How can companies select the most meaningful indicator to report, for example, their local economic performance? What’s a better way of stating economic contributions to a community than 'paid $X in local tax contributions'?
Indicators become more meaningful when they communicate the greater impact of their work, both positive and negative.
How about using these indicators such as:
- 'created demand for $X in local products'
- 'established a supply of products for local market worth $X/yr and growing'
- ‘investing in (or now competing with!) X local businesses’
- 'integrated X local suppliers into our global supply chain'
This is exactly what a few companies, such as SABMiller, Nestle and Unilever, have started testing.
Download a free summary of our research on how some companies are selecting impact indicators, and better understanding the environments they work in.
25 Aug 2010
11 Aug 2010
Survey suggests Canadian and American interest in CSR is growing
In some ways, corporate sustainability in North America lags behind Europe. Anyone with experience in corporate sustainability would agree that this recent Washington Post article pulls the sustainability debate in the US back a decade.
For corporate sustainability to progress in North America, stakeholder education about sustainability is obligatory, including awareness of the remit of sustainability professionals.
73 corporate sustainability professionals recently surveyed in Canada agreed with this requirement. Stakeholder awareness - especially among the general public – was the third biggest opportunity identified.
Top three opportunities identified by Canadians working in corporate sustainability:
1. Pursuing renewable energy & energy efficiency (22%)
2. Developing solutions to climate change (16%)
3. Generating public awareness (13%)
Top three challenges identified:
1. Climate change (27%)
2. Embedding CSR into strategy and operations (24%)
3. Addressing the needs of First Nations communities (11%)
Our upcoming briefing on the state of corporate sustainability in Canada indicates a significant boost in company commitments to sustainability, and progress is largely attributable to government commitment and legislation.
So, what do corporate sustainability teams spend most of their time doing?
They are not spending their time on charity or orchestrating great disasters as the Washington Post suggests.
According to our survey of 73 professionals in Canada and 147 in the United States:
Top three activities of CSR/sustainability teams in the United States:
1. Partnerships & collaboration tied with Reporting (33% each)
2. Performance measurement (27%)
3. Community engagement (22%)
Top three activities of CSR/sustainability teams in Canada:
1. Performance measurement tied with reporting (37% each)
2. Partnerships & collaboration (29%)
3. Community engagement tied with building corporate reputation (25% each)
There has also been a noticeable rise in strategic engagement of Canadian and American professionals, and a growing interest in working hand-in-hand with operational managers to embed sustainable practices across their company.
For corporate sustainability to progress in North America, stakeholder education about sustainability is obligatory, including awareness of the remit of sustainability professionals.
73 corporate sustainability professionals recently surveyed in Canada agreed with this requirement. Stakeholder awareness - especially among the general public – was the third biggest opportunity identified.
Top three opportunities identified by Canadians working in corporate sustainability:
1. Pursuing renewable energy & energy efficiency (22%)
2. Developing solutions to climate change (16%)
3. Generating public awareness (13%)
Top three challenges identified:
1. Climate change (27%)
2. Embedding CSR into strategy and operations (24%)
3. Addressing the needs of First Nations communities (11%)
Our upcoming briefing on the state of corporate sustainability in Canada indicates a significant boost in company commitments to sustainability, and progress is largely attributable to government commitment and legislation.
So, what do corporate sustainability teams spend most of their time doing?
They are not spending their time on charity or orchestrating great disasters as the Washington Post suggests.
According to our survey of 73 professionals in Canada and 147 in the United States:
Top three activities of CSR/sustainability teams in the United States:
1. Partnerships & collaboration tied with Reporting (33% each)
2. Performance measurement (27%)
3. Community engagement (22%)
Top three activities of CSR/sustainability teams in Canada:
1. Performance measurement tied with reporting (37% each)
2. Partnerships & collaboration (29%)
3. Community engagement tied with building corporate reputation (25% each)
There has also been a noticeable rise in strategic engagement of Canadian and American professionals, and a growing interest in working hand-in-hand with operational managers to embed sustainable practices across their company.
28 Jul 2010
Preliminary findings available on measuring social and economic impact
Preliminary findings are now available from our current research into how and why companies are measuring social and economic impact in vulnerable communities.
View these findings in the slideshow from a well-attended roundtable debate in London.
Thanks to all who attended and contributed to the debate.
View these findings in the slideshow from a well-attended roundtable debate in London.
Thanks to all who attended and contributed to the debate.
Live surveys on the state of CSR in Canada and the USA
If you are a corporate sustainability practitioner located in Canada or the USA, you're invited to participate in our sustainability surveys.
Canadian practitioners can click here.
American practitioners can click here.
Some findings will be shared with participants, and full country briefings will be published in September and October this year.
Thanks in advance!
Canadian practitioners can click here.
American practitioners can click here.
Some findings will be shared with participants, and full country briefings will be published in September and October this year.
Thanks in advance!
OECD's MNE Guidelines to get a boost on supply chains, human rights & environment
On the 1st of June the OECD continued it's long, consultative process for updating the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.
The OECD chose to strengthen the guidelines in response to stakeholder requests for a greater focus on human rights, supply chains and environment (a previous previous blog post links to these requests).
The consultation was based on discussion papers by John Ruggie, BSR and the OECD, each paper seeking to outline the core aspects of human rights, supply chains and environment.
The white papers and complimentary slideshows available on the OECD website provide a nice refresher for anyone working in one of these three areas.
Let's hope the final update of the Guidelines are able to reflect these core issues, and push businesses and governments to challenge the way they operate.
The OECD chose to strengthen the guidelines in response to stakeholder requests for a greater focus on human rights, supply chains and environment (a previous previous blog post links to these requests).
The consultation was based on discussion papers by John Ruggie, BSR and the OECD, each paper seeking to outline the core aspects of human rights, supply chains and environment.
The white papers and complimentary slideshows available on the OECD website provide a nice refresher for anyone working in one of these three areas.
Let's hope the final update of the Guidelines are able to reflect these core issues, and push businesses and governments to challenge the way they operate.
21 Jul 2010
CCC says UK growth is dependent on low-carbon funding
In the new report 'Building a low-carbon economy - the UK's innovation challenge', the prestigious Climate Change Committee warns that economic growth and progress towards climate targets are dependent on continued funding of low-carbon technologies.
The committee - comprised of nine distinguished scientists, economists, political scientists and an engineer - was asked by the UK's Chief Scientific Adviser, John Beddington to "review the adequacy of research and innovation arrangements in the UK related to achieving our climate change goals".
A strong recommendation emerged: the continued funding of green technologies, which the committee believes is sub-par relative to funding levels in other countries.
The report supports UK development and deployment of offshore wind, marine, carbon capture and storage (CCS) for power generation, aviation technologies, smart grids, and electric vehicle technologies.
It encourages research in hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, technologies in agriculture and industry, 3rd generation solar PV technologies, energy storage and advanced biofuels technologies.
Additional recommendations to the UK Government include longer-term climate change objectives (beyond 2020) and to quickly develop a clear strategy on climate change so that the necessary institutions can be supported or established.
The committee - comprised of nine distinguished scientists, economists, political scientists and an engineer - was asked by the UK's Chief Scientific Adviser, John Beddington to "review the adequacy of research and innovation arrangements in the UK related to achieving our climate change goals".
A strong recommendation emerged: the continued funding of green technologies, which the committee believes is sub-par relative to funding levels in other countries.
The report supports UK development and deployment of offshore wind, marine, carbon capture and storage (CCS) for power generation, aviation technologies, smart grids, and electric vehicle technologies.
It encourages research in hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, technologies in agriculture and industry, 3rd generation solar PV technologies, energy storage and advanced biofuels technologies.
Additional recommendations to the UK Government include longer-term climate change objectives (beyond 2020) and to quickly develop a clear strategy on climate change so that the necessary institutions can be supported or established.
Cameron plans to eliminate the Sustainable Development Commission
Contrary to David Cameron's pledge to lead the "greenest government ever", the UK Government plans to axe its sustainability watchdog.
The Sustainable Development Commission was established in order to advise government how to cut carbon emissions.
The Green Party is calling it an absolute disaster, and purports that public sector spending cuts are misdirected.
According to the Guardian, Caroline Lucas MP, the head of the Green party, called the move an "absolute disaster". "The Sustainable Development Commission has been a vital source of well-informed scrutiny of government policy. The commission has come out with very sensible proposals."
In a similar vein, the new Government has also failed to appoint a replacement CSR minister.
Given a shortfall of sustainability regulation, is removal of these positions likely to impact the level of corporate commitment to sustainability?
The Sustainable Development Commission was established in order to advise government how to cut carbon emissions.
The Green Party is calling it an absolute disaster, and purports that public sector spending cuts are misdirected.
According to the Guardian, Caroline Lucas MP, the head of the Green party, called the move an "absolute disaster". "The Sustainable Development Commission has been a vital source of well-informed scrutiny of government policy. The commission has come out with very sensible proposals."
In a similar vein, the new Government has also failed to appoint a replacement CSR minister.
Given a shortfall of sustainability regulation, is removal of these positions likely to impact the level of corporate commitment to sustainability?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)