Clarity for the Green Economy

Practical webinar on GHG reporting and creating a baseline for action

2011-09-08T20:47:00.000-07:00

PG & E, one of the largest natural gas and electricity utilities in the U.S. explains how it came up with a single solution for managing and reporting on greenhouse gas emissions.

There are literally hundreds of similar success stories, where companies glean significant internal, regulatory and reputational benefits. Here's hoping this webinar can clarify the issues and encourage more companies to tackle their GHG emissions.

Download the webinar at http://www.enviance.com/registration/landing161.aspx

Campbell's feeds the hungry, nourishes its image

2011-03-18T12:16:00.000-07:00

Campbell's Soup is launching a new product called Nourish that has all the markings of a corporate social responsibility (CSR) superstar program.

An article in Wednesday's Toronto Star has the Executive Director of Food Banks Canada calling Campbell's "a good corporate citizen," saying "It is the first time in Canada that a food company operator has created a product thinking about Canadians who are struggling to put food on the table."

Nourish is a healthy, premium meal in a can containing a full serving of vegetables, grains and protein. It will hit Canadian shelves later this year, but the first 100,000 cans will be donated to Canadian food banks to help feed the poor and needy.

This marks a profound shift for Campbell's which has built its reputation with tasty-but-wildly salty and not particularly nourishing soups. The company launched a low-sodium line a few years ago, but the new product is an innovative strategy to both build a reputation as a responsible company and help the hungry.

Nourish hits the corporate responsibility bulls eye on several fronts.

First, feeding people is linked to the company's core mission, which helps all stakeholders - everyone from executives to line workers to customers and investors to immediately understand that this is more than just a publicity stunt. It may help with branding, but it's also the right thing to do.

CSR Programs that aren't linked to a company's core mission or strategies typically look a bit desperate and fall short of their goals.

Helping feed people is also something Campbell's can do well. Anyone who has ever donated to a food drive in Canada knows that Campbell's soups usually end up in the bag.

This is also a significant step up from a simple handout. Campbell's is not only donating run-of-the-mill soup to charity, they met several times with Food Bank representatives for advice on designing a product that would be truly useful. The consultations resulted in a complete meal that would be attractive and sold to consumers, not just given to the poor, thus dispelling any potential stigma. It also represents a significant step up from typical food bank food, because, as Mark Childs, vice-president of marketing recently pointed out to The Star “Access to healthy food is a right. That runs at the core of the DNA strand of the Campbell’s team.”

And to round out the campaign, Campbell's will be donating one can for each person who "likes" Nourish on the campany's Facebook or Twitter pages.

To quote Bob Willard from a talk last week in Ottawa: "Frankly I could care less about motivations these days, but let's just get on with it, whatever works. We'll worry about motivations maybe later on when we've got more time, but right now we're kind of running out of time on some of these sustainability issues, so let's just clean up our act and get companies to do the right things - and goodness, if it's the way in which they can be more successful companies wouldn't that be fantastic."

In Campbell's case, it's both.

Mr. Willard's full presentation can viewed here

Pacioretty, Air Canada et la LNH - une question de Responsabilité Sociale d'Entreprise?

2011-03-11T13:16:00.000-08:00

Ceux qui suivent l'actualité du développement durable s'intéresseront au cas de Air Canada, qui à annoncé jeudi que pour une question de cohérence vis-à-vis la responsabilité sociale d'entreprise, elle pourrait retirer son soutien à la Ligue Nationale de Hockey.

Ni la foulée de tweet, de courriels et de commentaires facebook, ni l'amorce d'une investigation criminelle visant l'un de ses joueurs, ni même une sortie de Mario Lemieux contre les coups à la tête que Sidney Crosby à reçu il y a deux mois, n'a pas réussi à faire bouger la LNH, une entreprise qui est souvent à l'épreuve de la critique et parfois même de la loi.

Elle s'est pourtant vue enfin contrainte de s'expliquer quand Air Canada à envoyé une lettre aux bureaux du commissaire Gary Bettman exigeant des correctifs pour Zdeno Chara, le joueur des Bruins de Boston qui à délivré un coup choc à Max Pacioretty lors du match du Canadien de Montréal mardi soir, sans quoi elle se verrait contrainte de retirer son soutien à la LNH et à plusieurs équipes.

Pacioretty souffre désormais de blessures importantes, dont une commotion cérébrale majeure et une vertèbre fracturée, qui pourraient mettre un terme à sa carrière. Pourtant la ligne à annoncé mercredi que le coup ne méritait aucune mesure disciplinaire supplémentaire.

Après la sortie du propriétaire du Canadien de Montréal, Geoff Molson, et l'amorce d'une investigation criminelle contre Chara par la Société de Police de la Ville de Montréal, la menace d'Air Canada pourrait bien faire la différence et inciter la LNH de mettre en place des mesures pour protéger la santé des joueurs. Le transporteur craint une association avec un sport considéré comme aveugle et irresponsable, et en fait une question de responsabilité sociale.

"Du point de vue de la responsabilité sociale d'entreprise, il est de plus en plus difficile d'associer notre marque à des événement sportifs qui pour pourraient mener à des accidents importants et irresponsables; Il va falloir que la LNH agisse avant d'être confrontée à un fatalité."

La LNH, c'est une entreprise à but lucratif dont la responsabilité est plus qu'économique. Un événement choc pourrait enfin la convaincre qu'elle est responsable aussi de la santé et du bien-être des gens qui livrent la marchandise sur la glace. Il suffirait d'envoyer un message clair aux joueurs que lors d'un match, il n'y a pas que les règles du jeu à respecter - il faut aussi éviter de blesser les joueurs de l'équipe adversaire.

Comme quoi une entreprise irresponsable pourrait bien se voir contrainte d'agir non pas par l'opinion publique ou même celle des propriétaires des équipes qui composent la ligue, mais par une autre entreprise qui, elle, comprend ce qu'est la responsabilité sociale.

Peut-être un jour, la LNH se verra contrainte d'agir sur le plan de la responsabilité environnementale...

Why do we need qualitative assurance?

2011-03-11T11:38:00.000-08:00

The following is an opinion-piece I wrote on prizmablog, in response to a post in which the author identified the lack of qualitative assurance for GRI-style sustainability reports. I've tweaked my comments for clarity.

It's high time for a North American group to develop a recognized qualitative assurance program to address the tick-boxing syndrome caused by the most common sustainability reporting assurance programs. Companies can currently have their reports checked by the big four auditing firms, third-party consultants or the GRI itself, but none of these services are "designed to provide any verification or assurance of content or quality of processes applied" (Nazari).

This, in my view, reduces the effectiveness of GRI and sustainability reporting in general. It also represents value lost for reporting companies.

The GRI could do qualitative assurance but has thus far resisted embarking on the consulting path (rightly so in my opinion as this would raise the same ethical issues as Accountability's recent foray). A prominent NGO would be ideally suited to offer this type of assurance - along the consulting model of the African Institute for Corporate Citizenship in South Africa. However, a prominent, for-profit consulting group could also develop and offer a qualitative report evaluations system, ideally in collaboration with a respected NGO to achieve recognition at scale.

The system need not be overly technical, as the reputation and expertise of the consulting group would largely suffice in establishing trust with clients and legitimacy for the service. Recommendations could be geared toward fully reporting according to the G3 and other relevant guidelines (Equator principles, global compact, King III, etc.), increasing transparency, aid with positioning, benchmarking and building trust, things the GRI only partly accomplishes due to an excessive reliance on tick-boxing.

Such a program could be a significant boon for transparency in general and help companies glean real value from the reporting process (ISO standards would benefit from a similar approach as they have long been criticized for excessive reliance on tick boxes and a failure to ensure mid-to-long-term, qualitative organizational change).

A qualitative evaluation offered in conjunction with the G3 checklist would be far more comprehensive and useful to clients than the common assurance offered by the big four - effectively addressing the question "How do I get full value from my sustainability report?"

I would develop this service myself but my young consultancy does not currently enjoy the scale to make it work effectively. With a background in sustainability assessments, consulting, journalism and social geography, including qualitative research methods, I am open to suggestions of groups that might be interested in collaborating on a high-potential R&D project.

What GRI's New York launch means for American and Canadian companies

2011-02-03T16:17:00.000-08:00

North American corporate social responsibility (CSR) continued its recent surge this week as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) officially launched its push to encourage American companies to report on environmental, social and governance issues using the GRI framework.

Traditionally squeamish about disclosing non-financial information, North American companies now have a better chance of catching up to the rest of the world (many estimates put us approximately 10 years behind).
The GRI Focal Point USA office has been open since October, but this week's official launch at the New York Stock Exchange was an opportunity to clearly demonstrate the benefits of sustainability reporting, and featured big-name speakers from NYSE, Bloomberg, Avon, The Conference Board, CERES, Mariott and UPS.

So what does GRI's arrival in the US mean for North American corporations?

1. Michelle Greene, a NYSE Euronext vice president and head of corporate responsibility, said it best in her opening address.

"We are at a tipping point. Companies that do not issue CSR reports will have to explain why they do not."

2. American and Canadian companies will have access to dedicated resources adapted to help them overcome the regulatory, structural and marketplace barriers that have prevented a bigger uptake in reporting.
The prevalence of litigation, particularly in the USA, has prevented many well-intentioned and often quite responsible companies from publicly disclosing information.

The tendency to keep progress secret for fear of outside criticism is largely seen as outdated, however - Levis has been gradually incorporating 2% organic cotton into it's jeans for almost a decade, but did not disclose it until recently for fear of being asked about the other 98%. Today's companies increasingly understand the value of engaging stakeholders in a conversation on the progress and challenges of corporate responsibility, and the GRI provides a framework to do just that.

In the age of social networking and Wikileaks, the days of quietly keeping progress and challenges under the radar are gone. Companies will need to adapt in order to succeed.

3. Companies will have greater opportunities to be part of the conversation on how the GRI G3 guidelines can increase transparency and create value specifically in North America, through events and face-to-face meetings.

4. They will have greater opportunities to test the current G3 guidelines on the ground and provide feedback, thus helping generate the next generation of GRI reporting (G4) guidelines.

5. Investors will increasingly look to CSR reports to determine long-term growth prospects and core value. Environmentally or socially-focused funds are gaining in popularity, while Bloomberg LLP recently began listing sustainability indicators beside conventional analytics on one of the main screens at the Bloomberg Terminal.

Not to over state the impact one New York office can have - the barriers to corporate responsibility and reporting remain significant- but the GRI's arrival on the ground in North America should serve as a useful tool to address and overcome them.

For now USA office is in good company, being hosted by The Conference Board while the Big Four accounting firms (Deloitte, Ernst & Young, KPMG and PwC) are underwriting operations over the initial two years.

For more information about Focal Point USA and contact information click here

La Californie adopte une loi sur la divulgation

2010-11-13T23:55:00.000-08:00

J'ai l'habitude de commenter d'avantage les nouvelles qui transforment la société, mais cette fois je céderai la place à l'excellent article de Toby Webb, propriétaire de la firme de recherche Ethical Corporation, sur son blogue.

Il s'agit d'une analyse pointue d'une loi inédite qui contraint les grandes entreprises californiennes à rendre compte de leurs efforts pour améliorer les droits de la personne sur la chaîne d'approvisionnement.

J'ajouterai seulement que cette nouvelle exigence risque d'augmenter sensiblement le niveau de transparence des entreprises canadiennes et multinationales qui font affaires au Canada - étant donné que la plupart des grandes entreprises du monde font affaires en Californie. C'est un des rares exemples d'avantages de l'intégration des marchés pour les travailleurs du sud.

C'est également une excellente nouvelle pour les consommateurs canadiens, qui auront désormais droit a plus d'information sur les impacts des multinationales sur la société, et probablement une amélioration des impacts de surcroit.

The sustainability imperative: the new IT megatrend?

2010-11-04T07:38:00.000-07:00

A recent article in the Harvard Business Review entitled "The Sustainability Imperative" caught my attention" review caught my attention. This is mostly due to the title, which promised to firm-up the business case for sustainability.

What I found was indeed helpful in that respect, but also surprisingly prophetic in it's assertion that sustainability is equivalent in its business impacts to the information technology revolution, electrification, mass production and globalization in their respective eras: a "megatrend" that is already, and will continue to define the way companies do business.

Environmental pressures have created liabilities, competition for resources, and public awareness to the point that investors and other stakeholders now consider them central to a company's performance, and expect firms to share information about them, say the authors.

"What this all adds up to is that managers can no longer afford to ignore sustainability as a central factor in their companies’ long-term competitiveness."

I won't spoil the details because this short-but-well-written article is definitely worth a read.

Desjardins fléchit ses muscles

2010-10-30T17:37:00.000-07:00

Il y a peu de temps, le milieu financier considérait que sont devoir se résumait au seul fait de faire croître l'argent.

Quand l'économie roulait au rythme des véhicules utilitaires sportifs, il était plus facile de fermer les yeux à l'énorme influence des banques, et croire qu'elles ont relativement peu d'impacts en comparaison avec les secteurs industriel et manufacturier.

Aujourd'hui la crise financière semble avoir réveillé le secteur par rapport à sa responsabilité sociale, mais aussi au fait qu'une bonne performance environnementale et sociale peut être synonyme de la valeur sûre à long terme...

C'est ainsi que Desjardins, la plus importante coopérative financière canadienne, démontre son leadership par l'entremise du groupe Placement Nordouest et Éthique (PNE) dont il fait partie. Cette année, le PNE demandera à cinquante sociétés internationales de dialoguer sur la façon d'améliorer leur performance environnementale, sociale, et de gouvernance (ESG).

Ainsi Canon, Power Corporation, Microsoft et Bombardier devront défendre leur bilan en droits humains, tandis que les six grandes banques canadiennes devront défendre la compensation de leur dirigeants, alors que les sables bitumineux devront montrer leurs progrès pour réduire leurs impacts sur l'environnement.

En pratique, il serait difficile pour l'instant de rendre compte de toutes les activités des sociétés dans lesquelles elles investissent, du moins dans un rapport de développement durable. Cela ne devrait cependant pas les empêcher de rendre compte des exigences faites en vers ces mêmes compagnies pour améliorer leur bilan ESG.

L'ère de la non-responsabilité des banques est révolue: elles ne peuvent plus prétendre que leur appui n'a pas d'influence pour le meilleure ou pour le pire. Le système financier joue un rôle déterminant dans presque toutes les sphères de la société, et sa responsabilité envers la société est donc énorme.

Les banques peuvent choisir de mettre leur influence au profit du changement, comme le fait Desjardins, ou bien se laver les mains des maux de la société. À vous de choisir laquelle mérite de gérer votre argent.

Young people engage differently with green communications

2010-09-08T12:58:00.000-07:00

Readers may be interested in a recent survey by Toronto-based advertising agency Bensimon-Byrne showing that age is a determining factor in how people buy into a company's green communications.

Whereas people under 30 are frequently perceived to be more sensitive to social and environmental issues, the survey and the report containing it seems to suggest that young people are significantly less likely to buy products or services based on a company's CSR performance...

It's much more tempting however to interpret the findings not as disinterest or apathy, but rather as disbelief or distrust. It should come as no surprise that traditional marketing techniques are more effective at reaching older audiences, and that companies are not using the tools to which young people are most receptive. Meanwhile, online activism is flourishing through organizations such as Avaaz that regularly gather significant financial support and millions of signatures for worldwide social and environmental campaigns.

The report appears to indicate that green or not, old-style messaging is being met with increased skepticism, particularly from younger generations. The growing trend in green communications is to combat apathy by building reciprocal relationships with potential clients using various combinations of integrated forums, social media and websites designed to be more transparent and solicit feedback. A stark contrast to the antiquated concept of feeding messages, these collaborative platforms give companies a human face that engages potential customers in a conversation and builds trust. Savvy companies can then demonstrate they are actively listening by using this new information to retool programs, strategies, products and communications.

So whether you call it CSR, going green, social responsibility or just better business you should have a solid strategy to engage, not only pass messages to, new generations.

The entire report can be found here

La responsabilité sociale en six étapes

2010-06-30T13:01:00.000-07:00

Il existe désormais un nouveau guide pour implanter la responsabilité sociale au sein des entreprises. Fort de son travail avec plusieurs des plus grandes compagnies au monde, la firme Deloitte vient de publier ce guide en collaboration avec le Pacte Mondial de Nations Unies afin de permettre aux entreprises, les petites comme les grandes, à gérer la durabilité sociale et environnementale.

Le guide se veut un véritable modèle de gestion du développement durable, et je profite de l'occasion pour en discuter car la démarche proposée s'apparente bien à celle que je prends avec mes clients. Il devrait également faciliter la tâche aux entreprises grâce à son approche simple, inspiré des modèles reconnus et éprouvés. La forme circulaire du graphique reflète le fait qu'il n'y a ni point d'entrée proscrite ni de fin à la démarche... il s'agît bien d'un processus itératif qui favorise une amélioration continue.

Le guide s'articule autour des dix principes du Pacte Mondiale dont les droits humains, les normes du travail, la performance environnementale et la lutte contre la corruption. Les étapes décritent ci-bas peuvent cependant orienter toute démarche en développement durable, qu'elle que soit la taille ou la nature de l'entreprise.

Les six étapes sont les suivantes:

Engager la direction: Afin d'assurer les appuis au plus haut niveau de l'organisation. Adopter un language commun.

Évaluer la situation actuelle: Sert identifier les risques et les priorités d'action

Définir: Fixer les objectifs, les stratégies et les résultats escomptés.

Agir: étendre les stratégies et les politiques à l'ensemble des opérations afin de créer la valeur.

Mesurer: Les impacts et les progrès accomplis a date, en gardant les objectifs bien en vue.

Communiquer: les progrès et les défis, afin de créer un lien de confiance avec les parties prenantes et engager leur appui pour une amélioration continue

Cliquer ici pour télécharger le guide au complet (uniquement disponible en Anglais pour l'instant).

Future directions for sustainability reporting

2010-05-26T11:54:00.000-07:00

After ten years of sustained growth that made the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) the world standard in sustainability reporting guidelines, the number of new companies reporting is falling off. As Mehrdad Nazari, an experience sustainability reporter points out in a recent blog, reporting may have hit a glass ceiling.

I highly doubt this apparent stagnation has anything to do with a lack of excellent reasons to report, but it is clear the GRI guidelines meet the needs of multi-national corporations best, although new sector supplements for non-governmental organizations and other groups are starting to change that. However if the GRI and reporting in general are ever to become truly mainstream, they will need to be tuned to the needs of the small and medium organizations that make up 80% of businesses worldwide.

I see this both as a challenge and as an opportunity. For one thing, it creates space to adapt reporting guidelines for small and medium organizations, understanding that their needs are intrinsically different from the needs of multi-national companies. Some purists will shudder at the thought, but it is essential to streamline the reporting process by cutting out the steps that are essential for large organizations but less relevant for smaller ones.

Secondly, it provides an opportunity to rethink the reporting process with a focus on creating strong internal, even horizontal links within organizations. SME's may lack time and money, but they tend to have a much better grasp of what makes their organization tick as managers tend to be directly involved in multiple aspects of the organization and its people. This enables internal communication in ways that larger companies can only dream of, making it much easier to determine what is important (materiality) and what needs to go into a report.

Last but not least, reporting will only become mainstream once readership increases, and one way to make that happen is to produce targeted and engaging reports. Readership from your key stakeholders is a must. Here again, smaller is an advantage since SME's tend to have more direct links to some crucial stakeholders such as employees and partners and may already know how to engage them effectively. For an interesting article on how one company succeeded in getting key stakeholder to read its report, click here.

If you're part of an small or medium organization that is thinking about measuring and communicating sustainability, I'd love to hear your thoughts on reporting. What does your organization need, and how can reporting help you get there?

Nouvelles innovations durables

2010-05-08T22:38:00.000-07:00

Les aventures en recherche et en développement qui auparavant étaient considérées comme trop risquées sont désormais nombreuses. C'est notamment grâce à l'engouement pour les produits verts, éco-efficaces et responsables que les entreprises innovatrices investissent avec plus d'audace... Les deux exemples ci-bas démontrent à quel point le fruits de cette nouvelle confiance est sucré.

La peinture solaire:

Les dernières années ont vu la filière solaire progresser de façon remarquable, mais voici que la peinture solaire, une technologie à échelle nano, pourrait bien voir le jour. Non seulement cette peinture à un facteur d'utilisation remarquable de 40% selon la compagnie Next Gen Solar (10% de plus que les technologies solaires et éoliennes traditionnelles), mais le financement approche le nécessaire pour la mise en marché, fait rare dans le domaine du solaire haute-efficacité à prix-modique.

Une fois commercialisée, la peinture solaire permettrait de transformer les surfaces en mini-centrales électriques. Une fois séchée, elle forme des petites cellules interconnectées capables de transformer les rayons du soleil en électricité mieux que les cellules photovoltaïques, et ce à un prix comparable au charbon, selon Inhabitat.com!

L'ampoule à DEL:

Moins époustouflante que la peinture solaire, l'ampoule DEL de la compagnie General Electric a toutefois un potentiel d'utilisation énorme compte tenu de la place qu'occupe l'éclairage dans le bilan énergétique des ménages et des entreprises.

La nouvelle ampoule aura une consommation d'énergie similaire aux fluocompacte, mais devrait durer environ 3 fois plus longtemps, et 25 fois plus longtemps qu'une ampoule incandescente selon Sustainable Life Media. , À l'encontre des fluocompactes, on pourra aussi l'utiliser avec un variateur de lumière.

Reconnu depuis longtemps pour sa faible consommation d'énergie et sa durée de vie incomparable, les lumières à DEL n'avaient jusqu'ici qu'un faisceau uni-directionnel, alors que la nouvelle technologie permet d'éclairer dans toutes les directions. L'ampoule de GE devrait apparaître sur le marché vers la fin de 2010 au coût d'environ 40$. Rappelons que les premières fluocompactes se vendaient à un prix comparable (15$ en 1980 - l'équivalent d'environ 30$ aujourd'hui) et présentent des risques pour l'environnement et la santé humaine en cas de bris - ou si elles ne sont pas recyclées selon un processus homologué - en raison du mercure qu'elles contiennent.

Planes vs. Volcano: a taste of things to come?

2010-04-25T12:01:00.000-07:00

As planes take to the air once again across Europe, many around the world are wondering out loud whether air travel is necessary, or indeed even disireable.

Mount Eyjafjallajeokull's eruption is a climate change disaster, releasing 150,000 tons of CO2 every day, with no signs of slowing down. Even more damaging however is European air travel, as seen in the diagram below courtesy of informationisbeautiful.net. Unfortunately "planes or volcano" is now a moot question. How can we avoid the global consequences of planes + volcano?

Renewed plane travel now means that people, governments and organizations worldwide must increase their efforts to reduce their carbon footprints.

In North America, it's hard to imagine what would happen if air travel were to suddenly stop. Not only would there be no more roses from Colombia or Californian strawberries in February, but people would be grounded as well. Europeans recently got a taste of how that feels, but when the effects of climate change become more severe, governments will be forced to restrict air travel by introducing quotas or raising prices, while improving train and ferry service. That's according to one of my favourite bloggers, ethicalcorporation-founder Toby Webb, in a post this week.

One option is to fly as much as possible before that happens, but here's hoping that people and organizations will reduce their carbon footprints now in order to avoid having to make bigger sacrifices in a few years.

Métro gratuit pour le jour de la terre

2010-04-13T18:58:00.000-07:00

Bon, j'exagère un peu, mais les réseaux de transport en commun de 11grandes municipalités québécoises offrent aux usagers d'inviter un ami à prendre le métro gratuitement le jour 22 avril prochain, le Jour de la Terre. Il s'agit d'une collaboration inédite non-seulement entre les réseaux de transport en commun, mais aussi pour leurs partenaires
le Fonds Écomunicipalité IGA, l'Association du transport urbain du Québec, Astral Media Radio et Quebecor Média.

Pour obtenir un laisser-passer gratuit, il suffit aux usagers qui détiennent un titre de transport valide de se présenter aux guichets de leur réseau, dont ceux du Grand Montréal (ACIT, AMT, RTL, STL, STM) en avance du jeudi, 22 avril. Les laissez-passer seront valides sur les trains de banlieues, comme sur les autobus et le métro.

C'est surement une belle occasion à inviter un ami à délaisser l'auto le temps de célébrer le Jour de la Terre, tout en économisant quelques litres d'essence.

The risks of waiting for legislation: why Wal-Mart's green shift will affect you

2010-03-28T21:33:00.000-07:00

While Canadian companies such as Interface Flor continue to prove that going green can create a huge competitive advantage, the vast majority of companies are playing the waiting game. Perhaps inspired by the Harper government's “integrated” approach (widely regarded as a euphemism for wait-for-the-Americans-to-act-first), many see going green as an expense rather than an investment, and prefer to wait for the government to even the field.

But what if a multinational business, say the world's biggest retailer, were to preempt legislation and create a domino effect? The wait-and-see companies would then be at a disadvantage compared to those that had acted before action became necessary.

Last month Wal-Mart volunteered to cut 20 million metric tons of CO2 from its supply chain, among other environmental targets, thereby forcing the company's more-than 100,000 suppliers to reduce their environmental footprints. A market leader for decades, Wal-Mart's influence can hardly be underestimated... other companies will inevitably follow suit in order to remain competitive.

The effects on the company's 1,300 suppliers in Quebec are immediate: they are suddenly confronted with the very real possibility of losing their biggest client – or at least prime shelf space - unless they make a sudden green shift themselves. One of them called me recently looking for help measuring and reducing impacts not only at their Montreal facility, but also across their supply chain within 12 months in order to meet Wal-Mart's standards.

Strategic change can be extremely beneficial, creating opportunities for in-house innovations and a better understanding what drives a company - but the ride can be very bumpy when change is imposed, especially when a deadline looms. When companies act early, going green is less about 180 degree change than an adaptation that gradually improves on current processes, allowing time to develop the sustainable actions that mesh with the companies existing strategies and processes to create value and build trust with employees, clients and suppliers.

Over time the strategies are reviewed, analyzed and improved thereby creating a snowball effect that allows companies to link sustainability with overall performance and improve both. The result is a competitive advantage which companies that wait for legislation or other field-evening pressures cannot hope to match.

And Wal-Mart isn't the only company going green. Loblaws, Canada's number one grocery store group has been working to reduce its supply chain impacts by working to remove endangered fish from its shelves by 2013 and increasing the number of products in its Organics line. Rona, Canada's leading hardware is also a leader in supply chain transparency and has begun evaluating the life-cycle impacts of many products it sells.

The green shift is happening with or without legislation. Is your organization ready to be a leader in the new green economy?

Les citoyens se tournent davantage au « BMWs »

2010-03-10T21:02:00.000-08:00

Trois semaines, trois annonces de taille pour l'environnement, et qui risquent d'influencer le climat des affaires. Troisième texte sur trois

Une première depuis 40 ans - les déplacement en automobile ont chuté, selon la dernière analyse origine-destination de l'agence métropolitaine de transport (AMT). La chute de 1% est due aux choix de Montréalais avertis, qui en 2008 sont de plus en plus nombreux à choisir la formule Bike, Metro, Walk (BMW).

Les faits en bref:

-La chute de 1% s'applique aussi à la Ville de Laval et à la Rive-Sud, alors que la population à augmenté de 5% entre 2003 et 2008. À Montréal toute seule, les déplacements en auto ont été réduits de 6%. La région se démarque
donc face à la tendance nord-américaine d'augmentation continue d'utilisation de l'auto.

-les déplacements en métro ont augmenté de 15%, et les déplacement en vélo, de 11%. Ces chiffres ont de quoi à surprendre puisque l'analyse date de 2008, soit avant l'entrée en fonction du vélo-partage BIXI, qui à depuis connu un énorme succès! Il faut donc s'attendre à ce que la tendance prenne du gallon au cours des prochaines années, au fur et à mesure que les gens prennent l'habitude des transports actifs, et que l'infrastructure (piste cyclables, nouvelles lignes de tramway) s'améliore elle aussi.

Une petite anecdote pour illustrer en quoi l'engouement pour les transports actifs peut avantager/désavantager les entreprises. Récemment chez un client pour un service-conseil 5 Gestes éco-efficaces (5 gestes pour améliorer le bilan du développement durable d'une organisation), j'étais surpris de découvrir que cette entreprise de marketing située dans le vieux port encourage déjà les transports actifs. Elle offre le stationnement intérieur à vélo, des douches sur place et une contribution à l'achat d'une CAM mensuelle pour le transport en commun. À l'avis de la responsable des Opérations, les transports actifs améliorent la santé, l'humeur et la productivité des employés, tout en réduisant le CO2 et la pollution due à la navette quotidienne sur l'environnement. Tout cela chez une entreprise qui ne se trouve pas du tout verte... C'est le gros bon sens, comme on dit.

Greenwashing's latest victim: one massive“bamboo-zle.”

2010-03-07T17:58:00.000-08:00

The last few weeks have brought an unusually large number of environmental announcements that appear set to change the way we do business in Canada, particularly Quebec. The text below is the second of three mini-analysis' of these changes, and what they may mean for you.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Canadian Competition Bureau (CCB) recently accused companies of “bamboo-zling” consumers. Both are now accusing retailers of deliberately misleading consumers by labeling products as “made of bamboo fiber,” and forcing them to instead adopt the term “bamboo rayon.”

Yes, the raw material used to make bamboo fabric is indeed the fast-growing plant that requires little or no pesticides or fertilizers and is reputed to have natural anti-microbial properties. But the process to turn bamboo stalks into into those super-soft shirts, towels, underwear is so chemical intensive that the finished product does not retain any of bamboo 's natural properties. The products are therefore more accurately described as rayon or viscose, synthetic fibers similar to nylon. For a visual description of the chemical transformation, click here.

As bamboo garments increasingly finding their way onto clearance racks, business in general must adapt now that federal bodies are finally targeting greenwashers, and, in the case of the FTC, threatening to sue non-compliant companies for misleading consumers. Beyond the direct consequences of litigation, the erosion of consumer confidence could be potentially disastrous for companies caught greenwashing - whether intentional or due to a lack of product knowledge. Like unsubstantiated health claims before it, greenwashing has become a financial and reputational risk,

Two years ago the New York Times reported that Lululemon Athletica's popular line of seaweed-based clothing had no demonstrable health benefits, contrary to its product claims. The company had to remove all references to the product's therapeutic benefits from its websites and stores as its stock price plunged.

The CCB and FTC have long investigated health-related claims, but until recently, companies were free to advertise environmental benefits with only consumer skepticism and websites such as the Greenwashing Index to refute them. And while it has long been considered good practice for companies to thoroughly research and prove their advertised-environmental benefits, government watchdogs' sudden interest in greenwashing has dramatically increased the risks of making unsubstantiated product claims.

Could it be that we are entering a time when the responsibility for proving or disproving green claims will fall squarely on the shoulders of companies, rather than consumers?

Trois percées pour l'environnement à Montréal

2010-02-25T14:13:00.000-08:00

Trois semaines, trois annonces de taille pour l'environnement. Le portrait de la ville évolue alors que la place qu'elle réserve à l'environnement grandit à vue d'œil. Afin de mieux s'adapter aux changements qui s'annoncent, les organisations ont intérêt à en prendre note. Au cours des prochains jours ce blogue affichera trois mini-analyses des retombées de ces annonces pour les entreprises, ONG, OSBL et compagnie. Restez des nôtres.

Cinq nouvelles usines de traitement des résidus verts

La première annonce, celle de cinq nouvelles installations pour traiter les résidus organiques à Montréal et en région, dont trois bioréacteurs qui produiront de l'électricité à partir du méthane dégagé par la décomposition, permettra d'augmenter sensiblement le compostage résidentiel et commercial.

D'après Vision Durable, les projets, évaluées à $559 millions, devraient entrer en fonction d'ici trois ans. C'est à dire que définitivement d'ici 2013, pour éviter les chocs de la réglementation, toutes les entreprises devraient se doter d'un plan de gestion des matières résiduelles. Petit conseil: des 3RV(V pour valorisation), la réduction sera toujours l'option la plus rentable car le questionnement qui s'impose permet de réduire les intrants et les coûts de traitement de extrants, tout en améliorant la qualité de l'environnement – d'où la phrase « le meilleur résidu, c'est un résidu qu'on ne produit pas. »

Blogue bilingue

2010-02-14T20:15:00.000-08:00

Soucieux de n'exclure personne, je publierai dorénavant en Français et en Anglais, en alternance. Afin de publier plus souvent, les textes ne seront disponibles que dans une langue à la fois - mais vous pouvez toujours m'adresser directement vos questions à ianaérobaseduragence.ca, et il me fera plaisir d'y répondre.

Clarity for the Green Economy goes bilingual

2010-02-14T20:12:00.000-08:00

Publishing in a bilingual city such as Montreal often means excluding one audience or another, so this blog will now alternate between English and French-language entries in an effort to inform and engage both. I prefer to post frequently so will not publish translations of the text, but interested readers can always contact me directly at iandon'tspamsustainableagency.ca for information regarding posts, including translations.

ISO 26000, the key to making sustainability accessible?

2010-02-14T19:25:00.000-08:00

The world's first universally-applicable sustainability standard is entering the final stretch. ISO 26000, ISO's first “soft,” ie. non-technical standard will be finalized and put to a vote in Copenhagen this May 17-21st. Let's hope the Danish capital is a luckier location for ISO than it was for international climate negotiations...

As Paul Hohnen, co-founder of the Global Reporting Initiative writes in this recent post on the Ethical Corporation website, the crucial vote may not pass. Concerns over content, cost and certification could lead some countries to vote against the new standard. For a analysis of these issues, click here.

As a user and proponent of the GRI guidelines, I would nevertheless welcome a standard designed to be more flexible. From the outset, ISO 2600 was meant to help all organizations – big and small, businesses, NGO's etc. - integrate sustainability into the every-day working practices. For more than 10 years, the GRI has helped companies measure, improve and communicate their impacts on people, the environment and the economy, but it has come under criticism for being too long, too restrictive and too expensive to be useful for smaller companies.

At sustainable.Agency, we've worked hard to adapt the GRI into a series of tools to help SME's measure impacts, set reductions goals and communicate in ways that will make their stakeholders stand up and take notice. And yet, our client's need for reports that are easy to use and read (five pages or less) has required tweaking the guidelines to the extent that we qualify them as “GRI inspired.” ISO 26000 could therefore be invaluable in spreading sustainability and transparency to groups that haven't yet been engaged by the green shift.

At a conference in Montreal last February on responsible purchasing, Denis Pronovost, a member of the Canadian delegation working on ISO 26000 said that far from competing with the GRI guidelines, ISO aims to complement it by setting out broad-based goals for implementing sustainability within organizations. He also expressed reservations concerning its length, saying that the Canadian delegation would likely oppose a document more than 100 pages-long. Any bigger, he said, would be an obstacle for smaller organizations with limited time and resources. “We want as many organizations as possible to use the standard, and they won't if it's too long.”

Any developments will be posted on this blog when they become available.

Taxe sur le stationnement: l'avenir du transport en commun et du centre-ville en jeu.

2010-01-21T13:17:00.000-08:00

Le texte qui suit est également paru le site de Gaïa Presse

Les commerces du centre-ville de Montréal devront composer avec une nouvelle hausse de leurs taxes : le récent budget municipal inclut le paiement d’une redevance d'environ 400 $ par an pour chaque place de stationnement qu'ils possèdent, en plus de l'augmentation des impôts fonciers qui varie selon l'arrondissement. Les quelque 20 millions de dollars prélevés au total serviront à financer le transport en commun, et l'administration de Gérald Tremblay estime que les commerces ne seront pas accablés outre mesure.

Aux prises elle-même avec la récession et des finances serrées, l'administration publique devra trouver environ 350 M$ de plus par année, si elle veut réaliser les projets prévus dans son ambitieux Plan de transport, tels la navette ferroviaire vers l'aéroport et le réseau des tramways. La Ville a déjà largement exploité les impôts fonciers et les autres leviers financiers habituels. La taxe sur le stationnement serait donc raisonnable, si elle améliorait l'accessibilité et la qualité du transport en commun. On n’y arrivera cependant pas avec 20 M$.

La proposition de Projet Montréal

Ne vaudrait-il pas la peine d'étudier la proposition de Projet Montréal, qui consiste à élargir cette taxe à tous les commerces de la Ville? « Plus équitable », cette initiative assurerait un plus grand financement aux transports en commun et permettrait de réduire le taux d'imposition par unité de stationnement à 325 $ par an, en moyenne.

Tous les stationnements non résidentiels hors rue de plus de cinq places seraient taxés, ce qui permettrait aux commerces du centre-ville de concurrencer les grands centres de la périphérie qui offrent gratuitement le stationnement à leurs visiteurs. C'est du moins l'opinion de Peter McQueen, porte-parole de Projet Montréal en matière de finances.

Regardons les deux scénarios de plus près, celui de la taxe découlant de la Loi 22 et celui de la proposition de Projet Montréal.

Des rentrées d’argent nécessaires

Le Parti Projet Montréal estime que sa proposition permettrait à la Ville d'engranger environ 135 M$, soit 115 M$ de plus que la Loi de l'administration Tremblay. Cet argent pourrait servir à améliorer la qualité des transports en commun et leur accessibilité, quoiqu'il en faille encore plus pour financer tous les projets du Plan de Transport. Projet Montréal voudrait un jour étendre la taxe à toute la région métropolitaine, mais cela nécessiterait l'aval des villes de la banlieue et ne serait donc pas réaliste à court terme.

La Ville a mis sur pied une commission pour étudier la question de l'impact sur les commerces. Ces derniers auraient le choix de refiler la facture à leurs clients ou de l'absorber, soit environ 1,12 $ par jour pour la Loi actuelle, contre 0,94 $ par jour pour la proposition de Projet Montréal qui vise ainsi à limiter le choc pour les propriétaires de stationnement.

Aussi minime soit-elle, la taxe pourrait suffire pour inciter des commerces à fuir le centre‑ville, si elle ne visait pas les autres arrondissements, selon le docteur Craig Townsend, spécialiste en transport urbain à l'Université Concordia. « L'inquiétude, c'est que si on vise uniquement le centre-ville, certains commerces iront là où les frais sont moins élevés, ce qui pourrait augmenter la tendance vers l'étalement urbain. L'élargissement de l'application de la taxe à l'ensemble de la Ville permettrait d'éviter ce problème. Le fait est que le stationnement, c'est une activité à très petite valeur économique, qui occupe un espace à très grande valeur économique. »

Réduire les déplacements en auto?

L'effet serait plutôt nul sur le plan environnemental dans les deux scénarios, ajoute le docteur Townsend. « Une taxe d’un ou deux dollars par jour n'empêcherait pas les gens de conduire, car c'est relativement peu en comparaison avec le coût d'utilisation d'un véhicule, » qui s'élève à 6 500 $/an, selon les plus récentes données de l'Association canadienne des automobilistes.

Chose certaine, les centres commerciaux en périphérie se prêtent si mal au transport en commun, et l'offre de service y est si faible, que relativement peu de gens laissent l'auto à la maison pour éviter d'y payer le stationnement. M. McQueen estime pour sa part qu'une taxe étendue permettrait d'améliorer l'accessibilité aux centres commerciaux en périphérie au point où « plus de gens feront le choix des transports en commun. Les entreprises vont alors évaluer leurs vrais besoins en matière de stationnement, et peut-être même qu'elles en remplaceront par quelque chose de plus utile, comme des arbres et des espaces verts. »

Équité commerciale ET sociale

M. McQueen évoque la dimension équitable de la proposition de son parti, mais de quelle « équité » s'agit-il? Une taxe étendue créerait un meilleur équilibre entre les commerces du centre-ville et les magasins à grande surface, contribuant ainsi à limiter l'exode vers la périphérie et la banlieue. Cela favoriserait la vitalité du secteur par la densité, un aménagement également plus sain pour l'environnement, car il réduit le besoin de se déplacer, et donc, une meilleure planification urbaine...

Quant à l'équité sociale, une augmentation du prix du stationnement pourrait bien entraîner un coût de vie marginalement plus élevé pour les propriétaires d'auto. La taxe étendue de Projet Montréal toucherait toute la ville, y compris les résidents des quartiers les plus pauvres. Elle ne toucherait cependant pas les blocs de moins de cinq places de stationnement, afin d'exonérer les petits commerces et leurs clients. De plus, M. McQueen estime que l'argent perçu grâce à la taxe permettrait d'améliorer l'accessibilité aux quartiers pauvres. Selon le docteur Townsend, si une légère augmentation du coût de la vie devait se traduire par « une amélioration quantifiable de l'offre du transport en commun aux quartiers mal desservis, ce serait une bonne chose. »

De Vancouver à Nottingham

Taxer le stationnement, ce n'est pas un nouveau concept. La Ville de Vancouver a expérimenté les deux scénarios à l'examen à Montréal. En 2007, elle a dû annuler une loi sur le stationnement non résidentiel dans la grande région de Vancouver à la suite d’un grand nombre de ratés – plusieurs espaces verts et stationnements à vélo adjacents aux stationnements pour véhicules avaient été comptés lors du recensement des espaces à taxer - et une vive opposition populaire.

Cela fait longtemps que la Ville de Vancouver applique une taxe de 7 % sur tout stationnement payant de la grande région, mais le mois dernier, l'administration a triplé la taxe au centre-ville. Une coalition formée de plus de 30 groupes, dont la Building Owners and Managers Association et la Chambre de commerce, s'est vite dressée pour dénoncer l'inégalité de la mesure. La campagne qu'elle a menée pour combattre la taxe - affiches, brochures, médias sociaux, site Web sophistiqué et mobilisation des citoyens pour inonder les boîtes vocales des élus – devrait servir d'avertissement à Montréal, qui aurait intérêt à apprendre des erreurs de Vancouver. D'ailleurs, une coalition similaire vient de prendre forme à Montréal.

Inversement, la Ville de Nottingham en Angleterre ira bientôt de l'avant avec une nouvelle taxe sur le stationnement, pour réduire l'engorgement et financer une nouvelle ligne de tramway. Les frais de gestion, que l'étude de faisabilité estime à seulement 10 % des montants encaissés, sont si bas, que les villes voisines de Cambridge et Oxford, entre autres, envisagent de s'inspirer de l'exemple de Nottingham. Cette ville ne vise toutefois que les espaces destinés aux employés, tandis que les deux scénarios montréalais visent tous les blocs de stationnement commercial. Malgré cette nuance, on peut dire que les taxes sur le stationnement ont le vent dans les voiles, par rapport aux options de rechange : Nottingham avait étudié la possibilité d'instaurer des péages aux entrées de la ville pour financer les grands projets de transport en commun, une option que Montréal étudie actuellement dans le cadre de ses deux commissions de consultation sur le Plan de transport. Nottingham a finalement préféré la taxe sur le stationnement, car « cette option réduira l'engorgement de façon plus simple et plus équitable et ciblera mieux les voyageurs de la banlieue, que les péages routiers, » a dit le conseiller Jon Collins, en entrevue avec la BBC.

Étendre la taxe sur le stationnement constitue donc une option prometteuse que l'administration de Montréal devrait étudier rapidement, avant de se s'engager dans des péages sur les ponts. Cette dernière option nécessiterait l'accord des banlieues, et il est loin d'être acquis. À tout le moins, convenons que, puisqu'il est question de 135 M$, la proposition de Projet Montréal mérite d'être étudiée en bonne et due forme par une commission municipale appuyée d'une ou plusieurs audiences publiques.

How to communicate "Green"

2010-01-12T14:14:00.000-08:00

How green is your organization? Light, medium, or dark green? At what point can an organization say "we're green," without being met with the skepticism that often greets such claims?

The answer, unfortunately, is never. "Green" is a kind of holy grail with no universally accepted definition, so some people will always cry Greenwash no matter how green your organization is, so don't pretend to be absolutely green. Even some of the worlds most sustainable companies, such as Interface Flor, prefer to talk about their goals to be greener still, rather than brag about what they've done. They do this to avoid the inherent risks of greenwashing (see previous post, a case study on Canadian Tire)

Companies should first seek to answer this question ...
themselves: Do you feel your organization is green? If yes, why? If not, what factors are you working at improving?

Talk to People: people within your organization but also those who interact with it on a regular basis. These can be customers, suppliers, partners: what do these groups of people expect from your organization? What do they feel are your organization's strengths and weaknesses. Listening to your stakeholders can help you evaluate potential risks, and invest your time and money where it matters most.

Assess your "Greeness:" So how green are you? Once you've decided which green-related factors matter most to your organization and the people around it, create a few indicators to measure progress over time. Common indicators include waste and CO2 generation, energy use, employee illness days, transportation emissions, etc.

Set Goals: armed with your indicators as a baseline, you can now set realistic and ambitious goals for how much better you want to be in one, two or five years.

Tell the Story: Context is king. People really do want to know how companies are making the transition to the green economy, so do make your message accessible to a wide audience and do away with jargon. Most people understand that sustainability is a work in progress so don't be afraid to expose a few warts. Transparency and honesty in communications help you build trust with consumers and employees.

And however you chose to communicate your efforts, remember: claiming to be green is like saying you're the world's fastest runner - unless your name is Youssain Bolt, no one is going to believe you.

The Cost of Greenwashing

2010-01-03T14:18:00.000-08:00

I spent some time this past week looking through retail-store fliers and websites in search of boxing week deals. One in particular caught my eye, which I think illustrates the risks of making products seem greener than they are...
Going through Canadian Tire's website, I noticed that the company has replaced the heading “Garbage Bags, with “biodegradable garbage and recycling bags,” which is where I found this week's sale item, Hero-brand garbage bags. At best, the new heading is a gross exaggeration since a quick look at the product description reveals that these are plain, old, disposable garbage bags. Indeed, of the 16 bags under the heading, only 1 is biodegradable while 4 are transparent, meaning they can be used instead of recycling bins a handful of Canadian cities. Not that there's anything green or new about transparent bags.

At worst, the heading misleads consumers into thinking they are buying sustainable products by playing off the similarities between the words “recycling” and “recyclable.” Most Canadian cities do not recycle bags, so your used bottles, cans, newspapers may go to the recycling facility, but the bag will still en up in the landfill.

This is one of the more glaring examples of Canadian Tire's recent effort to look green without making a real effort. Others include efforts to promote so-called low-flow shower heads that have been mandated by Federal law in the United States since 1992 (to be fair, CT does sell a few ultra-low-flow models but these are buried deep in the website).

The cost: “greenwashing” can dupe customers into buying a non-green product, but it's a risky gamble. Companies that underestimate their customers' intelligence risk negatively impacting the trust relationship they've built through years of good business practices, not to mention expensive branding and marketing. Watchdogs such as Terra Choice, Greenpeace, Choice the University of Oregon and countless blogs are quick to single out companies that claim to be greener than they are. It can be tempting to save money by investing in marketing rather than substantive organizational changes, but one must weigh the short-term gains against the potential costs to a company's reputation and credibility.

The alternative: Canadian Tire's major competitors Home Depot and Rona began their green shifts several years ago by conducting life-cycle analysis' on dozens of products to measure their overall impacts, and have challenged suppliers to provide more efficient, less wasteful options. Their marketing campaigns are effective because they are based on (apparently legitimate) numbers. With its competitors so far ahead, Canadian Tire would have a hard time becoming a green leader in the sector, but it could stay off the green watchdogs' lists by investing in a green strategy axed on substantive change instead of marketing. Product life-cycle assessments and a transparent sustainability report would be go a long way to building a legitimate green reputation.

Copenhagen, and what it means for you

2009-12-07T21:08:00.000-08:00

The world's politicians will meet in Copenhagen today in an effort to create a binding agreement based on fixed carbon emissions targets. Even the Canadian government, which until recently defended flexible, intensity-based reductions targets(a weak position that would allow the western tar sands to grow by emitting less CO2 per barrel but more overall), now says it will argue in favour of binding emissions targets

So what does this mean for owners of small and medium organizations? ...
It means that if you haven't yet thought about your carbon footprint, it's time to start. Whether or not Copenhagen succeeds, the world is moving toward a low carbon economy, and the first step is finding out how much your organization and/or your product emits.

Part of my job is to convince small and medium organizations to measure their environmental and social impacts, however slight. Some are more aware of their impacts than others, so I like to ask business owners WHY they care. The answers allow me to help them better. Last week I met with the director of a fair-trade, organic-cotton-apparel distributor in Montreal, and asked him flat out: why do you care? Here are his answers.

"First, I just want to know. I lived in India for six months and studied fair-trade organic cotton, so I know that it's better for the environment and the producers physical and economic health. But I don't know how much carbon is emitted and what impacts occur once the cotton leaves India.

Secondly, once we know what those impacts are, we can develop a business charter saying what we stand for. So anytime someone on the team needs to make a sensitive decision, they will be able to refer to that chart for guidance.

And of course knowing our impacts allows us to let people know about the good things we're doing."

I would add to this last point that's it's also crucial to talk about organization's sustainability challenges. This helps build trust among stakeholders, as opposed to simply hitting your audience with more faceless PR. But I digress.

This business owner had the right idea. By acting now and understanding his organization's impacts, he is demonstrating leadership that may earn goodwill among employees, partners and clients, not to mention positive publicity. He is also acting ahead, anticipating that international agreements may in the near future force Canadian businesses to measure and reduce CO2 and other social and environmental impacts.

And by the way his business is tiny, five employees only. No massive supply chain, no franchises or divisions, nor widespread distribution network, proving that we all have important impacts at scale.

Organizations have everything to gain by understanding their impacts. If you wait for your competitors to act you'll miss the opportunity to lead the field, manage risks and develop that crucial trust relationship with the people who are important to your organization.

Consulting firms such as . help businesses, NGO's, not-for-profits and institutions develop strategies that work for them. To find out how, send me an email at ian@sustainableagency.ca or go to sustainableagency.ca

Change is coming: Are You Ready?

2009-11-25T11:52:00.000-08:00

International Panelists Agree: growth does not equal happiness. Economic experts Tim Jackson, head of an advisory body for the British government, Robert Costanza professor at the University of Vermont and Peter Victor, Professor at York University in Toronto came together today in an international podcast that challenged the western concepts of growth, progress, and quality of life.

Key points included...

1. The current economic system cannot be sustained. Change is necessary to ensure our continued survival within the planet's ecological limits.

2. Modern economies must stop growing in the commonly accepted sense of the term.

3. The Western world is at a point where increased consumption does not lead to increased quality of life.

4. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) does not measure quality of life. It measures financial data in the absence of other factors that influence personal happiness and fulfillment, and as such is an ineffective as an indicator of progress.

5. Growth/Progress should be measured not by GDP, but rather by a group of indicators:
a) Ecological capital (the environment's ability to provide us with services, resources etc.)
b) Social capital (our ability to provide health care, social safety net, etc.)
c) Human capital (full employment, rewarding work)
d) Built capital (efficient energy systems, buildings, cars, etc.)

Pretty heady stuff, but the concept appears to be catching on. Even French President Sarkozy has publicly commented that economies cannot grow continuously.

If the one-hour panel can be reduced to a single message, it is that inevitable change is coming - perhaps not as soon as some of us would like - but that the people, businesses, NGO's and governments that prepare now will survive the change much better than those that wait. What are you doing to prepare?

Tim Jackson speaks about tomorrow's green economy

2009-11-25T11:09:00.000-08:00

Part one of a talk Tim Jackson, author of Prosperity Without Growth, gave a few weeks ago, echoing many of the themes discussed in today's international panel. The video could be better, but I find the content to be crucial.

Getting it right in Copenhagen

2009-11-15T14:17:00.000-08:00

Politicians and environmentalists alike were lowering expectations in the lead up to the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference this week, but a few voices cut through the din.

Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, expects "...a list of targets from the industrialized countries, a list of commitments from the developing countries, and a list of financial contributions," according to the Reflections on Ethical Business blog. In essence, such a deal would result in...
significantly lower reductions than the scientific community is calling for, particularly since Barack Obama is unlikely to commit the United States to more than the 20 per cent reduction that is being discussed in the U.S. senate. If Obama commits to more than 20 per cent, he will lose hard-earned support at home and the legislation will not pass.

And while most would agree that something is better than nothing, considering the urgent need for action on climate change, contrast de Boer's hopeful analysis with David Suzuki's message to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) on Friday:
"I would prefer for the Copenhagen talks to fail rather than end up with another watered-down agreement." We can't afford another Kyoto. If we can't get a good deal in Copenhagen, we'd be better off waiting until next year and getting it right."

As one of Canada's preeminent environmentalist voices, Suzuki's comments are all the more poignant considering that Canadian political brass has become a subversive and increasingly irrelevant voice on climate change. Dozens of developing nations walked out when the government took the microphone at the Thailand climate talks this October, illustrating Canada's increasing isolation on the world stage.

Profit or not-for-profit?

2009-11-09T19:06:00.000-08:00

What did you wish you knew before starting a social enterprise?

My partner and I had the opportunity to contribute to a panel last Wednesday with the founders of some great organizations: Pieter Dietz from My Social Actions, Aleece Germano, founder of The S.W.A.P Team as well Lucie Chagnon, an Ashoka fellow and President of Commodus: Concilliation travail famille.

The panel discussion, which led to some heated debates, was part of a sold-out two-day social entrepreneurship conference organized by YES Montreal that provided some much needed (and particularly hard to come by) guidance for young social entrepreneurs. I'd thought I'd share some of the main ideas/debates, on this page...

Profit or Not-for-profit: Grants are available for both types of organizations, so don't think that your choice, one way or the other will prevent you from securing that seed funding to take you through the first few months.

Also remember that both types of enterprises need to make a profit: a little bit of money stabilizes your income and allows you to eat without worrying about whether or not your funders will renew their support.

Don't be afraid of making money: I have to admit, I've often hesitated on this one since I've never envisioned . growing beyond a few employees. And yet, the more money you make, the more people you can help - either by expanding your activities or by supporting worthwile causes (perhaps supporting young social entrepreneurs)...

When can you expect to live full-time off your project? This depends largely on the type of organization and the abilities of its owners, but everyone needs help starting out: financial and physical in the form of partners or advisors. Most for-profit businesses should be able to support themselves after the first year, but it takes a few months to get your name out there to the extent that funders, clients, media and other networks will take notice. Until then, seed funding and/or a part-time job will keep food on the table

But is it possible to make a lot of money? Possibly the most interesting exchange of the night was fuelled by Germano's answer to an audience member's insistance that even socially conscious companies must eventually make big profits to support the owner's family and way of life.

"We measure our success in how many boxes of clothing we collect, and how many people we help," she said, suggesting that it is possible to make a decent living off social entrepreneurship, but that the paybacks come in various forms.

In any case, Paul Hawken, Ray Anderson and Craig Kielburger are just a few examples of social/environmental entrepreneurs who have proven that sustainability and business are both compatible and profitable, thereby inspiring others to do the same.

And yes, knowing that you're helping to create change in no small way helps you get through the tough times, whether you're in a downturn or just starting out. There's something inspiring about doing something you believe in, particularly knowing that others will benefit.

www.theswapteam.org, www.my.socialactions.com, www.commodus.ca, sustainableagency.ca

British publisher

2009-11-09T16:21:00.000-08:00

Thanks to the Brits who have visited the blog over the past week. Those of you living across the pond can find Tim Jackson's book on sustainable economics for sale on the Earthscan website (http://www.earthscan.co.uk/?tabid=92763), while the New Economics Foundation's publication on the same subject can be downloaded for free at http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/the-great-transition (pdf), or printed and bound for 10 quid.

Cheers

Prosperity Without Growth

2009-11-04T20:03:00.000-08:00

With all the hype surrounding two audacious new books: Tim Jackson's new book, Prosperity Without Growth: Economics for a finite planet, and the New Economics Foundation's The New Economics: A Bigger Picture, one might wonder what university economics departments will be teaching next year. European press are making quite a big deal out of both books, so my feeling is that it's worth waiting a two or three weeks for copies to ship on backorder from Amazon.com, if only to get a sneak peek at how sustainable economics might work in the very near future.

I seem to have misplaced the sneak peak of Prosperity Without Growth that landed in my inbox a few weeks ago, but I CAN promise that The New Economics will answer these burning questions: Why Does Britain Import the Same Number of Chocolate Waffles as it Exports? Why do Fewer People Vote when there is a Wal-Mart Nearby? among others.

Moving beyond best-practice

2009-10-13T18:27:00.000-07:00

The last post left off calling this page "a space to share best-practice." Of course it's great to hear about organizations setting the example by finding new and innovative ways to make their corners of the world that much better.

But these examples don't set the bar. They exceed it, and most companies will find it difficult to achieve the same success. So where is the bar? How much is enough?
That's the question Green Biz editor Joel Makower asks in Strategies for the Green Economy, published earlier this year. Without getting into the details (I strongly recommend the book for any company looking to go green), "enough" will inevitably be different for each organization. That's why there's no single eco-label that applies to all business sectors, much less the ocean of non-profits and charitable organizations. "Enough" is often a relative term, so knowing your competition is a good place to start. Then again, sustainability isn't about simply catching up, or narrowly beating your competition. It's about vision. What does your organization want? What are its impacts, and who feels those impacts? What do those people want? Engaging in a conversation with your communities is often the best way to create value in all its forms: social, economic and environmental.

Can SME's be sustainable?

2009-10-07T19:05:00.000-07:00

I'd say 50% of the people I talk to, mostly small business owners, ask this question based on two assumptions:

A) Small and medium-sized businesses don't have significant social or environmental footprints.

B) Most have neither the money nor the time to invest sustainability.

While it's true that the big boys have taken the initiative, SMEs have an incredible capacity to create meaningful change, by shear numbers alone. In Quebec for example, 85% of businesses are SME's, meaning that small actions can make a big difference when they add up.

Small and medium organizations actually have a much easier time going green for three reasons:

1. The first step is always to mobilize the entire staff, and this is easier when you have a small number of departments and employees.

2. The first actions taken are generally the easiest - and the most profitable. Investments in energy efficiency and waste reduction in particular usually pay off in the short term.

3. Expectations just aren't as high. Big companies have big perceived responsibilities, and must now push the envelope further and further to stay ahead of their competition. People don't expect as much from a smaller company, so even small steps can improve its image and help it stand out from the competition while creating measurable benefits for communities.

It all boils down to that fact that SME's have to step up now, both to remain competitive and to prevent serious social and environmental problems like climate change from going past the point of no return.

That's why sustainable.Agency focuses on SME's, or SMO's (small and medium organizations) as we like to call them. Contact us to find out how to become a Green leader.

What do you think? Can smaller organizations really make a difference? I'd love to hear about any challenges implementing changes within your organization. Consider this a space to share best-practices.

Lack of Transparency: consumer distrust

2009-08-31T09:15:00.001-07:00

Welcome to sustainable.Agency's new blog! Consider it a space for comment and interaction on some of the pressing social and environmental issues confronting people, businesses and other organizations struggling to deal with an important transition taking place.

It's time to stop waiting for federal and provincial governments to take the steps necessary to position Canada as a leader in the global green economy. The responsibility of building the country today that we would like to live in tomorrow now falls on all businesses, small medium and large. Fortunately, a dedication to social and environmental sustainability can significantly help organizations, especially when times are rough, as global management consulting firm AT Kearney points out in a recent study.

Amid recent talk of what caused the world to fall into a recession, the issues of shadowy financial transactions and and a lack of information have generally come together in a common thread: transparency – how there currently isn't enough of it, and how we're going to need lots more of it to get the economy back on track.
This lack of transparency has translated into consumer distrust, and nowhere is this more apparent than in the green economy. Which companies are truly green? What does it even mean to be green?

People are becoming increasingly wary of greenwashing, and for good reason: a recent study by environmental marketing agency Terra Choice revealed that out of 1,753 environmental product claims, all but one were guilty of misleading consumers. With no evidence to the contrary, I choose to believe that most companies do not deliberately mislead consumers, but rather misunderstand how vague, irrelevant or unproven claims can be just as damaging their reputation as it is to the environment.

My partner Sarah and I founded this agency in part because we believe all companies need to take transparency to the next level, by communicating in a responsible way and by publicly disclosing the impacts their activities, thereby informing themselves as as well as their stakeholders - employees, clients, NGO's, news media or the communities of people who live and work around them.

While transparency can be incredibly useful to large corporations, it's also an opportunity for small businesses, particularly the ones that, like sustainable.Agency, were founded with the hope of helping society become better by becoming greener and fairer. These businesses, just like NGO's and non-profits, have everything to gain by going public with their positive and negative impacts. It's about walking the talk.

The agency helps small, sustainable companies get the word out about the leadership role they are taking in the green economy. What makes them different? How are they helping society make the transition to an economy where sustainability is not seen as a cost, but rather a way to significantly improve quality of life for everyone? SME's make up 90 percent of businesses, and can make significant contributions to society – many of them are. So let's start talking about it.