Search

At the COP27 climate talks in November, world leaders agreed to establish a loss and damage fund to help developing countries cope with the impacts of climate change. But it will be years until the fund is up and running — leaving many questions unanswered, chief among them: Who pays for the climate crisis?  

While the responses to this question often place the financial onus of climate change on the global superpowers (China, the U.S.) that have contributed the most environmental harm, those powerful nations have consistently failed to accept this charge. Nations in the Global South have, by and large, contributed little to climate change, yet face the most serious consequences — including more frequent and severe natural disasters like drought, intense heat, and extreme storms. As the leading contributors to climate change drag their feet, the window for action continues to shrink, and blameless millions pay the price of the Global North’s pollution.

Climate Neutral, a nonprofit dedicated to addressing this disparity, leverages corporate funding to finance sustainable projects in the world's least developed countries. In this way, corporations can circumvent the global gridlock preventing true action on climate change. The nonprofit also provides corporations a chance to move beyond empty promises and truly begin to right their own environmental wrongs.

“The pressure that we're trying to exert is pressure on companies because consumers, at least say, they care about climate change,” said Austin Whitman, CEO of Climate Neutral. “But they have very few ways to engage with companies directly and press companies to do more. So, if we can create the expectation that companies are doing their part to mitigate their emissions, there will be an increase in the flow of capital into projects.”

Climate Neutral challenges corporations to go beyond words and take aggressive action to reduce global emissions by 2030. To earn the nonprofit’s certification, a company must demonstrate that it is taking steps to reduce future emissions, while also paying the full price for current emissions.

Rich nations can "export low-carbon technologies" to decarbonize the developing world 

Rapid industrialization in an under-developed country can create intense environmental harm. But how can a country that already polluted the world through its own industrialization 200 years ago prohibit another nation from doing the same thing today? When it comes to polluting, rich nations are essentially telling poorer nations, “do as I say, not as I do,” and that isn’t very persuasive. 

“There is some transfer of wealth that's necessary to account for the fact that the economic costs are being borne initially, largely, by countries that have not caused the problem,” Whitman said.

For decades, the Global South has called on the North to pay reparations for the crimes of colonialism, which prevented development and stole the natural resources that would have funded such development. If rich nations don’t want poorer nations to develop in an environmentally harmful way, they ought to invest in sustainable infrastructure and practices in these underdeveloped nations.

“All the major sectors, they can be used just as well in India as they can in the U.S.,"  Whitman said as an example. "I think it's our job to export low-carbon technologies to really allow them to skip past that phase where the carbon intensity of the economy grows significantly before it starts to level off and then decline. We've got a pretty impressive system here in the U.S., and that knowledge can be exported, and is being exported.”

Climate Neutral understands that the urgency of the climate crisis demands action, not bureaucracy. Challenging corporations to pay for pollution and invest in the environment may not completely solve the climate crisis, but it is a fantastic way to get powerful players to put their money where their mouth is.

“This is one of the many, many dynamic aspects of the puzzle. We're not starting necessarily in the perfect spot,” Whitman said, “but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't start.”

Image credits: ©UNICEF Ethiopia/Raphael Pouget via Flickr and Climate Neutral

Committing to meet environmental, social, and governance (ESG) objectives and targets is one thing. Acting on them is quite another. What are businesses doing to prepare for high-quality sustainability and ESG reporting, and what challenges are they uncovering along the way? To find out, Deloitte surveyed 300 public company executives to get a pulse on current trends and sentiment. Here are five takeaways from the front lines of real-world change.

Embed ESG in the corporate strategy

Nearly 3 in 5 executives (57 percent) say their company has established a cross-functional working group to drive strategic attention to ESG, an increase of 21 percent since last year. Another 42 percent say they’re in the process of establishing one. 

A typical ESG working group includes executives from finance, accounting, risk, legal, sustainability, operations, supply chain and other functional areas. Increasingly, accountability for ESG performance can be most effective with an integrated governance structure that brings together all business functions. A philosophy of ownership across the business, paired with a strategic approach to governance, can establish ESG as a strategic priority highly aligned to corporate strategy. 

Assign roles and responsibilities

Only 3 percent of executives say their companies are prepared for potential increased ESG regulatory or other disclosure requirements, but many are getting ready. For instance, 81 percent of companies have created new roles or responsibilities, and 89 percent say they’ve enhanced internal goal-setting and accountability mechanisms to promote readiness. 

Who has management responsibility over ESG disclosure? Today, in many cases, it’s the chief financial officer (CFO) or chief sustainability officer (CSO), but many respondents indicate that increasingly there is shared responsibility for ESG reporting across the executive leadership team, human resources, supply chain and other functions. 

Of those executives surveyed, board-level oversight has been predominantly assigned to the nominating and governance committee, but we are seeing a trend of expanded oversight responsibility across all committees, aligned to respective remit, to drive greater integration and oversight of ESG risks and opportunities. 

Increase focus on assurance 

Nearly all (96 percent) surveyed executives plan to seek assurance for the next ESG reporting cycle. To prepare for a reasonable level of assurance, 37 percent of companies are starting to apply the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO)’s internal control guidelines, which can help companies measure, manage and validate ESG information with the same rigor typically applied to financial reporting.  

Respondents shared that they use a range of different frameworks and standards for their disclosures. The most common is the Task Force for Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) (56 percent), closely followed by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) (55 percent). Around half of respondents also use standards from the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI).

For multinational firms, the rapid progress of the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) signals optimism for convergence of a number of leading sustainability reporting standards and frameworks and the creation of a global baseline for sustainability reporting to help meet the information needs of the capital markets, as well as serve as the basis upon which other jurisdictions can build. 

Develop a workable solution for data gaps

When it comes to sustainability reporting, access to quality ESG data now appears to be a bigger challenge than data availability. Still, a majority (61 percent) of respondents indicate their companies are prepared to disclose details about the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions they directly produce, known as Scope 1. Even more (76 percent) say they’re ready to disclose details of their Scope 2 GHG emissions, or emissions generated by the electricity a company purchases, a substantial increase from the 47 percent who said so the previous year. 

At the same time, Scope 3 emissions — which account for GHGs produced along a company's entire value chain — appear to remain a challenge. Most respondents (86 percent) indicate they’ve run into challenges measuring them, and only 37 percent are prepared to disclose them in detail. 

To close any gaps, companies may consider focusing on the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, which currently serves as the leading standard for measuring greenhouse gas emissions and provides for methodologies to promote consistency of measurement with due consideration to the level of measurement uncertainty and data availability. 

Invest in technology for ESG reporting, disclosure and action

New technology is on the horizon for many companies as they embark on their ESG integration and disclosure journeys. Nearly all executives (99 percent) are somewhat likely or very likely to invest in new technology to prepare to meet stakeholder expectations and future regulatory requirements. 

Technology solutions can assist in accelerating preparedness in moving from reporting in accordance with voluntary sustainability standards and frameworks to enhanced disclosure in accordance with authoritative ESG standards and new regulation. 

No matter where a company is in their sustainability journey, strategic attention to ESG integration and disclosure today can help to deliver long term value to  stakeholders into the future. By implementing the insights shared by public company executives, companies can gear up for ESG reporting and work to meet stakeholder expectations while also creating long-term value. 

Image credit: Andrea Piacquadio/Pexels

Note: This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication.

The recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) has placed climate tech into the national spotlight. SVB was a financial hub of the venture-backed sustainability world, with approximately 1,550 climate and clean technology business clients. While other financial institutions didn't always have the in-house skill to understand sustainability startups, it was among SVB’s specialties. The firm’s appetite for funding climate tech ventures resulted in an industry-wide transformation for venture capital. 

Investments in climate tech reached a peak in 2021, followed by a 3 percent drop in 2022. However, when evaluated within the context of the 35 percent drop in the overall venture capital market, these numbers indicate investors are still very much interested in climate tech — and SVB helped that startup ecosystem develop. 

Within this context, SVB’s collapse — linked to rapidly rising interest rates, combined with a run on the bank fueled by fear that spread on social media — presented a real threat to the climate and clean technology sector. 

“SVB’s collapse was terrifying to the industry," said Justin Bean, an impact-focused tech executive and author of What Could Go Right: Designing Our Ideal Future to Emerge from Continual Crises to a Thriving World. "Startup founders and employees often are not making that much money, because they’re trading salary for ownership." 

And the potential impact went far further than individual startups. "We saw hard-working people out there creating innovation and sustainable abundance and are helping us compete with countries like China and Russia and helping us get ahead,” Bean said. “If the entire ecosystem was allowed to collapse, it would have been a huge hit to the U.S. during a time of great competition between nations. There is a geopolitical advantage to the U.S. being the research and development lab for climate tech. We are advancing humanity forward. For this, it was a good move by the Fed to ensure the deposits of the people banking with SVB.” 

Fortunately, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) gave depositors full access to their funds on the Monday morning following the collapse, including funds above the government-insured amount.

Climate tech still makes good business sense

Before the collapse of SVB, climate tech was on an upward trajectory.  It had a record year in 2021, and even today capital continues to be reprioritized across sectors into climate-friendly and clean tech companies. That trend is happening on the consumer level as well. For example, total U.S. car sales were down 8 percent in 2022, but electric vehicle sales actually increased by 60 percent. 

Renewable energy costs are also plummeting and becoming cheaper than fossil fuel energy in many markets, even without government subsidies. “It just makes business sense. We get to sustainable abundance by pushing prices down through innovation," Bean said of the growth of climate tech. "Sustainability should get cheaper because we have innovated and pushed the price down and they’re lower risk because they are circular."

Companies with higher ESG scores typically perform better financially than those with lower ESG scores — and climate tech, clean tech, and other sustainable initiatives are growing and diversifying. Climate tech and clean tech companies also historically fare better during a recession, Bean noted, and government initiatives like the Inflation Reduction Act are positioned to further support the sector.

“There is a big value proposition for climate," Bean said. "When you look at standard markets, they are performing at a lower rate than climate tech markets. Climate tech is smaller but growing much faster. If you want to capture growth and hedge risk, climate is a great choice."

Bean compared current low-carbon innovations to the digital transformation of 10 and 20 years ago, saying: “There is currently competition between the new world and the old world, like what we saw with the digital transformation. There are companies like Blockbuster and Kodak that weren't paying attention and should have founded Netflix and Instagram. They were asleep at the wheel and didn’t see the future coming. We saw digital solutions perform better, take the market and grow faster than anyone had ever seen before. The growth rate of Facebook, Uber, Google and the like was record-breaking. I think we will see some of those records broken again by climate tech. This transition is happening faster than people realize.” 

SVB’s legacy and the future of climate tech 

SVB was the financial institution of choice for a huge number of climate tech companies, so the question remains as to which firms will take its place. After all, SVB was a climate finance pioneer. It funded 60 percent of community solar projects and its support of clean energy projects helped mobilize other lending agencies. 

“We are in the process of creating sustainable and circular economies. Climate tech will continue to grow and diversify,” Bean said. While SVB made a number of risky choices that contributed to its demise, its early and bold support of climate tech and cleantech transformed the sector from a niche, high-risk industry to a promising, attractive and growing sector.

Image credit: Alpha Photo / Flickr

Half a mile down the road from Henkel North America’s research and development facility in Trumbull, Connecticut, is the Trumbull Nature and Arts Center, a small nonprofit with a mission to provide nature-rich experiences to all members of its community. The center offers hands-on environmental science experiences for students and educational programming for families in the Trumbull community. It has grown rapidly in recent years, thanks in large part to collaboration with corporate volunteers from Henkel North America. 

An employee’s passion prompts an ongoing partnership 

Henkel established the Make an Impact on Tomorrow (MIT) initiative in 1998 to fund and support employee volunteering efforts. Employees can volunteer with nonprofit organizations benefiting a wide variety of causes, from homelessness and food insecurity to education, and Henkel provides many of these organizations with financial support and product donations. Over the past 25 years, the company has supported more than 17,000 volunteer projects in over 100 countries. 

As Henkel celebrates the 25th anniversary of its MIT program is, it shows no signs of slowing down. In 2022, the work of Henkel volunteers in North America specifically, impacted the lives of more than 110,000 people — and that work continues to grow as they move toward the mission to improve life for generations to come.

An employee involved with the MIT program got the company connected with the Trumbull Nature and Arts Center — and Henkel’s interest in supporting environmental and STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) education made the partnership a perfect match. 

“Over the years, Henkel has been a fabulous supporter of our center,” Kevin Malone, president of the Patrons of Trumbull Nature and Arts Center, told TriplePundit. “They funded and built a playground that is made from 100 percent recycled plastic, which is the centerpiece of our outdoor area, and they continue to provide two main resources we rely on: financial, which is extremely important, and human resources, which is volunteer hours and everything volunteers bring to the center.”

Its work with the center is part of a broader effort at Henkel North America to prioritize volunteering in the communities where it does business, said Angela Curley, the company’s senior manager for diversity, equity and inclusion in North America. “We want to be there for our community, to help build thriving communities,” said Curley, who also leads corporate citizenship, social partnerships and philanthropy work. “We do this work because it’s good for society and we want to give back. We also want to engage in projects important to our employees’ interests — we want to support their passions and their contributions.” 

Like with the center, it’s often employees who introduce the Henkel team to nonprofit and community partners through the MIT program. “One of our employees, Steve Leeper, has been involved with Trumbull Nature and Arts Center for many years, so it was just natural for us to continue that partnership through MIT,” Curley said. “Sometimes it's the small, thoughtful impact that goes the longest way. Steve has been passionate and consistent about staying involved with Trumbull Nature and Arts Center, and that’s made a big impact.” 

Henkel employees regularly visit the center for volunteer days, where they beautify the grounds by planting, painting, repairing, organizing and building. The company also funded a recent expansion and continues to support the center’s educational programming for underserved students.  

“The Trumbull Nature and Arts Center is a very important part of our town and community, bringing in young families and area schools to learn and enjoy the Center’s arts and sciences,” said Leeper, facilities manager at Henkel’s Trumbull site. “We enjoy getting the Center ready for the daily visitors and seasonal classrooms. One part of our volunteer work was the funding for an outdoor classroom. This allows Center volunteers and instructors to hold classes outside, but away from the summer sun and other weather conditions.”

“Having them there shows the rest of the community that we have this support from our corporate partners and lets the community know that we are here and we have the support of an important business in town, and it adds something that we otherwise couldn’t get,” Malone said. "It is amazing to have Henkel on our team and supporting us.”

Instilling a love for nature

As part of their partnership, Henkel and the Trumbull Nature and Arts Center work to bring natural learning to young people who aren’t often exposed to nature. 

“We know that many students in underserved urban communities don’t have the same kind of access to nature that students in suburban neighborhoods may have,” said Sheryl Baumann, executive director of the Trumbull Arts and Nature Center. 

Last year, Henkel and the center collaborated on a project for first-grade students in Bridgeport, Connecticut, focused on new ways to get kids outdoors. “Nature does exist nearly everywhere, if you know how to find it,” Baumann said. “With this in mind, we wanted to give students and teachers the tools they need to go outside and view nature in their own schoolyards, whether it's a flower bed around the school perimeter, some trees near a fence, birds flying by, or a dandelion struggling to grow through the cracks of a sidewalk.” 

The partners developed a curriculum for the program and rolled it out to multiple schools in Bridgeport during the last academic year, and Henkel volunteers packed supplies like binoculars, bug viewers and butterfly nets into backpacks to help students on their journeys.

Engaging employees while supporting the community 

These ongoing initiatives further the center’s mission by increasing engagement with nature among the community’s youth and encouraging students to think creatively about environmental science.

“The Trumbull Nature and Arts Center is a great example of how our MIT program can come to life when a team of employees put their minds to it,” Curley said. “We know the easy part is the funding — the hard work is getting out and getting it done. MIT programs involve a wide variety of Henkel employees, from frontline employees to senior executives who volunteer their time for the causes they care about. We are enormously proud of our people and the things they do.” 

Supporting nonprofits like the center also affords measurable benefits for employee engagement. “We hear from our employees that it is meaningful that Henkel supports the projects that are important to them,” Curley continued. “It’s not about the amount of money, it's about supporting the work they do.”

Read more about Henkel’s community support in North America.

This article series is sponsored by Henkel North America and produced by the TriplePundit editorial team.

Images courtesy of Henkel and the Trumbull Nature and Arts Center

As companies make bolder commitments to advance diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), stakeholders are looking for more information to back up their claims. Shareholder resolutions related to racial equity more than doubled at U.S. companies last year, many focused specifically on convincing companies to publicly disclose diversity data about their workforces. 

Likewise, the vast majority of the American public — 92 percent, according to 2022 polling from Just Capital — feel it's important for companies to promote racial equity in the workplace. And they recognize data is an important tool to do it, with 76 percent of respondents to Just Capital's survey agreeing that disclosing demographic data is an important step toward advancing racial equity.  

While some corporate commitments related to racial equity have failed to fully materialize, the area of diversity disclosures in particular is one where companies are stepping up in a big way, with record levels of best-practice disclosure across the world's largest public firms. 

The state of corporate diversity disclosures

What's often missed in conversations about diversity disclosures is that most large companies already track this information because they're legally obligated to do so. All U.S. public companies with more than 100 employees are required to submit annual reports to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Department of Labor that detail workforce data, including breakdowns by race and ethnicity, sex, and job categories. 

These reports, known as EEO-1 reports, are kept confidential by government agencies unless companies choose to voluntarily disclose them — and more companies are going just that.

Nearly 75 percent of Russell 1,000 companies disclose some form of workforce diversity data, compared to 55 percent in 2021, according to tracking from Just Capital. Within that group, 34 percent of companies publicly disclosed their EEO-1 reports or similar intersectional data last year — a more than threefold increase from 11 percent a year earlier. 

"Over the past year, companies across the Russell 1,000 have made great strides toward improving disclosure of racial and ethnic workforce demographic data," Just Capital's director of research insights, Matthew Nestler, and his team wrote in the report. 

When Just Capital last gathered disclosure data in September 2021, nearly half of all Russell 1,000 companies made no diversity disclosures at all. By September of last year, that number had fallen to 28 percent, as more than 150 companies opted to newly disclose their diversity data.

Importantly, many of these companies are skipping over the less granular disclosures, such as data about overall “non-white” or “minority” employees without racial and ethnic categories or job title breakdowns, and going right for publication of their EEO-1 reports.

Given increased stakeholder interest, it's no surprise that companies taking the lead on diversity disclosures are reaping the benefits: Companies that published their EEO-1 or similar intersectional data outperformed those that didn’t by 7.9 percent over the trailing one-year period ending in 2022, according to a companion analysis from Just Capital. 

"Publicly disclosing demographic data represents a critical initial step for companies looking to build more diverse workforces, as well as stronger returns," Nestler and his team wrote in the report. "It holds corporate leaders to account on their DEI goals and signals commitment to advancing racial equity."

The bottom line

This type of rapid change indicates that advocacy from investors and consumers is working: Business leaders are hearing their stakeholders loud at clear, at least within the context of diversity disclosures. And even as anti-woke crusaders erroneously blame DEI "distractions" for everything from the Ohio train derailment to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, companies don't appear to be backing down. 

"The story the report tells may not be a perfect one, but disclosure is a crucial first step in holding companies accountable to change," Nestler and his team concluded. "From there, to ensure lasting progress on DEI, corporate leaders must ultimately go beyond demographic disclosure and measure and disclose the outcomes of their DEI efforts, including whether C-Suite compensation is tied to DEI-related progress, what resources are directed toward DEI efforts, how they drive impact in local communities, and more." 

Just Capital works to incentivize corporate behavior change on DEI issues through accountability initiatives like the Corporate Racial Equity Tracker and actionable guidance like the CEO Blueprint for Racial Equity. Other resources such as the business-led coalition CEO Action for Diversity and Inclusion, and its Actions Database of more than 1,900 insights, are also at hand to guide business leaders as they look to advance DEI within their workforces. 

Image credit: August de Richelieu/Pexels

Every March 22 is World Water Day — an observance designated by the United Nations to bring attention to different issues surrounding water and how it impacts our lives. The 2023 theme is Be the Change, an effort to encourage people to be more active in how they use, consume and manage water. 

This feels like both a straightforward task and a daunting one. Most people are unaware of where their water comes from, let alone the volume they use and how. Having that information is the first step toward more effective water management at the individual level, which can help water boards and utilities better manage the larger systems and watersheds.

Can you guess what accounts for most residential water use?

Most people do not have a clear idea of where they are using water — and so do not know where they are wasting water. Inside the home, toilets, showers and faucets are the biggest water hogs. But if you have a yard, your biggest culprit is probably irrigation and lawn care. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, about a third of all residential water use in the U.S. is for landscape irrigation — about 9 billion gallons per day.

In the Western U.S., a region prone to both droughts and awash with lush green lawns, the situation is even more dire as the Colorado River runs dry. On background, a meter reader with Austin Water told TriplePundit that maintaining lawns accounted for 50 percent to 75 percent of many homes’ water usage — and many consumers often don't believe it until they're shown the meter reading.

Some utilities are now focusing solely getting customers to better manage their outdoor use, cutting back on indoor incentives. For example, San Antonio Water System, the city’s water utility, now only offers outdoor rebates and incentives. Program staff told TriplePundit that focusing on irrigation and pools would lead to greater water savings in the water-stressed city. The utility has also hired landscape experts to help residents replace turf with more native and drought-resistant plants. 

Smart metering offers more opportunity for water conservation

Another big water waster is leaks. On the utility side, more utilities are getting better at identifying and fixing leaks, but the state of the country’s water infrastructure is going to require significant investment. On the demand side, however, if customers better understand where they’re using the most water — and how to catch leaks when they first happen — they can be more active conservationists.

Much like electric smart meters, water smart meters can help people better understand their usage. The technology is not as widespread as it is in the electricity space due to a number of factors, such as available resources and challenges in measurement that make it harder to pinpoint water usage versus electric usage (i.e., it’s easier to measure electrons than drops). But as climate change continues to put pressure on watersheds, more companies are bringing technologies onto the market.

For example, in 2022, several California water utilities started rolling out water smart meters to customers. While the utilities have a big lift on the supply side, demand needs to be lowered where it can. Much like with electricity — where energy efficiency is the first and best defense — water conservation is the critical component of ensuring water is available when and where it is needed.

Working along the energy-water nexus

And like energy efficiency, water conservation is a climate strategy. Treating, pumping and distributing water uses copious amounts of energy, and generating fossil fuel- and nuclear-powered energy uses a lot of water. So, by reducing water demand, people are also taking action to lower emissions systemwide, while reducing energy use can also help with water conservation. Most people don’t think about the source of electricity when they flip a light switch or the source of water when they turn on their faucets. But the fact remains that both actions are inextricably linked.

World Water Day 2023 calls for people to be more active in their water conservation. It is a good reminder that understanding where your water comes from and how you use it has ripple effects throughout the community and the system. Utilities can help people be the change. But the real change must come from each consumer.

Image credit: Karolina Grabowska/Pexels

A majority of consumers say they're ready to change their lifestyles to help combat climate change, and more people than ever are seeking out information about sustainability on social media. A new study commissioned by Unilever shows that influencers have the biggest impact on consumers’ sustainability-related choices, ahead of documentaries, news articles and governmental campaigns. In fact, 83 percent of all consumers believe that TikTok and Instagram are helpful places to seek out information about sustainability, and 75 percent are more likely to add sustainable behaviors to their lifestyles after viewing social media content about sustainability.

Unilever also specifically examined the efficacy of different content styles in inspiring consumer behavior change around plastic use and food waste, comparing pragmatic and explanatory content with more optimistic and humorous posts.

While the study found that both styles were effective in spurring consumer behavior change, 69 percent of people who viewed the more pragmatic content went on to make lifestyle changes, versus 61 percent of those who watched the more optimistic, humorous content. Branded content was seen as equally engaging and authentic as unbranded content.

“People are finding it hard to make sustainable choices due to a lack of simple, immediate and trustworthy information. Our ambition is to continue to collaborate with our partners to improve the sustainability content produced by our brands and support the creators we work with” said Conny Braams, Unilever’s chief digital and commercial officer, in a statement. 

Leveraging social media to drive consumer behavior change

Unilever partnered with Behavioral Insights Team and 10 sustainability influencers to develop content that aimed to persuade consumers to use less plastic and waste less food. Unilever then showed the content to 6,000 social media users in the U.K., U.S., and Canada.

Three out of four respondents said the content made them more likely to engage in the suggested sustainable behaviors, specifically reusing plastic, buying refillable products, and freezing and reusing leftover food. Also, 72 percent of participants supported companies selling them more sustainable products and services.

“This study is a world-first of its kind and the largest online, controlled trial to test the effect of different styles of social media content," David Halpern, chief executive of the Behavioral Insights Team, said in a statement. "The behavior change potential of social media is clear, and the results show that there’s huge opportunity — providing fertile ground for further exploration in this space.” Over 75 percent of respondents said they support content creators encouraging their audiences to behave in more sustainable ways. 

More social change is needed to avert climate catastrophe

Unilever’s study found that social media is an effective tool for sustainable consumer behavior change. However, today's world of social media is more commonly used to increase spending habits and consumption levels, which are key barriers to fighting climate change.

To effectively use their platforms to drive sustainable behaviors, brands and influencers must encourage individual actions and social change. Unilever is leveraging the results from the new study to bolster its sustainability messaging.

“What we hear from consumers is that living sustainably is a constant, overwhelming effort and many feel ‘my act alone won’t count, anyway,’” Braams noted. However, armed with the results of the new study, Unilever is aiming to support content creators and improve their sustainability content to help drive better individual actions across their consumer base.

“Together, we are learning what is all likes and no action versus content that makes sustainable choices simple and preferred,” she said. Instead of contracting with influencers to encourage their viewers to buy and consume, companies can accelerate rates of individual change by communicating with their audiences simple ways to make better choices for the environment.

Image credit: Anna Nekrashevich/Pexels