normal” from all of its brands’ personal care and beauty products after research the CPG giant commissioned revealed that, more often than not, the term connotes negativity and makes consumers feel excluded.

Image credit: Dove South Africa

The electronics giant Samsung announced in late February that it was redoubling its efforts toward environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives, offering one more piece of evidence of just how seriously corporate sustainability, and ESG investing, are now regarded.

Indeed, Samsung’s mission, as stated by Executive Vice President Jaeho Shin, is to “further evolve into a global company that earns trust from our customers and members of society, and that dedicates to the development and happiness of humanity.” Doing so is “no longer optional” according to a February 22 note issued by Goldman Sachs, which cited European regulations and the ESG advocacy of the new U.S. president, Joseph R. Biden, as the primary reasons for the uptick.

But even before Biden took office or those regulations took shape, ESG had taken center stage. A study by the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) Institute showed that in 2020, 85 percent of that organization’s members took ESG into consideration and that 65 percent of their clients demanded that they do so.

Moreover, nine of every 10 investment professionals believe that going forward, their firms will delve more deeply into ESG, though that contrasts markedly with the number of institutional and retail investors who actually consider ESG investing. Those respective numbers stand at 19 percent and 10 percent, according to the survey.

One of the primary issues affecting ESG investing is those businesses that engage in “greenwashing,” whereby they portray their products as being more environmentally compliant than they might actually be. That speaks to one of the primary concerns surrounding surging interest in ESG investing: a lack of consistent, reliable data to measure such compliance. Fully 78 percent of those responding to the CFA survey pointed out a need for uniform standards.

In fact, the report concluded, enterprises are often “left to determine for themselves which ESG factors are material to their business performance and what information to disclose to investors.” An example would be the Morgan Stanley Composite Index (MSCI), which measures companies’ commitment to various environmental and social initiatives, as well as corporate governance.

As mentioned, there is every expectation that the Biden administration will address the issue of uniformity -- that in particular, the appointment of Gary Gensler as head of the Securities and Exchange Commission will change the landscape. As an advisor to Senator Paul Sarbanes, he helped draft the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which called for managerial oversight of companies’ financial reporting on the part of business leaders, and severe penalties for those CEOs who failed to comply.

The expectation is that similar standards will be applied to ESG disclosure. In addition, the asset manager BlackRock, besides issuing a request to companies to reveal their plans for going net-zero, is banding together with State Street and Vanguard to encourage enterprises to abide by the reporting standards set forth by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), a nonprofit organization formed in 2011 with such transparency in mind.

In the private sector, multiple companies have attempted to introduce data-driven ESG analytics to analyze companies and portfolios. Some, like investment bank Schroder’s, which has built SustainEx, rely on in-house tools. Others, like New York-based Vestive, are providing third-party tools to attempt to provide greater clarity for investors.

In addition, Nasdaq is mulling an amendment that would require companies to make diversity disclosures - specifically, as it pertains to directors - part of its listing standards, as such social concerns were brought to the forefront by the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020.

Finally, the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Trustees announced in February that it is moving forward with the idea of forming a new board that would establish global ESG reporting standards, in hopes of a proposal being finalized in September and the board’s formation being announced at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in November.

In the meantime, companies can expect continued pressure from stakeholders and investors regarding ESG, as was the case in 2020 when major oil companies were challenged to meet emissions targets. As BlackRock chairman Larry Fink noted in a January 2021 letter to CEOs, “There is no company whose business model won’t be profoundly affected by a transition to a net-zero economy” by 2050. As a result, Fink added, it would behoove businesses to formulate a “well-articulated long-term strategy” that moves the company toward this goal while assuaging investors.

Climate initiatives have long been front and center and will understandably remain so. But the other facets of ESG investing will likewise continue to demand attention, as will the ongoing quest to establish uniform reporting standards. The latter is of particular importance, as that will ensure transparency and adherence to the larger goals of ESG.

Image credit: MayoFi/Unsplash

Many fitness-related images we see impart the message that yes, this girl can. The problem is that usually it is just one certain demographic of young women are shown in them.

Since the pandemic started last year, it seems as if the amount of fitness-related social media ads have doubled – if not tripled – in quantity and frequency. Almost all of the posts feature young, seemingly able-bodied, thin white women in coordinated sports bra and leggings sets, smiling while riding a Peleton or doing yoga. The unglamorous realities of “exercising while female” – sweat, cellulite, arm jiggling, kids underfoot, post-baby bodies, hormonal changes and ill-fitting workout gear – are nowhere to be found.

Sport England’s This Girl Can initiative seeks to “help address the misrepresentation of images used in marketing and the media” with a new free image library celebrating women exercising and practicing healthy habits.

The image library – introduced earlier this month on International Women’s Day – was inspired by a recent study conducted by This Girl Can. At least 63 percent of women interviewed said that “seeing slim, toned bodies on social media sites has a negative impact” on how they view themselves.

The study also examined existing stock imagery on the web, analyzing the first 100 photos listed in a Google image search of the phrase “women exercising.” Not surprisingly, 85 percent of the results were of women who appeared to be a U.S. size 6 (U.K. size 10) or smaller. Seventy percent of the women were white, 65 percent looked younger than 35, and only 2 percent appeared to be “out-of-breath, sweaty or red-faced.”

The new This Girl Can stock image collection, however, features women from infants to seniors, of all different body shapes and sizes. There are women with hijabs, women with tattoos, and women who are very pregnant. There are women using adaptive mobility equipment such as walkers. There are even women who are – gasp – sweating!

As of press time, there were almost 1,000 royalty-free images available in the new collection.

“Our aim is to inspire women to become more active and showcase the many fantastic ways they can do so,” said Kate Dale, the campaign lead of This Girl Can, in a release from Sport England. “We know there are barriers women have to exercise, fears of judgment and feeling that they will fail. We are encouraging behavioral change, which can be difficult if women’s misconceptions are often reinforced on a daily basis by the imagery they view in media, advertising and online.”

For six years, This Girl Can has spread the message that exercise is accessible to all. Not only has the campaign inspired hundreds of thousands of women and girls to get active, but it also has opened up national – and international – dialogue over many issues not often discussed by the sports media. For example, the organization’s 2020 video (released shortly before the pandemic) showed a disabled woman using a lift to get into a swimming pool, a woman breastfeeding before playing basketball, and a woman working out to alleviate her menstrual cramps.

This Girl Can is not the only one bringing more women in fitness into the conversation around fitness and sports. Earlier this month, Olympic medalists Sue Bird, Chloe Kim, Simone Manuel and Alex Morgan launched Togethxr, a media company focused on sharing female athletes’ stories through videos, podcasts and photography. Also debuting this month, Nike’s latest ad for its maternity line features pregnant women (obviously), along with a mother pumping breastmilk, a mother in labor and mothers of infants of toddlers.

With changes like these, there is some hope that women’s fitness struggles and successes will finally get the attention they deserve.

“COVID has shown how quickly women sacrifice their own exercise time to care for others,” Dale said in a recent interview with RWL Magazine. “Women need to know now, more than ever, that they are still very much part of the home exercise conversation.”

Image credit: This Girl Can Image Library

From a brand perspective, 2020 was a trying year for Corona (for obvious reasons), but the ever-popular beer proved to not only survive but thrive during the pandemic. Not only are sales up overall, but the company continues to launch new drinks and it is also trying out new, more sustainable packaging.

The brand’s latest development is a more circular form of fiber-based packaging for its six-packs of bottles. This new six-back holder contains barley straw mixed with 100 percent recycled wood fibers. As with many ales, barley is an important ingredient in the brews made by Corona; now some of that straw that farmers often discard after harvesting barley will be put to another use.

According to AB InBev, the parent company of the Corona brand, churning barley straw into cardboard fiber is a process the requires up to 90 percent less water than using virgin wood – and also requires far less energy and chemicals. And when it comes to land use, far less acreage is also needed.

The new packaging builds upon Corona’s previous ventures to eliminate wasteful and even harmful packaging, such as the six-pack rings for aluminum cans made from waste byproducts including that of barley.

But Corona serves up far more beer out of its iconic glass bottles then cans, so these new six-pack holders could have a larger impact in the long run. AB InBev said in a public statement that it would consider rolling out the barley-based packaging across more of its brands.

It could be a while before you see this packaging in North America – especially as Constellation Brands owns the rights to Corona here in the U.S. For now, AB InBev is piloting the new packaging in Colombia, and will then introduce it in Argentina later this year. For anyone asking why it could take so long, keep in mind that AB InBev said this new packaging option was three years in the making.

Image credit: Corona/Business Wire

The U.S. railroad industry has spent many years building up its image as a sustainability leader. However, the veneer of “green” hides an aggressive history of lobbying against climate action. Now the wall of denial appears to have grown a massive crack. The leading rail company CSX has just agreed to disclose its lobbying activities as an important step towards a more consistent and meaningful sustainability policy.

U.S. railroads are green on the outside…

Railroads have a built-in advantage on climate action, due to the fuel efficiency of rail transport.

“Trains can move a ton of freight more than 450 miles on a single gallon of fuel,” CSX notes, adding that  “Efficient use of fuel means less greenhouse gases or carbon emissions for our planet.”

Still, there is always room for improvement. CSX set a relatively modest emissions reduction goal in 2012, and the company has ramped up its goal considerably since then. Just last year, CSX became the first rail company in North America to gain approval from the global Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi).  
 
“CSX will reduce greenhouse gas emissions intensity by 37.3 percent between 2014 and 2030,” CSX stated. “The company expects future transformational technology to facilitate this next level of reductions and is extensively investing in technologies and operational practices that drive maximum achievable efficiencies.”

…not so much on the inside

Unfortunately, the impact of CSX’s commitment to climate action begins to crumble in the context of its trade group ties, including the Association of American Railroads.

In 2019, The Atlantic reporter Robinson Meyer detailed the findings of two recent studies on the lobbying activities of the Association of American Railroads. He describes a decades-long trail of anti-science activities rivaling that of ExxonMobil in its scope and impact.

“The four largest American freight railroads - BNSF Railway, Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific, and CSX - have sat at the center of the climate-denial movement nearly since it began,” Meyer wrote. “These four companies have joined or funded groups that attacked individual scientists, cast doubt on scientific consensus, and rejected reports from major scientific institutions, including the United Nations–led Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

Follow the money

The record of climate science denial clashes with the fuel efficiency profile of railroads, but it is fully consistent with the railroad industry’s reliance on the coal industry.

“Nearly 70 percent of American coal is shipped by rail, often along ‘dedicated’ lines that can ‘operate around the clock, the rail association says on its website,” Meyer wrote. “The largest class of railroads made a combined $10.7 billion, or 14 percent of their revenue, hauling coal last year.”

CSX is a case in point. As described on its own website, CSX is “the largest coal transporter east of the Mississippi River.”

The company also outlines its role in the global coal industry, explaining that it “provides service from the largest number of active coal origins, seamlessly interchanges with Western railroads and short lines, and provides access to multiple Eastern seaports.”

“Our specialized unit train service creates an efficient pipeline that allows us to move more than 130 - 165 million tons of coal products per year,” CSX states, listing coke and petroleum coke among the coal-related products it carries.

Making a real commitment to climate action

Apparently, CSX has begun to see the writing on the wall. Globally and here in the U.S., coal is losing its once-mighty grip on the power generation sector due to the advent of low-cost natural gas and renewable energy.

Steel manufacturers and other energy-intensive industries are also beginning to ease their dependence on coal, with an assist from new green hydrogen technology. In addition, new plastic recycling technology and bio-based alternatives are beginning to replace coal, petroleum and natural gas in the chemicals industry.

The election of President Joe Biden on an aggressive decarbonization platform may have also sparked CSX into action. Earlier this week, the sustainable investment firm Green Century Capital Management announced that it has withdrawn a shareholder resolution with CSX, following a new transparency pledge by the company.

The resolution was spearheaded by the Unitarian Universalist Association and supported by the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility.

“Green Century has withdrawn a shareholder resolution with CSX Corporation (CSX) after it agreed to report on any of its lobbying activities, and those of its trade associations, that contradict the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement,” the firm announced, while calling out the Association of American Railroads by name.

“These new commitments signal that the company is ready to address the material risks posed by the climate crisis and end its support for lobbying that does not align with its climate destination,” Green Century President Leslie Samuelrich emphasized.

A new direction for CSX and its competitors

The pledge calls for CSX to review its lobbying practices and those of its trade associations alongside its climate policies, and to report on any discrepancies.

Regardless of its past practice, those trade associations may already be pivoting to adopt new business models that offset the loss of coal freight and other forms of fossil energy.

The American Association of Railroads, for one, appears eager to cannibalize the trucking industry for new opportunities to make up for the loss of coal traffic.

Last summer, the trade group issued a white paper that “contextualizes how and why freight rail provides a solution that helps decrease the country’s carbon emissions and reduces transportation’s overall environmental impact.”

The analysis looked at two scenarios for replacing long haul truck transport of at least 750 miles with rail transport. Under a 25 percent replacement scenario, the analysis finds a fuel savings of 1.2 billion gallons, leading to a reduction of approximately 13.1 million tons in greenhouse gasses.

That savings could diminish as the long haul trucking industry electrifies. However, the analysis does suggest that the coal industry is beginning to lose a key ally as CSX, and other railroad stakeholders, adapt to a more sustainable future.

Image credit: Benjamin Wagner/Unsplash

Depressive and anxiety disorders are rising among children and youth in the U.S. and the COVID-19 pandemic together are accelerating what has become a mental health crisis. Children are facing disruptions in their daily lives including isolation, food insecurity and financial changes. The results are influencing their mental health and from some mental health professionals, depression and anxiety have become a bigger concern for them than the virus itself. During the pandemic, more than 50 percent of children have felt moderately sad, depressed or unhappy relative to 25 percent of adults, according to at least one study.

Children's mental health has reached a breaking point

As more companies are now working to alleviate the pandemic’s impact on mental health, Morgan Stanley says it has been investing in children’s mental health for over 50 years. Further, in February 2020, Morgan Stanley established the Morgan Stanley Alliance for Children's Mental Health in response to rising concerns over rising concerns over children's mental health and related challenges. This synergy between Morgan Stanley's resources and expertise of its non-profit partners aims to help youth, especially those within marginalized communities. Child Mind Institute is among the founding non-profit partners of this alliance.

“There’s almost none or very few corporate players in this space but I think from a societal perspective, there is actually a dearth of spending there so it’s definitively in need,” said Joan Steinberg, the company’s global head of community affairs and President of the Morgan Stanley Foundation, in a recent interview with 3p. “It’s an underfunded area in every way you can imagine.”

Extensive research on mental health points in one direction

In response to this crisis, Morgan Stanley launched more research and surveys on children’s mental health in 2019. These efforts, says the company, were made to enhance children’s quality of life and understand where exactly in children's health can the company prevent death and diseases. The situation in dire: In 2018, the second leading cause of death for individuals between the ages of 10 to 34 was suicide.

The company continued its research with a follow-up study in November 2020, which confirmed the initial findings: Disruption in daily life is detrimental for both children’s and adults' mental health. 

Morgan Stanley is continuing its efforts today. Earlier this year, the company announced a $250,000 grant to support research studies from Child Mind Institute. These studies aim to raise awareness and help develop intervention strategies for children's mental health issues during the pandemic. This grant is one extension of the company’s CRISIS (Coronavirus Health and Impact Survey) project.

Combating institutional challenges and stigma

While financial support kickstarts preliminary research, challenges in children obtaining mental health support exists in access, socio-economic barriers and stigma. To eliminate these challenges and the stigma attached, Morgan Stanley is focusing on education in high schools and colleges as well. More specifically, one of the alliance’s founding non-profit partner is The Jed Foundation (JED), which has established student mental health programs across campuses.

“There are some hard-core infrastructure issues that have to be addressed and no one company is going to solve that problem. That’s going to take a lot more listening than just us but we can do a lot to raise awareness and reduce stigma as a corporation,” Steinberg told 3p. Institutional challenges include the lack of psychiatrists and psychologists in the U.S, especially in rural areas. This scarcity paired with financial constraints, long commutes and family members working multiple jobs are burdensome when obtaining mental health support.

To measure the effectiveness of its efforts, Morgan Stanley has key performance indicators to measure the company’s impact and how far and in-depth children are reached and parents are educated. The company is also measuring success through obtaining additional funding and influencing other corporations to participate.

“Certainly, we’re looking to see that other funders start joining us and what other corporations, whether private, foundations can we bring to the table, it’s really important to us,” added Steinberg.

Reducing stigma, emphasizing education and encouraging participation is setting the foundation for long-term solutions to a rising problem. As COVID-19 exacerbates mental health issues, especially those of children, the pandemic has made one thing very clear: Children’s mental health cannot be ignored and it is an area in which corporations can contribute resources to help take on this crisis.

Image credit: Ketut Subiyanto/Pexels

Photo: A Black Lives Matter protest in Atlanta, Georgia, in 2020. Almost a year later, lawmakers are pushing legislation that would result in voter suppression across the Peach State.

In the run-up to election day in 2020, Georgia’s professional basketball, baseball, football and soccer organizations helped to amplify nationwide get-out-the-vote efforts. The Atlanta Falcons’ high-profile “Rise Up and Vote” game on Oct. 25 is just one example. Now, their commitment to free and fair elections is facing a new test, as state lawmakers push legislation that makes Georgia the face of state-sanctioned, race-based voter suppression in America.

So far, Georgia’s professional sports teams have kept out of the fray. However, money talks, and the fate of new sports betting legislation may stir them into action.

Georgia becomes the face of voter suppression in America

More than 250 voter suppression bills are circulating in Republican-controlled statehouses this year, and Georgia has become a particular focus of attention. With the state’s legislative session set to end on March 31, all eyes are on a series of Republican-sponsored bills aimed at making it harder for many Democratic-leaning Georgia voters to cast a ballot.

The voter suppression bills have already provoked a massive pushback from voting rights advocates in Georgia, who have been leaning on the state’s leading corporate citizens to take a stand.

Most of the pressure has focused on such Georgia-based companies as Aflac, Coca-Cola, Delta Air Lines and Home Depot. All of these companies eventually responded by issuing statements in support of voting rights in general. However, they mostly fell short of criticizing specific elements in the proposed legislation, including new ID requirements and restrictions on early voting and vote-by-mail ballots.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

One company speaking out is Salesforce. The company was not among the first to issue a statement, but it finally came through on March 16 and targeted specific legislation.

“A person’s right to cast their ballot is the foundation of our democracy,” Salesforce wrote on its official Twitter account. “Georgia HB 531 would limit trustworthy, safe & equal access to voting by restricting early voting & eliminating provisional ballots. That’s why Salesforce opposes HB 531 as it stands.”

The Metro Atlanta and Georgia Chambers of Commerce have also spoken out against the voter suppression legislation.

Sports betting is also on the line

The corporate response may be too little, too late to help prevent voter suppression legislation from reaching the desk of Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp. Now, the pressure is on the governor to exercise his veto power.

In an interesting twist, voting rights advocates may be able to leverage sports betting to sway his pen.

Earlier this month, reporters Greg Bluestein and Tia Mitchell of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution took note of that development (emphasis added).

“One potential casualty is a measure to legalize sports betting that requires bipartisan support and that seemed, to some supporters at least, on the cusp of success in Georgia,” they wrote. “The House vote on the issue last week was delayed by Democratic leaders who say they’re withholding support both to demand new concessions, such as provisions for minority vendors, and also to protest the elections restrictions.”

That is where Georgia’s professional sports leagues come in.

Bringing legalized online sports betting to Georgia has been a decades-long effort on the part of its supporters. All four of the state’s leading professional sports franchises recently stepped up the pressure to push it over the finish line.

Under the banner of the Georgia Professional Sports Integrity Alliance, the Atlanta Braves, Falcons, Hawks and United organizations have pumped more than $272,000 into state campaigns in support of bills legalizing online and mobile sports betting since 2019.

When will pro sports “rise up” and push back against voter suppression?

With the coveted prize of legalized online sports betting finally in view, Georgia’s pro sports franchises are most likely doing their best to avoid ruffling feathers in the statehouse, or in the governor’s office. That could explain why they have failed to take a stand on the voter suppression bills.

However, the situation is dripping with irony compared to their get-out-the-vote activities last year.

The Atlanta Falcons, for example, promoted the aforementioned “Rise Up and Vote” game with a message from franchise owner Arthur M. Blank. He specifically lauded the role of early voting and vote-by-mail, the very elements now targeted by Republican lawmakers to suppress the vote.

The United FC, another franchise under the Blank umbrella, used the same message in support of the team’s 2020 voter registration drive. The Atlanta Falcons went a step farther, donating the use of their venue for early voting in advance of election day.

The Atlanta Braves were notably absent from a voter drive rundown promoted by Major League Baseball leading up to election day. However, the Braves, like the other three franchises, did promote Black History Month this past February.

This month, professional sports franchises in Georgia have a chance to make history and take a stand against voter suppression. But the clock is ticking.

The ball is in their court.

Image credit: Ben Dutton/Unsplash

Are we seeing a shift in thinking when it comes to paid family leave?

Years ago, legislation such as the Americans with Disabilities Act and Family and Medical Leave Act received plenty of pushback from the business community. The typical narrative was that such legislation was a “job killer.” And in recent years, politicians, with the implicit backing of companies, have introduced bills that would weaken those laws.

Now, it appears more business leaders realize that giving their employees time and space to take care of their families in times of need — without confronting economic hardship — is actually good for the bottom line.

This week, almost 200 companies signed a letter urging the U.S. Congress to support paid family leave in any federal economic recovery package.

“We cannot emerge from this pandemic and remain one of only two countries in the world with no form of national paid leave,” the letter reads. “We need a policy that is inclusive and that protects all workers equally, regardless of what kind of work they do, where they live, or whom they love.”

The companies supporting paid family leave cut across sectors and include the likes of Danone North America, Diageo, Levi Strauss, Nextdoor and Salesforce.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

The letter to Congress comes on the heels of a recent report indicating that 75 percent of U.S. businesses agree a nationwide paid family leave policy would help them to withstand future public health and economic crises.

Supporters of paid family leave also say such legislation can help take on the racial, gender and class inequalities still prevalent across the U.S. — exemplified by the estimated 3 million women who have left the workforce in the past year.

Such legislation could help fix the patchwork of national and local laws that leave most employees without any paid family leave options to take care of their loved ones during a time of crisis. From a moral and ethics perspective, paid family leave legislation would cement a culture of caregiving and job flexibility that companies are increasingly touting as the COVID-19 pandemic continues.

But there’s an economic case for paid family leave, too. While mass vaccination is underway, there’s no guarantee we’ll reach herd immunity any time soon, especially if new strains of the novel coronavirus continue to sicken more people. Further, as any human resources professional will tell you, hiring new employees via remote tools is a slog. The high cost of employee turnover has long been documented — and there is a price to pay for disenchanted employees who believe their companies don’t care.

Image credit: Kelly Sikkema/Unsplash

Photo: A March 2021 Washington, D.C. protest against human rights violations that are ongoing against Uyghurs in China. Many ethic Uyghurs keep their faces covered during such protests abroad, as they fear reprisals against family members back home.

This summer saw major American companies release statements in support of Black Lives Matter and the racial justice protests taking place across the U.S. and the world. Several even followed up these statements with concrete goals to address racial inequity within their organizations or supply chains. It was seen by many as a hopeful sign that even large companies could be progressive when it comes to social issues and take difficult stands.

Companies balk at discussing Uyghurs at all

Apparently that courage ends at the border, especially when it comes to the country on which many brands depend for raw materials, manufacturing and essential parts — China, America’s largest trading partner. According to a recent investigation by The Wire China, only a handful of companies were even willing to speak with reporters about human rights violations against the mostly Muslim Uyghur ethnic minority. Most refused to comment or did not respond.

“With the genocidal campaign that is soon to enter its fifth year, Uyghurs don’t understand how ‘business as usual’ has continued as long as it has,” said Omer Kanat, director of the Uyghur Human Rights Project in Washington, D.C.

This is concerning as, over the past four years, the situation in the Uyghur homeland in eastern China has deteriorated significantly. What started out as a digitally enhanced police state morphed into the largest system of concentration camps since World War II, housing perhaps as many as 3 million Uyghurs and other mostly Muslim minorities. Mosques, Uyghur neighborhoods and shrines have been destroyed, and the use of their language is increasingly prohibited.

Meanwhile, China has severely restricted access to these camps and the entire Uyghur homeland, making it hard for us to really gauge the extent of what is happening.

A 'slow genocide' is ignored

What news has gotten out is deeply worrying. Camp detainees were also being used as forced labor for factories supplying international companies. Torture, sexual violence and suspicious deaths of camp detainees have been reported. And now, there is evidence of a program to reduce Uyghur birthrates, in what some call a “slow genocide.” And that’s the right word: Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared what’s happening a genocide in January, only the sixth such declaration in U.S. history — one that his successor and the Joe Biden administration have made clear they uphold.

Despite its inaccessibility to NGOs and journalists, the Uyghur homeland (now called Xinjiang, formerly East Turkestan) is one of the world’s main cotton growing regions and also a key source of silicon and other minerals used in technology manufacturing. The region is deeply interconnected with global supply chains. Yet thus far, few brands have been willing to be proactive about addressing forced labor and human rights concerns.

“The Uyghur community demands real action from brands to end their complicity in Uyghur forced labor, not empty declarations. Brands must urgently . . . ensure that they are not profiting from Uyghur forced labor,” said Muetter Iliqud, head of communications of the Norwegian Uyghur Committee, in a press statement.

While the situation for the Uyghurs is especially bad, it is part of a worrying trend across China, where human rights lawyers and feminists are being jailed, journalism is being criminalized, and censorship is growing. China’s paramount leader, President Xi Jingping, has his own cult of personality befitting any dictator, and he has consolidated power to a degree not seen in China in decades. This is why we have also seen a rapid, sudden, and shocking repression of the democracy movement in Hong Kong.

China, the supply chain, and dismissal of human rights

China is not only a key cog in many companies' supply chains. It's also an increasingly important consumer market and the world’s second largest economy. Refusing to follow the rules — in this case, being outspoken about human rights — could mean losing access to this market. That's a lesson Google, which has been blocked in China since 2010 for refusing to censor search, knows all too well. Sadly, this is one case where companies are putting profit ahead of people.

“I find it somewhat discouraging that one of the biggest and clearest violations of liberty and human rights of our era — the treatment of the Uyghurs — receives as little condemnation from those in power as it does,” said Patrick Collison, CEO of the fintech company Stripe, in a recent interview. “I get why, of course: It's bad for business.”

But if companies don’t act, the government might force their hands. Cotton and tomatoes from Xinjiang are already being refused entry at the border. In Congress, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act has bipartisan support. If passed, it would essentially prohibit any goods from Xinjiang from entering the United States unless importers can show clear and convincing evidence it had no connection to forced labor.

“Many U.S., international, and Chinese corporations are complicit in the exploitation of forced labor and these products continue to make their way into global supply chains and our country. It is long past time for the Congress to act,”  U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said in a recent press statement.

For Uyghurs suffering in camps for years, the fact that companies chose profits over people for so long is an unforgivable offense. All the ethical commitments, human rights policies, and sourcing standards mean nothing if governments allow companies to ignore one of the most egregious human rights violations of the 21st century. Ignorance is no longer a valid defense.

Image credit: Kuzzat Altay/Unsplash

New research on the impacts of lead-acid car battery recycling paints a dark picture of the impacts of illegal operations and loose regulations. This legacy of public health and environmental impacts provides automakers with all the more reason to transition into electric vehicles (EVs) and new energy storage technology. Though EV battery recycling will not be impact-free, a new venture in Nigeria provides a pathway for a more sustainable automotive industry.

The impacts of lead-acid battery recycling

In terms of raw numbers, the auto industry generally gets high marks for lead-acid car battery recycling. Battery manufacturers cite a figure of 99 percent recyclable materials in a typical lead-acid battery, and an impressive recycling rate of 99.1 percent.

However, the numbers mask outsized impacts related to improper and poorly regulated recycling operations.

In a Yale 360 Environment profile last November, contributing writer Fred Pearce catalogued contaminated breast milk, child mortality and widespread contamination in communities ranging from Kenya and Senegal to California.

“Tens of thousands of backyard battery breakers and smelting enterprises around the world are seeking to cash in, collecting an abundant supply of used batteries to turn into new product. With little regulation, the result is often lethal,” Pearce wrote.

Pearce also takes note of bad actors among larger recycling enterprises, which can leave behind a legacy of widespread contamination even after they are finally shuttered.

Of particular concern to U.S. automakers is the prospect of ever-tightening regulations on domestic battery recycling. All else being equal, that will lead to an increase in the export of spent batteries to nations where rules for handling lead-acid batteries are less strict. Right now the prospect does not look much better for EV battery recycling. 

Out of the lead-acid battery recycling frying pan, into the Li-ion fire

As the electric vehicle market grows, the auto industry has a golden opportunity to leave lead-acid technology behind. In addition to all-electric startups like Tesla, legacy automakers like GM and Ford are planning to electrify their entire fleets. Lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries are the alternative of choice, though other new types of batteries are in development. Hydrogen fuel cells are another option for vehicle electrification.

However, new energy storage technology does not erase the recycling problem. It only creates new challenges with EV battery recycling that must be tackled head-on, and quickly.

The problem is that a recycling pathway for Li-ion car batteries has yet to scale up. Until recent years, Li-ion batteries have been used mainly in handheld devices and other small electronics. At that scale, the payback for recycling has been minimal, and the global recycling reflects that. As of 2018, for example, the Li-ion recycling rate was 2 to 3 percent in Australia.

Scaling up the recycling stream for millions of car batteries will be an enormous challenge. In 2019, reporter Mitch Jacoby of C&N described the chicken-and-egg dilemma.

“Because the Li-ion battery industry lacks a clear path to large-scale economical recycling, battery researchers and manufacturers have traditionally not focused on improving recyclability. Instead, they have worked to lower costs and increase battery longevity and charge capacity,” Jacoby wrote. “And because researchers have made only modest progress improving recyclability, relatively few Li-ion batteries end up being recycled.”

A large-scale solution for recycling EV batteries

Stricter national standards on a global level can help tamp down on improper or illegal Li-ion battery recycling operations. However, a more holistic solution for safe and effective EV battery recycling would involve both automakers and battery manufacturers.

In that regard, automakers can take a cue from the solar industry. It is increasingly common to find solar panels marketed with energy storage in the form of Li-ion batteries, and the leading solar firm Lumos recently set a high bar for the industry.

Lumos bills itself as the first leading firm to offer Li-ion batteries in a standard home solar package, and it has recognized the need to scale up EV battery recycling. According to Lumos, the demand for batteries in Africa was just 2 gigawatts (GW) in 2015. Demand could grow to 15 GW by 2030 under the current state of electrification on the continent. As electricity access increases, battery demand will also rise, leading to the potential of a 30-GW demand for batteries by 2030.

In 2019, Lumos partnered with Carnegie Mellon University Africa and the Korean battery materials manufacturer and recycler Taisen Company to help the Nigerian firm Hinckley Recycling enter the Global LEAP Award for E-Waste Recycling. The award is supported by USAID, UK Aid, and the public-private electrification initiative Power Africa, with the aim of managing waste from the off-grid solar industry in sub-Saharan Africa last year.

With the assist from its partners, Hinckley won the 2020 LEAP Award, and now Lumos has followed up by forming a recycling partnership with the firm.

Under the partnership, Hinckley will recycle waste batteries from Lumos at its recycling center in in Ojota, which has an annual capacity of 20,000 metric tons of e-waste.

The need for holistic EV battery recycling

Lumos already has a vast footprint in Nigeria and it is expanding into other countries, starting with Côte d’Ivoire. The partnership with Hinckley provides Lumos with a significant sustainability and social responsibility marketing edge.

Hinckley won the 2020 LEAP Award on the basis of its plans for taking on a major challenge for the e-waste recycling industry, which is the competition that legitimate, responsible recyclers face from the “informal” recycling network.

In addition to competing for materials recovery, informal recyclers also disrupt the supply chain in the growing field of second-life batteries.

Hinckley is assessing the informal e-waste recycling in Lagos, with the aim of establishing relationships within the informal recycling ecosystem rather than trying to drive small-scale recyclers out of business. That includes health and safety training, and the potential for health insurance plans as well.

The company has also been researching safer, scalable methods for informal recyclers, including a manual process being implemented in China.

In addition, Hinckley’s ongoing work with Carnegie Mellon involves developing a battery test lab aimed at second-life battery use.

Firms like Lumos and Hinckley are already establishing a three-legged roadmap for automakers to follow, and all three legs are needed for success: a strong government platform, partnerships with corporate and academic stakeholders, and meaningful engagement with the informal recycling network that sustains jobs as well as public and environmental health.

Image credit: Markus Spiske/Unsplash