Search

The 2017 NFL season is about to get started. And what you may not know is that small and diverse businesses are already winning. The Houston Super Bowl Committee is building upon the success of Super Bowl 50’s Business Connect program in the Bay Area, by providing mentoring and other resources so diverse local businesses can compete for Super Bowl-related contracts.

A Super Bowl can have an impact of $200 million to $500 million on the local economy in which the game is played. Bu, keeping that money in the community has always been a challenge. Last year’s Super Bowl Host Committee CEO Keith Bruce said, "… It's a chance for the Bay Area's diverse small business community to tap into opportunities for new contracts and business growth".

For Super Bowl 50, the Business Connect program partnered with Pacific Community Ventures (PCV) — a nonprofit community development financial institution (CDFI) that engages small businesses, investors and policymakers to build an economy that works for everyone — to provide its technical assistance program to 400 diverse businesses in the Bay Area, with an emphasis on businesses owned by people of color, veterans, women, and members of the LGBT community.

All this effort was done with the goal of helping diverse small businesses have an increased chance to win contracts and to leave a lasting legacy for Bay Area diverse small businesses. Through the Business Connect program, enrolled small businesses won over $6,000,000 in Super Bowl related contracts!

Building a small-business Super Bowl

What intrigued the Super Bowl Host Committee about PCV’s technical assistance was that it combined the traditional hands-on approach with a modern platform to connect small business owners with expert business advisors from anywhere in America who provide tailored assistance.

PCV has built up a pool of hundreds of professional mentors from all industries and areas of expertise. So, BusinessAdvising.org matched their entrepreneurs in the program with mentors from Fortune 500 Companies to help these businesses grow for the Super Bowl and beyond. Growing these small businesses will bring economic development in communities across the Bay area, creating hundreds of quality jobs that are outlasting the game itself.

Online business advising is a game-changing innovation

It’s common for entrepreneurs to seek advice from a variety of community development organizations — from our local SBDCs to SCORE to the numerous CDFIs around the country — that offer technical assistance. Yet, what these organizations have the resources and budgets to offer is often one or two generalists or a retired businessperson who mentors a younger entrepreneur through the business planning process. And few small business owners can afford to hire a costly consultant.

Across the board, finding a mentor yourself is a time-consuming proposition. Enter online technical assistance and mentoring.

BusinessAdvising.org leverages technology (an online platform with an internal, proprietary matching algorithm) and volunteerism to provide small business owners with high-quality mentoring at no cost that removes geography as a barrier. If your company is in downtown Omaha, and the best advisor for your business lives in Tampa, BusinessAdvising.org can make that match happen. Think of BusinessAdvising.org as Doctors Without Borders, combined with eHarmony, adapted for small business.

"Pacific Community Ventures' BusinessAdvising.org program has helped accelerate the growth of participating small businesses and add jobs at 167% the national average since 2011," said PCV President and CEO Mary Jo Cook. “And, the small businesses who receive free technical assistance grow their revenue by over 20% on average.”

Making technical assistance available to CDFIs coast-to-coast

Taking technical assistance online in a national, scalable platform means that CDFIs now have a way to significantly increase the breadth and depth of technical assistance they offer. Wherever a business is in America, supplementing your CDFI’s TA with the BusinessAdvising.org platform lets your team offer the best advisor to help that company grow. And since the advisors volunteering their time are all active professionals, they can open their networks to our clients and dramatically increase the opportunities available to them.

"Pacific Community Ventures is just one of the latest examples of how CDFIs are equipping small businesses with the tools they need to drive economic development in their communities," said Miti Sathe, Senior Vice President of Small Business Initiatives at the Opportunity Finance Network. "Providing proven technical assistance to small businesses owners who have been historically separated from critical resources supports small businesses' path to sustainability, growth, and strong portfolio performance."

Small business owners who want to participate in the program -- and professionals interested in becoming business mentors or -- should visit BusinessAdvising.org for more information.

Image credit: Flickr/jimmagz

Patrick Duggan is a Director with Pacific Community Ventures -- a nonprofit social enterprise that engages small businesses, investors, and policymakers to build an economy that works for everyone. We achieve our mission by providing small businesses with access to the capital and mentorship they need to grow and create quality jobs for working people, and by working with impact investors to help define, measure, and communicate the social outcomes of their investments to drive even more investment in underserved communities.

By Ken Alterman, President and CEO of Savers

On August 17, eager shoppers will hit their favorite thrift stores to celebrate National Thrift Shop Day in search of special treasures and great deals. But there’s more to that thrifted item than a low price tag. Each piece of clothing has an environmental and economic footprint: from the production and manufacturing of the garment to its disposal. This National Thrift Shop Day, let’s celebrate the benefits of shopping thrift, which extend beyond our pocketbooks and positively impact our communities and the environment.

Considering that it can take over 700 gallons of water to make a single cotton T-shirt and over 1,800 gallons to produce one pair of jeans, we wear more water than we drink! If these items are thrown in the trash when they go out of style, then the resources that went into producing the garments go with it.

With North Americans now consuming 80 billion pieces of new clothing every year, four times more clothing than in 1980, the environmental impact of clothing has become enormous. From the chemicals to the massive amounts of water used to produce clothing, a single item amasses a large environmental footprint before it ends up in the hands of consumers. Despite the increasing popularity of green lifestyles, people are largely unaware of the environmental and economic impact of throwing unwanted clothing into the trash. By responsibly reselling, recycling and disposing of secondhand goods, the thrift and reuse industry is working to foster awareness around reuse. Shopping thrift and repurposing unwanted goods are easy ways to help conserve resources and give usable items a second, or even third life, through reuse.

The clothing industry is quickly becoming one of the most polluting industries in the world, with 26 billion pounds of unwanted goods thrown into landfills in 2015 alone. Unfortunately, 95 percent of the clothing and textiles that end up in landfills could have been reused or recycled.

To raise awareness of the impact clothing has on the community and the planet, Savers is challenging everyone to make their next T-shirt purchase a thrifted one. By choosing a thrifted item over something brand-new, we can reduce our clothing footprint and help decrease the demand for 80 billion pieces of new clothing ever year, conserving the precious natural resources that go into making our clothing. Small decisions about what people wear can make a huge difference for the planet when we work together. If one million people choose a thrifted tee in place of a new one, together we can offset 700 million gallons of water – equivalent to over 1,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

What we decide to do with that T-shirt or pair of jeans when no longer wanted is critical to minimizing our clothing footprint and creating a sustainable fashion culture. When donating items after you clean out your closet rather than throwing them in the garbage, not only are you helping the environment, you’re often benefiting nonprofit organizations in your community.

Each Savers thrift store benefits a local nonprofit partner who receives regular payments in exchange for supplying stores with community-donated goods. By purchasing these goods from our nonprofit partners, Savers provides consistent financial support to organizations that provide vital community services to the neighborhoods surrounding our stores. This model fosters longstanding relationships with nonprofits and is a unique approach that engages businesses to build stronger, more sustainable communities.

By repurposing, recycling and reselling goods purchased from nonprofit organizations, Savers strives to realize the potential in every item and keep viable goods out of landfills. Savers kept 650 million pounds of goods out of landfills last year alone. Our efforts are part of a dedicated reuse industry that handles over 3.8 billion pounds of textiles annually, working to reuse, repurpose and recycle unwanted goods.

When you’re taking advantage of the great deals this National Thrift Shop Day, you’ll be saving more than just money; giving a Sh!rt about your clothing footprint conserves the planet’s finite resources and strengthens local communities by providing funding for nonprofit organizations. Savers challenges you to start with the simple act of making your next tee a thrifted one.

Image credit: Flickr/David Sorich

Ken Alterman is President and CEO of Savers.

Has this summer’s heat waves got you worrying about a high electricity bill? Your electric utility is worried, too. But in a different way. Increasingly, clean technologies like solar, batteries and smart appliances are costing less due to global growth in manufacturing economies of scale plus technical innovations. Utilities fear an epidemic of customers investing in these technologies to reduce electricity bills. To utilities, this looks like a zombie apocalypse!

Disregard the potential of customer-owned technologies reducing pollution. Forget about how these technologies could generate hundred of thousands of new jobs across America. To utilities the idea of customer-owned technologies hooked up to “their” grid to lower electricity bills is nothing less than a catastrophic infection.

The utility industry is using rules, regulations and legislation designed around what it calls “revenue preservation” to destroy the economics of customer-owned clean technology. To a utility, revenue preservation means they must be reimbursed for whatever decisions and investments they made that their regulators deem “used and useful.” What revenue preservation means to a consumer is a higher electricity bill than what they could achieve if their own technology choices were successfully integrated into the grid.

How utilities use demand charges to block your ability to lower your electricity bill

In a deja vu of the rating agency’s participation in creating the Great Recession, Fitch Rating has published recommendations on what utilities should do to protect their self interest at the expense of higher electricity bills. Fitch Rating encourages utilities to keep rates high through demand charges that assign grid infrastructure costs to customers. Demand charges can be the perfect customer-owned solar killer. It allows utilities to charge a huge price for grid connection even if a solar system is fulfilling 100 percent of a customer’s energy consumption.

The question is: Why did Fitch even bother printing such a recommendation? The utility industry already understands this. The industry’s Edison Electric Institute (EEI) published a paper encouraging utilities to adopt demand charges to blunt customer adoption of “distributed generation.” Distributed generation is the utility industry’s code word for customer-owned solar, wind and fuel cells that reduce electricity bills and utility revenues.

There is a telling distinction between the Fitch publication and EEI’s. Fitch tells it like it is by urging utilities to use demand charges to keep customer bills high. The EEI publication is wrapped in language about “customer fairness.” EEI’s argument is that it isn’t fair for one customer to invest in technologies to lower their bill because customers who do not invest end up paying more to make up the utility’s “lost revenues.” What is obviously missing in EEI’s perspective is a utility’s obligation to keep bills low in the face of competition just like businesses not protected by regulators and legislators.

Will Nevada be ground-zero for the low-bill zombie apocalypse?

Nevada could be ground-zero of the lower-bill zombie apocalypse. The state’s utility and regulators chased out solar competitors through a rate redesign that eliminated solar’s economic benefits. This has cost jobs. When SolarCity left Nevada, it took 550 jobs with it. This job loss is significant. NVEnergy, Nevada’s electric utility, employs approximately 2,000 work associates. SolarCity’s job loss is equal to NVEnergy cutting its workforce by over 27 percent.

The Nevada regulatory commission also retroactively applied this new rate design to people who had invested in solar. A fireman gained 500 signatures on his protest letter explaining how his $25,000 home solar system is now worthless. Consumers reacted by supporting a November ballot initiative restoring solar economic benefits. This initiative was just blocked by the Nevada Supreme Court based on a finding that the language used was “inaccurate.”

In the meantime, Nevada casinos (MGM and Wynn Resort) have announced their intentions to disconnect from the grid. This is the rationale for doing so presented by John McManus, MGM executive vice president: “It is our objective to reduce MGM’s environmental impact by decreasing the use of energy and aggressively pursuing renewable energy sources.”

A customer-focused grid

The potential lower-bill zombie apocalypse is symbolic of the global Green Economic Revolution. In the Green Economic Revolution, technologies like solar win price-competitive advantage against less sustainable technologies like a utility grid that is anchored by base load fossil-fueled power plants. (Based loaded power plants are designed to turn on and run. This contrasts with power plants designed to cycle in alignment with the customer’s ability to shape their load using solar, batteries and smart building technologies.)

Reconciliation could be achieved if the utility industry asked itself this question: What business wins a war against voters/consumers? The business reality is that customer-focused clean tech is achieving declining costs from global manufacturing economies of scale and innovation. The utility industry’s technology has an increasing cost curve.

The more the industry uses its lobbying power to preserve its revenues, the more it sparks a populist rebellion. Its current rules and regulations, where the only good clean tech is one that the utility can meter, is unsustainable based on customer/voter satisfaction. Consumers want lower electricity bills, reduced pollution and the jobs that clean tech can bring to their communities.

What if Nevada succeeds at becoming ground-zero of a lower-bill epidemic? Dream about that as you pay this summer's high electricity bills! Then try to join the rebellion for lower electricity bills with your vote, and if the utility permits, investing in clean tech.

Image credit: Pexels

By Annie Rhodes

CF Insights, a project of the Foundation Center, recently released the results of its 2015 Columbus Survey. The Columbus Survey provides a yearly snapshot of community foundation growth and other related operational activity over the past fiscal year. As part of the Columbus Survey, CF Insights puts together a list recognizing the Top 100 Community Foundations by Assets.

In my role as director of foundation strategy, I work with many of the community foundations on that list, many of which ranked within the top 20 and collectively generated over $63 billion worth of assets. Even among the top ranked foundations, an ongoing challenge all foundations face is how to become a donor’s choice — after all, donors have a plethora of options to choose from in the U.S. alone, including donating directly to nonprofits. So for community foundations looking to generate more donations, we’ve put together a three-step roadmap on how to do just that.

Step 1: Provide information — and lots of it

It’s often overwhelming for people to wrap their heads around the number of causes that exist to which they can donate. This is only exacerbated with the rise of individual and crowd-funding platforms that allow anyone to create a cause and collect donations. We know that people want to support organizations and causes that make the most difference, and the way to demonstrate this is by showing specific and measurable impact of dollars.

Community foundations must educate those in their local areas of the needs that exist right in their backyards. People are often not aware of these needs and as a result, not aware of the nonprofits that exist locally to address these needs. Donors need to know both needs and clear steps on how they can meet them. Use the communication channels at your disposal to reach your audience. This can include community newsletters, email lists, social media groups, your website, and even the local paper to drive awareness, interest and engagement.

Step 2: Be transparent and authentic

People need to know their donations are going to a credible cause. After all, information delivered without credibility or authenticity is as ineffective as delivering no information at all. A community foundation can deliver information and advice with an invaluable advantage: the element of face-to- face human interaction.

Invite community members and potential donors to come down to the local animal shelter to see where their donations are going, for example. At a high level, community foundations should serve to bridge the gap between organizations and donors. Information sharing and demonstrable results are the quickest ways to establish trust with your donor base.

Step 3: Make it easy

Convenience is critical. If it’s not easy for donors to choose your foundation, they won’t. In practice, this means implementing the appropriate technology to reduce complexity and make the giving process as convenient and seamless as possible for donors. Offer donors an online portal that serves as an extension of your foundation. Here, they should be able to access their personal information with the click of a button or swipe of a finger—after all, mobile is the most widely used consumer channel.

By following the three-step road map laid out above, community foundations can greatly increase their chances of being chosen by donors amid an endless plethora of options.

Image credit: Pixabay

Commentary by Annie Rhodes, Director of Foundation Strategy, MicroEdge + Blackbaud. MicroEdge + Blackbaud is the leading provider of software and services that help the giving community effectively collaborate around their efforts to raise funds for, manage and communicate the impact of their philanthropic investments. Follow MicroEdge + Blackbaud on Twitter @MicroEdgeLLC.

 

On September 9, 2010, a section of a natural gas pipeline exploded in San Bruno, just south of San Francisco. The blast killed eight people, injured 58 and destroyed 38 homes. Almost six years later, a federal jury found the utility guilty of five counts of safety violations and one count of obstruction of justice. According to Bloomberg, however, the maximum fine that Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) faces could be at most $3 million, far less than 1 percent of the $526 million than prosecutors sought during the trial and a fraction of the $1.13 billion fine originally considered by the U.S. government.

In a public statement, PG&E said, “While we are very much focused on the future, we will never forget the lessons of the past.” But an overview of the company’s behavior in the aftermath of the San Bruno explosion reveals an organization that was more concerned with covering up lax oversight and saving money rather than conducting itself as a responsible company. As described by the Los Angeles Times, PG&E executives lied to federal investigators about the standards the company had used to pinpoint high-risk pipelines so that it would not have to undertake more time-consuming and expensive tests.

A National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation found that PG&E had a history of poor quality control related to this pipeline, going as far back as the 1950s. One year after the deadly San Bruno explosion, an NTSB report accused PG&E of running a “deficient and ineffective” pipeline safety program that had numerous flaws. Among the problems were incomplete and inaccurate records; a failure to detect cracks when evaluating the structural integrity of this pipeline; and a series of internal assessments within PG&E that were “superficial and resulted in no improvements.”

The NTSB also savaged PG&E for taking 95 minutes to stop the flow of natural gas and isolate the site of the rupture. While the report lauded the quick response of local first responders, its authors found that PG&E lacked any detailed and comprehensive procedure allowing it to deal with an emergency of this scope, had no clear internal command structure who could lead during such a crisis and was saddled by a data system that made it difficult to gauge the exact location of the pipeline’s rupture.

While PG&E continues to describe the San Bruno explosion as an accident, the city of 42,000 and its mayor, Jim Ruane, have accused PG&E of trying to absolve itself of any responsibility. “It was an entirely man-made disaster,” the city said in a press release, “one that resulted from negligent decision making and actions by PG&E corporate executives over six decades and from the failure of the California Public Utilities Commission to protect our safety.”

Last year, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), which was also criticized for allegedly poor oversight of the San Bruno pipeline, fined PG&E $1.6 billion for the unsafe operation of the utility’s entire natural gas transmission system. PG&E started paying off the fine by selling stock to finance the payments. In the meantime, state legislators in Sacramento have called for a complete restructuring and decentralization of the CPUC. State assembly members and senators have said that the San Bruno explosions and disasters such as the Aliso Canyon gas leak in the San Fernando Valley have shown that the regulator is inefficient and ineffective the way it is currently organized.

PG&E has said that it has spent $2.7 billion in shareholder funds to bolster the safety of its natural gas transmission system. But what the company does not reveal is that the incompetence of some of its executives has had a far reaching impact far beyond places such as San Bruno and Aliso Canyon.

PG&E's stock is held in a bevy of pension funds, including CALPERS, the foundation of the California’s state employee retirement system. Over the years many shareholders have invested in the company in the belief that utility stocks are safe. This can be justified by the company’s overall stock performance over the last several years, but changes in how the state will generate electricity in the coming decades will have an impact on a company that is only another crisis away from seeing its financial performance, and stock, both tank.

PG&E has a track record of being tone deaf to the concerns of its shareholders and stakeholders, as when California regulators had to intervene five years ago to ensure ratepayers would not be on the hook for a $10 million bonus the company awarded for a retiring CEO. One would think the company would be more attuned to the public’s concerns over its environmental stewardship and safety. After all, this was the company that was the inspiration of Erin Brockovich’s story, which was told in a 2000 movie about the company’s contamination of the local water in the Mojave Desert town of Hinkley. Although the company lists a long portfolio of actions describing it as a trusted community partner, the outcome of the San Bruno litigation shows that PG&E has a long way to go before it can truly portray itself as a responsible, people-oriented company.

Image credit: Brocken Inaglory/Wiki Commons

By Alice Williams

If you want to attract customers and investors, you might want to consider expanding your sustainability initiatives.

Today’s consumers and investors are basing their financial decisions on the societal and environmental impact of the companies they interact with — so it’s no surprise that many corporations have come to view corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives as a necessity rather than a luxury.

External pressures aside, Deloitte’s social impact study suggests that businesses with strategic and holistic sustainability programs reduce operating expenses and increase efficiency and profitability. In addition, some companies report their socially responsible business practices help them attract, engage, and retain top talent. CSR just makes good business sense.

The phrase “sustainable companies” may conjure images of small companies with lofty social goals that don’t care about profits, but the truth is that many global companies have dedicated considerable resources to developing their sustainability initiatives. The following five companies derive and produce shared value from their sustainability efforts.

1. Caesars Entertainment

Caesars — yes, the entertainment behemoth in Las Vegas — has had a sustainability plan in place since 2007. Named CodeGreen, the initiative focuses on decreasing the company’s environmental impact by reducing energy use, waste, and greenhouse gases.

The company has made great strides toward its 2020 environmental performance targets: It is a mere 2 percent away from its 30 percent emissions-reduction goal, has already passed its goal for reduced water consumption, and every new building or expansion since 2007 has been LEED certified. To raise awareness with customers, the company installed 50 electric vehicle charging stations and for the past seven years has participated in an annual Earth Hour by turning off all nonessential lights in its properties and signage. The CodeGreen at Home program encourages employees to practice sustainability in their personal lives as well.

Its work has encouraged others on the Strip to do the same. The Wynn, Las Vegas Sands and MGM have all publicly committed to sustainability efforts.

2. CenturyLink

If a sustainable Las Vegas resort doesn’t surprise you, then maybe a socially responsible telecommunications company will.

CenturyLink’s sustainability initiatives focus on three areas: philanthropy, volunteerism and the environment. The company’s environmental programs involve employees and local communities for broader impact and shared value — a company-wide Environmental Sustainability Council is responsible for prioritizing green initiatives for the company. Their primary goal is to reduce landfill waste and carbon emissions through the responsible use and disposal of resources.

In 2015 alone, the company diverted more than 8.5 million pounds worth of electronic equipment from landfills. Its recycling programs have offset the destruction of 30,000 trees, and its 30 solar sites generate thousands of watts of power. Its commitment to sustainability also led directly to the creation of the CenturyLink Technology Center of Excellence, featuring a green roof that grows vegetation throughout the year.

3. Heineken

SABMiller often claims the spotlight when it comes to sustainability in the beer industry, but Heineken is no lightweight. Its Brewing a Better World strategy focuses on six key areas, including reduced water consumption and increased sustainable sourcing. In the past two years, the brand has reached many of its 2015 environmental performance goals and has committed to even higher goals for 2020.

The company has reduced its water consumption in breweries by 26 percent since 2008 and reduced its total carbon footprint by 6 percent. On top of these initiatives, the company also sells beer byproducts to farmers as cattle feed: rather than paying for the disposal of the byproduct, the company makes a small profit from the sale and farmers save money on food for their livestock.

Heineken stands distinct from its competition because of how it publishes its annual results: the company knows few people will read a full-length PDF. Instead, it invests in interactive documents and spoken word poetry to share the results its sustainability efforts.

4. Heinz

Unsurprisingly, CSR programs at Heinz emphasize agriculture, the supply chain, nutrition, and food safety. What may come as a surprise, though, is that the company has been able to surpass several of its overall sustainability goals since 2005: it has reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 23.8 percent, water consumption by 23 percent, and solid waste sent to landfills by 51.2 percent.

Because the company operates worldwide, and different regions require tailored sustainability considerations, Heinz has created a Global Sustainability Council to share best practices across its facilities. Results in specific regions have been particularly staggering. Its facility in Dundalk, Ireland, for example, has reduced its solid waste by 92 percent, and the facility in San Joaquin, Venezuela — a water-stressed region — has reduced its water consumption by 56 percent.

Though the company has increased its use of renewable energy by 7.9 percent, it is still below its target of 15 percent. In an effort meet its goal, the company installed a biomass boiler in its factory in Brazil. The boiler uses sugarcane, eucalyptus, and straw for fuel and has helped the factory reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 60 percent.

5. Ikea

Perhaps the least surprising company on this list, Ikea nonetheless employs an astonishing number of sustainability initiatives with aspirational goals to have a positive impact on employees, customers, and the environment.

The People & Planet Positive initiative calls for Ikea to produce as much renewable energy as it consumes by 2020. The company has already installed 550,000 solar panels on 100 stores worldwide and 96 wind turbines in seven countries. In 2013 alone, the company produced the equivalent of one-third of its total energy consumption in renewable energy.

The initiative also requires the company to source 100 percent of its wood, paper and cardboard from sustainable sources, and increase sales of products that specifically encourage sustainability in its customers’ lives — resulting in the company reinventing many of its historical business models. The goals are lofty, but Ikea seems well on its way to meeting them with redesigns of existing products, deployments of new ones, and continued dedication to sustainability and corporate responsibility.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that companies across industries are embracing sustainability practices. Companies that align sustainability initiatives with their purpose and business objectives increase profitability, reduce employee turnover, and grow customer sales and loyalty. More importantly, they leave this world and its inhabitants better than they found them.

What companies do you know that embrace sustainability as a core business strategy? Does sustainability affect your purchasing decisions? Let us know in the comments below.

Image credit: Pexels

Alice Williams is a communications professional with an MA in Communication Studies. In her spare time, she freelances and blogs about health and wellness over at www.honestlyfitness.com.

By Brad Martin

Corporate sustainability efforts are often derided by stockholders as “do gooder” actions that are a cost center as opposed to a source of additional profits. While that criticism has been largely debunked by studies such as that conducted by We Mean Business in April 2016, which found that companies taking steps to mitigate climate change accrue profits at an above-market internal rate of return of 27 percent, the critique remains persistent against the travel industry.

That’s in part because, for many, travel is an industry in which excessive consumption on both a personal and ecological level is seen as integral to the industry’s business model. But a number of travel companies prove that sustainability can drive increased margin and profits. Here are three of them.

1. Holland America Cruises

Within popular culture, cruise lines epitomize excessive consumption both for their passengers and as to their ecological impact. Bucking that popular image, however, is Holland America. Marketing to the luxury cruise sub-market, Holland America has incorporated a black water treatment system, worked extensively with their supply chain to reduce the amount of waste generated each day, and employed and empowered environmental officers on every ship to constantly seek areas of improvement. One such improvement was adding window tinting to passenger room windows to keep rooms cooler and reduce the use of air conditioning.

The company was an early adopter of low hanging fruit efforts like towel re-use programs and installing low-flow showerheads and faucets. They’ve since gone well beyond these efforts by incorporating a two stage water internal waste water treatment system, converting to all non-toxic cleaning supplies and soy based detergents among other steps. Holland America has also modified the ships themselves and their travel schedules. For example, they schedule port visits to work with, rather than against, tide schedules to conserve fuel, and by adding silicone paint to the ships hulls they’ve reduced drag and fuel consumption.

In terms of profitability, the company has leveraged these efforts to differentiate itself among the premium segment of the cruise industry, where it is a leader, and as such able to command higher margins than most competitors across the cruise industry. That success is reflected in the earnings and healthy profit margin of its parent company, Carnival, which earned $1.9 billion on nearly $16 billion in sales in 2011, in part due to the success of Holland America.

2. NatureAir

Listing an airline company in an article highlighting sustainable businesses may seem counterintuitive, but NatureAir is no ordinary airline. Established in Costa Rica in 2000, the airline takes extraordinary measures to reduce its carbon emissions, such as providing bus service for employees, using single-engine taxiing, and replacing lighting with energy efficient LEDs. Additionally, the company is researching incorporating ethanol and pig waste as fuel alternatives. But because the airline industry has an inherently heavy and largely unavoidable carbon footprint, the NatureAir purchases carbon offsets which support wind farms, solar energy and forest conservation, which led it to be certified in 2004 as the world’s first carbon neutral airline.

In terms of how these conservation efforts have translated to corporate growth and profitability, NatureAir has seen consistent and dramatic growth in large part due to their ability to distinguish themselves from larger more established competitors through their marketing as a sustainable airline. That status has given the company a dramatic leg up when developing and growing partnerships with other eco-conscious companies and tour groups. Growing from a mere one aircraft in 2000, the company now makes 74 flights per day.

3. Element Hotels

The upscale hotel chain parent company Starwood, which includes Westin and Sheraton, has made sustainability a priority, reducing energy usage by 11.5 percent, water usage by 14.8 perent and carbon emissions 11.6 percent over the last four years. This initial success in attacking low-hanging fruit for sustainability and cost savings led Starwood to launch a sustainability-focused line of boutique hotels under the brand name Element. Element hotels are all LEED certified, use eco-friendly paints, carpet and furniture, utilize water-efficient faucets and fixtures, and employ reflective roof surfaces to reduce energy demands.

In terms of the profitability of the brand, because it’s a subsidiary of Starwood, individual brand statistics are unavailable. However, a 2014 study by the Cornell School of Hotel Administration compared 93 LEED-certified hotels to 514 non-certified competitors, and found that the LEED-certified hotels had an average ADR of $10 more for the long term, and an additional $20 for the two years immediately following certification, which collectively outweigh the additional infrastructure costs considerably. Thus it’s clear that Starwood has made, and continues to make investments in sustainability not only for the ecological benefits but also because it is a source of increased margin.

Conclusion

The financial case for travel companies making the investments necessary to seriously incorporate sustainability efforts into their business model is rather clear, as several studies have shown. Without trailblazing companies actually making the investments needed to demonstrate the viability of sustainable business practices to achieve greater profitability, however, such conclusions remain purely academic. That’s why it’s important to highlight the financial success of companies like those listed above.

Image credit: Flickr/Bernal Saborio

Brad Martin is an Editor with Soar Payments, a merchant account provider that serves the travel industry. You can get company updates and learn more about Soar Payments via their Facebook page.

With a busy week behind you and the weekend within reach, there’s no shame in taking things a bit easy on Friday afternoon. With this in mind, every Friday TriplePundit will give you a fun, easy read on a topic you care about. So, take a break from those endless email threads and spend five minutes catching up on the latest trends in sustainability and business.

It's easy to bemoan large tour groups and 'big box' travel as unsustainable and just plain lame. But many of us don't have the time to plan out trip itineraries on our own. And hopping from hostel to hostel with kids in tow isn't always practical.

Fortunately, the growing popularity of eco-tourism has spawned an ever-growing list of low-impact operators that will do the planning for you, while ensuring a sustainable and immersive travel experience. So, block off those vacation days, and check out these options that deliver better travel with one click.

Mt. Kilimanjaro with Intrepid Travel

Conquer the highest peak in Africa, the mighty Mount Kilimanjaro, with sustainable tour operator Intrepid Travel for a grueling adventure you'll never forget. The company's Tanzania trek takes travelers on a seven-day adventure from the historic city of Marangu to Uhuru Peak, the highest summit on Kibo's crater rim.

You'll travel with local guides who will explain the beauty of your surroundings and help you adjust to the higher altitude. And all the while, you'll rest easy knowing Intrepid makes an effort to improve the lives and livelihoods of the people who call this picturesque landscape home. (Just ask 3p's Nick Aster and Jo Piazza, who took the trek as part of their honeymoon earlier this year.)

Intrepid operates several offices in East Africa and works passionately on porter's rights through the Intrepid Foundation. In October, just in time for the United Nations' International Day of Rural Women, the company will help over 2,000 women farmers from around Africa on a trek up Kilimanjaro to raise awareness for land rights.

Click here to schedule your Kilimanjaro trip.

Click here to browse Intrepid Travel's itineraries.

Galapagos Islands with EcoVentura

https://youtu.be/Rttaqr2Glfc

For travel to the Galapagos Islands, the volcanic archipelago around 700 miles west of the Ecuadorian mainland, you’ll need to plan ahead.

Made famous by Charles Darwin’s visit in the early 1800s, the Galapagos and its stunning biodiversity remain shrouded in mystery — and 97 percent of the islands are a tightly restricted national park. A limited number of tourists can visit each year, and only a few dozen operators can take you there.

3p founder Nick Aster traveled with EcoVentura, which emphasizes sustainability in its cruises to the islands. We know what you're thinking: A sustainable cruise? Is that even possible? But by adhering to the park's strict rules and going even further through a focus on ecology and conservation, the EcoVentura team manages to make the oxymoron a reality. Check out the video above to learn more about Nick's experience.

Click here to choose your Galapagos itinerary. 

Southern Africa with G Adventures

If you're itching to see Africa but aren't sure if your gym regimen jives with the Kilimanjaro trek, you may want to take a second look at Botswana. Lonely Planet named this southern African country as its top travel destination for 2016, and it's thriving as an environmentally-responsible tourism destination.

3p's Travis Noland recently returned from a trip into the Botswana bush with low-impact operator G Adventures. The company, which emphasizes small groups and cultural immersion, offers three southern Africa itineraries that bring visitors up-close and personal with the region's landscapes and people.

Yes, you can go on safari in G Adventures’ all-terrain eco-vehicles. But the most memorable part of your trip may very well be interactions with local communities like the San. Click here to learn more about Travis' experience.

Click here to browse southern Africa itineraries. 

Click here to browse all G Adventures itineraries. 

Nepal with Ace the Himalaya

From the viral 'Barbie Savior' Instagram to actress Louise Linton's gap-year fail, the headlines are full of the hidden pitfalls of 'voluntourism.' (Turns out it's not such a good idea to get sick kids attached to someone who'll be gone by the weekend, or enlist a Western volunteer to do something for which a local could be paid.) But this is not the voluntourism we're talking about here.

Last year, a 7.8-magnitude earthquake struck the Nepalese capital of Kathmandu, killing more than 8,500 people. The nation is still rebuilding 15 months later, and millions remain in temporary housing. Sustainable travel operator Ace the Himalaya took action with a 13-day trek that allows travelers to see Nepal's beauty while working side-by-side with locals to rebuild.

Rebuilding activities take place in the remote Gorkha region, the epicenter of the quake. Since Gorkha is a far distance from Kathmandu, the bulk of disaster-relief efforts have yet to reach this region. Gorkha is also close to the operator's heart, as most of its in-country guides hail from the region and many lost homes in the disaster, the company says on its website.

Click here to schedule your Nepal trip.

Click here to browse all Ace the Himalaya itineraries.

Bhutan and Nepal with Myths and Mountains

Established in 1988, Myths and Mountains provides cultural tours in Asia and South America. You can also travel with a purpose through its READ trips to India, Bhutan and Nepal.

For every trip, Myths and Mountains provides a donation to its affiliate nonprofit READ Global, which funds the construction of libraries and community centers for rural villagers. The nonprofit seeds for-profit businesses to make each library self-sustaining and “connect centers with other organizations providing such diverse resources as microcredit, women’s empowerment, literacy training and health care.”

To date, the nonprofit has established 92 READ Centers, catalyzing 133 for-profit enterprises and serving 2.3 million rural villagers. Myths and Mountains will host READ trips to both Bhutan and Nepal in 2017.

Click here to browse Bhutan itineraries. 

Click here to browse all Myths and Mountains itineraries.

America's National Parks with REI Adventures

The National Park Service celebrates its centennial on August 25. And what better way to take part than an unforgettable excursion into untouched America? To give back more with your trip, book one of dozens of itineraries with REI Adventures, the adventure travel offshoot of outdoor gear brand REI.

In addition to a multimillion-dollar investment as a centennial partner, REI Adventures will donate 10 percent of all national park trips sold this year to the National Park Foundation. The company donated $300,000 through this giving model last year, and this time is expected to be even bigger, the company told 3p.

I took an REI Adventure to the Peruvian Andes last year. And I can attest to the attention to detail and emphasis on sustainability you can expect from the company. National park trips range from exotic kayaking journeys through Alaskan fjord country to backpacking the Great Smoky Mountains and everything in between.

Click here to browse REI Adventures' national park itineraries.

Click here to browse all REI Adventures itineraries. 

Cuba with Global Exchange

It's official: Travel to Cuba is now legal (with some caveats), and sustainable operators are lining up to take you there. When traveling to our southern neighbor for the first time, consider booking your trip with Global Exchange.

Established in 1988, Global Exchange is a nonprofit international human-rights organization dedicated to promoting social, economic and environmental justice. It dubs its itineraries 'reality tours' -- emphasizing meaningful, socially-responsible travel that can "change the world."

Choose from several Cuba itineraries this fall, each focusing on an aspect of Cuban life and culture -- from the arts to education and healthy living.

Click here to browse Global Exchange itineraries. 

Italy with Exodus Travels

Focusing on adventure travel that's low on impact and high on cultural immersion, Exodus Travels offers over 500 itineraries in 90 countries. And if you've always dreamed of that luxe holiday in Italy, the company knows just how to kick the eco up a notch: by taking in the gorgeous scenery on a bicycle.

In small groups ranging from four to 16 people, Exodus Travels brings visitors to Italian hotspots like Venice, Tuscany and the Amalfi Coast. Most routes are low-impact, so they're perfect for families, retirees and 'soft adventurers' of all kinds.

Click here to browse Italy cycling itineraries.

Click here to browse all Exodus Travel itineraries.

Image credits: 1) Mary Mazzoni; 2) Intrepid Travel; 3) Ace the Himalaya; 4) REI Adventures; 5) Exodus Travels 

ExxonMobil and several of its competitors have said repeatedly that the time has come for a carbon tax. Such statements suggest to some environmentalists that these companies have “seen the light.” But a careful look at how ExxonMobil distributes its political donations should raise questions about whether legislation will ever pass. The company says it is lobbying for climate action, but when we follow the money, it becomes clear ExxonMobile is still more invested in climate denial.

Back in 2009, ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson declared that the company would be open to a carbon tax. At the time the Congress and the Obama administration were trying to pass a carbon cap-and-trade scheme, modeled on a similar market-oriented program employed during George H.W. Bush’s presidency. The SO2 Allowance Program, passed by Congress and signed by the first President Bush, was part of a 1990 legislative agenda that largely reduced the sulfur dioxide emissions behind the headline-grabbing “acid raid” of the 1980s.

But when it came to cap-and-trade for the energy markets, oil companies balked at what they said was a complex, ineffective and expensive system. So Tillerson floated the idea of a carbon tax, which he said would be a “more direct, more transparent . . . and more effective approach.” Publications such as the Wall Street Journal, which in the past supported cap-and-trade programs, were in agreement. A cap-and-trade bill passed the House of Representatives, but died in the Senate in 2010.

Seeing the writing on the wall after this two-year slump in oil taxes, energy companies are offering a veneer of cooperation as policymakers and society have aligned on finding ways to reduce climate change risks. Companies like ExxonMobil still say they support the concept of a revenue-neutral carbon tax, which most experts say would have a minimal financial impact on consumers. Such revenues would pay for damages related to climate change while allowing society to shift toward a clean-energy economy.

But a review of ExxonMobil’s campaign contributions, especially during this election cycle, shows that the company is only paying lip service to the idea of a carbon tax. And what is even more clear is that the world’s eighth largest company is still padding the coffers of climate deniers serving in the current Congress.

A report issued earlier this year documented at least 182 climate deniers in the House and another 38 in the Senate. In the Senate, former presidential candidate Ted Cruz of Texas has received the most funds from ExxonMobil. In the House, Republican Fred Upton of Michigan scored the most donations from the company this year. Other contributors who benefitted from ExxonMobil’s largess include Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas and Rep. Evan Jenkins of West Virginia. If a carbon tax proposal makes its way to the halls of Congress next year, count on these fellows to lead the charge against any legislation.

When it comes to a carbon tax, Upton has described himself as “not a carbon tax guy.” Sessions pilloried the carbon tax as “an attack on American families.” In approving a resolution earlier this year that rejected any notion of a carbon tax, Jenkins released a statement saying that a carbon tax would “raise prices” and “reduce the number of hours people worked.” Cruz, of course, has gone on record of opposing any carbon tax.

Curiously enough, ExxonMobil could be hedging its bets, as its contributions to Hillary Clinton this year are second only to Cruz. But the disconnect between what ExxonMobil says publicly and where its political contributions are going should, at a bare minimum, raise eyebrows. The company says it is lobbying the energy industry and Congress to move forward, but following its trail of cash raises questions if this is all a charade.

As Huffington Post contributor and Union of Concerned Scientists writer Elliott Negin pointed out this week, the numbers behind the June House resolution condemning the notion of a carbon tax bear witness. “Eighty-five percent of the House members who voted for the resolution received ExxonMobil political donations since 2013,” Negin wrote. “The numbers are unambiguous: When it comes to a carbon tax, there’s no escaping the fact that ExxonMobil still funds legislators who don’t favor it and, by the same token, doesn’t support many who do.”

Image credit: World Economic Forum/Flickr