dannyc’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Sustainability vs. Profits

  Where businesses have a choice between different profitable options, some are beginning to look for  the more sustainable option. Which is clearly a good thing.

  However, in many cases (and especially in the case of industries whose core products produce large amounts of carbon emissions) the changes that we desperately need are NOT currently profitable - BP isn't reducing the amount of oil it extracts, BA isn't cutting the size of its air fleet, Lafarge isn't making less concrete. Yes, there are still important savings to be made out there in energy and resource efficiency, but not enough to achieve the 90%+ cut in CO2 emissions that we need across the industrialised world. Yes, some companies can get a certain amount of added "brand value" from being seen to do a few high-profile "sustainable" things, but these are patchy at best, tokenistic at worst, and not relevant to the many companies for whom this kind of branding is not a major issue.

  We desperately need strong regulation of companies, coupled with social and political shifts away from a reliance on huge, unaccountable corporations for the provision of goods and services. We need to create a new economic environment where sustainable practices are a legal norm, not an optional extra. The risk of relying on the voluntary approaches championed by this article is that it creates the false impression that all is well, companies are cleaning up their act and if we just leave things to the industry "experts" and "gurus" it will all be sorted out. In fact, we need to be campaigning like crazy and challenging the corporations more than ever before - if we leave them to sort it out, we are likely to end up with a host of supposed environmental "solutions" (such as biofuels, dodgy carbon trading schemes and large-scale technofixes) that may keep the companies in profit for a few more years but will do little to prevent runaway climate change and other ecological disasters.

  For an excellent critique of the current "Corporate Responsibility" trend (to act as a nice counterpoint to this article) see the latest edition of the "New Internationalist" magazine - www.newint.org/bigbadwolf.

  http://adaisythroughconcrete.blogspot.com

  On Six insights on the business trend toward sustainability posted 1 year, 10 months ago 2 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Excellent New Magazine on Greenwashing

  The latest edition of the New Internationalist magazine is all about "Corporate Responsibility" and greenwashing. Normally you have to subscribe to read it, but you can get a sneak preview of a few articles here:

  http://tinyurl.com/2kp48z

  It's all really well-researched and illuminating stuff. Here's a quote:

  "The biggest problem with Corporate Responsibility, however, is not that it doesn't go far enough. It is that it's taking us in completely the wrong direction.

  "For many large companies, CR is primarily a strategy to divert attention away from the negative social and environmental impacts of their activities, and to continue operating without being forced by governments to change their core business practices. It is no coincidence that the Corporate Responsibility pioneers are companies who have come up against the most brand-damaging public criticism: Shell, Nike, BP, Wal-Mart, Rio Tinto, McDonald's. In fact, it would seem that the more egregious the industry, the more outrageous the greenwash."

  Check it out.

  D

  PS I should declare an interest here - the magazine also includes one of my poems. But don't let that put you off...

  http://adaisythroughconcrete.blogspot.com

  On BP joins 'biggest global warming crime ever seen' posted 1 year, 11 months ago 11 Responses