Category: General sustainability

“Unless we act now, the 2030 agenda will become an epitaph for a world that might have been,”

Said the Secretary-General of the United Nations Antonio Guterres

This was the comment highlighted in the 2023 UN Sustainability Development Goals (SDG) report. This report from July painted a dark image of our capacity to reach the goals that were set for 2030, with Climate disasters on the rise, even hunger progressing after years of decline.

So what did the report say ? Let’s look at the top 3 positive and more worrisome messages along with other key messages.

Top 3 Wins:

• Renewable Energy Advances 🌞: A shining example of progress is the substantial growth in renewable energy. Investments and innovations in solar, wind, and other renewable sources are reshaping our energy landscape, promising a cleaner, more sustainable future.
  Global renewable energy capacity has increased dramatically, with the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) reporting a record addition of 260 gigawatts (GW) in 2020 alone, which is a nearly 50% increase over the capacity added in 2019.
• Digitalization Leap 💻: The acceleration in digital technology has been a game-changer, especially in enhancing access to information, education, and services. This digital leap is bridging gaps and opening new avenues for development and equity.
  According to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), internet usage worldwide has grown from 17% of the global population in 2005 to over 60% in 2021, showcasing the massive leap in digital connectivity.
• Education Access 📚: Notable strides in education have been made, with increased access to quality education worldwide. This progress is crucial in equipping future generations with the skills and knowledge to sustain and advance our global community.
  UNESCO reports that the global primary school net enrollment rate rose from 83% in 2000 to over 91% in 2020, demonstrating significant progress towards universal primary education.

Top 3 Misses:

• Escalating Climate Crisis 🌍: Despite progress in renewable energy, the report soberly notes that we are lagging in combating climate change. Rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and biodiversity loss remain alarming challenges needing immediate action.
  The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) stated that the last seven years, up to 2020, have been the warmest on record, indicating a continuing trend of global warming.
• Widening Inequalities 📉: Inequality continues to be a significant global issue, exacerbated by the pandemic. Economic disparities within and between countries are growing, threatening social cohesion and sustainable development.
  The World Bank highlighted that the COVID-19 pandemic has pushed an additional estimated 88 million to 115 million people into extreme poverty in 2020, reversing a two-decade trend of poverty reduction.
• Reversal in Hunger Reduction 🍽️: Alarmingly, after years of decline, hunger and food insecurity have been on the rise. This reversal is a stark reminder of the fragility of our progress and the need for sustained efforts in food security.
  The United Nations reported that the number of undernourished people grew by as many as 161 million in 2020, reaching an estimated total of 811 million worldwide, significantly set back by the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Other Important Messages:

• Health Systems Under Pressure 🏥: The global health crises have stressed the importance of robust health systems. Strengthening healthcare infrastructure remains crucial for combating current and future health challenges.
• Sustainability in Business 🌿: The report emphasizes the vital role of the private sector in achieving the SDGs. Businesses are encouraged to integrate sustainability into their core strategies, aligning profit with planetary and societal well-being.
• Call to Collective Action 🤝: The overarching message is clear – achieving the SDGs requires a collective effort. It calls for partnerships across governments, businesses, and civil society to unite in this critical mission.

In conclusion, while the 2023 SDG Report presents a mixed bag of progress and setbacks, its underlying message is unmistakably clear: there’s an urgent need for concerted and accelerated action across all sectors.

And while we could say that this is “government stuff”, businesses are key in shaping a sustainable, equitable future and should contribute as much and to as many of these goals as it can. It can be as much as an opportunity for growth and efficiency as it remains an imperative for compliance to existing and upcoming regulations.

As business leaders, the report offers not just insights but actionable pathways to integrate these goals into our strategies, ensuring our businesses are not just successful but also responsible stewards of a sustainable future. 🌟🌏

The Role of Packaging in Modern Business

Packaging is often a crucial element of a company’s marketing strategy, acting as an emblem of the product itself. Iconic examples like Toblerone’s triangular box or McDonald’s Happy Meal box illustrate how packaging can become a symbol of brand identity. However, beyond its role in branding, packaging also significantly impacts the environment. The criticism Amazon faced for using oversized boxes is a prime example of how wasteful packaging practices can attract negative attention. In response, businesses are increasingly focused on reinventing their packaging to make it not only functional and visually appealing but also sustainable.

Innovative Approaches to Sustainable Packaging

And the industry is quite innovative, coming up with many ways to achieve this! During my time at Amazon, I loved the idea of shifting to e-commerce-friendly packaging was inspiring. The idea is simple yet powerful: create packaging that’s ready for shipment, eliminating the need for extra layers and reducing waste. And Amazon was lobbying this idea directly with the largest FMCG companies to make an impact.

In this article, we explore practical strategies to enhance packaging sustainability, each with its definition, real-life examples, and potential for sustainability.

Practical Strategies for Enhancing Packaging Sustainability

1. Using Sustainable Materials

The choice of materials in packaging plays a critical role in its environmental impact. By opting for sustainable materials, businesses can significantly reduce their ecological footprint. These materials, whether derived from responsibly managed forests, recycled sources, or compostable plant-based options, are designed to minimize environmental harm while maintaining functionality and appeal. Sustainable material selection is the foundation for creating packaging that aligns with modern ecological values.

• Cardboard from Sustainable Sources
  • Explanation: Sourcing cardboard from sustainably managed forests ensures that the materials used do not contribute to deforestation or environmental degradation. Certifications like FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) guarantee that the cardboard comes from responsibly managed forests.
  • Example: IKEA’s use of FSC-certified cardboard demonstrates a commitment to sustainable forestry practices, contributing to forest conservation and reducing environmental harm.
  • Impact: High sustainability potential due to its role in promoting forest conservation.
• Recycled Cardboard or Plastic
  • Explanation: Incorporating recycled content in packaging reduces the demand for virgin materials, conserving natural resources and reducing waste. This practice also supports the recycling industry by providing a market for recycled materials.
  • Example: Loop Industries’ transformation of waste plastic into high-quality PET plastic used by major brands showcases how recycling can be integrated into packaging on a large scale.
  • Impact: High sustainability potential due to waste reduction and resource conservation.
• Compostable Materials
  • Explanation: Compostable packaging is designed to break down safely in composting environments, returning nutrients to the soil. This type of packaging is particularly beneficial for products that are likely to be disposed of quickly.
  • Example: SunChips’ use of compostable bags made from plant-based materials is a pioneering example, though it faced challenges in consumer acceptance due to noise levels.
  • Impact: Moderate to high sustainability potential, as it can significantly reduce landfill waste and enrich soil.

2. Using Fewer Materials

Reducing the amount of material used in packaging is a direct way to lessen environmental impact. Minimalist and customized packaging designs focus on using only what is necessary to protect and present the product, thereby cutting down on waste. This approach not only conserves resources but also reduces costs and enhances the efficiency of the entire packaging process, reflecting a commitment to sustainability in every aspect.

• Minimalist Packaging
  • Explanation: By simplifying packaging designs, companies can use fewer materials, reducing resource consumption and waste. Minimalist packaging often focuses on the essential functions of protection and branding without unnecessary frills.
  • Example: Apple’s packaging is renowned for its minimalist approach, which not only enhances the unboxing experience but also minimizes environmental impact.
  • Impact: High sustainability potential through resource and waste reduction.
• Customized Packaging
  • Explanation: Tailoring the size and shape of packaging to the specific dimensions of a product reduces the need for excess material and minimizes void space. This approach also improves shipping efficiency.
  • Example: Amazon’s technology for customizing parcel sizes to fit specific products exemplifies how tailored packaging can reduce waste and optimize material usage.
  • Impact: High sustainability potential by minimizing waste and improving efficiency.
• E-commerce Focused Packaging
  • Explanation: Packaging designed specifically for online retail can be optimized for protection and efficiency, often eliminating the need for additional layers or materials that are necessary for in-store displays.
  • Example: Amazon’s “Frustration-Free Packaging” initiative reduces the use of excess materials and focuses on recyclability, aiming to improve both the customer experience and environmental impact.
  • Impact: Moderate sustainability potential as it balances protection with material efficiency.

3. Increasing Packaging Lifecycle

Extending the lifecycle of packaging is a powerful strategy for sustainability. By designing packaging that is reusable, recyclable, or multi-functional, companies can ensure that their packaging stays out of landfills and serves multiple purposes over time. This approach not only reduces waste but also encourages a circular economy, where packaging materials are continuously reused and repurposed, minimizing the need for new resources.

• Reusable Packaging
  • Explanation: Designing packaging that can be reused multiple times extends its lifecycle, reducing the need for single-use packaging. This approach is particularly effective in reducing waste in industries where packaging is a significant cost and environmental burden.
  • Example: The Loop platform’s use of durable containers that customers return for refilling represents a significant shift towards a circular economy model.
  • Impact: High sustainability potential due to extended packaging life and waste reduction.
• Enhanced Recyclability
  • Explanation: Making packaging more recyclable involves minimizing the use of mixed materials, which are often difficult to separate during the recycling process. This increases the likelihood that packaging will be recycled rather than discarded.
  • Example: Nestlé’s commitment to making 100% of its packaging recyclable or reusable by 2025 reflects a growing industry trend towards enhancing recyclability.
  • Impact: High sustainability potential as it facilitates recycling and reduces landfill waste.
• Multi-functional Packaging
  • Explanation: Packaging that serves additional purposes beyond its primary function can reduce the need for additional products and extend its usability. This approach can also add value to the product, enhancing the customer experience.
  • Example: Puma’s “Clever Little Bag” reduces cardboard use and doubles as a reusable shoe bag, combining practicality with environmental consciousness.
  • Impact: Moderate to high sustainability potential due to added value and extended usability.

4. Optimized Processes

Sustainability in packaging also involves optimizing the processes surrounding its production, distribution, and disposal. By partnering with eco-friendly suppliers, optimizing logistics, and producing packaging locally, businesses can reduce their overall environmental impact. These process improvements not only enhance sustainability but also often lead to cost savings and greater operational efficiency, making them a win-win for both the environment and the bottom line.

• Sustainable Supplier Practices
  • Explanation: Partnering with suppliers who prioritize sustainability ensures that the entire supply chain supports environmental goals. This can involve sourcing materials from eco-friendly suppliers or collaborating with logistics partners who use green technologies.
  • Example: Many companies are now incorporating sustainability criteria into their supplier selection processes, enhancing the overall sustainability of their operations.
  • Impact: Moderate sustainability potential, as it influences the broader supply chain.
• Efficient Logistics and Transportation
  • Explanation: Optimizing packaging for transportation efficiency involves reducing the size and weight of packages to lower transportation costs and emissions. This can also involve using innovative materials that reduce packaging volume.
  • Example: Dell’s use of bamboo cushioning not only provides sustainable protection for products but also reduces the volume of packaging, improving shipping efficiency.
  • Impact: High sustainability potential through emission reductions and cost savings.
• Localized Production
  • Explanation: Manufacturing packaging materials close to where they will be used reduces the carbon footprint associated with transportation. This approach can also support local economies and reduce lead times.
  • Example: Lush Cosmetics’ local sourcing of packaging materials demonstrates how companies can reduce transportation emissions and support local suppliers.
  • Impact: Moderate sustainability potential as it cuts down on transport-related emissions.

Conclusion

By adopting these strategies, businesses can not only reduce their environmental impact but also strengthen their brand identity in an increasingly eco-conscious market. Sustainable packaging is no longer just a trend; it’s a necessity for companies aiming to stay relevant and responsible in today’s world. As sustainability continues to shape consumer preferences and regulatory landscapes, redefining packaging practices becomes essential for long-term business success.

The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals are primarily goals crafted for countries in 2015, to make the world a better place by 2030. Since then, it has been used as a framework for businesses to design and develop their sustainability strategy to be all-encompassing. Many annual reports use now these SDGs to report on the company’s ESG strategy.

In this article, we will explore what the UN Sustainable Goals are and why they matter to businesses (even if they are primarily for governments).

I. Understanding the UN Sustainable Development Goals

The Genesis and Vision

The SDGs were born out of the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro. Officially adopted in 2015, they are a set of 17 interconnected objectives designed to address the world’s most pressing challenges by 2030. These goals cover a broad spectrum, from eradicating poverty and hunger to promoting sustainable industrialization and fostering innovation. Their website is updated frequently and contains a lot of information on each areas !

Country Participation

Participation in the SDGs by countries is voluntary and collaborative. Nations across the globe are encouraged to adopt these goals as part of their national development agendas and strategies. While the SDGs are not legally binding, they carry significant moral and political weight, as they represent a universal commitment to tackling critical global issues. Countries report their progress voluntarily through platforms like the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development, fostering a spirit of shared responsibility and international cooperation.

The List of Goals

The Goals are the following (self explanatory):

1. No Poverty
2. Zero Hunger
3. Good Health and Well-being
4. Quality Education
5. Gender Equality
6. Clean Water and Sanitation
7. Affordable and Clean Energy
8. Decent Work and Economic Growth
9. Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
10. Reduced Inequalities
11. Sustainable Cities and Communities
12. Responsible Consumption and Production
13. Climate Action
14. Life Below Water
15. Life on Land
16. Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
17. Partnerships for the Goals

The Goal’s Target and Indicators

Each goal, with its specific targets and indicator, offers a roadmap for each country to contribute meaningfully to global sustainability.

For the Goal 12 of responsible Consumption and production, there are 11 targets with indicators that will be used to track and monitor changes.

II. Why the SDGs Matter to Businesses and ESG Strategy Integration

While the SDGs have primarily been created for countries and public institutions, as a comprehensive roadmap to a better world, it is a great framework when it comes to designing ESG strategies for businesses. Nowadays, the primary topic discussed is carbon, but this framework helps businesses think beyond and incorporate all aspects when deciding to focus their action.

Inspiring Comprehensive ESG Strategies

The SDGs provide a comprehensive framework for Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) strategies. Aligning with these goals ensures that a company’s ESG approach addresses the most critical global challenges. From reducing the carbon footprint (Goal 13: Climate Action) to ensuring inclusive practices (Goal 5: Gender Equality), these goals guide businesses towards a holistic and impactful sustainability strategy.

Business Impact and Opportunities

Beyond the moral “duty” to strive for each of these goals, they are aspirations that will ensure businesses stay compliant with the ever-growing regulations and never get caught in PR crises.
Gender equality (Goal 5) is already mandated by law in many countries and bad practices are more often condemned.
If circular economy (Goal 12) is encouraged, why isn’t every business looking at how to make their products more repairable and continuing to make disposable products? Even Apple didn’t win against the EU and had to change iPhone charging cables.

Aspiring for these goals guarantees businesses a safer ride.

Conclusion

So, whether you are looking for a starting point for your sustainability strategy, or want to make it more comprehensive, the UN Sustainable Development Goals provide an excellent framework to ensure your business is at the forefront of sustainability or simply wants to remain relevant.

Sometimes, it’s just about common sense and applying the principles within its own organization: how can my products not destroy marine life? How can I make sure that gender equality is the norm? How can my products become more repairable and use recycled materials etc…

But it can also be about fostering community projects, local businesses and connecting with our environment to contribute positively.

Trying to uphold these objectives also maybe just guarantee better sleep at night for any business leader, their organization is literally doing good.

Last month, the EU voted to new rules aiming to make product labelling clearer and more trustworthy by banning the use of environmental claims such as “environmentally friendly”, “natural”, “biodegradable”, “climate neutral” or “eco” without proof.

As part of the objective to empowering consumers for the green transition, the EU wants to offer better protection against unfair practices and better information” by making it clearer for consumers what is really sustainable vs. what is greenwashing.

What It Does:

• Objective: Enhances consumer rights and prohibit greenwashing claims by amending two directives (Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC and Consumer Rights Directive 2011/83/EU).
• Focus: Addresses unfair commercial practices, especially greenwashing, early obsolescence, and misleading sustainability labels.
• Key Measures:
  • Information on the durability and reparability of products.
  • Clear and accurate environmental claims.
  • Prohibition of misleading sustainability labels and practices related to early obsolescence of goods.

Steps for Supporting a Green Claim:

The document outlines the process and document to provide to the government institutions before a green claim can be made! The final information are still due to be released, including who to contact, delays for approval etc…

1. Durability Guarantee: Traders must provide information on the existence or absence of a producer’s commercial guarantee of durability for goods.
2. Software Updates: Information on the availability of free software updates for goods with digital elements must be provided.
3. Reparability Information: Traders must provide a reparability score or other relevant repair information for goods.
4. Environmental and Social Impacts: Traders must ensure accuracy in claims regarding the environmental and social impacts of products.
5. Future Environmental Performance: Environmental claims related to future performance must involve clear commitments with an independent monitoring system.
6. Comparison Accuracy: For sustainability information tools that compare products, traders must provide information about the comparison method, products, suppliers, and update measures.

Consequences of Fraudulent Claims:

1. Prohibitions: Several practices are banned, including the use of non-certified sustainability labels, making unfounded environmental claims, and practices related to early obsolescence.
2. Enforcement Mechanisms: The proposal relies on enforcement mechanisms in existing EU consumer law, recently strengthened by the Better Enforcement and Modernisation Directive and the Representative Actions Directive.
3. Sanctions for Non-Compliance: Companies breaking the rules may be excluded from public procurements, lose their revenues and face a fine of at least at 4% of their annual turnover.

So in theory, any products that will claim to be eco-friendly will have to undergo this new process and businesses who don’t may have to remove the products from sales and/or be prosecuted. There will however be exemption for small businesses in order to not add more burden to them.

With this new move, and the recent agreement on a framework regarding carbon offset, the EU is really moving toward less greenwashing and more true action.

The concept of planting trees to combat climate change is appealing in its simplicity and natural appeal. And many companies have touted their efforts and pledge to plant trees to offset their impact. However, while trees are indeed valuable allies in our environmental efforts, relying solely on planting trees as a means to reverse climate change is an overly optimistic and insufficient approach. This article aims to shed light on the beneficial role of tree planting while highlighting its limitations, backed by quantitative data and examples.

The Role of Trees in Carbon Sequestration

Trees are nature’s carbon-capture powerhouses. On average, a young, healthy tree can absorb about 22 pounds (10 kilograms) of CO2 per year and up to about 48 pounds (22 kilograms) annually as it matures. Over its lifetime, a single tree can absorb roughly one ton of CO2. While these numbers demonstrate the individual power of trees, the broader impact requires a much larger scale.

The Limitations of Tree Planting

Despite the clear benefits, several factors limit the efficacy of tree planting as a standalone solution to climate change:

1. Space Constraints: The sheer volume of trees needed to make a substantial dent in global CO2 levels is staggering. A study in the journal Science (2019) suggested that planting about 1.2 trillion trees could theoretically absorb two-thirds of human-made carbon emissions. However, this would require over 3.5 million square miles of land – an area about the size of the United States – dedicated solely to this purpose. Currently, there isn’t enough suitable, available, and unoccupied land to reach these numbers without encroaching on vital agricultural or urban areas.
2. Growth Time: Trees take time to grow and reach their full carbon-absorbing potential. This delay means that the benefits of today’s planting efforts will not be fully realized for several decades, a timeline that doesn’t align with the urgent need to reduce atmospheric CO2 levels.
3. Ecological and Agricultural Considerations: Planting massive numbers of trees, especially in monoculture formations, can disrupt local ecosystems. Moreover, converting large tracts of land to forests could impinge on agricultural productivity, posing threats to food security. This can lead to making diversity disappear for an elusive benefit.
4. Emission Reduction Overshadowing: Emphasizing tree planting can detract from the critical need to reduce current CO2 emissions. To put it in perspective, global CO2 emissions in 2019 were approximately 36.8 billion tons. Even with effective tree-planting campaigns, this massive emission volume cannot be offset solely by forests and we have to find, and develop other alternatives.

Beyond the physical limitations of Tree planting

An additional caveat to consider : Many of the tree-planting projects that company claim to offset their emission are plain green-washing as they cover areas that are already forested and oftentimes even protected parks that would have otherwise remained forested so the claims are in fact detrimental as we allow the corresponding emissions to be released when in fact no offset was made.

For instance, the World Resources Institute in Mexico found issues with Mexico’s billion-dollar government-funded environmental recovery program, Sembrando Vida. The program was intended to help meet climate targets under the Paris Agreement by paying farmers to plant trees. As a result, 80 million trees were planted in a few years (14% of the goal); sounds great right ? However, an the same time, the amount of trees cut dwarfed the amount of trees planted, and to make matters worse, 80% of these trees died within 5 years as they were not taken care of or suited to the local climate and incurred a few corruption scandals in Mexico.

This whole topic is discussed in the excellent video from John oliver on the topic :

Conclusion

Planting trees undoubtedly offers numerous environmental benefits, including carbon sequestration, biodiversity support, and ecosystem preservation. However, the scale of the climate crisis demands a more comprehensive approach. Significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, a shift towards renewable energy sources, and widespread adoption of sustainable practices are imperative. Trees are a part of the solution, but they cannot shoulder the burden of climate change mitigation alone. A balanced, multi-pronged strategy is essential to address the complexity and severity of the ongoing climate crisis.

In the ever-evolving landscape of business, sustainability has shifted from a peripheral concern to a central strategy for long-term success. Integral to this shift is the concept of the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) – a framework that expands the traditional reporting framework to include social and environmental, alongside financial performance. This article aims to elucidate the TBL concept and illustrate its application using a compelling example from the textile industry, as highlighted in the influential book “Cradle to Cradle” by William McDonough and Michael Braungart.

Understanding the Triple Bottom Line

The Triple Bottom Line, conceptualized by John Elkington in 1994, revolutionized how businesses measure success. Traditionally, the singular focus was on profit – the financial bottom line. However, TBL introduces two additional ‘bottom lines’: social (People) and environmental (Planet) performance.

• Profit (Economic Sustainability): This dimension is about ensuring that a business is economically viable and profitable. But in the TBL framework, economic success goes beyond mere profit. It involves contributing to the economic health of the wider community, maintaining fair practices, and ensuring long-term financial stability.
• People (Social Sustainability): This aspect focuses on the social implications of business operations. It encompasses labor practices, community engagement, and the overall impact on society. Businesses are expected to operate ethically, respect human rights, and contribute positively to the communities they affect.
• Planet (Environmental Sustainability): This dimension involves the company’s environmental footprint. Sustainable practices, such as reducing waste, minimizing emissions, and using renewable resources, fall under this category. The goal is to minimize negative environmental impacts and contribute to the planet’s health.

At the junction of these three areas, sustainability emerges as a holistic approach that balances profit with people and the planet. It’s a dynamic equilibrium where each aspect supports and reinforces the others, creating a model of business that can endure and prosper over the long term while contributing positively to the world.

When the focus is only on two of the three components, the approach is not called sustainability but :

• Bearable: When it intersects the environmental and social aspects of the TBL. Sustainability is considered bearable when it does not compromise the planet’s health or the well-being of the people living on it. In other words, it’s about ensuring that environmental practices are not only ecologically sound but also socially acceptable and beneficial. For example, a company might focus on reducing emissions (good for the environment) in a way that also improves community health (good for people).
• Viable: When it intersects the economic and environmental pillars. A sustainable practice is viable when it is both environmentally friendly and economically feasible. This means finding solutions that not only reduce environmental impact but also make economic sense for the business. For instance, implementing energy-efficient technologies can reduce costs in the long run while also reducing the environmental footprint.
• Equitable, when it intersects the social and economic aspects. A practice is equitable when it fairly distributes economic benefits without compromising social equity. It’s about ensuring that economic activities contribute to social welfare and that all members of society have fair access to these benefits. For example, a business practice is equitable when it provides fair wages and safe working conditions, contributing to the economic stability of workers and their communities.

Sustainability is the intersection of the three pillars of the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) – economic viability, social responsibility, and environmental stewardship. Any approach that aims at less than that is therefore NOT sustainability. At its best, sustainability is a dynamic equilibrium where each aspect supports and reinforces the others, creating a model of business that can endure and prosper over the long term while contributing positively to the world.

APPLYING THE TBL : The Textile Dye Example from “Cradle to Cradle”

An excellent illustration of the TBL in action is found in “Cradle to Cradle,” specifically regarding the textile dyeing process. The traditional dyeing process in the textile industry is notorious for its environmental and social impacts. It often involves toxic chemicals that pollute water sources, harm aquatic life, and pose health risks to workers and nearby communities.

The authors of “Cradle to Cradle,” however, present an innovative approach where they want to break from the linear model of Take, Make, Dispose for textiles. They describe a new dyeing technique that not only eliminates the use of harmful chemicals but also turns the whole process into a positive one, where the production of a sweater is not harming people or the planet and where you could even eat your sweater at the end of its lifecycle. This method uses safe, non-toxic dyes and a closed-loop system that recycles water and materials, significantly reducing environmental harm and many other benefits to all stakeholders.

Applying TBL to the Textile Dye Example

In this case, the TBL approach leads to a holistic transformation of the dyeing process, where the author tried to eliminate any chemical dye and ended up selected only a few organic and harmless products, with impressive results for each of the stakeholders :

• Profit: Economically, the new dyeing method proves beneficial. It cuts costs on waste management and environmental compliance by an estimated 50%, while also reducing raw material usage. This efficiency leads to an approximate 20% reduction in overall production costs. Furthermore, market research indicates a growing consumer preference for sustainably produced textiles, opening new market opportunities.
• People: The health and safety impact on workers is markedly improved, with a reduction in toxic exposure leading to a reported 40% decrease in health-related complaints and absenteeism. It even led to high employee retention as the work environment no longer felt like a lab, but a safe place to work in. In local communities, improved water quality has led to a 30% decrease in waterborne diseases, highlighting the method’s profound social impact.
• Planet: Environmentally, the closed-loop water system and reduced chemical usage have led to a 70% decrease in water pollution and a 60% reduction in carbon emissions. These improvements showcase the method’s alignment with environmental sustainability goals.

The textile dye example is a microcosm of the broader implications of the TBL. It demonstrates how innovative thinking and sustainability can create a harmonious balance between profitability, social responsibility, and environmental stewardship. Businesses adopting the TBL framework can lead to transformative changes, paving the way for a more sustainable future.

Conclusion

The Triple Bottom Line is more than a concept; it’s a roadmap for businesses to contribute positively to the world. By balancing economic viability with social and environmental responsibilities, companies can achieve long-term sustainability and set new standards in their industries. The textile dye example from “Cradle to Cradle” is a testament to the power of sustainable innovation, embodying the essence of TBL. As businesses continue to navigate the complexities of the 21st century, the TBL offers a guiding light towards a more sustainable and equitable world for all.

In the next articles, we will deep-dive into the circular economy, which is really at the heart of this foundational book “cradle to cradle”

EU Sustainability Objectives

On 2 May 2022, the 8th Environment Action Programme (EAP) entered into force, as the EU’s legally agreed common agenda for environment policy until 2030. This little publicized move is creating a number of noticeable changes throughout Europe and is perhaps marking the beginning of the revolution: less talking, more doing with more actions being felt at every level: businesses, governments, and individuals.

The long-term priority objective is that, by 2050 at the latest, Europeans live well, within planetary boundaries, in a well-being economy where nothing is wasted. Growth will be regenerative, climate neutrality will be a reality, and inequalities will be significantly reduced.

There are six priority objectives to 2030

• achieving the 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction target and climate neutrality by 2050
• enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience, and reducing vulnerability to climate change
• advancing towards a regenerative growth model, decoupling economic growth from resource use and environmental degradation, and accelerating the transition to a circular economy
• pursuing a zero-pollution ambition, including for air, water, and soil and protecting the health and well-being of Europeans
• protecting, preserving, and restoring biodiversity, and enhancing natural capital
• reducing environmental and climate pressures related to production and consumption (particularly in the areas of energy, industry, buildings and infrastructure, mobility, tourism, international trade and the food system)

These objectives are ambitious as they are all-encompassing and if realized, will make Europe a truly great place to live in, but how do they translate into the daily life of hundreds of millions of Europeans?

How does that commitment translate to daily life?

Business side

Europe is already a constraining destination when it comes to doing business, or at least it is often said, because of all its regulations, and this is likely to get worse, but for the good cause. Businesses already have to comply with many obligations regarding the safety of the products (CEE for instance), and about child/forced labor, etc.. and have soon to comply with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (LINK article), but this is not the only change that impacts businesses.

Here are a few of the latest or upcoming changes, note that this is not a comprehensive list, just a few items that I thought significant because they go beyond the education framework and translate into real impacts:

• IPhone charging cable: Maybe the latest and most written about change, is when the EU forced Apple to get rid of their charging cable and sell iPhones that use the same USB-C cable as all other phones to limit electronic waste.
• Reparability index in France for instance, manufacturers are required to indicate the level of repairability of their products, this is the latest in a move that is designed to give consumers more transparency onto what consumers are buying and eventually drive changes. France is now taking this even further, with the creation of a subsidy for people to repair electronic goods instead of throwing them away. This is a great move as this creates both a new habit for consummers, and an industry for repairing electronics.
• Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive: the next level of CSRD. When CSRD only sets up the framework for reporting the sustainability impact of a company, this directive would oblige these companies to develop a plan that’s in line with the objective of carbon neutrality and Paris Climate Change.
• Ban of single-use plastic items: From 3 July 2021, single-use plastic plates, cutlery, straws, balloon sticks and cotton buds cannot be placed on the markets of the EU Member States

Overall, the general increased sensibility to sustainable topics in Europe is a big driver for corporate behavioral change, as consumers are now considering these criteria more and more in their buying decisions.

Government side

Governments have long been talking about sustainability and how to implement measures to fight climate change. Over the years, many cities have taken initiatives to make living in it more sustainable: promoting greener transportation, increasing energy efficiency and limiting public lighting, or the maybe more controversial meat reductions in school canteens. Now, Europe is going one step further by giving cities a more pregnant role with real, measurable objectives that they have to commit by.
I’ll take the example of France, which set up the Climate-Air-Energy Territorial Plans (Plans Climat-Air-Énergie Territoriaux, PCAET), which are individual to each city and lay out the different initiatives to take along with clearly defined KPI. This approach is bounded to be replicated across EU (and cities like Copenhagen haven’t waited !)

France’s PCAET: The Climate-Air-Energy Territorial Plans in France exemplify this shift. Mandatory for inter-municipalities with over 20,000 inhabitants, PCAETs encompass a range of sustainability metrics that they will have to hit :

Here is a table outlining various sustainability topics along with two examples for each:

Copenhagen’s Climate Plan: Copenhagen, Denmark, is at the forefront of urban sustainability with its ambitious Climate Plan aimed at becoming the world’s first carbon-neutral capital by 2025. Key initiatives include:

• Extensive cycling infrastructure, promoting a bike-friendly city where more than 60% of residents cycle to work or school.
• Large-scale investment in renewable energy sources, particularly wind power, contributing significantly to the city’s energy mix.
• Innovative green building practices and energy-efficient housing developments.
• Implementation of integrated waste management systems focusing on recycling and reduction of landfill waste.
• Progressive urban planning incorporating extensive green spaces and water management systems to combat the effects of climate change and enhance the city’s resilience.

The European Union’s determined approach, as embodied in the 8th EAP and reflected in initiatives like France’s PCAET, marks a significant transition from dialogue to decisive action in environmental sustainability. These comprehensive strategies, spanning from business regulations to urban planning, demonstrate a commitment to reshaping Europe into a sustainable, resilient, and equitable society. This evolution from planning to implementation signifies a crucial step towards meeting the global challenges of climate change and environmental degradation, setting a commendable example for regions worldwide.

And you, what recent change do you think is the most important ?