Non-Green Companies Warned on Earnings

WASHINGTON, Dec 3 (OneWorld.net) - Companies producing many food, beverage, and household items must implement sustainable environmental strategies or risk income losses of 19 to 47 percent over the next 10 years, says a report released Tuesday by an environmental think tank.

• Go green or lose green, say environmental experts. © Charlie Ambler (Flickr)The analysis, performed by the World Resources Institute and management concultancy A.T. Kearney, finds that "environmental pressures will continue to impact the supply and price of key commodities in the long term. The [current financial] crisis should be viewed as an opportunity to address these challenges through transformational change and not as a time to ignore them."

• Last month, as the Group of 20 major economic powers prepared to meet to discuss the global financial meltdown, environmental experts from the Worldwatch Institute urged leaders to focus on a "Global Green Deal that capitalizes on the current economic crisis to build economically and environmentally sustainable economies." In particular, Gary Gardner and Michael Renner said that transitioning to a renewable energy economy will not only phase out limited, environmentally hazardous power sources like oil and coal, but will also usher in 2 million new jobs around the world. "Doing more with less," they noted, "is one of the surest paths to wealth creation, and environmentalists have a great many ideas to raise energy and materials efficiency."

• And green business practices do not only benefit companies and the environment, but also, in many cases, local people. In November, for example, the world's first shipments of sustainable palm oil left Malaysia for Europe as part of a global effort to avert ecological disaster and support millions of poor palm oil producers. Palm oil is found in roughly half of all packed grocery items in supermarkets. The establishment of palm oil planatations, however, not only causes severe environmental harm -- particularly through mass deforestation -- but it often forces small farmers and indigenous communities off their traditional land and can lead to serious abuse of workers' rights, including harsh working conditions, unfair pay, and exposure to toxic pesticides. OneWorld.net reports on the alternatives.

---

Consumer Goods Companies Face Major Earning Hit Without Smart Environmental Sourcing

From: World Resources Institute

CHICAGO and WASHINGTON, DC, December 2, 2008 -

Companies in certain consumer goods sectors that do not implement sustainable environmental strategies could face a potential reduction of 13 percent to 31 percent in earnings by 2013 and 19 percent to 47 percent in earnings in 2018.

These findings are the result of a “future scenario” analysis released today by the World Resources Institute and A.T. Kearney, Inc. It is titled Rattling Supply Chains: The Effect of Environmental Trends on Input Costs to the Fast Moving Consumer Goods Industry, and is the first report of its kind to calculate the financial impact of environmental issues facing this industry.

The analysis provides consumer packaged goods executives with a tool to assess how environmental legislation and climate change could impact their businesses in future years. It also outlines how these executives can begin to develop strategies to address these issues.

Although the current financial crisis has resulted in declining commodity prices, the authors find that environmental pressures will continue to impact the supply and price of key commodities in the long term. The crisis should be viewed as an opportunity to address these challenges through transformational change and not as a time to ignore them.

“The Ecoflation scenario is a vision of a future where companies have to deal with environmental costs previously borne by society,” said Andrew Aulisi, director of WRI’s Markets and Enterprise Program. “Environmental concerns are driving a global trend of policy activism and regulation. Our scenario describes this trend and the most pressing environmental challenges, and finds that the earnings of consumer goods companies are exposed to significant risk rising out of their supply chains.”

For their research, WRI and A.T. Kearney based the “ecoflation” scenario on major environmental trends and policy developments, such as U.S. and international climate change regulations, enhanced forest policies, growing water scarcity, and new biofuel policies. They then analyzed how these drivers might affect prices on selected commodities like oil, natural gas, electricity, cereals and grains, soy, sugar, palm oil, and timber. The results offer tangible illustrations of how environmental costs might impact the value chain, especially for fast-moving consumer goods that are usually produced in large quantities, such as food and beverages or household products.

Cereal prices, for example, are shown to have upward pressure from climate change policy and growing water scarcity, but may be reduced if certain biofuel policy changes reduce ethanol demand. The report finds a 6 to 13 percent increase in cereal commodity prices due to these pressures.

“The results highlight the need for strategic scenario-based planning,” according to Daniel Mahler, A.T. Kearney partner. “Winning companies will anticipate this changing landscape. These companies will collaborate with suppliers and other stakeholders, and make environmental sustainability a key business principal.”

Rattling the Supply Chain outlines a four-step process to develop a robust strategy around a company’s sustainability challenge and opportunities:

1. Understand environmental impacts and dependencies by examining how cost drivers are exposed to emerging environmental trends and, when possible, seek substitutes with lower environmental impacts.
2. Take inventory of current sustainability initiatives through the value chain to see what the company, its suppliers, and its partners are addressing.
3. Prioritize environmental issues and opportunities according to their current and future potential impact on costs, revenues, and reputation.
4. Chart a new course by having a cross-functional team systematically evaluate opportunities to reduce cost exposure to critical input commodities. This evaluation should include product re-design, backwards supply chain integration, local versus global sourcing, and an upgrade of sustainability standards for the supply base.