7gen Bloc

Thanks so much. Your blog is always enlightening.

I cringed as well hearing that Exxon was a sponsor of a conference for socially responsible business! I work in events as well, developing partnerships for the Green Festivals, and we screen every single exhibitor and partner/sponsor through Green America, which has been judging the deep green roots (or lack of them) at corporations for years. I wish that every conference would put its sponsors through some sort of screening, instead of short-sightedly counting the marketing dollars from the big boys first.

I am surprised you found occasion to question what BSR will do about the climate crisis. In addition to the on-the-ground work we conduct globally with companies like Wal-Mart, H&M, and AT&T, we have made clear that business must take action. During my opening remarks at the BSR Conference 2009, I proposed a comprehensive approach for business includes: 1. support for public policy frameworks; 2. technological innovation; 3. efficiency; 4. value chain partnerships; and 5. communication with consumers, employees, and other stakeholders.

To be clear, BSR believes that effective climate policy—at Copenhagen as well as in Washington, Brussels, and elsewhere—is crucially important, and should place a price on carbon to enable the transition that's needed. I made this point unequivocally in opening our Conference.

I think we agree on this.

You have too easily dismissed the multiple ways that BSR is working to support the development of a low-carbon economy. Every day, we are actively working with companies to build more sustainable business strategies, operational solutions, and collaboration between business, and among business, civil society, and policymakers. Such efforts are a crucial part of the solution. Indeed, no agreement will be successful if these steps aren't taken. I have to assume that you agree that these efforts are needed to make progress on climate change.

Where we disagree is whether BSR should engage in lobbying. Unlike business associations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, BSR is explicitly set up not to represent its members. While there is a role for these organizations in promoting change through direct political engagement, the role BSR plays is equally important.

For more details on my perspective, I encourage you and your readers to visit my response on BSR’s own blog.

I want to further build on my blog post from the recent Business for Social Responsibility (BSR) conference, particularly in light of BSR President Aron Cramer’s comments both on my blog as well as the BSR blog.

First, Seventh Generation has long been a supporter and admirer of BSR. There is no question that BSR has played an important role within the business community in bringing sustainability and corporate responsibility to the mainstream and has worked with companies day in and day out to ensure that some of the nation’s largest firms are developing sustainability strategies.

However, I stand by the question I posed at the conference: “If not now, when?” It is true that many companies, both within and without BSR, are working on climate change. That work is driving incremental progress on energy efficiency and renewable energy. My concern is that the sum of these efforts still has us speeding off the cliff of environmental destruction with our foot solidly on the accelerator.

As Aron said in his opening remarks, companies must have a “positive influence on public policy”. I couldn’t agree more. The single most important thing that we as business leaders can do to stop the global climate crisis and begin the transition to a sustainable economy is to support strong science-based policies at both the national and international level. The legislation currently being considered by the Congress is far from perfect. But make no mistake. This legislation will place a national cap on emissions, and ramp them down over time. It will incentivize investments in efficiency and renewables, and spur a clean energy economy that will create jobs, end our dependence on foreign sources of energy, and stabilize energy prices. Absent this legislation, the work of individual companies, including my own, is largely irrelevant.

There are a lot of good companies in the world working hard on climate change, yet emission levels in the US and globally continue to soar. I would respectfully suggest that Aron’s statement on public policy does not go far enough. The imperative today, a month out from the international summit on the climate crisis in Copenhagen, is not to simply support generic action or policy on climate change, but to take a clear and outspoken position on the legislation now before the Congress.

In my view, no company or organization can say it has a comprehensive strategy on climate change if it does not include taking a clear public position on this legislation. To be relevant, you must have a point of view. This opinion has been echoed by administration officials from Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke to former EPA head and current Energy “czarina” Carol Browner and Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor to the President, all of whom have communicated the urgency of more business voices coming forward to speak out in support of much needed changes.

Aron wrote that, “business associations such as ours that represent diverse membership tend to take watered-down positions. Achieving a synthesis of the views of 250 member companies coming from all parts of the world would inevitably lead to compromises that would leave everyone unhappy.” I disagree. It hasn’t slowed down the Chamber of Commerce, which has been doing it for a long time! It certainly might lead to a few unhappy members, who might even decide to quit, but that seems like a small price to pay.

And then there is the issue of ExxonMobil, a BSR member and sponsor of the most recent conference. Having ExxonMobil sponsor a BSR event is like putting Colonel Sanders on the Board of PETA. ExxonMobil has spent tens of millions of dollars fighting any attempt to regulate greenhouse gasses. More egregiously still, they have a long history of funding bogus science in an attempt to obscure the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community on climate change. They lied, and then tried convince both the public and policy makers that their lies were facts. More recently, in 2009, ExxonMobil spent millions of dollars lobbying against the current legislation in Congress.

If BSR feels it does not yet have a role in the rough and tumble world of policy advocacy, a welcome first step might be to ensure that those actively working to undermine our transition to a sustainable economy don’t have a seat at the BSR table.

-Jeffrey Hollender

Well said Jeffrey, I agree totally. But BSR, like many other companies, hide behind words. After all they are in a predicament: to move forward or not to move forward. They represent powerful companies who's sole interest at the moment is to keep the status quo. However, times are changing, Obama's election was a turning point in history for the environment and I believe there is a role to play for for those companies too in this ever evolving world. Let's keep a positive mind and accept reality: yesterday's and today's polluters might become some of the green rescuers of the future. I think that Exxon and the likes are here to stay and that the tide of events will slowly push those companies to adjust if not take a green lead eventually (if only for their own economic survival). However, only tangible results will prove their commitment to sustainable energy and to solutions for a healthier environment. Right now, their tangible results are for the whole world to see and it is nothing to be proud of.
Earthspirit