Search

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.

“Designers have a pivotal role to play in driving long-term solutions that circumvent the concept of waste in favor of materials that can remain in a perpetual cycle of use and reuse," Lewis Perkins, president of the Cradle to Cradle Products Institute, wrote in a prompt for its third design challenge.

Sponsored by the Institute and Autodesk, the Cradle to Cradle Product Design Challenge seeks to inspire up-and-coming designers to create products for the circular economy — highlighting safe materials that can be perpetually cycled.

A total of 138 design professionals and students in 19 countries worked as individuals or in teams to submit 79 entries for the contest. Participants were required to take a free two-hour, online course about designing for the circular economy, made possible by a partnership with the Alcoa Foundation, prior to entering the challenge. So, even those who don’t win will still walk away with an increased knowledge of cradle-to-cradle design.

"From retail packaging to human shelter, the Spring 2016 Challenge winners are outstanding examples of the way young designers and design professionals alike are stepping into the crux of this revolution, using Cradle to Cradle principles to pioneer ideas for innovative materials applications and, in turn, the circular economy,” Perkins said.

So, without further ado, here are the four winning designs from this year's challenge. Read on to be inspired -- and start reimagining what you consider waste.

MODS

Winner: Best Student Project

Millions of pairs of shoes end up in landfills each year, where they can take 30 to 40 years to decompose. Quang Pham, a student at Virginia Tech, created a modular sneaker in response to this problem.

Made with bamboo, wool textiles and recycled PET fiber, MODS consist of five modular units that use the minimal amount of material needed for maximum comfort and security. Even better: The user retains full control of the shoe’s aesthetic and functionality. MODS shoes can be customized and updated to change up the style, as components begin to deteriorate, without using glue.

Because the shoe can be easily disassembled, cleaning is a breeze. In Pham's vision, component parts could be sent back to the manufacturer for recycling at end-of-life, in exchange for a discount on new parts.

Banana Stem Fiber Packaging

Winner: Best Professional Project

Colombian designers Brayan Stiven Pabón Gómez and Rafael Ricardo Moreno Boada wanted to transform a geographically abundant material into sustainable food packaging. The result is this compostable packaging concept made from banana stem fibers.

Bananas are farmed across several regions of Colombia, yet farmers perceive banana stem fiber (extracted as part of routine crop maintenance) as waste.

Drawing upon traditional food preparation methods, Banana Stem Fiber Packaging offers a sustainable alternative to plastic and paper food packaging, along with the potential to generate sustainable economic development in farming communities, the designers said.

Huba

Winner: Best Use of Aluminum

Developed by designers Malgorzata Blachnicka & Michal Holcer, Huba is a self-sufficient, compact mountain shelter that is able to generate its own energy. Huba also offers a potential solution for other housing applications, including helping homeless populations or the provision of emergency shelter, the designers said.

Huba’s design is based on traditional alpine architecture, with its small size and choice of materials aimed at minimizing its impact on the environment. Intended to be located above 3,200 feet, the shelter is equipped with an effective vertical wind turbine.

The energy produced by the generator is stored within a battery and is used to supply the building’s heating, lighting and water pump. Specially arranged roof tiles enable rainwater to easily be collected within the tank, which is then filtered and safe for drinking.

OLI

Winner: Best Use of Autodesk Fusion 360

It seems Virginia Tech isn't messing around when it comes to educating designers about the circular economy. Another VTech student, Claire Davis, came away with the win for the best use of Autodesk’s Fusion 360 3-D printing technology.

Her design, the OLI, is a convenient, elegant and intelligent solution for food waste. The food scraps collection bin creates a pretty and elegant at-home composting experience. It's also made entirely from sustainable materials like coconut shells and recycled PET bottles. And it can be disassembled for easy cleaning, reuse and recycling of component parts.

Images courtesy of the Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute

Adopted last September, the Sustainable Development Goals reflect the best aspirations for a world in transition. Building on the Millennium Development Goals of 2000, the SDGs integrate all stakeholders across developing and developed nations, challenging each to confront the global goals of sustainable development, social justice and equity. Combined with the Paris Agreement, reached last December at the COP21 climate talks in Paris, the business community is taking up the challenge like never before.

What does any of this really mean on the ground? How do aspirational goals translate into business decisions into a better life for people? How can business leaders determine if their strategies align to the SDGs, measure their progress, and manage a rapidly changing global landscape?

Reaching any destination requires knowing where you are and where you want to go. When heading out into unfamiliar territory, a map or a compass can keep us on course. Fortunately, there is such a "compass" for businesses staking their claim in a sustainable new energy economy. Developed by GRI, the U.N. Global Compact and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, the SDG Compass is a roadmap for businesses in all stages of their journey toward sustainability.

TriplePundit spoke with Andrea Valcalda, head of sustainability for the Italian-based Enel Group, to discuss how this global energy company incorporates the SDG Compass into its mission and daily operations.

Enel Group talks with Triple Pundit

TriplePundit: Let's talk about SDG 7, affordable and clean energy for all. How is Enel working to achieve affordable and clean energy in both the developed and (especially) developing world?

Andrea Valcalda for Enel: Enel’s new sustainability-based vision, “Open Power to help address some of the world’s biggest challenges," gives us a strong strategic position on a number of key issues, such as access to energy, climate change, and urbanization. Industrially, this means a focus on renewable energy development, digitization of distribution networks, energy management and efficiency, and leaner ways of both managing and making changes to our traditional generation fleet. We are investing in these areas in order to create a steady supply of clean and affordable energy for mature and emerging countries, making our business “greener” and ensuring steady returns for our shareholders.

Enel has 10.5 gigawatts of renewables and 26 GW of large hydro in its 87 GW of installed capacity. These sources generated around one-third of the electricity produced by Enel worldwide in 2015, and we will invest 9 billion euros in increasing our renewable energy capacity between 2016 and 2019, meaning that more than 50 percent of the Group’s resources for growth are being directed towards green power in emerging and mature economies. Our aim is to increase clean energy’s share of Enel’s installed capacity to 53 percent by 2019. By 2050, we want to become an entirely carbon-neutral company.

But we are going further. Enel is promoting a strategy that integrates sustainability into business processes through the entire value chain, in order to consolidate a business model focused on the creation of long-term shared value. Enel’s sustainability credentials led to the company being ranked #5 in Fortune magazine’s 2015 “Change the World” list, a ranking that shines a spotlight on businesses that make addressing social challenges part of their strategy. The Group, which is both the only utility and only Italian company to be included in the list, was ranked fifth out of the 50 companies selected by the magazine, and was hailed by Fortune for “charging the barricades when it comes to clean power."

We are strongly committed to ensuring access to clean, sustainable electricity to increasing numbers of customers, in order to match social needs with our business activities. And we are addressing energy needs both in emerging countries and mature markets. In emerging countries, we are supplying energy services and creating or strengthening infrastructure to boost access to electricity, including in remote areas. In mature markets such as Spain  and Italy, it also means tackling fuel poverty and helping removing economic barriers for people in need.

For instance, in Spain, we have launched voluntary energy efficiency training courses for customers on low incomes. In emerging markets, from Latin America to Africa and Asia, Enel has developed and is still exploring innovative ways of connecting more people to secure, sustainable energy, focusing also on off- grid and mini-grid solutions.

In the Chilean village of Ollague, for example, Enel built the world’s first high-altitude microgrid, which combines a PV solar plant, a mini-wind turbine generator and a co-generation system for the combined production of electricity and hot water, all integrated with a sophisticated electrochemical storage system. The hybrid system satisfies the energy needs of the whole community of around 300 people, as well as the heating of the local school.

Together with an international partner, Enel will build a portfolio of solar mini-grids in Kenya, which will have a total installed capacity of 1 megawatt and will bring clean energy to 20,000 households, small businesses, schools, and healthcare centers, connecting around 90,000 people to the grid. The project will also provide customers with an easier and more reliable payment system through a mobile phone prepayment application. In South Africa meanwhile, Enel’s YouPower offer combines distributed generation and storage with innovative technologies such as home automation and other digital energy services.

Educating people about renewables and energy efficiency encourages social and economic development, and that’s why Enel has developed programmes that aim to drive energy access. Through our ENabling ELectricity initiative, we are supporting the United Nations Sustainable Energy for All program, which pushes for electrification in remote, rural and poor areas around the world.

Our work with the Indian NGO Barefoot College has gives women from isolated areas around Latin America training to become solar engineers, enabling them to install and maintain solar panel systems in their local communities. Our Powering Education program supports inclusive education and aims to increase literacy rates in Africa, initially through the donation of hundreds of solar lamps to schools in the Amboseli National Park in Kenya.

3p: How is this work tied to the concept of the developing world “leapfrogging” energy development so emerging economies can grow without a concurrent expansion of fossil fuel energy dependence?

AV: According to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2015, renewables are expected to account for over half of new electricity output between now and 2040.

Renewables projects, with their flexibility and short time to market, are particularly well-suited to emerging countries, which often boast particularly high levels of energy resources and have urgent electricity needs driven by population growth, economic development or simply the remoteness of human settlements.

But that’s not all. The energy industry is going through a profound transformation in which the traditional, large fossil-fuel generation-based paradigm is expected to lose ground. Digitization, the increasing cost competitiveness of renewable technologies, more efficient storage systems, and the changing role of customers, who are now able to produce their own energy and even sell it onto the grid, are just some of the key elements at the heart of a rapidly changing industry.

The market can no longer afford big conventional plants that need 10 years before they start delivering returns. By the time these big plants are completed there is the very real risk that either their capacity may not be needed anymore or that their technology will be obsolete and therefore priced out of the market.

Enel has fully embraced this new energy paradigm by departing from merchant exposure, large plants, and investments in new coal capacity.

3p: How has Enel utilized the SDG Compass to further its goals?

AV: Enel is constantly managing and measuring its sustainability performance by using and developing instruments to ensure an integrated, standardized system of similar projects, information, and data which are constantly updated on the basis of trends in operations and relevant standards, while promoting the sharing of best practices and experience.

According to the SDG Compass, Enel has linked the SDGs to all sustainability processes. The guide helped us to use a common language and maximize our contribution to the goals. Enel Materiality Matrix issues and priorities are linked to the SDGs and GRI standards, and the Enel Sustainability Plan includes opportunities to make positive contributions to the SDGs through core business activities, as well as to reduce current and any potential negative impact (with a focus on SDGs where Enel is committed). Furthermore, Sustainability KPIs are linked to SDGs for driving, monitoring, and communicating progress.

The projects, activities, performance and main results, including progress on the SDGs in line with the SDG Compass, are presented in Enel’s Sustainability Report.

3p: Besides SDG 7, what other SDGs is Enel pursuing in its business operations?

• SDG 4: Supporting education activities for 400,000 people by 2020 through projects similar to those already launched, such as Powering Education in Kenya, education support program in South Africa and scholarship programs in Latin America.


• SDG 8: Promoting employment as well as inclusive and sustainable economic growth for 500,000 people.


• SDG 13: Adopting initiatives aimed at combating climate change, with the goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050.

Besides these four public commitments, Enel, through the other objectives of its Sustainability Plan, contributes to many others goals, like SDG 6 regarding clean water with the target of reducing, by 2020, water consumption per kWh produced by 30 percent compared to 2010, or SDG 9 - Industry, innovation and infrastructure - with the target of 30 million of smart meters installed or re-installed between 2015 and 2019.

To say that genetically modified foods are controversial would be a massive understatement. Millions of citizens are concerned about potential health and environmental hazards and the fact that not enough is known about food being produced this way.

There are those who feel confident that these foods are safe, some of them are even scientists. Then, there are those who may not even care that much about the food itself, but are totally outraged by the way the companies that produce and sell these foods continue to behave in what appears to be a full-scale attack on the rights of consumers to know what they are eating.

The most recent battleground is New Hampshire. Several billboards, featuring pictures of Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), as well as Whole Foods co-CEO Water Robb, Stonyfield Farms CEO Gary Hirschberg, and Melissa Hughes, CEO of Organic Valley and chairman of the Organic Trade Association’s board, proclaim: “These three organic food traitors have sold out the GMO-labeling movement for thirty pieces of silver.” The billboards were placed across the street from Ayotte’s campaign headquarters in Concord and Stonyfield's headquarters in Londonderry.

The action is taking place just days before a new GMO-labeling bill hits the Senate floor. Food advocacy organizations say the bill was produced in a backroom deal between Sens. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), along with representatives from Monsanto, Whole Foods, Stonyfield, Smucker’s and a handful Organic Trade Association (OTA) lobbyists. The bill is opposed by all leading grassroots organizations in the food movement, including the Center for Food Safety, the Organic Consumers Association, Consumers Union and Food Democracy Now, which referred to it as a “corrupt bargain.”

Carefully-worded loopholes in the bill make all provisions voluntary and exempt 85 percent of all GMO foods already on the market. Even the FDA acknowledges that the language is deeply flawed. The agency objects to the fact that the bill would transfer oversight of genetically-modified foods from the FDA to the USDA. They also oppose the fact that any information contained on the label would be embedded electronically, requiring a smartphone or similar device to be viewed. This would put the information, incomplete as it is, beyond the reach of many of the nation’s poor.

The Des Moines Register weighed in as well: “The bill’s use of the words 'that contains genetic material' ... would mean that oil made from genetically engineered soybeans, and starches and purified proteins, would not require a GMO label.”

“It’s hard to imagine," said Dave Murphy, executive director of Food Democracy Now!, “that two of the leading senators on the agricultural committee, responsible for crafting legislation that governs our nation’s food policy, and leading food companies could get these basic details so wrong.”

The bill would also pre-empt food labeling laws in Vermont, Connecticut and Maine and Alaska's GMO fish labeling law, as well as the GMO seed labeling laws of Vermont and Virginia.

The New Hampshire billboards specifically go after Sen. Ayotte for accepting campaign contributions from Monsanto.

Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety said: “A bill of this importance merits hearings, expert testimony and thorough legal analysis, not the ‘backroom dealing’ that created this deeply flawed draft. As it stands, this bill is a sham and a legislative embarrassment."

As to why these organic companies are supporting it, the bill would apparently allow them to include cheaper GMO ingredients in their “organic” food without labeling them, saving them millions of dollars.

It would seem that if these people are so confident that these foods are safe, why not come forward in a transparent way and share all their test data, rather than suppress our right to identify them? Instead, they choose to behave very much like someone with something to hide.

To contact your senator about the upcoming vote click here. 

Image courtesy of Food Democracy Now!

WhiteWave Foods, which arguably helped make organic and non-GMO food and beverages mainstream, has announced that France’s Danone will acquire the company for an estimated $10.4 billion. The Denver-based food company company -- best known for its Silk brand of non-dairy beverages, Earthbound Farms salad mixes and Horizon organic milk -- offers Danone an opportunity to bolster its presence in North America and emerging markets. Danone already has a stake in the lucrative yogurt market with its Oikos and Stonyfield brands.

While organics are still a sliver of overall food sales, the fact is that the organics market has become lucrative and is growing rapidly. While it is difficult to measure the size of the organics market, the Organic Trade Association (OTA) estimated that organic sales reached $39.1 billion in 2014 — higher than the figures that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) predicted earlier this decade.

A sizable portion of those sales is due to WhiteWave. The company generated an estimated $4 billion in revenues last year. And unlike many companies that have gone public recently, WhiteWave has overall met the expectations of its investors since the company issued its IPO in 2012. The sales and stock price of the company have been on an upward trajectory since it became public, only to decline late last year as the U.S. stock market in general took a bearish turn. At press time, the company’s stock jumped 18 percent to over $56 a share on the announcement that Danone would purchase outstanding shares at a 24 percent premium. Some analysts suggested another buyer could swoop in and make an even larger per-share offer, as that premium is less than the typical 30 percent range at which most acquiring companies offer for a takeover bid.

Much of WhiteWave’s success comes from the fact that its products have been able to land on valuable shelf space at many of the largest American retailers, including Costco, Kroger, Target and Walmart. For Danone, the acquisition of WhiteWave gives the food giant an even larger presence on this side of the Atlantic, with the size of its North American portfolio almost doubling. And as the Wall Street Journal noted, this new company will generate a massive advertising machine, which last year combined to spend over $200 million in advertising — almost one-third more than Mondelez, the maker of Oreo cookies and Triscuit crackers.

The result is not only a larger gravy train for these combined companies, but will also give the overall organic, non-GMO and “healthy” food market more exposure, more publicity and more awareness. Some observers may bemoan the further consolidation within the food industry. But in this case, a larger Danone-WhiteWave entity could generate more competition and consumption of what in general are more healthful foods, which in the long run would only be a plus for this marketplace.

Image credit: Mike Mozart/Flickr

Hong Kong is renowned for its population density, a vibrant business scene, the Star Ferry and magnificent views from Victoria Peak. But the madness of Kowloon or Hong Kong Island can be easily fled for the region’s 100-plus beaches, the best of which are plonked on relatively barren islands such as Lantau and Cheung Chau.

But this summer many of these beaches have been flooded by trash, the vast majority of which has come from mainland China.

While much of Hong Kong is immaculate, garbage remained a festering problem throughout Hong Kong and the surrounding New Territories. In a city and metropolitan area that is home to at least 7.3 million people, garbage will always be a pesky problem. During the 1990s, when I first visited Hong Kong, I would find an isolated beach in southern Hong Kong Island, Lantau or Lamma, only to find a spectacular scene marred by plastic trash.

But the onslaught of trash in recent days has become even worse. Summer is the peak season for China’s notorious monsoons, which made the problem even more dire. Some residents alleged that the government is focusing more on promoting the filthy beaches as a tourist destination instead of taking action in order to clean up them up.

According to Sea Shepherd, an NGO that has confronted ocean pollution and illegal fishing for almost 40 years, the ongoing flood of garbage has accelerated since mid-June. The organization’s Hong Kong chapter documented the ever-piling swathes of trash and continues to post photographs on its Facebook page. Based on a quick scan of company logos, phone numbers and addresses, much of the trash is coming from mainland China. The question, however, is why the constant stream of garbage has surged.

Chinese consumerism, of course, is not helping. As the country’s middle class continues to spike in numbers — CNN Money suggested that its middle class is larger than that of the U.S. — more products, more meals to-go and, therefore, more single-use disposables are available in the nation’s ubiquitous mega-malls and hypermarkets. As publications including The Economist profiled, Chinese consumers are particular about having their products presented in a certain way, which means copious amounts of packaging. In addition, China’s leading travel agency insists that tap water within the country is not safe unless boiled, and naturally, the hospitality industry will not go through the trouble — hence the endless supply of bottled water doled out in hotel rooms and tourist buses.

Although many cities in China purport to have recycling programs, based on the vast number of segregated waste containers that are visible in cities from Shanghai to Xi’an, there is little evidence to suggest these materials are being recycled. For years, consumers in America and elsewhere could find comfort in the fact that their curbside recyclables were being churned into new containers, but China grew tired of being the world’s dumping ground. And mounting frustration over containers mixed with food and other garbage led to the nation’s “green fence” policy, which launched in 2013. Now Chinese recycling companies will only accept the cleanest and tidiest bales of plastic or metal scrap, and the proliferation of disposables means more materials are being dumped instead of finding a second or third life as a container. The two-year slump in oil prices has further discouraged plastics recycling as containers made from virgin material are cheaper to produce.

Whether the causes are illegal dumping or just bad luck due to the summer storm season, the onslaught of trash accumulating on Hong Kong’s outer islands does not appear to show any signs of receding. The result is a disaster for the small businesses and restaurants that survive on the desire of Hong Kong’s residents and visitors to escape the city for a tranquil day out.

It may just be time for China to start charging a recycling fee for disposables as one step toward cleaning up this mess. Many of its citizens can afford it, while others could benefit financially from scooping up containers that otherwise end up in a dumpster or, even worse, a river or beach. And consumer packaged goods companies need to start entertaining extended producer responsibility programs as they have long benefited from this lucrative market while avoiding any responsibility for the waste their products generate.

Image credit: Sea Shepherd Hong Kong/Facebook

Global oil prices recently edged upward but still hover around $45 a barrel. Some observers blame the two-year slump on a conspiracy by Saudi Arabia, its allies in the Middle East and OPEC to sabotage the American energy industry. And they may soon find more ammunition for their argument. According to Norway-based Rystad Energy, an oil and gas consulting firm, the U.S. has the world’s largest reserves of oil when accounting for shale oil.

When accounting for proven reserves, U.S. oil deposits are dwarfed by Russia and Saudi Arabia, and barely edge out Canada. But even with the numbers behind what Rystad’s analysts call a conservative estimate, when the total amount of proven, probable and “most likely estimate” of oil fields yet to be discovered are tabulated, the U.S. edges out Russia by just over 3 percent. Over half of the estimated U.S. oil reserves are in what the energy industry describes as unconventional shale oil — Texas is home to 60 billion barrels of shale oil alone.

Such news will cheer the Obama administration, which has been criticized by the left and right over its “all-of-the-above” energy policy. And while Americans’ affection for cheap goods has long caused a trade imbalance with China, which in part explained the rise of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders during this year’s presidential campaign, U.S. oil exports to China have surged. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimated that such sales set a record in April with over 7.8 million barrels of oil shipped to China.

For advocates who insist that the U.S. transition to a low-carbon economy, such news is discouraging, and will cause the “keep it in the ground” movement to scream even louder. Nevertheless, market trends suggest electric cars still have a future, cheap oil aside. Yes, low gas prices have resulted in an uptick in sales of larger cars and SUVs. But in fairness, gas and diesel cars overall have become far more fuel efficient than in years past. Meanwhile, despite their fits and starts and the occasional bad press, sales of electric vehicles are growing — and are projected to continue doing so in the long term.

Think of electric car sales as analogous to the emergence of organic foods. They are now a small part of the industry’s overall portfolio, but consumers are catching on. As their overall range increases, consumers will continue to gravitate toward electric cars not necessarily out of concern over gas prices (which could spike at any time, as history shows), but over their torque, reduced maintenance needs and improved road handling.

Transportation still accounts for the bulk of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, but an interesting trend is going on. Just as how it sounds insane to be able to tax less and spend more — the holy grail of American politics -- so, too, is the prospect of harvesting more fossil fuels while reducing the country’s carbon footprint. Amazingly, however, the U.S. is pretty close to accomplishing that, based on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data. With the cost of renewables falling and more U.S. corporations investing in clean energy, the U.S., to its credit, is pulling quite an astonishing feat thought to be impossible earlier this decade.

Image credit of Kern River Oil Field: Hamish Reid/Flickr

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpA5hDDh_zk

The U.S. organic food industry is booming, and sales grow each year. In 2015, the industry reached a new benchmark of $43.3 billion in sales, up 11 percent from 2014. Despite unprecedented growth, supply issues persist. "Going organic" is not as simple as it sounds. Farmers incur significant effort and cost to make the transition from conventional to organic and it's not always obvious how it pays off.

The Organic Trade Association says: "Dairy and grains were two areas where [organic food sales] growth could have been even more robust in 2015 if greater supply had been available. There is an industry-wide understanding of the need to build a secure supply chain that can support demand. This goes hand-in-hand with securing more organic acreage, developing programs to help farmers transition to organic, and encouraging new farmers to farm organically."

It takes a minimum of three years for a farm to become certified organic - a so-called "transition period". During this time the farmer incurs costs without the benefit of being able to use the organic label on her crops.  Financial and logistical hurdles make it a daunting process with many upfront costs. Organic farming doesn't necessarily equate to larger profits either. But if there were an added incentive to help make the transition, it might help move things along and help farmers profit in the interim.

This issue is precisely what motivated Kashi to launch its Certified Transitional protocol and the first Certified Transitional product – and it looks like a tasty one. Kashi’s new Dark Cocoa Karma Shredded Wheat Biscuits features Certified Transitional ingredients that help increase access to organic foods.

“The health of people and the health of our planet are inextricably linked,” said David Denholm, CEO of Kashi. “One percent organic acreage is just not enough – and we want to promote solutions that benefit everyone working to move organic farming forward. We believe championing farms in transition will make organic foods more accessible and support a more sustainable food system – for all of us.”

Kashi is working with Quality Assurance International (QAI), which developed the Certified Transitional protocol after input from Hesco/Dakota Organic Products, agricultural suppliers, a global environmental NGO, farmers, retailers, distributors and food companies. The program allows products that contain at least 51 percent transitional ingredients to use the QAI Transitional mark on the package.

The idea is that premium pricing will be passed down to the farmer, adding an incentive for transitioning their farms to organic. Farmers must agree to immediately discontinue the use of prohibited synthetic pesticides and fertilizers and grow crops without the use of the GMO seeds. The farmland must be managed organically during the three-year period. Farmers are expected to graduate from the program at the end of three years, once they are certified organic.

“Transitioning to organic isn’t easy – farmers must invest in new infrastructure, create new business plans, and even obtain new crop insurance and financing. That all starts day one when they begin converting to organic, but they don’t see the financial benefit of organic prices for three years,” said Brad Hennrich, president at Hesco/Dakota Organic Products, a specialty grain company. “Certified Transitional provides a revenue opportunity and roadmap for farmers looking to transition that simply didn’t exist before.”

Image credit: Pixabay

By Judy Sandford

The world of corporate responsibility (CR) reporting has changed dramatically in recent years. Governments, stock exchanges, regulators, customers and consumers are demanding more information from companies about their environmental and social impacts, and companies are responding in huge numbers.

I sat down with Alyson Genovese, GRI’s head of corporate and stakeholder relations for the U.S. and Canada, to find out what corporations need to know about the changing reporting landscape.

Judy Sandford, Cone Communications: Thank you, Alyson, for taking the time to update us on the current state of reporting. How has reporting grown and changed over the last decade?

Alyson Genovese, GRI: It’s grown in terms of the pure number of businesses that report, but also in the depth and breadth of their reporting. The content is becoming more sophisticated, timely and future-oriented. But most importantly it’s more material—more focused on the most important issues. According to a study by WBCSD, the average PDF report is 100 pages in length. But I’ve noticed reports expanding beyond PDF documents, using more web-based tools, providing reporting on specific information for specific stakeholder groups, and providing summary versions that are used by corporate HR and sales teams. Companies are finding ways to be succinct while still providing compelling storytelling.

Perhaps most interesting is the growth in types of reporters outside the traditional realm. Although 90 percent of reporters are large multinationals, we are now seeing first-time reporters including municipalities such as Atlanta, events such as the London Olympics and organizations such as the US Postal Service and the Cleveland Clinic. All of these organizations have stakeholders to which they need to disclose information, and the conversation is much easier when they use standard terminology. It’s a way to demonstrate their economic, social and environmental short- and long-term strategies.

JS: What’s driving the growth in reporting?

AG: First, expectations for companies are much higher these days. End-use consumers, customers and even other companies’ procurement offices are demanding more information. They want to know how a company’s behaviors impact a community’s health and the environment. Secondly, there’s a much greater regulatory environment. In particular, developing countries are finding these reports helpful in securing foreign investment, and many stock exchanges are starting to recommend or even require reporting. Finally, the investment community, increasingly mainstream investors, is requesting more information on materials risks and opportunities to guide their decisions. Just in the last three years, there’s been a sea change in demand for “non-financial” information, which has recently been reconsidered as “pre-financial” information. Sustainability information can help indicate a company’s potential for future financial success.

JS: How has report content changed?

AG: I’m seeing an evolution of these reports from being a PR tool to being a business management tool. There’s less fluff and more detailed explanations of business risks and opportunities for innovation. In particular, we’ve seen coverage of social information double in reporting since 2013.

Most recently, I’ve seen companies such as Visa*, AB InBev* and Nestle announcing support of the new UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in reports. GRI is helping companies to align with these goals by providing new mapping services from our GRI reporting framework, as well as a tool called the SDG Compass. These resources are giving early adopters more confidence that they’re working to contribute to the global goals.

JS: How should a company go about selecting the appropriate frameworks for reporting?

AD: It really depends on the company’s industry, size and geographic reach. For example, companies operating in Europe with more than 500 employees and meeting a certain market cap will soon need to report according to the EU Directive. To help companies out, GRI has developed a full list of linkage documents with many major frameworks. The recently released Carrots & Sticks report (developed by KPMG, GRI, UNEP and the Centre for Corporate Governance in Africa) provides an overview of 383 frameworks in use with descriptions of those that are most commonly used.

Furthermore, in response to companies’ desire for a single tool to report to multiple authorities, GRI’s independent standard-setting body, the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB), is transitioning the G4 Guidelines into a set of modular, interrelated GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). GRI Standards will provide regulators with confidence about reporting information for multiple authorities. Already, G4 is aligned with tools such as the CDP Climate Change Questionnaire that go deeper on energy and emissions. GRI Standards will allow companies to use that type of specific information for multiple frameworks. The exposure drafts of GRI Standards are now available for public comment until July 17, 2016, and anyone can review them and offer feedback on the GRI Standards hub.

Ultimately, the goal is for GRI Standards to make data from different frameworks complementary and comparable. It will also allow GRI to focus on having conversations about the value of reporting, gathering data and engaging with stakeholders. GRI aims to help organizations use data to its maximum value by making it more accessible, digestible and comparable. GRI Standards will be released at the end of 2016, and GRI will continue to provide technical assistance for the G4 Guidelines until the end of 2017.

JS: What can companies do to make their current reports more effective?

AG: I can’t overstate the value of having a robust materiality assessment. It is really challenging for large, complex multinational corporations to decide what to measure and communicate. What readers really want to know from a report is “how is this company managing its resources effectively?”

JS: What reporting trends do you see in the next three-to-five years?

AG: Already, I’m excited to see a number of companies laddering up their individual goals in the context of global goals from COP 21 and the UN SDGs. They are trying to understand their local context as well as demonstrate how they are part of a larger ecosystem and generating value beyond their own four walls.

Another big trend is the idea of making report data more accessible. Two-to-three years from now, I see the ability to unleash reporting data in an organized way—like a phone book. GRI recently launched the Digital Reporting Alliance to develop a dynamic tool (involving XBRL taxonomy) to aggregate data across companies. The project is  in its infancy, and we’re gathering partners and convening meetings to develop a central, online platform. The idea is that companies would be able to input their information into a database so other companies, investors and interest groups would have access to seek information and make comparisons.

JS: Thank you Alyson. If people have additional questions, how should they contact you?

AG: I’m happy to answer questions at Genovese@globalreporting.org

Image credits: GRI

Judy Sandford is Vice President of CR Strategy for Cone Communications. With more than 20 years of marketing communications experience, Judy has focused the last decade of her career on sustainability communications and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) reporting. Drawing upon her passion for taking CR data beyond the pages of a report, she has helped more than 30 Fortune 500 corporations and leading nonprofits tell their stories and ensured that their stakeholders get the message in the way they prefer to receive it – including interactive web experiences, social media and video.

by Deepak Arora, CEO, Essar Foundation — The Companies Act, 2013 is considered to be one of the most significant legal reforms in India, having introduced several new provisions, among which those with regard to the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) have gained utmost importance. Two years into the enforcement of the prototypical CSR law, the practitioner and the decision maker in the Indian corporate is asking questions… has the law impacted CSR the way it was expected to? Has the law been understood in its spirit and executed? Does the law require revisiting and amendments?

Historically, philanthropy has been an essential element in the functioning of business houses in India. However, the approach and spending areas being too vague, the legislation provides direction and definition to the way CSR ought to be planned and the areas where the interventions are most needed. However, without long term planning, consultation and strategies towards designing CSR programs there continues to be a dominant dependence on NGOs for CSR implementation. At the same time, NGOs who were expecting a wave of large funding in terms of donations are inadequately prepared to handle such scale and strategic management of corporate CSR.

‘Compliance’ may have been playing a more prominent role in the way CSR is being perceived by the Boards. Meanwhile, there have been more instances where the local government bodies have either sought reporting from corporates or directed the CSR fund usage into their identified priority areas. This sort of intervention might have two sides to it. One, that this would eliminate possibilities of duplication of efforts by government and corporates while indicating real developmental needs of an area. The other side to it is that the autonomy of the Boards in deciding the CSR plans is obstructed by the government instructions one might be obliged to undertake. Adding to this, a lot of States have begun constituting state level CSR authorities where large consultancy agencies have taken over the job of deciding the direction of CSR in states. The question here is, are there too many players in the CSR space now? The number of stakeholders a CSR entity might be managing is already quite many, and not to mention, diverse. Having multiple decision-making authorities may be making things a lot more complicated for CSR managers. Moreover, this is in direct contradiction to the intent of the law itself, where the provisions suggest that the CSR structure and direction is the Board’s mandate and responsibility. 

With regards to the investments being made in infrastructure and demonstrable pilot projects in the surrounding areas of industry presence, there is a large amount of concentrated input going into designated zones of CSR presence, whereas the geographical areas beyond these zones stay immune to the impact of such interventions. It’s pertinent to ask whether this has created islands of excellence, thus increasing the divide between haves and have-nots. It also might mean that the discrepancies between issue-based interventions and location-based development are even starker.

The thematic areas for CSR are primarily around education, health, sanitation, environment and livelihoods, with more or less the same approach adopted across locations. According to the India CSR Outlook Report, 2015, about 32% of the CSR spending was on Healthcare and WASH, and 29% on Education and Skills, whereas a mere 6% was on gender equality and 1% was in rural sports. Certain issues, like those relating to child sexual abuse or human rights, either largely remain untouched or superficially taken up. Presumably, the corporates believe that being involved in such sensitive issues may ruffle feathers among sections of the society or media if not treaded upon cautiously, and may end up having a negative rub-off on their brand image. Investing in infrastructure or assets like schools, toilets, mobile medical vans or community halls may be considered a safer investment as it is more visible and measurable, after all.

Similarly, with large scale and rigorously promoted national developmental schemes like Swachh Bharat and Skill India, CSR funds are being rapidly mobilized into the kitty of such schemes. Besides, contributions to these schemes are incentivized to evoke greater interest. Understandably, a structured approach with localized planning and advanced resource planning is being ignored.

Considering the limited scope of CSR provisions in the law and multitude of compliance points, in the coming years the emergence of philanthropy organizations—besides the existing CSR bodies—may be seen among Indian companies. On the same lines as that of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, such philanthropy offshoots of companies may be seen working on more widespread pertinent issues, with or without direct linkages to business mandates.

Something that is, however, working holistically in favour of the CSR sector is that the questions are being asked from all quarters, and thus leading to a coming together of practitioners, decision makers and thought leaders for meaningful discourse around the issues. Optimistically speaking, corporate leaders and boards will continue to seek more value out of CSR, including brand visibility. This implies the CSR space will continue to grow and evolve, with strategic CSR being undertaken with shared value philosophy embedded in the ethos of the corporates. However, it will take a few more years for it to move beyond mere compliance and mature in a manner that the national development indicators are measurably enhanced, and that rural development is principally driven through CSR and their collaborators in India.

 

 

by Brian Collett—New French labour laws, making it easier for employers to hire and fire and allowing them to negotiate directly with employees, have been condemned by trade unions and the political left as an assault on workers’ rights.

The reforms, intended to tackle France’s high unemployment rate, were forced through without a parliamentary vote under a constitutional provision.

They give new powers to companies that are large enough to have union representation and are facing economic difficulties or are trying to increase market share. Companies may now bypass all collective union agreements to negotiate deals directly with employees on pay cuts and overtime arrangements.

Employees are allowed a ballot to decide whether to accept or reject an offer if talks reach deadlock.

When considering redundancies employers may now use declining economic performance to justify dismissals. Those with a workforce of ten or fewer may lay off staff after a one-month decline in income. Companies with up to 300 employees must show three successive quarters of falling revenues. The largest companies must wait a year.

Two measures that would have benefited employers were dropped from the new laws – the capping of severance packages to wrongfully dismissed employees and the choice for companies too small to have union representatives to agree to deals with staff on working hours.

The business lobby was particularly critical of the second omission, saying it disadvantages smaller businesses, which can create the majority of new jobs in a climate of high unemployment but contend they need flexible conditions to realise this potential. The overall jobless figure is more than 10%. Among young people it is almost 25%.

The first measure would have been welcomed by employers as the fear of heavy pay-offs had deterred some from hiring new people. 

Employers’ bodies maintain the package was diluted to gain popular support. On the other side, the huge hard-line CGT union and other left-wing enthusiasts see the laws as weakening the unions and their collectively negotiated deals, and argue that as such they are pro-business. 

The legislation has even brought protesters on to the streets. In Paris the most recent demonstration was banned by the police on security grounds but the government overturned the decision. In an earlier demonstration youths in balaclavas hurled Molotov cocktails, smashed windows, set cars alight and injured policemen.

Passions were inflamed in parliament too. Prime minister Manuel Valls, announcing the measures, said: “This country is too used to mass unemployment. It is not posturing, it is not intransigence.”

Many members booed and some walked out.