Category Archives: Wharton IGEL

A Sustainable Development Expert’s Take on the 10th Anniversary IGEL Conference

By Noam Lior, PhD, Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics, University of Pennsylvania

The vital urgent challenge: with projected population increase of 30%, to 9 billion within the next 33 years, exponential increase in the demand for resources, the associated large scale of projects, the proven serious impact on the environment, all development must be done sustainably to prevent major deterioration of present and future life quality or even global disaster. For the utter skeptics: at the very least, prepare for damage to the business, and stricter government regulations, monitoring, and enforcement.

Education, for business or otherwise, requires, as much as possible, definitions, methods that are quantitative/scientific, correct data, and wide acceptability, standardization and uniformity. This is especially important for the complex highly multidisciplinary field of sustainable development which is of vital importance to humanity’s survival (or at least well-being), and thus also has a meta-ethical foundation. Education in business sustainability must increasingly and more rigorously address the role of sustainability as a business paradigm, including multi-generational and international/global considerations. Business education should consider and support the evaluation and substantiation of national and international sustainable planning policies, now for example the US new administration’s directions, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). It should include a description of the dangers of Greenwashing and other sustainability fraud.

Sustainable development requires a scientific approach, close and honest cooperation between all humans, across any borders they drew, vision of the future, and much respect for the environment that we so temporarily occupy.

Advertisements

Interviews: Paving the Way Towards a Future of Sustainability in Business Education

By: Elena Rohner, Graduate IGEL Coordinator.  April 12th, 2017

Solutions for improving sustainability in business education often center on creating integrated, cross-disciplinary courses or concentrations; yet this requires a large investment of time and resources. It can take at least a semester to put together the syllabus, materials and teaching tools for a new course, not to mention the time dedicated to overcoming administrative bureaucracy. Therefore, one of the best solutions that business schools can employ to better prepare students for roles in sustainability is: get them talking to professionals!

I recently interviewed two leaders in sustainability for a final assignment in a course called Leading Change for Sustainability (ENVS 682) taught by Penn alum and Sustrana Sr. Associate, Kim Quick and Penn’s Sustainability Director, Dan Garofalo. One interviewee was Todd Hoff, VP of Marketing and Customer Solutions at CHEP North America. Hoff reiterated, in a more nuanced manner, strategies and take-aways commonly touted in the sustainability world. He also shared stories of achievements and challenges, highlighting the seemingly basic pathways and pitfalls of sustainability that continue to pervade industry and create unsolved barriers to sustainability.

CHEP_LogoTreatment_2015_0507

Here are some of my take-aways from our conversation:

  • People don’t know what sustainability is…
    • Sustainability remains an enigma—a concept widely misunderstood with a different definition according to pretty much anyone you ask. Many business executives define sustainability as a strategic force in leadership where an organization makes impactful choices that preserve economic and environmental resources.
    • Hoff shared that sustainability should not be understood as something separate from the business activities. Business can make a difference through business itself, and as a result sustainability should be embedded in the decision-making and the core operations of the company. Hoff also finds peoples’ confusion about sustainability to be the most challenging aspect of working as a sustainability proponent. He highlights the example of employees confusing a sustainability initiative with office supply recycling. And, while recycling is one facet of “sustainability,” it is only that. A single and siloed leverage point. People fail to understand the need for a multifaceted approach to sustainability. As an example, Todd shared his experience at Brambles, the parent company of CHEP, where they have a multi-faceted sustainability strategy including Better Planet, Better Business, and Better Community. http://www.brambles.com/sustainability
  • Having a growth mindset is key:
    • A lot of class time in ENVS 682 is spent identifying and leveraging strengths and mindset. Hoff, whose team just took the Gallup Strength Finder questionnaire, said his results were: relator, learner, arranger, achiever, and includer. Hoff also highlighted his growth mindset when it comes to work—he is motivated by the work itself and the constant growth and learning involved in his role. It is clear that a successful sustainability, or any business, leader has a growth mindset, strong communication skills, and a talent for seeing and making connections.
  • Adam Grant got it right.
    • In class we saw Adam Grant’s quote, “The stories we tell ourselves shape what we do. If you believe people are fundamentally selfish, you will act in ways that make it true.” This stuck with me, so I asked Hoff what he thought about the quote and whether it held relevance for his work. He agreed with Grant and without me bringing up the concept of positive psychology, Hoff gave a great example of how he lives by this concept every day. Hoff noted his learner strength and that he tries to always stay positive in his learning approach. He said that “it’s all related”—that is, successfully managing a large diverse team and achieving the results he wants to see.
  • Surprise! Money plays a critical role:
    • Hoff highlighted how financials are always a motivating factor in any sustainability conversation. He spoke about the “business sense” argument as an invaluable strategy when working with people who are not on board with a sustainability initiative. In other words, he makes sure to include the environmental benefits of the service or product, but what truly seals the deal is conveying how a client can also make or save money. His strategy is to sell the “Win-Win” concept. In this sense, money is the problem solver—it creates a common ground, a business language that everyone speaks and understands. And many, myself included, agree with this idea.

As I hope was conveyed above, interviews and coffee chats are an incredibly rewarding experience for students in any field. From the student and professional’s perspective, the benefits of an interview are a win-win, including:

  • Students learn insider tips
  • Professionals share anecdotes that highlight key, industry-specific take-aways
  • Both parties build their network

And, the best part about interviews is the minimal infrastructure and planning required—all you need is a phone and 20-30 minutes of someone’s day.

 

CHEP_LogoTreatment_2015_0507

Sustrana square logo tagline 500x500

18300_wharton_igel_blue_hvddmb

Exclusive Offer for Sustainable Brands CSR Conference

Submitted by Karina Newman, Community Engagement Coordinator, Sustainable Brands

sb17detroit-full-program-twitter5-800x320

Exposure to New Ideas that Drive Change

Sustainable Brands® is the largest peer community of global brand leaders committed to driving value through sustainability-led innovation. Gain insight from global thought leaders who are conducting ground-breaking research and analysis on how businesses can position themselves for success against the backdrop of changing societal needs.

300+ Speakers, 100+ Sessions, 2K+ Attendees Igniting Conversation

SB’17 Detroit will bring a diversity of collaborators and many of the world’s largest global brands together to explore innovative solutions to the world’s most pressing issues. The newly released full program includes deep-dive workshops, inspiring plenaries, insightful breakouts, SB-style spirited networking events, and many NEW surprises, including:

  • New research results from Harris Insights & Analytics, Eco-America, World Resources Institute, Unilever and more.
  • New case studies from innovators at companies ranging from Ford, Apple, Google, and Procter & Gamble, to Chobani, Kellogg, Levi’s, and REI, who are driving breakthrough success by helping their customers and suppliers live better lives.
  • New tools and solutions from companies and organizations like: Amazon, BASF, Dow Chemical, Biomimicry 3.8, C2C Product Innovation Institute, Biogen, Planet Labs, the Closed Loop Fund and more.
  • Plus – Impossible Foods, Lush Cosmetics, Target, Nordstrom, The Nature Conservancy, BLab and hundreds more. Dive in and Enjoy!

Prices Increase THIS WEEK! Exclusive Offer for  the Wharton IGEL community!

Register before prices increase on Friday, April 7, 2017 and save up to $300 on your ticket! And, as part of the Wharton Community, you can save an extra 25% any time with code nwmWHARTONIGELsb17d, so register today for maximum savings.

IGEL at the COP22

By Eleanor Mitch, CEO and Founder of EM Strategy Consulting, Wharton alumna

The swift approval and ratification of the Paris Agreement[1] (104 countries of the 197, or 58%, have ratified the agreement!) was nothing short of “miraculous” in CIDCE[2] president Michel Prieur[3]’s words. Never before had an international agreement been so rapidly approved and adopted by so many nations in such a short span of time (approximately 1 year). Indeed, Prieur, one of the “fathers” of the principle of non-regression in environmental law, was instrumental in ensuring the addition of “this momentum is irreversible” in para.4 of the Marrakech Action Proclamation[4]. He has participated in the drafting of many international conventions since the 1970s and sees great hope in the rapid action even though we and future generations will still have to face the grave effects of climate change.

As part of this historic movement of awakening to the realities of the changes climate change must bring about, Wharton IGEL was represented with a presentation in absentia[5] by Eric Orts[6] on the implications for business of the Paris Agreement. Indeed, one of the key sectors that will be facing changes is the business sector. While markets have already chosen more sustainable energy sources in some areas (investments in wind and solar power, and Morocco boasts the world’s largest solar power plant, which just went live in 2016[7]), much more needs to be done, all throughout the supply chain, especially in Operations.

For the first time ever at a United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of the Parties (UNFCCC-COP), an event uniting the ITC[8], IFAD[9], WTO[10], UNCTAD[11], UNFCCC[12] and UNFCCC Subsidiary Body for Implementation[13] was held to discuss how to move forward with business and trade on the Paris Agreement. During the event, Wharton IGEL Alumni Eleanor Mitch raised the point of the role of business schools, and especially IGEL’s, in leading the way to new business opportunities and innovation in sustainability. Given that Wharton graduates and those of other business schools will become business leaders, it is important to strengthen ties with the international law-making, enforcing bodies and business schools to prepare graduates to provide services and products for the challenges the world faces: environmentally displaced persons, sea-level rising, sustainable energy and consumption among others. Innovation and creativity-driven prosperity can come hand-in-hand with sustainable development.

 

[1] https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf

[2] http://cidce.org/

[3] http://cidce.org/structures-institutional/

[4] http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/marrakech_nov_2016/application/pdf/marrakech_action_proclamation.pdf

[5] Eleanor Mitch, presented for Eric Orts

[6] http://cidce.org/presentations-cop-22-cop-22-presentations/

[7] http://www.greenprophet.com/2016/02/worlds-largest-solar-power-plant-goes-live-in-morocco/

[8] http://www.intracen.org/

[9] https://www.ifad.org/

[10] https://www.wto.org/

[11] http://unctad.org/en/Pages/Home.aspx

[12] unfccc.int

[13] http://unfccc.int/bodies/body/6406/php/view/reports.php#c

PSR Presents: The Business of Sustainability

By Samantha Freeman

group-1

On Saturday, November 19th, my Management 100 team hosted a conference in John H. Huntsman Hall on behalf of Penn Sustainability Review. This conference, The Business of Sustainability, explored the intersection between business and sustainability. Our keynote speaker was David Cohen, Chairman of the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania and an Executive Vice President of Comcast Corporation. Our panel included Morgan Berman, CEO and Co-Founder of MilkCrate; Melissa Lee, CEO and Founder of The GREEN Program; Jason Halpern, CEO and Co-Founder of Gridless Power; and Emily Schapira, Campaign Director for the Philadelphia Energy Authority (PEA). Together, these speakers and panelists answered the long-standing question: How can the sustainability efforts of businesses both small and large lead to significant change?

My team, Flight Club, kept two main goals in mind when planning this conference. We wanted to 1) promote the discussion of sustainability issues among the Penn population, and 2) increase name recognition and interest in PSR. With over 130 Penn students in attendance, the conference successfully raised awareness for the academic discourse community PSR has created. Furthermore, the dozens of questions received for the panel and several students’ newfound interest in writing articles post-conference revealed that sustainability is a topic that truly sparks the curiosity of the Penn population. We are so excited to see how PSR will keep bringing this enthusiasm to new heights over the next few years.

pic-2

Around 1 pm on Saturday, students began entering F85. They happily stacked their plates with Chipotle burritos and Zesto’s Pizza, then found a seat and waited for introductions from Lori Rosenkopf, Vice Dean of the Wharton Undergraduate Program, and Julianne Goodman, Editor-In-Chief of PSR. Following these introductions, David Cohen spoke for twenty minutes on Comcast’s commitment to sustainability and future of sustainable investments for businesses. Comcast’s LEED-certified buildings were one point of focus. Comcast Center, in downtown Philadelphia, utilizes high-performance glass and sunscreens and water-saving fixtures to reduce expenses and energy consumption. As Comcast builds more structures like these, the corporation remains committed to delivering its services in a manner that lessons its environmental footprint.

Around 1:50 pm, the panel began its discussion, moderated by Penn graduate student Emily Newton. As the panelists shared the stories behind their businesses and how they got involved with sustainability, one thing became clear: All a person needs to start building an idea is a personal commitment to the issue at hand. For Morgan Berman and Melissa Lee especially, an independent goal to live more sustainably blossomed into a plan for a company that would allow others to do the same. Following the initial round of questions, audience members were welcome to ask their own. Several students were interested in hearing the answer to this question: What small things can I do? As they learned from the panelists, regardless of how miniscule the activity may be (for example, carrying a reusable water bottle over a plastic one), anything counts, and every great decision can have an even more substantial impact.

pic-3

My team thoroughly enjoyed working with PSR over the course of the semester, and we hope everyone who attended our conference found the experience to be as enjoyable and rewarding as we did. If you are interested in learning more about the featured businesses or want to know what you can do to promote sustainability, please reach out to our panelists, whose contact information is listed below. We’d like to extend a huge thank you to Julianne Goodman, Hersh Solanski, and Elena Rohner for their guidance, and we thank you all for flying with us.

 

Panelists’ Contact Information:

Morgan Berman: Morgan@mymilkcrate.com

Jason Halpern: Halpern@gridless.com

Melissa Lee: Melissa@theGREENprogram.com

Emily Schapira: eschapira@philaenergy.org

Environmental Catastrophes: The Buck Stops in the C-Suite!

By Lawrence B. Cahill, CPEA, Wharton IGEL Alumni Advisory Group

Introduction

Corporate environmental, health and safety (EHS) programs require a substantial commitment on the part of executive management in order to be successful.  Programs, policies, and procedures must be defined and implemented, resources committed, audits assessing performance conducted, deficiencies corrected, and improvements made.  If all goes well, there is a presumption that unwanted surprises and incidents will be rare, resulting in fewer management headaches and no material adverse personal consequences for senior managers.  Truly a win-win for both the company and its executives.

Sadly, it is not always the case that senior corporate executives participate actively in EHS programs.  A passive approach is much more common as EHS compliance and performance is often deemed to be the sole responsibility of EHS and Sustainability Managers in the organization.  This passive approach can be perilous for both the individual executive and the company.  Senior executives should be involved actively and there are ways to test whether this involvement is real or not.  What follows is a discussion of why participation and commitment are important and a way to test whether it is truly happening in a given organization.

Why Commitment is Important to the Executive

Some believe that environmental incidents and catastrophes will have an impact on a company’s reputation but will not directly affect senior corporate executives.  For example, a recent column in the on-line Environmental Leader was entitled “No Reputational Penalty for CEOs on Environmental Lawsuits.”[1]  The column refers to a study published in the Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics entitled “Corporate litigation and changes in CEO reputation: Guidance from U.S. Federal Court lawsuits”.[2]  This study, based on almost 10,000 cases filed in U.S. federal court over an eight-year period from 2000-2007, concluded that there was:

“…no evidence of any reputational penalty for CEOs following environmental allegations against their companies,” [University of Adelaide, South Australia] business school lecturer Dr. Chelsea Liu told Environmental Leader. “This means that the executive labor market, driven by the collective actions of corporations in the marketplace, is not inclined to ‘shun’ those CEOs whose firms are accused of environmental violations. This is very different from how the market reacts to allegations of financial fraud —prior research shows that CEOs whose firms are accused of financial fraud do experience significant reputational damage.”

Yet, actual notable cases in recent history would appear to contradict the study’s conclusions.  There are any number of instances where very senior executives, including several CEOs, have had their reputations permanently sullied and some have even been sentenced to prison for negligence with respect to EHS mismanagement.  These include the following five cases:

  • Union Carbide Corporation (UCC). Warren Anderson, the then CEO of UCC, and seven other employees were sentenced to 2 years in prison in June 2010 for negligence (the maximum allowed by Indian Law) as a result to the December 1984 Methyl Isocyanate release in Bhopal, India, which killed an estimated 4,000 people and injured another 500,000.  Anderson died in Florida in 2014 at the age of 92 and served no prison time in India as he was not extradited.  Interestingly, “Bhopal protestors” picket the Dow Chemical Headquarters in Midland, MI every year at the annual shareholders meeting.  Dow purchased the assets of UCC in 2001, a full 17 years after the incident.  Should the Dow/DuPont merger announced in December 2015 go through one wonders if the protesters will picket in Wilmington, DE as well, the historical headquarters of DuPont.  Not something that executives in either company presumably relish.
  • BP. After a 28-year career with BP, Tony Hayward, the now ex-CEO, was forced to resign on October 1, 2010 as a result of the April 20, 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.  Ironically, Mr. Hayward had replaced Lord John Browne as CEO in 2007 who resigned partly as a result of the BP Texas City Refinery fire that killed 15 people in 2005.
  • Massey Energy. Don Blankenship, the now ex-CEO of Massey Energy, was forced to resign on December 3, 2010 after the April 5, 2010 explosion at the Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia, which killed 29 miners.  On April 6, 2016, Mr. Blankenship was sentenced to one year in prison for “conspiracy to willfully violate mine health and safety standards.”
  • Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO). Three former TEPCO executives were indicted for negligence on February 29, 2016 as a result of the Fukushima nuclear power plant meltdown caused by a March 2011 tsunami.  In March 2015, a Japanese National Police Agency report confirmed 15,894 deaths, 6,152 injuries and 2,562 people missing as a result of the tsunami.
  • Volkswagen. The now ex-CEO of Volkswagen, Martin Winterkorn, was forced to resign on September 23, 2015 as a result of the 2015 “Clean Diesel Scandal” in the U.S.  Winterkorn accepted responsibility for the scandal while asserting that he was “not aware of any wrongdoing on my part.”  Volkswagen and its executives face possible criminal enforcement action from the U.S. Department of Justice and over 25 State Attorneys General.

It is pretty clear then that there are indeed personal consequences for senior executives when significant EHS incidents occur.  Any individual sitting in one of the chairs in the C-Suite would do themselves a favor by becoming more involved in the company’s EHS management.  And in fact, senior management reviews are a mandatory requirement of ISO 9000 (Quality), ISO 14000 (Environment) and OSHA 18000 (Health and Safety) management system standards often adopted by organizations to better govern operations.  For example, ISO 14000 requires the following: “Top management shall review the organization’s environmental management system, at planned intervals, to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.”[3]  And indeed, there are companies, such as Occidental Petroleum, where members of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors regularly review actual site EHS audit reports.  Although this particular activity should not be relied upon exclusively for assurance purposes, it does provide valuable information on both leading and lagging EHS compliance and performance indicators.

Evaluating Executives’ Commitment

How then does one test whether key executives have an understanding of the implementation and results (and potential consequences) of the company’s EHS management and programs?  One way is to interview these key executives as part of an annual review of EHS program performance.  This annual review can be conducted internally or through a third party.  The evaluation should involve a detailed review of policies and procedures, interviews with a sample of executives at various levels of the organization, and testing the implementation of the EHS program at the site level through assessments or audits at a sample of operating facilities.

The interviewing of key executives is, then, a key component of an EHS program evaluation. In conducting these interviews any interviewer must be diligent, thorough but also respectful of the executive’s time. They are very busy people.  The questions provided below in Table 1 can be used to address and test an individual executive’s involvement and commitment.  It’s important to note that each executive must tailor his or her involvement to best support the organization as effectively as possible.  So, the interviewer should not assume that any given executive should be involved in all the aspects suggested by the questions.  For example, one executive might be involved in the setting of corporate EHS policy and sustainability goals, while another might be responsible for implementing programs within his or her division to achieve those goals, while still others might actually visit plants in their business units periodically to assess site-level performance and gather feedback on the challenges the site management experiences in meeting the goals.

Based on actual experience the questions can be covered in 30-45 minutes. Face-to-face interviews are preferred but a phone interview or video conference can be used as well with comparable results.  Note that the questions are designed to elicit more than a yes/no response.  The interviewer might also discover that the executive will request to see the questions in advance.  That is perfectly acceptable and might actually produce a more productive session as there is a good chance that the executive will have given the questions considerable thought in advance.  In some cases, they will have actually written-out their answers which can enhance the face-to-face discussion.

TABLE 1: Ten Questions to Test an Executive’s Involvement in a Corporate EHS Program

Area of Inquiry Question
1. Personal Involvement What has been your involvement with the corporate EHS program to date?
2. Program Objectives Do you understand the objectives of the program? What are they? Do you believe the objectives are being met? Why or why not?
3. Program Effectiveness Do you believe the program is effective, adequately resourced, and adds value? Specifically, why or why not?
4. Organizational Setting Do you believe that the program is positioned within the organization so as to achieve the appropriate independence and authority? If not, what could or should be done?
5. Stakeholder Involvement Are the concerns of all stakeholders’ (e.g., management, employees, stockholders, regulators, NGO’s, communities) being considered appropriately? Any stakeholders’ interests that are under-represented?
6. Management of Change Is management of change a key component of the program?  If so, how do you know?  If not, why not?
7. Risk Identification Does the program adequately identify and define the key EHS risks faced by the company?  In your estimation, what are the top three risks?
8. Program Outputs Do you see what you need to see with regards to the outputs of the program? If not, what would you like to see that you don’t see now?
9. Corrective Actions Is there sufficient management attention given to correcting identified program deficiencies and needed improvements in a timely fashion? How do you know?
10. Improvements What is the EHS program doing well and should continue to do? If you could change or add one thing to the program to make it better what would that be?

Note that the very last question is extremely important. So, the interviewer has to be careful to manage the interview process so that there will be time for it to be asked and answered.  Executives are very smart and savvy people.  Asking them to identify one thing they might change or add to the EHS program to make it better will often elicit some sage advice and maybe even some “out of the box” thinking.

Closure

Executive participation in and commitment to EHS performance is one key to assuring company-wide compliance and potentially avoiding catastrophes. Experience shows that there is no guarantee that executive participation will be a ‘fail-safe” measure but rigorous management support throughout the organization can be extremely valuable.  Involving executives in an active way can help bolster the program and provide the support necessary to accomplish goals, achieve compliance and minimize (but sadly not eliminate) the potential for disasters.

[1] Hardcastle, Jessica Lyons, “No Reputational Penalty for CEOs on Environmental Lawsuits,” Environmental Leader, March 7, 2016

[2] Liu, Chelsea, et.al., “Corporate litigation and changes in CEO reputation: Guidance from U.S. Federal Court lawsuits,” Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2016, Pages 15–34.

[3] International Organization for Standardization (ISO), “Environmental management systems – Requirements for guidance and use,” ISO14001:2015, Third Edition, Section 9.3, September 15, 2015

Sustainable or Not Sustainable? That is the Question!

By Lawrence B. Cahill, CPEA, Wharton IGEL Alumni Advisory Group

Today there are many economic and social drivers for companies to move towards being more sustainable, green, compliant, and safe in the workplace. One of these drivers is being recognized by credible third parties for exceptional performance. For example, being listed on the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) or having one or more sites as members of U.S. OSHA’s Voluntary Protection “Star” Program are noble corporate goals and can enhance a company’s reputation. However, some recent events suggest that these recognition programs should be viewed with perhaps some skepticism. Case in point – BP, Tokyo Electric Power, and VW were all DJSI-listed companies prior to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon, 2011 Japanese Tsunami, and 2015 Clean Diesel incidents. All three companies were removed from the DJSI list within a month of the incidents, suffered significant hits to their stock prices, and had CEO’s and other executives forced to resign. One has to ask the question then: What might this say about formal sustainability recognition programs. This link to an EHS Journal article in 2015 explores this issue in more detail.

Thinking About the Future of Sustainability and What It Means for the Global Economy

Submitted by Members of the IGEL Network

 

“Leadership in the global economy is one that takes a long term systems view of the world.  This lens understands complexity and intended and unintended consequences of actions. While this perspective leads with strong direction, it also understands that change is constant and therefore flexibility is an imperative.  This leadership understands the tug and pull of the natural and man-made worlds.  Yet, through leadership it creates value for all.”
– Bernard David | Chairman, 
CO2Sciences.org | CO2 Sciences, Inc.

“The future of corporate sustainability leadership means that companies will push governments hard to step up environmental standards, green tax reform and climate policy ambitions.”
– Arthur Van Benthem, Faculty, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

“The future of sustainability leadership and its effects on the global economy largely hinge on education. As leaders of the electronic waste recycling community, it has been an honor and a privilege for ERI to be able to share our insights with the tremendous business and research minds of Wharton and IGEL. Based on our shared commitment to sustainability and the preservation of natural resources, we formed an instant connection. We’re excited to see how the report IGEL developed from this research will help to fuel positive change via informing the thought leaders of the next generation.”
– John Shegerian, Chairman & CEO, Electronic Recyclers International

“Sustainability is about creating a better planet, better business and better communities. At CHEP, we help our customers become more efficient, reduce costs and achieve their sustainability goals,” said Kim Rumph, president of CHEP North America. “We are honored to work with IGEL in promoting the importance of sustainable business practices worldwide.”
– Kim Rumph, President   & CEO, CHEP

“Leaders in corporate sustainability skillfully balance the needs of their customers, business and communities. It takes both foresight and immediate action. The simple changes and program evolutions we embrace today must complement more complex, long-term programs and revolutions that can better serve customers and their communities in the future. Those companies that can balance today with tomorrow, evolution with revolution, local with global, and business with stakeholders will ultimately build a more sustainable future for all.”
– Laura T. Bryant, Assistant Vice President – Corporate Communications & Sustainability Enterprise Holdings Inc.

“The essence of leadership is all about building a sustainable global economy for the well-being of people and the planet. Sustaining the world economy will require addressing many significant challenges including rapid population growth and mass urbanization, limited financial and natural resources, high or extreme risk of water shortages, and rising energy costs, coupled with the impacts of aging, failing and insufficient infrastructures as well as climate volatility and ecosystem degradation. This will require transforming many of our current policies and practices, and creating shared value with sustainable business model innovation. For example, governments need to better translate globalization into real benefits for their citizens. Civil engineers must now focus on the needs and the outcomes, not the prescribed project, process and/or standard.  While this will require a new mindset, standards and protocols, the outcome will satisfy the need, produce affiliated benefits and reduce unintended impacts, all the while conserving funding, resources and the public’s good will and confidence. In short, it will all be about creating infrastructure that is environmentally, economically, and socially sustainable to equitably meet the needs of human welfare and to realize healthy communities.”
– Paul F. Boulos, President, COO and Chief Innovation Officer, Innovyze

“Sustainability leadership in the future will include continuing to do good things that are now being done without falling into the trap of calling any worthwhile activity “sustainable”. Environmental sustainability, financial sustainability, social sustainability are all terms that are too often used without proper definition. Future leaders will work to ensure that term “sustainability” will be well defined and used in a way that the average person can understand, thus increasing the leader’s credibility.”
– Stan Laskowski, Faculty, School of Arts & Sciences, University of Pennsylvania

“Penn, and IGEL more specifically, have taught me that sustainability and existing business goals are often much closer than most companies and individuals realize. Nowhere is that truer than in supply chains, where greener operations often mean reduced costs and more efficient production. Because of this symbiotic relationship, I want to work in transforming supply chains and hope one day to work on creating zero-waste production facilities.”
– Austin Bream, C’17, W’17, University of Pennsylvania

“Simply put, sustainability leadership is business leadership in a global economy.  Successful, growth oriented businesses are ones that understand how their revenue model depends on natural and human capital – not just financial capital  – and where the future license to grow may be constrained by limited capital in regions around the world. IGEL has helped to bring business leaders together to discuss these issues, and sparked important conversations on the future of sustainability leadership.”
– Libby Bernick, Senior Vice President, North America, Trucost

“The State of Sustainability can be achieved when Humankind devises a humane and globally equitable strategy to maintain the human population at a level at which efficient and frugal use of natural resources are implemented.”
– Robert Giegengack, Faculty, School of Arts & Sciences, University of Pennsylvania

Is Your Business Safe from Climate Change?

By: Anne Coglianese

Climate change poses global threats to the environment, but do you know how it will affect the quality of life where you live and work? If you own a business, do you know how climate change will affect your bottom line? A recent report called Risky Business: The Economic Risks of Climate Change to the United States helps businesses identify and prepare for the specific, local risks that climate change poses.

To the average citizen, climate change may feel abstract, and many people believe that only coastal communities will be affected. However, the Risky Business report draws attention to effects far beyond sea level rise, including mortality, storm surge, crop yields, and energy, to name just a few.  For the first time, individuals can narrow in on their region to learn which issues are most relevant in their state, discovering how closely climate change will affect all of us.

The report was released by the Risky Business Project, started in the fall of 2013 when the nongovernmental organization Next Generation paired up with Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Paulson Institute to research climate change’s economic threats. The report stresses “this is not a problem for another day. The investments we make today—this week, this month, this year—will determine our economic future.”

The Risky Business Project’s website makes the group’s report highly interactive and more informative. Due to the many videos, images, and charts found on the website, visitors can easily digest information on climate change risks.  For example, the website contains a video designed to help individuals understand the progression and threat of extreme weather changes.

What makes the report truly unique is the focused analysis provided. By breaking the US into regions and states, Risky Business targets the climate concerns in specific parts of the country as well as nation-wide.  The website then allows individuals to scroll through date on their prospective locations.

The report focuses on climate risk education in order to provide businesses with the information necessary to begin taking action to sidestep catastrophe. It highlights three areas to reduce risk: business adaptation, investor adaptation, and public sector response. Throughout various sections of the report, one thing becomes clear: a shift towards sustainable business and investment needs immediate action.

Former New York City Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, a co-chair of the Risk Business Project, and a key player in the development of this report, recently stated in an interview:

Damages from storms, flooding, and heat waves are already costing local economies billions of dollars—we saw that firsthand in New York City with Hurricane Sandy. With the oceans rising and the climate changing, the Risky Business report details the costs of inaction in ways that are easy to understand in dollars and cents—and impossible to ignore.

To learn more about climate change and find your business’ next move, visit the Risky Business Project website.

The Win-Win-Win of Impact Investing

By: Nathan Sell*

Ask not what your investment dollars can do for you, but ALSO what they can do for others, and the environment. That’s the idea behind Impact Investing, an emerging paradigm shift in philanthropy. This form of socially responsible investing generates both measurable social and environmental impact as well as returns on investment. Mark Tercek, CEO of the Nature Conservancy and former Managing Director at Goldman Sachs is at the forefront of linking business and the environment for a better world as he discusses in his recent book “Nature’s Fortune.” Tercek, and the new wave of impact investors are proving that your investments can make money AND do good.

Impact investing in the environment is quickly coming to scale as the value of ecosystem services to clean air and water, armor shorelines, as well as climate change mitigation and adaptation is being realized. Cities like Philadelphia are leading the way in green infrastructure investment. Over the next 25 years, Green Stormwater Infrastructure will help the city to combat the extreme weather patterns as well as prevent Combined Sewer Overflows resulting in greener cities and cleaner waters for which the initiative is named.

Novo Nordisk entered China in 1994 and immediately noticed that a diet high in starch was leading to diabetes in a large portion of the population. Combined with rapid pathogen spread due to urbanization, the health of the people in China was (and continues to be) at risk. Novo Nordisk put their efforts toward alleviating some of these health concerns. By training doctors in diabetes care and prevention, the company has helped to save over 140,000 life years. The shared value of impact investment ensures companies like Novo Nordisk remain profitable while helping the communities in which they work.

Impact investing also has the potential to bring promising technologies to scale. Without investment, it’s possible that companies like d.light may never have gotten off the ground. With the help of investment, this for-profit social enterprise has been able to sell affordable solar lamps to those without reliable power. The result? D.light is bringing safe, bright and renewable lighting to people around the world, allowing students to do their homework, families to cook, and an overall better quality of life to over 34 million people.

Impact investing may prove better for people and the planet than charitable giving. Investing in businesses that do good by people and the planet can ensure the success of their mission, allowing for long term solutions, rather than a potential band-aid in the form of a grant or gift. If your investment could benefit the triple bottom line, rather than just YOUR bottom line then you’ve found the rare win-win-win scenario. The next time you invest, think strategically about what your money can really do.

*Nathan is a recent graduate of the Master of Environmental Studies program at the University of Pennsylvania and a current ORISE Fellow with EPA Water.