Are Under Armour's Sustainability Claims Green or Greenwashing?

Baltimore based Under Armour, Inc. is a sports apparel manufacturer that makes a number of bold claims about their commitment to sustainability. However, their environmental performance has been widely criticized.

Under Armour's website makes audacious claims starting with the well worn cliche that sustainability is woven into the company's DNA. They also state that sustainability is integral to their strategy and directly related to the company's core values.

The athletic apparel giant claims their sustainability vision, systems and practices have grown with the company and they further claim that they are focused on continuous improvement and actively seeking ways of adding value to the communities they serve.  They specifically proclaim that they are constantly enhancing their materials usage and design process in pursuit of cleaner and healthier environments. They add they are working to upgrade their sustainable practices in their corporate, retail, logistics, and manufacturing operations. As explained on the Under Armour website, "Just like the athletes we serve, we always look to improve our performance."

Supply chains

Under Armour claimed it joined the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (SAC) as part of their efforts to minimize their environmental impacts throughout their supply chain. The company proudly proclaims that it has partnered with the Fair Labor Association (FLA) to support the efforts of third-party manufacturers to develop sustainable solutions (the overwhelming majority of their products are built by independent third party manufacturers).

According to their website, the clothes and shoe manufacturer collaborates with a network of business partners to address some of the big sustainability challenges. They also claim to work closely with their suppliers to ensure adherence to the guidelines contained in their Supplier Code of Conduct.

SSC Peer Benchmarking Analysis

Even though these guidelines include clauses on forced labor, Under Armour has been accused of using cotton derived from slave labor in Uzbekistan.  However, this is only the tip of the greenwashing iceberg.

Under Armour was deemed to be the worst performing company in the Environmental Dimension of SSC’s Peer Benchmarking Analysis. Based on the companies' website and reports the SSC evaluates a company's sustainability.

Under Armour had the weakest scores in their sector in all aspects of the Environment dimension. They secured the worst score among their peers in the water category. They also had the weakest score in the energy and climate change category. Under Armour was the only company not to mention waste and recycling in their website. Unlike Nike and Puma, Under Armour made no mention of land use or biodiversity.

The overall results for the environmental dimension of the SSC analysis show a tremendous gulf between Under Armour and its competitors. Nike came in first in the environmental dimension with 20 points followed by Puma (19), Adidas (14) and Lululemon (10). Under Armour came in a distant last with only 4 points.

RankaBrand

According to RankaBrand Under Armour gets a "don't buy" or "E" grade on sustainability. Under Armour received the E-label, because their website addresses only three out of 63 questions about their sustainability performance.

Under Armour under-performed all of its competitors including Nike, Puma, Adidas, Reebok, New Balace, Hanwag, Mammut, engelbert strauss, KangaROOS, Ellesse, Helly Hansen, Timberland and Volcom.

Ethical Consumer

In June 2016 Ethical Consumer gave Under Armour the Worst Ethical Consumer rating on their measures of sustainability. This includes environmental reporting, toxic chemicals, cotton sourcing, and supply chain management,

Activists from Rainforest Action Network’s (RAN) targeted Under Armour and other fashion brands for making clothes that destroy forest, contribute to human rights abuses and cause climate pollution.

Upside

The Ethical Consumers rating was not all bad for Under Armour. The company got an average rating for its use of tax avoidance strategies. Although Under Armour has been criticized for its failure to provide sustainability metrics it does appear to be moving in the right direction. The organization is undergoing a company-wide process to create a framework for tracking the right sustainability metrics for their Port Covington Campus. Under Armour has begun a formal materiality assessment process aligned with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) G4 guidelines.

Under Armour also wins awards. They were named one of the top green brands for customer loyalty. Their top 50 ranking in the Customer Loyalty Engagement Index is for company's that are perceived as "authentically and resolutely green by their own customers." In 2016 the Small Business Administration (SBA) awarded Under Armour and CEO Kevin Plank SBA the first Hall of Champions award.

Under Plank's leadership, Under Armour has increased their efficient use of resources. Plank has also been a forthright advocate of inclusiveness. When Trump defended the alt-right after the Charlottetown tragedy, Plank was among a group of CEOs who resigned from the president's business council in protest.

Falling share prices

However, what little they are doing on the sustainability front is far outweighed by what they have yet to do. This is made worse by their unsubstantiated claims. Greenwashing can have adverse consequences and this may be playing a role in their declining stock values.

Under Armour shares are the biggest losers on the S&P 500 Index in 2017. As reviewed in a Forbes article by Sarah Halzack, Under Armour's "blockbuster" growth is slowing. Sales in its core footwear division declined on a year-over-year basis causing the company to cut its revenue forecasts.

Compared to its competitors Under Armour is performing very poorly. While sustainability focused competitors like Nike are enjoying strong sales from their footware division Under Armour is falling short.

Companies with  measurable sustainability performance metrics may have an edge.  Consider the example of Amadeus a sustainability focused company who is keeping investors happy with strong returns. Conversely, Under Armour's failure to provide sustainability metrics may have contributed to the poor performance of its stock.

Under Armour says it sees environmental and social sustainability as a journey. As they claim on their website, sustainability is not just about who we are now it is about who we will be. If Under Armour is to turn their comittments into reality they better get busy soon or they risk getting left behind.

Climate Awareness by Country (Percentage of the Population)

The most climate aware country in the world is Japan with 99 percent of the population indicating that they know about of the existence of climate change. The country with the lowest percentage of people claiming to be aware of climate change is Benin (21%). In general Northern Europe and North America are more aware of climate change than Africa and Asia. The average percentage of climate aware people in all of the 129 countries surveyed is 63. It is interesting to note that even though the current US president is a climate denier, almost all Americans (97%) acknowledge the existence of climate change.

Worst 20 countries
Lowest percentages of climate awareness (20 % - 30 %)
  1. Benin 21
  2. Burundi 22
  3. Niger 24
  4. Afghanistan 25 
  5. Egypt 25
  6. Ghana 26 
  7. Nigeria 28
  8. Togo 29 
  9. Morocco 30  
  10. Rwanda 30  
  11. South Africa 31
  12. Bangladesh 33  
  13. Pakistan 34
  14. India 35
  15. Uganda 35
  16. Burkina Faso 36 
  17. Senegal 36
  18. Sierra Leone 36
  19. Nepal 37
  20. Botswana 38  

Best 20 countries
Highest percentages of climate awareness (90 % - 99 %) 
  1. Latvia 91 
  2. Lithuania 91
  3. France 93
  4. Hong Kong 93
  5. Hungary 93
  6. South Korea 93
  7. Ireland 94
  8. Iceland 95
  9. Canada 95 
  10. Austria 95
  11. Luxembourg 95  
  12. Netherlands 96 
  13. Germany 96 
  14. Sweden 96
  15. Australia 97  
  16. Norway 97
  17. United Kingdom 97
  18. United States 97
  19. Finland 98
  20. Japan 99          

Complete alphabetized list of all 129 countries
Percentages of climate awareness
    • Afghanistan     25    
    •  Algeria     56    
    •  Angola     43    
    •  Argentina     76    
    •  Armenia     78    
    •  Australia     97    
    •  Austria     95    
    •  Azerbaijan     58    
    •  Bangladesh     33    
    •  Belarus     80    
    •  Belgium     89    
    •  Belize     53    
    •  Benin     46    
    •  Bolivia     55    
    •  Botswana     38    
    •  Brazil     79    
    •  Burkina Faso     36    
    •  Burundi     22    
    •  Cambodia     58    
    •  Cameroon     49    
    •  Canada     95    
    •  Central African Republic     56    
    •  Chad     45    
    •  Chile     73    
    •  China     62    
    •  Colombia     68    
    •  Costa Rica     75    
    •  Czech Republic     87    
    •  Democratic Republic of the Congo     53    
    •  Denmark     90    
    •  Djibouti     43    
    •  Dominican Republic     50    
    •  Ecuador     70    
    •  Egypt     25       
    •  El Salvador     55    
    •  Estonia     88    
    •  Ethiopia     80    
    •  Finland     98    
    •  France     93    
    •  Georgia     62    
    •  Germany     96    
    •  Ghana     26     51    
    •  Greece     87    
    •  Guatemala     57    
    •  Guinea     55    
    •  Guyana     67    
    •  Haiti     46        
    •  Honduras     62    
    •  Hong Kong     93    
    •  Hungary     93    
    •  Iceland     95    
    •  India     35        
    •  Indonesia     39    
    •  Iran     55         
    •  Iraq     55        
    •  Ireland     94    
    •  Israel     86    
    •  Italy     84        
    •  Japan     99        
    •  Jordan     62    
    •  Kazakhstan     60    
    •  Kenya     56       
    •  Kyrgyzstan     52    
    •  Laos     80       
    •  Latvia     91    
    •  Lebanon     64    
    •  Liberia     15    
    •  Lithuania     91    
    •  Luxembourg     95    
    •  Madagascar     49    
    •  Malaysia     71    
    •  Mali     53        
    •  Malta     75        
    •  Mauritania     44    
    •  Mexico     67    
    •  Moldova     83    
    •  Mongolia     75    
    •  Morocco     30    
    •  Mozambique     54    
    •  Namibia     46    
    •    Nepal     37    
    •  Netherlands     96    
    •  Nicaragua     53    
    •  Niger     24      
    •  Nigeria     28    
    •  Norway     97    
    •  Pakistan     34    
    •  Palestine     67    
    •  Panama     65    
    •  Paraguay     58    
    •  Peru     62        
    •  Philippines     47    
    •  Poland     84    
    •  Portugal     90    
    •  Qatar     64      
    •  Republic of the Congo     41    
    •  Romania     81    
    •  Russia     85    
    •  Rwanda     30    
    •  Saudi Arabia     49    
    •  Senegal     36    
    •  Sierra Leone     36    
    •  Singapore     84    
    •  South Africa     31    
    •  South Korea     93    
    •  Spain     85         
    •  Sri Lanka     73    
    •  Sudan     47        
    •  Sweden     96    
    •  Syria     56        
    •  Taiwan     91    
    •  Tajikistan     43    
    •  Tanzania     53    
    •  Thailand     88    
    •  Togo     29        
    •  Trinidad and Tobago     72    
    •  Tunisia     60    
    •  Turkey     74    
    •  Uganda     35    
    •  Ukraine     79    
    •  United Kingdom     97    
    •  United States     97    
    •  Uruguay     73    
    •  Uzbekistan     53    
    •  Venezuela     63    
    •  Vietnam     73    
    •  Zambia     27    
    •  Zimbabwe     52    
      Data Source: Wikipedia
      Graphics: The Green Market  Oracle

      Trump May be Irrelevant but he is Not Harmless

      Trump's defective judgment, psychological dysfunction and amorality have made him irrelevant. On the campaign trail Trump promised his supporters that they would win so much they would get tired of winning. However, his backlog of failures have made him the most unpopular president in US history. Trump is irrelevant because no thinking person can believe what he says, or take what he means seriously. Trump is an entertainer and there is still interest in his antics from that point of view. However, this is the same kind of interest that one has in watching a train wreck. It is a voyeuristic spectacle, not of great achievement, but of catastrophic failure.

      Trump has done nothing during his presidency with the exception of voiding Obama era executive orders. Meanwhile Trump's picks are destroying government from the inside. Fossil fuel lobbyist Scott Pruitt, the man Trump picked to run the EPA is dismantling the agency he was tapped to run. Former Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson is also gutting the department he was charged to oversee, in part by simply not filling vacancies.

      Trump's failed leadership means that America is being ignored by the G20 and at COP23. The US has seen its global reputation plummet and business leaders are abandoning the president in droves. He is even irrelevant to in his own party.

      Plummeting global standing

      The United States always had its detractors, but something unprecedented is happening today. This is not just about differences of opinion, this is much more fundamental to the world's perception of America.

      In an op-ed CNN host and Washington Post columnist Fareed Zakaria argued that the US is "becoming irrelevant". To support his argument Zakaria cited a recent Pew Research Center survey that revealed the world’s confidence in the US president has fallen to a third of what its was a year ago. Confidence in President Barack Obama was at 64 percent, under Trump it has declined to 22 percent. To put it another way almost four fifths of the world, or 8 out of every 10 people think Trump is not trustworthy and as such unimportant.

      Zakaria anticipated the demise of the US in a 2008 book however, "the parochialism, ineptitude and sheer disarray of the Trump presidency" is bringing about America's demise much quicker than he ever thought possible.

      Corporate America

      Corporate America sees Trump as irrelevant too. The word on Wall Street, like just about everywhere else, is that Trump's poor grasp of the issues and his fundamental incompetence make him impossible to work with. Trump has earned the ire of corporate America for a number of reasons including the Moslem ban, his defense of racism in Charlottesville and his withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.

      Sustainability titan Elon Musk bluntly inferred that Trump is bad for business. In fact a number of business leaders are standing up for sustainability and opposing Trump. CEOs have resigned en masse from his business councils forcing Trump to disband them. Corporate leaders are ignoring Trump's climate ignorance and moving forward with ambitious sustainability initiatives.

      In a New Yorker article William D. Cohan's investigation of CEOs and Wall Street bankers led him to conclude that business leaders think Trump is incapable of achieving corporate America’s policy goals.

      Some CEOs are still playing it safe and keeping their opinions to themselves. However, many business leaders have decided that inaction in the context of the Trump administration may be even more dangerous than speaking out. "Corporate executives increasingly view Trump as so erratic, unpredictable, and polarizing that being too close to him risks alienating employees and consumers," Cohan said.

      Corporate leaders are still looking for lower taxes and less regulation, however, they are now working with Congress and forgetting about Trump altogether. A Wall Street executive told Cohan, "Donald Trump as a leader of an agenda and a set of policies is no longer a part of the frame."

      Domestic politics

      As suggested above Trump has even made himself irrelevant in domestic politics. In June, Fairfax Media columnist Nicole Hemmer penned an article in which she said, "Six months into his presidency, Trump is becoming increasingly irrelevant to the goings-on in Washington."

      After Hurricane Harvey at the end of August Dan Rather told MSNBC that Trump runs the risk of seeming 'irrelevant'. The irrelevancy of the Trump administration became abundantly apparent in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria.

      In a Newsweek article Robert Reich proclaimed, "Trump’s Do Nothing Presidency Is Irrelevant". Robert Reich is no lightweight he knows of what he speaks. He is an author and professor at UCLA, Berkeley. He is also a senior fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies. He served as secretary of labor in the Clinton administration, and Time magazine named him one of the 10 most effective Cabinet secretaries of the 20th century.

      Reich asserts that when it comes to the actual work of governing America, Trump is irrelevant. Reich's thesis is premised on Trump's failure to understand basic policy issues. Reich points out that Congress largely ignores Trump just as they ignored his budget. Trump is out of the loop. He is being excluded from the legislative strategies of both Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell and the Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan.

      Irrelevant not harmless 

      The dismal failure of Trump's nativist populism has made him irrelevant. However, saying that Trump is irrelevant is not the same as saying he is harmless. The damage that Trump has done and will do should not be underestimated.

      Reich shares the view that orange Potus continues to be worrisome even if he is irrelevant. "Trump is still a dangerous showman and conman – tweeting condemnations of critics and ranting before friendly crowds at his never-ending campaign rallies. He continues to fuel bigotry and meanness. He has reduced America’s standing in the world. His outbursts could start a nuclear war." Reich said.

      Trump is a man who has no ideological vision beyond his own self-aggrandizement. He cannot fulfill his promise to make the country great again, however he may be hastening America's decline.

      As we watch Trump teeter on the brink of political solvency, we must remember that it is not only his brand that is dying, he imperils America as he rages against his own imminent demise.

      Event - Green Building Virtual Expo

      Canada's premiere virtual green building event will take place on November 1, 2018 from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.. Exhibits will remain accessible online for three months. The second annual Green Building Expo is free to attend. It is also an affordable way for exhibiting businesses to connect with potential clients and customers all across Canada – and beyond. The online show will celebrate Canada’s greenest and most successful building projects. Each exhibit will showcase sustainable construction solutions to a target audience in a timely and cost-efficient manner.

      Green Building Expo will serve as an ideal platform to bring together technology, materials, products, service providers, developers, general contractors, architects, consultants, engineers, interior designers, builders, specifiers, project managers, green investors, bankers, building owners and facilities managers; not to mention municipalities, expert organizations and other key stakeholders of green building projects.

      One of the must-see free sessions is titled, "Achieving Net Zero" and it will take place in the Auditorium on November 1st, 2017 at 11 a.m.

      Two of the bonuses available to participants in this virtual event include saving money and eliminating travel time. As it’s not a physical trade show, booth construction costs are eliminated, logistical problems are non-existent and carbon footprints are minimized.

      The virtual spaces include a hall, booths and a networking lounge (see images below).



      Why Virtual
      • Not only does the virtual model reduce a company’s carbon footprint on the front end, but it also eliminates the production of materials that will go to waste after an event.
      • Making perfect sense: It’s logical to utilize new technologies and trends — after all, that’s what you’re encouraging your buyer to do. So it goes hand in hand with sustainability.
      • Tracking lead generation: Virtual trade show platforms make it easy to provide prospects with downloadable materials, offer built-in tracking, lead management, and attendee profiles so you know exactly who is downloading what.
      • Saving money: For those who’ve been to trade shows, you know it costs a lot, both to sponsor booths and to attend. Among the expenditures are paying for employee time, travel, lodging, and meals, not to mention the various outlays needed for booths.
      • There is absolutely no question that exhibiting at a virtual trade show costs significantly less as the costs are reduced to Internet, printing, electricity, and shipping.
      • Better time management: Green Building Expo not only allow you to save time on travel, but it houses your virtual booth for six months after the actual event. That means that the money you pay for your space isn’t buying you a few days, it’s buying a more long-term marketing platform.
      • The cool factor: Booths can link directly to an exhibitor’s Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook or YouTube social media accounts. Impossible to dispute the value of that.
      • Extended reach: Companies can interact with a global audience to generate a high volume of leads and prospects.

      Why Attend?
      • Green Building Expo is free for attendees.
      • Exchange contact information and interact with Canada’s most active green building professionals, solely by using digital technology.
      • Be “green" and save: Attend the show without wasting time and money on travel.
      • Attend expert webinars and keep up to date with the newest products and technologies – all only a click away.
      • Download valuable information and save it permanently for future reference.
      • Connect with your industry peers by interacting through text, audio and video capabilities.

      Keynote Speakers
      • ERIK JANSSEN (Senior Analyst): An Introduction to Heat Pumps and Photovoltaics for Net Zero Homes
      • SVEND DE BRUYN (Sustainable Technologies Education / Training Specialist): Participate in an amazing mobile experience: Research shows that over 40 percent of traffic to online events.

      Whether as a sponsor, an exhibitor or an attendee this is a not-to-be missed event for those involved with or interested in the Canadian green building space. Click here to learn more about a virtual booth or here to register to attend.

      Corporations Offering Hope this Unhappy Thanksgiving

      The Trump administration and the GOP give Americans no reason to be happy this Thanksgiving. Resistance from citizens and corporate leaders offer a shining ray of hope in an otherwise bleak picture. America's greatness is now being systematically dismantled. Its institutions, its democracy, and its moral center are under siege. What makes this enemy especially pernicious is the fact that unlike previous adversaries, this threat comes from within Congress and the Oval Office itself. While nobody was listening Trump's former chief strategy advisor Steve Bannon made it clear that the goal of this administration is the deconstruction of government. Even though Bannon has been pushed out his influence remains.


      Numerous government agencies and departments have been reduced to a shadow of their former selves. This includes agencies like the EPA under Scott Pruitt.  Along with Trump and the GOP, Pruitt is working to end climate action and erode environmental protections.

      The State Department under Rex Tillerson has stepped back from international agreements including the Paris Climate Accord.  A number of leading corporations urged Trump to stay with the Paris Agreement and then they condemned him when he withdrew. At COP23 in November it became clear that Trump is irrelevant. Companies, governors and mayors stepped in to represent the US in the wake of Trump's abdication.

      Russia's influence over Trump may be the most serious concern. Despite the clear consensus from American intelligence agencies Trump refuses to accept, let alone condemn Russia for influencing the 2016 election. There is evidence to support the allegation that the Trump team conspired with Russia to win the election.  Even more troubling are allegations that Trump won't cross Putin because of Kompromat.

      While Trump casts a dark shadow over the nation and the world, there are some signs that give us reason to hope. Corporate leaders are publicly refuting Trump's climate ignorance. Several CEOs called him out for defending racists. Others have criticized him for his lack of understanding of business. CEOs like sustainability titan Elon Musk have said that Trump is bad for business.

      To be fair it should be said that corporate leaders resist Trump as a matter of self interest. Trump is not just temperamentally and intellectually unfit for office he is dangerously incompetent. CEOs and investors cannot afford to ignore the fact that Trump is a serious risk factor.

      Businesses continued to act on climate change even as a climate denier assumed control of the White House. Soon after Trump came to power corporate leaders began to redouble their efforts to advocate for sustainability and oppose the newly elected administration. A number of businesses across the US stood up in support of sustainability while rejecting Trump. 

      Despite Trump's climate denial, companies all across the US are integrating environmental, social and governance practices into their core business strategies.  They are also adopting renewable energy in ever increasing numbers.

      Corporations like Target and U.S. Bank are leading by example. Both companies have earned a spot in Ceres Business Network for improving the climate resiliency of their operations and their supply chains.  In stark contrast to Trump's support for fossil fuels, many of these companies are massively ramping up their use of renewable energy.

      Corporation are doing more than just showing business leadership they are taking on some of the responsibilities of government. In the face of Trump's inaction after Hurricane Maria, corporations including Tesla, reached out to help the people of Puerto Rico.

      In the context of the current administration sharing sustainability matters more than ever.  Business leaders must ask themselves which side they are on even though there really aren't two sides to this issue. Like climate change, there are those that accept the facts and those that don't. This is not about dividing America, this is about uniting them against a common enemy.

      Amadeus Sustainability Gains are a Win for Investors

      In addition to celebrating its 30th birthday, Amadeus is also celebrating its sustainability efforts in 2017. Amadeus IT Group (AMS) is a major Spanish IT Provider for the global travel and tourism industry. The company was founded in 1987 and their headquarters are located in Madrid. They currently operate in 190 markets, with a worldwide team of 15,000 people. They have invested over €4 billion in R&D since 2004. In 2016, they reported revenues of €4,473 million. As of November 22, 2017 their market cap was $27 Billion.

      Chief Executive Officer Luis Maroto Camino responsibility for overall company strategy as well as line management of the finance, internal audit, legal and human resources functions. He has also been instrumental in Amadeus’ return to the stock market with the company’s successful IPO in April 2010.

      Amadeus has a comprehensive sustainability strategy. They are engaged in organization-wide efforts to monitor and reduce the impact of their operations. They are committed to social responsibility in an effort to balance environmental, social and economic performance.

      Amadeus has been ranked among the top sustainability companies (Dow Jones Sustainability Index) for five consecutive years. Amadeus has won many awards for their excellent sustainability performance. In 2017 alone they were listed in Corporate Knights' 2017 Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations in the World index. They also earned a Silver Class Distinction from RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment (CSA) and inclusion in The Sustainability Yearbook 2017.

      In 2016, Amadeus scored very well in the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Climate Performance Leadership Index earning them a place on CDP's Climate A List. In 2015 Amadeus won RobecoSAM Bronze Class Sustainability Award.

      As of the third quarter of the year(nine months ended September 30, 2017), Amadeus increased revenue 8.9%, to €3,686.6 million. EBITDA grew 10.1%, to €1,466.3 million. In the Distribution segment, total travel agency air bookings grew 6.0% to 434.4 million. In IT Solutions, Passengers Boarded increased 19.4% to 1,228.1 million

      Amadeus is not only delivering on sustainability, they are also delivering superior returns to investors.

      Related
      HSBC Taking its Sustainability Commitments to New Heights 
      Ceres Company Network Gains Two High Profile Members
      Criticisms of Sustainability Offset by Tangible Results
      Mars' Sustainability Leadership Through Science Based Climate Action
      Top 10 Money Earning Careers in Sustainability
      Responsible Business: The Rapid Growth of the B Corps
      More Decoupling: Corporate Emissions Reduction are Compatible with Growth
      Which Side is Your Business On?
      Business Benefits from Science-Based Climate Action
      Sustainability Leadership at BMW (Videos)

      The Cost Saving Tesla Semi is Poised to Revolutionize Truck Transportation

      The recently launched Tesla Semi is an emissions-free fully electric class 8 truck that is far less expensive to operate than comparable diesel-powered trucks. The Semi consumes less than 2 kilowatt-hours per mile and uses no fossil fuels resulting in significantly reduced operating costs. Tesla claims the savings could amount to more than $200,000 per vehicle in fuel costs for every million miles on the road.

      As reported in the New York Times the cost to run the vehicle is just $1.26 a mile compared to $1.51 for a diesel. When operating in a convey to reduce drag the price goes down to 85 cents per mile making it a cheaper method of transporting goods than rail. According to CNBC, the Tesla Semi could save a company at least $25,000 a year per truck.

      In addition to the 25-cents-per-mile saving. There are also saving on maintenance as the Tesla has no driveshaft, transmission, or combustion engine. Taken together these factors have prompted Tesla CEO Elon Musk to say that using diesel trucks is now "economic suicide".

      Performance

      Musk is a sustainability titan who is on a mission to replace dirty energy with clean electric power sources. The Semi has a range of 500 miles and it's regenerative braking system recovers 98 percent of the kinetic energy to charge the battery while operating. It is also much faster than conventional diesel trucks. According to Tesla, the Semi can go from zero to 60 MPH in five seconds without a trailer, compared to 15 seconds for a comparable diesel truck. A fully loaded truck can go from 0 to 60 MPH in 20 seconds. This is also much faster than comparable diesel trucks and it is also faster going up hills.

      The Semi is easy to drive as it has no gears and it can be recharged in as little as a half an hour. It can carry up to 80,000 pounds of cargo which is the maximum weight allowed under federal highway regulations. One of the features that make this vehicle stand out is Tesla's integrated Auto Pilot semi-autonomous driving aids that help drivers with braking, acceleration, lane positioning and obstacle avoidance.

      Safety

      In addition to the automated driving assist, Tesla claims the Semi, "safely integrates with passenger car traffic". Other safety features include a design that makes jackknifing "impossible" and a "thermonuclear explosion-proof glass" in the windshield.

      The truck's huge battery is efficiently integrated into the Semi's chassis providing a lower center of gravity. The truck has four motors, one for each of its rear wheels. The single-seat center-mounted driver's cockpit is closer to the road than conventional trucks and it has two large screens comprising the truck's dashboard.

      Production is scheduled to start in 2019 although several companies including WalMart, J.B. Hunt Transport Services, and Loblaws have already preordered.

      Concerns

      Tesla has no shortage of detractors who point to the fact that it will be expensive to buy and has half the range of a diesel truck. There are also valid concerns about the company’s capacity to meet demand. Tesla has a back order of half a million Model 3 sedans and production has not come close to the 1,500 it had promised in August. Still, others point to the $671 million loss for the last quarter. Going forward there are many who say that Tesla could get hit hard if the Trump administration succeeds in killing the tax credit for electric vehicle buyers.

      Despite these concerns, the emissions-free Tesla Semi is less expensive to operate, safer and faster than diesel trucks. This revolutionary vehicle is poised to disrupt the shipping industry. As stated by Musk, the Semi, "will blow your mind clear out of your skull and into an alternate dimension".

      Competition

      The market demand for electric trucks is growing as companies are increasingly interested in electrifying their fleets, some have even committed to fully electric transport. Further evidence comes from the number of companies working on their own electric trucks and self-driving transport vehicles. In August Cummins, a leading maker of diesel and natural gas engines for commercial trucks unveiled a heavy duty cab called AEOS. Daimler AG has already delivered electric tractor trailers to the United Parcel Service (UPS). Embark is already using self-driving trucks.

      A strong competitor is the Nikola One made by Nikola Motors. This electric hydrogen long-range truck has a 320 kW battery pack, capable of getting up to 1,200 miles on a full charge when coupled with a methane range extender. The company already has more than 7,000 reservations totaling more than 2.3 billion dollars.

      Sales of electric trucks could be slowed by technologies that retrofit existing diesel trucks.  Pittsburgh-based Hyliion introduced a patented system to convert diesel trucks into hybrids. This could reduce fuel consumption and emissions by 30 percent. The company already has preorders worth $20 million.

      Other companies that are developing their own electric trucks include, Eaton, Nikola, and Volkswagen. However, none of these prototypes have the performance and emissions-free characteristics of the Semi. To see a side by side comparison of some of the leading electric truck designs click here.

      The Tesla Semi may well offer us a glimpse into the future of truck transportation and an early example of the kind of vehicle that will revolutionize the global trucking industry.

      Related
      Truck Transport: Green Greener and Greenest (Video)
      Nikola One: The Hydrogen Powered Electric Semi Truck of the Future (Video)
      An Electric Truck Case Study: Smith Electric Goes Chinese to Stay Alive
      The US Transportation Sector can Reduce Petroleum Use and GHG emissions by 80%
      Video - Sustainable Transportation Ideas of the Future
      Ten Greenest Trucking Companies in North America
      Trucking Companies Need to do More than Reduce Emissions on the Road
      The Sustainable Shipping Initiative
      Followup on Sustainable Transportation Commitments at Rio+20
      Sustainable Transportation

      Event - Shareholder Activism Unlocking Shareholder Value

      This event will take place on January 25, 2018 at the Time Warner Center, 10 on the Park, 60 Columbus Circle, New York, NY.  The Shareholder Activism  Unlocking Shareholder Value conference brings together activists, board directors and corporate management to discuss the state of play in activist engagement and what to expect in the upcoming shareholder season. The event includes full day of interviews, panel discussions, presentations by practice experts, strategists, advisors, activists and investors makes this one-day program an invaluable gathering, needed to effectively manage through the ever-evolving landscape of proxy fights and settlements.

      Shareholder activism is an increasingly important issue as evidenced by the high profile Kraft Heinz shareholder sustainability motions earlier this year and many other similar motions.

      Participants at the conference will share views and practices on the evolution and current state of shareholder activism in the US and abroad, with a focus on how engagements continue to shape efforts between directors, public company management and activist investors, all seeking positive outcomes.

      Industry thought leaders will explore why and how ongoing shareholder engagement and activism play a vital role in affecting share value. The conference will also examine how activist investors cultivate relationships with companies to positively influence sustained value creation as well as the latest campaign practices of activists, how they unfold, their outcomes, and how boards and executives work constructively toward improved stock performance.

      Speakers (Session Leaders)

      Skytop Strategies session leaders are chosen from the highest caliber companies,foundations and funds for the express purpose of diversifying thought and creating balanced panels with all-encompassing viewpoints.
      • David Benoit Activism Reporter The Wall Street Journal New York, NY
      • Josh Black Editor-In-Chief Activist Insight New York, NY
      • Christopher P. Davis Partner Kleinberg, Kaplan, Wolff & Cohen New York, NY
      • Paul Davis Partner and Co-Chair Capital Markets & M&A, McMillan Toronto, Canada
      • Charles Elson Director John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance Newark, DE
      • Jeremy Fielding President and Chief Executive Officer Kekst New York, NY
      • Jason Frankl Senior Managing Director FTI Consulting Washington, D.C.
      • Andrew Freedman Partner and Co-Chair, Shareholder Activism Practice Olshan Frome Wolosky New York, NY
      • Michael Garland Assistant Comptroller, Corporate Governance and Responsible Investment New York City Office of the Comptroller New York, NY
      • Zachary George Portfolio Manager FrontFour Capital Group, LLC New York, NY
      • Bruce H. Goldfarb President and Chief Executive Officer Okapi Partners LLC New York, NY
      • Phillip Goldstein Founder Bulldog Investors Saddle Brook, NJ
      • Holly Gregory Partner and Co-Chair, Global Corporate Governance & Executive Compensation Practice Sidley Austin LLP New York, NY
      • R. Taylor Ingraham Director ASC Advisors LLC New York, NY
      • David Katz Partner Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz New York, NY
      • Eleazer Klein Partner Schulte Roth & Zabel New York, NY
      • Charles A. Koons Managing Director, Activism & Contested Situations Morrow Sodali New York, NY
      • Jeroen van Kwawegen Partner Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann New York, NY
      • Patricia Lenkov Founder and President Agility Executive Search New York, NY
      • Kai Haakon Liekefett Partner Vinson & Elkins New York, NY
      • Jonathan Litt Founder and Chief Executive Officer Land & Buildings Greenwich, CT
      • Leah Malone Director PwC New York, NY
      • Tom Manning Lead Director Dun & Bradstreet Board Director CommScope Board Director Clear Media Ltd. Chicago, IL
      • Bob Marese Managing Director MacKenzie Partners, Inc. New York, NY
      • Damien J. Park Managing Director Spotlight Advisors, LLC New York, NY
      • Lissa Perlman Senior Vice President Kekst New York, NY
      • Steve Pully Member, Board of Directors Titan Energy Dallas, TX
      • KT Rabin Chief Executive Officer Glass Lewis LLC San Francisco, CA
      • David Rosewater Managing Director Morgan Stanley New York, NY
      • Jim Rossman Managing Director Lazard New York, NY
      • W. Graeme Roustan Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Roustan Capital Ontario, C
      • Matthew Sherman President and Partner Joele Frank New York, NY
      • Walied Soliman Chairman and Partner Norton Rose Fulbright Toronto, CA
      • Lex Suvanto Managing Director, Financial Communications & Special Situations Edelman New York, NY
      • Michael Swartz Head of Shareholder Activism Litigation Schulte Roth & Zabel New York, N
      • Greg Taxin Managing Director Spotlight Advisors New York, NY
      • Scott Winter Managing Director Innisfree M&A Incorporated New York, NY
      • Steve Wolosky Partner Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP New York, NY
      • Dan Zacchei Managing Director Sloane & Company New York, NY
      Conference Price: Early bird special is $995.00. The price will be $1,695.00 as of December 1, 2017. Click here to register.

      KXL Pipeline Leak Highlights Serious Dangers and Questionable Economic Value

      A leak in the Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline occurred just days before Nebraska decides on the fate of a pipeline expansion. The tar sands oil that would be carried by the pipeline are currently being shipped by rail but not at the rate they would be if the $8 billion KXL expansion were built. If the KXL runs at full capacity it could ferry up to 830,000 barrels per day.

      There are many reasons to oppose the KXL. The tar sands require more energy to transport by pipe and more energy to refine.  As revealed by oil spills in 2015 and 2016, oil pipelines leak. Tar sands pipelines are even more likely to leak than those that transport conventional oil and when they do, they are harder to clean up. This puts dozens of critical waterways at risk. Tar sands also emit at least 20 percent more greenhouse gases than conventional oil. That is why tar sands pipelines are often referred to as carbon bombs. We can ill afford a surge in greenhouse gases as we ebb ever closer to the upper threshold temperature limits.

      TransCanada announced that the leak was detected on Thursday, November 16 at 6 am. The pipeline was shut down after more than 5,000 barrels leaked in Amherst, South Dakota. The 1,200-mile pipeline pipeline stretches from Canada to the Gulf States. The sections affected run from Hardisty, Alberta, to Cushing, Oklahoma, and the towns of Wood River and Patoka in Illinois. The southern part of the pipeline is still operational. 

      The leak could not be more untimely for pipeline advocates. On Monday, November 20, the Nebraska Public Service Commission is scheduled to announce its decision regarding the expansion of the controversial KXL pipeline expansion. The most recent KXL leak follows another that occurred in April 2016.

      Leaks are one of the reasons that people protest oil pipelines. Protests against Canada's Energy East succeed in killing the pipeline project. The KXL has been much harder to kill. It has died and been resurrected at least twice. Similarly, the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) has also been stopped and restarted a number of times.

      Within a week of his inauguration, Trump signed executive orders to push through the KXL and Dakota Access pipelines (DAPL). This is but one example of a raft of measures taken by the Trump administration to kill environment and climate regulations and clear the way for fossil fuel development. Because the KXL crosses the border between Canada and the US it is considered an international project and as such it requires review and approval by the US Department of State.  However, in the Trump administration that now amounts to a rubber stamp precluding any environmental review.

      Many are questioning the economics of the KXL. TransCanada has been having a hard time finding oil producers and refiners who want to invest. Triple Pundit reported that major oil companies including Shell, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Statoil were pulling back due to low oil prices. However, A subsidiary of Koch Industries is banking on higher oil prices and they are acquiring new tar sands leases. Koch Industries is already among the largest tar sands leaseholders in Canada. This is a similar move to their shale gas play. They bought in as the prices fell and hoped for a rebound.

      The situation is complicated by the interdependence of  these two North American fossil fuel producers. The US needs Canada's tar sands oil to refine the large quantities of ultralight oil that is being produced. More pipelines are being built to ferry even more of this ultralight oil to the coast. This means that as long as the US continues to produce its fossil fuel reserves the KXL will be in demand. Canada must also import US ultralight oil to move its tar sands through pipelines. So the US and Canada are locked in a vicious and dirty circle.

      These market forces are countered by widespread opposition to the KXL. Environmentalists are not the only ones that are resisting the KXL, there is also a grassroots movement of farmers and ranchers who are opposed because they want to protect their property rights.

      Trump made the building of the pipeline more difficult when he insisted that it be built with US steel, he then recanted and waved the requirement. Up to a few thousand temporary jobs would be created to build the pipeline, however, only 35 permanent jobs would be generated by the project.

      Approximately 70 percent of oil is transported by pipelines, 23 percent by river barge, and 4 percent by truck. Only 3 percent is transported by train and it can cost as much as five times more to transport oil by rail than it does through a pipeline.

      Making oil transportation more expensive decreases its demand and this is good for those who know we need to leave it in the ground. The most important calculation is not about supply and demand it is about the CO2 load associated with oil pipelines. The math on carbon emissions associated with fossil fuels is clear. We cannot exploit the majority of existing oil reserves if we are to stay within prescribed upper temperature limits.

      As illustrated by this most recent incident, pipelines inevitably leak. However, other means of transporting fossil fuels are no better. Trains derail and barges and trucks crash. The truth is there is no safe way to transport fossil fuels.

      Scientists Issue Dire Warnings about Climate Change

      A new US report and a recent warning from 17,000 scientists adds to the chorus of those calling for climate action.  On November 3, 2017, US government released its most significant and conclusive climate change report yet. The U.S. Global Change Research Program's fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4) is a comprehensive review of leading climate science that was compiled with contributions from 13 federal agencies under the direction of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Further, it was reviewed by the independent National Academy of Sciences and approved by the National Economic Council.

      It clearly states that this is the warmest period in human history. It further states that this is due to human activity especially rising rates of greenhouse gas emissions. This study corroborates thousands of others that document melting glaciers, shrinking sea ice, rising sea levels, ocean acidification, and extreme weather.

      Ten days later an open letter was issued by more than 15,000 scientists from 184 countries warning humanity about the dangers of climate change. The Alliance of Scientists letter was published in BioScience on November 13, 2017. The warning specifically said that humanity must change its ways in order to protect the planet. It specifically points to rising greenhouse gas emissions and deforestation.

      The letter campaign was founded by William Ripple, a professor at Oregon State University's College of Forestry. He found that over the last 25 years, there has been a 26.1 percent decline in the availability of fresh water per capita, and an increase in unsustainable marine fisheries. He also documented a 75.3 percent increase in ocean dead zones. He further concludes that forests are also declining and there is dwindling biodiversity. He also says that we have seen carbon emissions increase by 62 percent and this is driving global warming and climate change.

      "We are in the throes of a mass extinction event that is anthropogenic," said co-author Eileen Crist, a professor at Virginia Tech’s Department of Science and Technology in Society.

      With the exception of ozone depletion, things have gotten substantially worse over the last 25 years. However, the fact that we were able to close ozone holes by finding alternatives to CFCs suggests that we may be able to transition away from fossil fuels and towards renewable sources of energy.

      This is the second time in a quarter century that scientists have warned us to change our ways or face "widespread misery and catastrophic biodiversity loss". "Humanity is not taking the urgent steps needed to safeguard our imperiled biosphere," the letter reads."Soon it will be too late to shift course away from our failing trajectory, and time is running out." Let us hope that we heed this second notice as we may not have time for a third.

      Corporate Actions that Combat Trump's Climate Ignorance

      Corporations are opposing the Trump administration and embracing both science and sustainability. Corporations are increasingly adopting science-based emissions reduction targets and increasing their renewable energy investments. Many of these companies also support President Obama's Clean Power Plan which the Trump administration is in the process of dismantling. As part of their efforts to dismantle regulations Trump and the GOP are at war with science.

      The position of the current US government is in stark contrast to business leaders who acknowledge that climate change represents a serious material threat. This includes vulnerabilities to resource scarcity and supply chain disruptions. Corporations also have to contend with reputational threats from consumers who may punish laggards.


      Partisan political interests like to suggest that the Obama administration killed dirty energy (ie coal). However, the fact is that market forces have driven the transition from coal to gas and now those same forces are pushing the corporate world in the direction of renewable energy. Corporations cannot afford to ignore the global decarbonization effort. This is why many are embracing both sustainability and renewable energy.

      Corporations are actively opposing the Trump administration because they know that sticking your head in the sand is counterproductive. Leaders in the business community are adopting a wide range of climate actions. Around 50 percent of Fortune 500 companies are becoming more efficient as well as tracking and reducing their carbon emissions. This is to address bottom line efficiency issues as well as in response to demands from shareholders and consumers. Many of these companies are pressuring governments to embrace science and accept the veracity of anthropogenic climate change. 

      Very early in the life of the Trump administration corporations joined citizens in resisting this government. Corporations began by opposing Trump's environment and energy agenda. Business leaders then showed their support for sustainability while they rejected the Trump administration's climate denial. These criticisms were so widespread that it forced Trump to disband his business councils.

      Today's business leaders do more than just act to reduce emissions internally they have become sustainability advocates. Many companies strongly urged this administration to stay in the Paris Climate Accord and they vociferously condemned Trump when he withdrew.  The US is now the only country in the world that has not signed on to the Paris Agreement.

      We are seeing sustainability leadership from hundreds of companies this includes corporate giants like HSBC, Mars and GlaxoSmithKlein. Businesses are tackling a wide range of issues including transparency and water stewardship.

      In the face of the Trump administration's climate ignorance hundreds of companies have adopted their own carbon rules.  A total of 365 businesses, Some of the biggest brands in the US are on board. They are engaged in serious efforts to mitigate carbon emissions. This includes ArcelorMittal, DuPont, General Mills, Hewlett Packard, Kellogg, Loreal, and Nike. Even the oil industry giants like BP, ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell and StatOil support carbon pricing schemes to reduce emisisons.

      Through their involvement with Science Based Targets initiative corporations are setting meaningful climate goals. There are currently more than 155 companies that are part of the initiative and these actions have gleaned tangible benefits. Many of these companies have pledged to work towards emission reductions that far exceed the minimum required.

      The sustainability non-profit CERES has a roadmap for corporate sustainability and it hosts a Company Network of responsible organizations that are committed to achieving sustainability goals and improving resiliency in their operations and supply chains. More than 50 companies including dozens of Fortune 500 firms are part of the network. Previously CERES helped to organized a letter in support of the Clean Power Plan and signed by 350 investors and businesses including Nestlé, Unilever, Staples, General Mills, and Adidas. This letter was sent to 29 US governors and it highlights the growing consensus among companies both large and small in support of clean energy. 

      American Tech giants are also showing leadership by pledging to get all of their power from renewables. This includes Apple, Amazon, Google, Intel and Microsoft.  These businesses are part of a renewable energy revolution that is being spearheaded by the RE100 initiative.

      The Breakthrough Energy Venture started by Microsoft Founder Bill Gates is providing $1 billion in funding to help steward the clean energy transition over the next two decades. These funds will be used in part to research promising clean energy initiatives. The goal of the venture is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a half-gigaton a year.

      Despite the Trump administration we are seeing tangible results from the corporate sector.  Carbon emissions in the United States have fallen by 2.2 percent between 2014 and 2015. US greenhouse gases are almost 10 percent below 2005 levels. At the same time we are also seeing economic growth proving that decoupling is possible.

      The fact that the Trump administration eschews its own government research on climate change has made this administration irrelevant at COP23 and to a growing number of corporations.

      Corporate leadership gives us reason to be optimistic in 2017 and beyond. In the context of the Trump administration sustainability matters now more than ever. Sustainability is an economic boon not a liability and although Trump will not admit it businesses are thriving with sustainability and risk dying without it.

      Sustainability is now a mainstream phenomenon but it is not impervious to Trump. Nonetheless, businesses need to make an existential choice, they must decide whether they are for or against climate action.  It is not overstating the case to say that if they side with the latter they are writing their own obituaries.

      The Economist Events Sustainability Summit 2018

      The Sustainability Summit 2018 will take place on March 22nd 2018 in London. The event is subtitled, "from responsibility to leadership". If you are only able to attend one major event in 2018 this is one of the events you will want to consider.

      As global political shifts have given way to a new world order, the role of citizens, businesses and policymakers in the pursuit of progress on the green agenda has also evolved. The decision of the US president, Donald Trump, to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, and the subsequent defiance from certain state legislatures and multinational companies demonstrates the expanding role of individuals and corporates in driving progress in a globalised world. At the same time, Brexit is narrowing the bandwidth of European legislators, threatening to delay critical progress on policy. But with the effects of climate change increasingly apparent across the world, can we really afford to wait?

      Does the onus fall upon businesses and consumers to pick up the slack where governments have failed? How can capital markets be reformed to price in the risks related to sustainability on a timeframe that reflects the seriousness of the risks and the urgent need for action? And how can collaboration between those with ideas and those with resources be stepped up across sectors and countries? The Economist Events’ third Sustainability Summit will convene business leaders, policymakers, scientists, researchers, advocates and investors to gauge the scale of the task, and work out how best to lead and encourage co-operation on the path to progress. (To register click on the link at the bottom of the page).

      Why attend & agenda highlights:

      • Reframing the mission: from responsibility to leadership
      • Making the future present: counteracting short-termism in business strategy and investment
      • Preparing for Brexit
      • Making a difference in…policy
      • Making a difference in…consumption
      • The engines of change: technology and innovation

      Attendees will

      Network with leaders from business, finance and government Make connections with those at the forefront of the sustainability effort Join the global effort to create an inclusive and environmentally sustainable marketplace Shape the evolving dialogue on sustainability and share ideas

      Speakers 

      Mike Coupe Chief executive officer, Sainsbury's
      Ayesha Imam Chair, board of directors, Greenpeace
      Christopher Davis International director, Corporate Responsibility and Campaigns, The Body Shop International
      Eric Beinhocker Executive director, The Institute for New Economic Thinking, University of Oxford
      Dr. Dagomar Degroot Tenure-track Assistant Professor of Environmental History, Department of History at Georgetown
      Baroness Bryony Worthington Executive Director, Environmental Defense Fund Europe
      Nick Mabey Chief executive and founding director, E3G
      Daniel Franklin, Executive editor, The Economist Jan Piotrowski
      Environment correspondent, The Economist

      Agenda


      March 22nd Thursday

      9:00 AM Chair’s opening remarks, Daniel Franklin, Executive editor, The Economist

      9:15 AM Reframing the mission: from responsibility to leadership

      Corporate responsibility is a familiar concept to businesses working across all sectors, but where does the boundary lie between responsibility and leadership? At what point must businesses intervene to lead global thinking on climate change mitigation and sustainability? And as policy unpredictability continues across the world, can multinational companies provide much-needed consistency (and leadership) on these issues? 10:00 AM A tale of three cities City governments are playing an ever-increasing role in setting environmental standards across the world. In this session, the mayors of three cities at different stages of development will discuss the lessons that they’ve learned from their individual experiences, and opportunities for international collaboration.

      10:45 AM Making the future present: counteracting short-termism in business strategy and investment

      Although many accept the harmful role of human activity on the environment, the adjustment of consumer and business behaviour at a scale that could mitigate the impact of this falls far short of what is needed. This session will bring together a leading scientist, a historian and an economist to deliver a prognosis on the scale and immediacy of the threat. What will happen in the next five, ten or 15 years if we don’t act now?

      Dr. Dagomar Degroot, Tenure-track Assistant Professor of Environmental History, Department of History at Georgetown

      11:15 AM Pieces of the puzzle

      In the first of a series of three short, sharp sessions, we will interview individuals working in different industries about the specific challenges that they face as they transition to a more sustainable business model, and how these contribute to the bigger picture. Christopher Davis

      International director, Corporate Responsibility and Campaigns, The Body Shop International

      11:30 AM Networking break

      12:00 PM Changing minds

      What is the psychology behind how humans respond to short- or long-term threats? And how can scientists use lessons from psychology to ensure that the urgency of climate change is effectively conveyed to decision-makers and consumers? 12:30 PM Strategy sessions: Reforming capital markets: A big failure of the market is that it fails to price in the risks related to sustainability adequately. As companies take on an increased role in global sustainability efforts, how do we reform the markets to reflect the necessary standards that would correct this failure? How do you make regulation more effective in enforcing standards, but that also rewards companies for their efforts? Is it time to admit that the status quo is not working?

      Preparing for Brexit: The UK’s exit from the European Union is drawing closer, but much of its impact on the green agenda is yet to be understood. What will Brexit mean for environmental regulation, both in the country and the broader region? And how can businesses respond and prepare?

      1:10 PM Working lunch

      This sit-down luncheon is an opportunity for participants to network in a relaxed setting. Speakers and sustainability experts will act as table hosts, leading informative discussions that reflect on the morning’s sessions.

      2:10 PM Pieces of the puzzle

      In the second of a series of three short, sharp sessions, we will interview individuals working in different industries about the specific challenges they face as they transition to a more sustainable business model, and how these contribute to the bigger picture.

      2:25 PM Making a difference in…policy

      How can individuals and businesses influence change at a policy level? In this session, we will learn how to maximise the impact of advocacy and campaigning from the streets to the boardroom, with the goal of influencing change at the highest level of decision-making. Baroness Bryony Worthington

      Executive Director, Environmental Defense Fund Europe

      2:55 PM Making a difference in...consumption

      In this session, we will hear from brands that have focused their efforts on educating consumers. We will also learn practical steps that businesses can take to encourage shifts in patterns of consumption, with the goal of moving towards a sustainable, “circular” economy.

      3:25 PM Networking break

      3:55 PM Pieces of the puzzle

      In the third of a series of three short, sharp sessions, we will interview individuals working in different industries about the specific challenges they face as they transition to a more sustainable business model, and how these contribute to the bigger picture.

      4:10 PM: Call to action

      Participants will be divided into small groups to draft a list of actionable personal and professional commitments that delegates can pledge to achieve over the coming year. Progress will be measured, tracked and discussed at next year’s summit, and participants will be invited back to share the results of their work.

      4:55 PM: Keynote interview

      The engines of change: technology and innovation — A worker is only as good as their tools. As we close the day’s proceedings and consider the road ahead, this interview will look at the latest technological trends that have the potential to streamline efforts in sustainability and help to drive progress.

      5:25 PM: Chair’s closing remarks

      5:30 PM: Networking reception

      The Sustainability Summit 2017

      What does COP21 and the push for greater environmental sustainability mean for business? The Sustainability Summit will bring together key thinkers, policymakers and business leaders, who will deliver strategies, ideas and solutions to decision makers, helping them to turn challenges into new opportunities and prepare for the future.

      Over the past two centuries, global economic development has often come at the expense of our environment. Ice caps have melted, forests have been flattened, noxious fumes expelled and species wiped out, all in the name of a type of progress that threatens to be unsustainable. In late 2015 at COP21 in Paris governments made bold commitments to limit climate change, but there is still much more to be done if their aims are to be delivered, and the election of Donald Trump has cast doubts on US policy.

      The issue of sustainability is a multifaceted one, and cannot be tackled by policy alone; international business must also rise to the challenge. But how can businesses evolve and develop their practices to improve their environmental footprint? Is it possible to make adjustments that have a net positive impact on revenue? And what are the challenges that multinational companies face in implementing such changes across borders?

      The Economist Events Sustainability Summit in London offered an alarming prognosis: adapt or die. In 2017 we will be evaluating progress and the scalability of sustainability initiatives, while asking the crucial question: what does the Paris Agreement and the push for greater environmental sustainability mean for business? Bringing together leading critical thinkers, policymakers and business leaders, the Sustainability Summit will offer strategies, ideas and solutions to decision makers, helping them to turn challenges into new opportunities and prepare for the future.
      • Why attend/Questions that will answered:
      • What steps can we take to break the prevailing short-termism which dominates the markets and begin to act with an eye to the future?
      • How can policy-makers better address market failings and encourage a move toward a circular economy?
      • In what ways do our current, global regulatory frameworks account for climate change? 
      • How can we leverage the capital markets and big business to create a more sustainable economy? 
      • Where should investors direct their capital in order to make the biggest impact? 
      • From source to shelf, how can businesses take better stock of natural capital and ensure resource efficiency all the way across their supply chains? 
      • Could technological innovation provide some of the solutions we need to deliver sustainable growth? And, how can we scale the green tech that already exists? 
      • How can we further the social components of the SDGs and create a more inclusive marketplace around the world?

      Attendees will:

      Network with more than 200 international leaders from business, finance and government Make connections with those at the forefront of the sustainability effort and discover new opportunities for cross-border and cross-sectoral collaboration Shape the evolving dialogue on sustainability and share ideas with decision-makers and innovators Get to grips with practical steps businesses are taking to scale-up action and create the swift change we need to realise the transition to a two degree world Gain a fresh perspective on sustainability as a value driver and differentiator for business and finance Join the global effort to create an inclusive and environmentally sustainable marketplace

      Companies registered to attend include:

      • A Greener Life a Greener World
      • AB-InBev
      • Abbott Laboratories
      • Africa Water and Agriculture Conservation
      • Almond Board of California
      • Alstom Sa
      • Aon
      • Article 13
      • Aviva
      • B.N.P. Paribas
      • Bain & Company
      • Bank of America Merrill Lynch
      • Barclays
      • Barilla Centre for Food and Nutrition
      • Bayer
      • BBC
      • bio-bean
      • Black & Veatch
      • Blackstone Porftfolio Company
      • Bloomberg
      • BNP Paribas
      • BP
      • Business and Sustainable Development Commission
      • Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership
      • Carbon Calculated
      • Carbon Tracker Initiative
      • Carbon Trust Ltd
      • Carnival UK
      • Centre for Synchronous Leadership
      • Changeboard
      • City Financial Investment Company/Cumulus
      • ClearBright
      • Climate Bonds
      • Co-Op Group
      • CSR Europe
      • Daily Mail
      • DEFRA
      • Delta Lloyd
      • Department for International Development
      • Diageo
      • E.L. Rothschild
      • EAT Foundation
      • Ecoved Technologies
      • Edelman
      • EFFEM HOLDINGS LTD
      • Elanco Animal Health
      • Embassy of Brazil in London
      • Energy Institute
      • Envac
      • Environment Agency Pension Fund
      • Environment Europe
      • Environmental Defense Fund
      • Environmental Finance Magazine
      • Epworth Investment Management
      • Ericsson
      • European Commission
      • European Commission, Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME)
      • European Committee of Domestic Equipment Manufacturers (CECED)
      • Feed Algae
      • Fernhay
      • Finance Alliance for Sustainable Trade (FAST)
      • Franklin Templeton Investments
      • Global Counsel
      • Global Trade Review
      • Global Water Development Partners
      • Globechain
      • Goldman Sachs & Co
      • Guardian Sustainable Business
      • GWDP
      • Hewlett-Packard Co
      • HSBC
      • Hutchison Kinrot
      • IBM Corp
      • IFAH-Europe AISBL
      • Ilala Municipal council
      • Impact Squared
      • INCEIF
      • Indigo
      • Industry and Energy
      • Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales
      • International Business and Diplomatic Exchange
      • Invesco
      • IPIECA
      • John Lewis Partnership
      • Lenzing
      • London Business School
      • Long-Term Infrastructure Investors
      • Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership
      • Lyft
      • Made in Africa
      • Mastercard
      • Met Office
      • MicroFarms , FarmX , Root
      • Minister of Labour and Social Affairs
      • Ministry of Defence
      • Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation
      • Ministry of the Environment
      • Mondelez International
      • Nature Publishing Group
      • Neals Yard Remedies
      • New West End Company
      • Nordic Capital
      • Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment
      • Novapower
      • OFID
      • OLIO – The Food Sharing Revolution
      • Ophir Energy
      • Oracle Corporation UK
      • Oxbridge Capital and Hult International Business School
      • Pathfinder Trade & Invest
      • Pathway21
      • PepsiCo
      • Polecat Risk Intelligence Technology
      • Project Earth Rock
      • Qualcomm Europe
      • Queen Mary University of London
      • Retail Design World
      • Retail Gazette
      • Retail Newsagent
      • Royal Bank of Scotland
      • Safaricom
      • Sainsbury
      • Santander
      • SBI Global
      • Schlumberger
      • Simply Sustainable
      • Siyeh Strategies
      • Sky News
      • Solar for Life
      • Springer Nature
      • Stockholm Recilience Centre
      • Sweco
      • Swiss
      • Synchronous Leadership Sysdoc
      • Tetra Pak
      • The Body Shop International Plc
      • The Carbon Trust
      • The Foundation For Science and Technology
      • The Nature Conservancy
      • The Rezidor Hotel Group
      • The Thomson Reuters Foundation
      • Trevi Systems
      • Trucost
      • Unilever
      • United Nations Development Programme
      • United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment
      • University of Basel
      • University of Iceland
      • University of Oxford
      • University of the Arctic
      • University of Warwick Business School
      • University of York
      • US Business Council for Sustainable Development
      • Vodafone Qatar
      • Walter Scott & Partners
      • Wellcome Trust
      • Westminster City Council
      • William Jackson Food Group
      • World Climate
      • World Green Building Council
      • World Resources Institute
      • WRAP
      • Zurich
      Speakers

      John Podesta Founder, Centre for American Progress Paloma Duran, Director, Sustainable Development Goals Fund

      Mark Wilson,Chief Executive Officer, Aviva

      Bob Collymore, Chief Executive Officer, Safaricom

      Daniel Franklin, Executive editor, The Economist, Editor, The World in… Miranda Johnson

      South-East Asia correspondent, The Economist,

      Jeremy Oppenheim, Programme Director, Business and Sustainable Development Commission

      Usha Rao-Monari, Chief executive officer, Global Water Development Partners, Blackstone Group

      Agenda

      March 23rd - Thursday

      8:00 AM: REGISTRATION AND REFRESHMENTS

      9:00 AM: CHAIRS OPENING REMARKS

      Daniel Franklin, Executive Editor, The Economist; Editor
      Miranda Johnson, Environment Correspondent, The Economist

      9:10 AM: WELCOME ADDRESS - Moving from trickle to stream

      9:30 AM: SETTING THE SCENE: Operating within the ‘planetary playing field’

      First introduced in 2009 by a group of renowned scientists, the planetary boundaries framework identifies and quantifies nine boundaries under which humanity can develop sustainably. This framework has since gone on to underpin much of our present thinking, including the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This scene-setting session will explore and explain the current thinking on sustainability. What does this means for policymakers and industry? What would a path towards a more resilient future look like?

      Johan Rockström, Director, Stockholm Resilience Centre

      10:00 AM: POLICY-MAKERS DISCUSSION: The politics of change

      If we are to have a more sustainable future, governments will need to co-operate much more closely. In this session, we bring together global ©2016 The Economist Events – This is a confidential draft programme for the summit mentioned in this document. All topics and speakers are indicative and subject to change. policymakers at the forefront of these efforts. What are the key priorities? Which hurdles must be overcome to allow for better cross-border collaboration? What impact could Brexit and wider disruptions to the global economy have on co-ordinated efforts? How can policymakers better address market failings and encourage a move towards a circular economy?

      Michaela Marksová, Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, Czech Republic
      Lars Andreas Lunde, State Secretary for Climate and Environment, Norway

      10:40 AM: MORNING REFRESHMENT BREAK

      11:10 AM: VOICES FROM THE FUTURE

      In this series of conversations, The Economist Events will identify key innovators driving progress across policy and business, either as entrepreneurs, policy advocates or researchers.

      Gunhild Stordalen, Founder, EAT Foundation

      11:25 AM: ECONOMIST INSIGHTS: Encoding sustainability into the DNA of capital markets

      How do our current, global regulatory frameworks account for climate change? Do the existing mandates of key regulators and co-ordinating bodies explicitly include sustainability and address long-term risks? What are the principal obstacles to getting this regulation in place? In this discussion of EIU research, we explore the extent to which changes to financial regulation can enable climate change mitigation.

      Mark Wilson, Chief Executive Officer, Aviva
      Chair: Renée Friedman, Managing editor, thought leadership, The Economist Intelligence Unit

      11:50 AM: THE BURNING QUESTION: Climate change in the Trump era

      Following his claim in 2012 that climate change was a hoax created by the Chinese, the election of Mr Trump as US president in November 2016 was a shot through the heart for many environmentally minded people. But is such pessimism warranted? Will Mr Trump actually fulfil his pledge to withdraw from the Paris Agreement? What, if any, optimism can be gleaned from his recent softening on the issue of climate change? And how could US state governments mitigate the effects of any backtracking at the federal level?

      Diane Regas, Executive director, Environmental Defense Fund
      John Podesta, Founder, Centre for American Progress
      Myron Ebell, Director of global warming and international environmental policy, Competitive Enterprise Institute



      12:35 PM: ASK THE EXPERTS: Long-term strategy in a short-term world

      Last year the Bank of England governor, Mark Carney, spoke about climate change as a ”tragedy of the horizons”, in which the tangible effects often extend beyond the lifespan of the actors and organisations involved. How can we break the prevailing short-termism that dominates the markets and begin to act with an eye to the future? In this forward-looking panel we gather a group of sustainability experts from different industries to look at the ways in which they have already begin to build sustainability into corporate strategy and to redefine long-term goals within business and investment.

      Greg Lowe, Global Head of Resilience and Sustainability, Aon
      Philippe Joubert, Founder, Earth on Board, Chair, Prince of Wales' Corporate Leaders Group
      David Croft, Global environmental sustainability director, Diageo
      Mario Abreu, Vice president, environment, Tetra Pak

      1:00 PM: NETWORKING LUNCH

      1:50 PM: AFTERNOON KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Water security

      Usha Rao-Monari, Chief Executive Officer, Global Water Development Partners, Blackstone Group

      2:20 PM: VOICES FROM THE FUTURE

      In this series of conversations, The Economist Events will identify key innovators driving progress across policy and business, either as entrepreneurs, policy advocates or researchers.

      May Al-Karooni

      Founder, Globechain

      2:35 PM: PANEL DISCUSSION: Impact investing for sustainable development

      Capital is increasingly being used as a tool for sustainable development and not solely for short-term gains. Environmental, social and governance (ESG) policies are no longer just nice to have, but are actually starting to reshape the goals and fiduciary duties of investment professionals. A panel of forward-looking investors will discuss the effect that impact investing can have on sustainable development, and the key trends and movements they see coming in the investment community.

      Steve Waygood, Chief Responsible Investment Officer, Aviva Investors
      Kyung-Ah Park, Head of Environmental Markets, Goldman Sachs
      Tom Delay, Chief Executive Officer, Carbon Trust
      Mardi McBrien, Managing Director, Climate Disclosure Standards Board
      Moderator: Krister Koskelo, Finance correspondent, The Economist

      3:05 PM: VOICES FROM THE FUTURE

      In this series of conversations, The Economist Events will identify key innovators driving progress across policy and business, either as entrepreneurs, policy advocates or researchers.

      Benjamin Cohen, Chief Executive Officer, T-REX

      3:20 PM INTERVIEW

      Lewis Blackwell, Chair, Wildlife Photographer of the Year

      3:35 PM, AFTERNOON REFRESHMENT BREAK

      4:05 PM, VOICES FROM THE FUTURE

      In this series of conversations, The Economist Events will identify key innovators driving progress across policy and business, either as entrepreneurs, policy advocates or researchers. Geoffrey von Maltzahn, Founder and chief innovation officer, Indigo

      4:20 PM: THE WORLD IF...

      What if businesses continue operating as usual and don't incorporate more sustainable practices? How could this damage their credibility with consumers? How would this alter the dynamics of the market? And how could this affect revenue in the short, medium and long term? We ask business leaders, economists and notable thinkers to consider three imagined but plausible scenarios. What would the world be like if?

      David Dingle, Chairman, Carnival UK
      Gordon Clark, Director, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford

      4:45 PM: A VIEW FROM THE TOP: How sustainable development is changing business leadership

      The private sector has an extremely important role to play in achieving sustainable development. Proponents of the SDGs argue that the Global Goals provide the private sector with a framework for advancing the world’s transition to a more sustainable, inclusive economy. Many leaders are beginning to elevate this conversation, looking at sustainable development not only as a social responsibility, but also as a strategic business opportunity. Drawing on the insights from the Business and Sustainable Development Commission’s 2017 flagship report, a forward-looking panel of corporate leaders will take a critical look at sustainability as a value driver.

      Bob Collymore, Chief Executive Officer, Safaricom
      Helen Hai, Chief Executive Officer, Made in Africa
      Jeremy Oppenheim, Programme Director, Business and Sustainable Development Commission

      5:20 PM: CHAIRS CLOSING REMARKS

      Daniel Franklin, Executive Editor, The Economist, Editor, The World in
      Miranda Johnson, Environment Correspondent, The Economist
      5:30 PM CLOSE OF DAY ONE

      To register for the Economist Events Summit 2018 click here (rates go up after November 30, 2017).