BP was once recognised as the leader in sustainability reporting. A long time "A+" reporter against the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). They have also won numerous sustainability-related awards around the globe and regularly topped sustainability assessments, such as the Tomorrow's Value Rating. Then there was the Deepwater Horizon accident and the reputation of BP changed.

Through its "Beyond Petroleum" communications platform anchored by public commitments to alternative energy development, community engagement and development and robust management systems for social and environmental protection, BP has been a long-standing leader in the development of the "nuts and bolts" for a strong sustainability program. The accident in the Gulf highlights the gap between messaging, perception and reality for the CSR industry.

There have been allegations in the press and on TV that BP or its suppliers may have been cutting corners with regard to health and safety, but the BP Sustainability Report claims to have robust health and safety controls through the group-wide operating management systems. It is also alleged in the press that there may have been inappropriate relationships with US regulators which are counter to the principles stated in the company's Code of Conduct.

CSR practitioners should be asking ourselves some important questions in light of these conflicting allegations: Does the fact that a supposedly good CSR practitioner can  be criticised for these allegedly huge error suggest a failure of CSR? Can society (or investors) trust the material in sustainability reports?

It may not be the case that this is a fundamental failure of CSR, but there are some important lessons to be learned before sustainability reports can be trusted or used to make accurate assessments of a company's practices and performance:

CSR practitioners and "experts" must update and validate methodologies for assessing corporate CSR claims. It has never been sufficient to judge a company based on the "quality of the report." We should be relying on criteria that assess the underlying systems and performance for the company in order to make an informed judgment.

Businesses must get better at identifying material issues. Currently, many companies rely on universal reporting frameworks like the GRI to define the possible list of environmental and social issues that might be significant to the business or its stakeholders. Others rely on perceptions of importance driven from media coverage to determine which issues should be managed and communicated. Neither of these methods could have identified the problems that led to the Deepwater Horizon explosion and subsequent oil spill.

There has to be much greater commitment by industry to assurance (third party audits) of CSR reports. Checking the accuracy of the data and claims in the BP report would not have identified alleged problems in the relationships with regulators or the alleged cutting of corners at the operational level. Therefore assurance has to be smart assurance. The BP Sustainability Report was assured against the AA1000AS, but to identify the types of problems they had we should recognise that assurance is only the first step.

Sustainability reporting should be preserved as a meaningful form of communication. CSR experts should get smarter about how to assess reports and provide informed opinions on whether the companies are acting as they report. Companies should also commit to external checking and assurance. Without this, Sustainability reports will increasingly become about public relations and useless for making investment or ethical decisions.

Note: we refer to BP in this article but this applies to any company that has undergone a serious environmental or Health & Safety issue. We also ask readers to note that the allegations against BP are ‘alleged’ in press and on TV, but are yet to be proven. However we still feel that this is a good example of a CSR problem that highlights serious issues we should all consider.

Read full newsletter >>

This month, Katie Stockford has joined SustainIT Solutions for a few weeks of work experience. There has been a bit of paper filing, tea rounds, and being sent out to buy a left handed hammer and a tin of tartan paint involved - that's what we all had to do. I even went out to get my boss some salmon legs for lunch; but I thought this could be an ideal opportunity for Katie to help with some research. We asked Katie, 19, about her and other teenager’s opinions on, and experiences of, CSR and sustainability, in an unscientific experiment to discover 'how green are today's teens?'  We also asked her to come up with some sustainability tips targeted at fellow teenagers.

Katie explained that "When you were about eight years old sustainability seemed like such an obvious thing to do, getting excited about the prospect of turning old things into something new, getting dirty with the compost and thinking about treating people fairly around the world and protecting the planet; but when you reach teenage years sustainability and global warming become less of a priority. Everybody wants to pass their driving tests, making walking less of a desired option and there's a lot of peer pressure to have all the latest gadgets and keep up with your mates."

With the phenomenon of social networking sites, which are slowly and surely taking over teenager lives, the number one way to keep up with friends, and what is now available on mobile phones and computers, the contribution of all these luxuries to global warming is the last thing on teenagers’ minds. Katie explained that it is difficult for younger people to accept less and be burdened with the guilt of global warming and the effects on our planet when all they want to do is hang out with friends and be free to experience the world around them.

Through Katie's research, she has discovered that there are many ways teenagers can be greener without having to sacrifice too much of their social life and luxuries. Here's a list of simple things that can be done that will help decrease energy use and subsequently carbon emissions:

• Don't leave things on standby, turn off your TV, unplug your computer and turn your switches to off
  
• Recycle old clothes as it uses less energy than making new clothes. Go vintage with your mum's 80's jacket
  
• Use public transport occasionally, instead of driving all the time (or getting lifts off your oldies!). - Research shows that buses produce fewer emissions than cars do
  
• Turn off lights when you leave a room
  
• Don't litter, use bins and recycle if you can
  
• Eat less meat, by going veggie a few times a week it can help the planet as well as the environment - it uses a lot less water to grow grains of rice than to feed the cow that you will eventually eat
  
• Refill water bottles instead of replacing them with more small ones.

Read full newsletter >>

Holiday season is upon us, and SustainIT Solutions is no different than other organisations with staff returning from far flung places with tales of adventure. David and Charlie Stockford enjoyed a few weeks in Santa Maria de Tebra, Galicia, Spain; not far from the Portuguese border. During their stay they came very close to a number of wild forest fires as the authorities battled bravely to bring under control many throughout the region. Currently, in the news are similar fires in California, Russia and other parts of Europe.

Forests are vitally important to the health of our planet. Covering around 9.4% of the Earth's surface, or 30% of total land area, thriving forests regulate the water cycle and stabilise soils as well as help moderate the climate by soaking up and storing carbon dioxide. According to conservationists, the earth was once covered in ancient forests, 80% of which have been either destroyed or degraded. Illegal logging, industrial-scale farming and climate change all pose a threat to the remaining tracts of forest around the world. Not only do countless species face extinction and entire communities being displaced, but deforestation is estimated to cause one-fifth of global GHG emissions. Forests have emerged as a key player in climate change because trees can suck huge amounts of CO2 out of the atmosphere and "sequester" the carbon for decades.

It is therefore interesting to think about the effects of these fires on CO2 emissions. A recent US study suggested that intentional forest blazes could significantly cut carbon dioxide emissions from wild fires in California. This highlights the challenges forest managers face in balancing plans to use fire to restore forest ecosystems in efforts to curb carbon emissions.

A raging wild fire could vapourise vast swathes of timber in just a few days returning huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. In both the US and Europe, concerns about the climate impacts of wild fires have grown, as centuries of fire suppression has left forests packed with timber ripe for combustion. Researchers fear fire risk could rise in the future, as the climate becomes hotter and drier.

To reduce the threat of runaway infernos - and help restore fire-starved forest ecosystems - some researchers advocate "prescribed burns." These intentional fires tend to burn cooler and consume less wood, leading some researchers to wonder just how much they might also help reduce CO2 emissions from wildfires. These researchers estimated how much CO2 had been released by wild fires in western US from 2001 to 2008. They then estimated what the total might have been if the wild fires had been cooler, with more controlled, prescribed burns. The results showed that the planned fires might have cut CO2 emissions by 18%-25% and as much as 60% in specific forest types. However, these figures assume that intentional fires would be 100% effective in eliminating wild fires which is unrealistic. However, the research did clarify some important climate implications of forest fires such as wild fires release about twice as much carbon per-unit-area as prescribed fires. Also, that prescribed burns to improve ecosystem health may well reduce the carbon-storing capacity of forests over the short run.

Read full newsletter >>

The inconsistency of information provided in corporate sustainability reports is the main area of concern suggested by participants at a recent Global Conference on Sustainability and Transparency sponsored by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). There was a commonly held view that the practices of sustainability reporting remains in its early stages and does not yet possess a common language or metrics, tools that are very much needed for progress to accelerate.

Similarly, in a KPMG survey of readers of sustainability reports, respondents said reporting companies are most likely to omit failures, leading to questions about the credibility of their sustainability reports. They suggest that more hard data is needed for reports to be truly transparent and they generally have a low opinion of internal company and national reporting guidelines. Furthermore, the readers would want to see companies provide direct and useful information about what their sustainability impacts are and what they are doing about these impacts in concrete terms. The advice is that companies issuing sustainability reports need to provide evidence of how their key sustainability impacts are addressed in operations.

Sustainability reports need to be reframed as a metrics-driven transparency tool that can help businesses both internally and externally. This is because the data provided on carbon accounting ledgers may cover onsite fuel, corporate fleets, business travel, energy purchased from utilities covers and employee commutes.  They often don't include metrics on water, waste, procurement, supply chain impacts, or social impacts, among others, because those categories are not required under many reporting schemes. Externally, reporting metrics will help to increase transparency for stakeholders and dispel any suspicions of green-washing. Internally, tracking and reporting sustainability metrics ensures results.

Whether or not a company chooses to publish a sustainability report, everyone needs to track all of these metrics to achieve cost savings and reduced environmental impact. Without comprehensive internal reporting on metrics, companies do not have a clear picture of how they are performing over time. They lack the information they need to evaluate and improve their practices.

By tracking and reporting data on internal resource usage and costs, companies can focus in on the green initiatives that will deliver the biggest cost savings. However, comprehensive metrics that go beyond the carbon footprint are essential to inspire companies to accelerate along the path of sustainability. Metrics that make the business case for sustainability initiatives help to build internal buy-in as well.

Metrics can help us save money, revealing information on poorly functioning products and systems so we can take steps to calibrate or redesign. They can standardise reporting and they can help to ensure that we are making meaningful progress towards sustainability.

For more details on how to improve your sustainability data and reporting please contact a.peake@sustainitsolutions.co.uk

Read full newsletter >>

The coalition government is scrapping the last Government’s plans for the imposition of bin taxes. Instead, Cabinet Ministers Eric Pickles and Caroline Spelman are keen to see a roll-out of the recycling reward scheme piloted in the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead as the way to encourage households to recycle waste.

Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, said: “Rather than helping the environment, bin taxes would have fuelled fly-tipping and back garden burning. The best way to encourage people to recycle is not to punish families, but to encourage and reward them for going green. It’s time to rein in the bin bullies and work with local people to build greener and cleaner communities.”

Caroline Spelman, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said “Windsor and Maidenhead Council have got it right by rewarding people for voluntarily doing the right thing, not penalising them for doing the wrong thing – that is how we can change behaviour, improve the environment and get people to play their part in a big Society.”

Households volunteer to activate a RecycleBank account. They then receive a new, blue wheelie recycling bin for their mixed waste. Residents will earn points for how much they recycle, similar to airline miles for flying – rewarding households 5.5 points for each kilogram the household recycles. A small electronic tag on the blue bin links to equipment on the collection vehicle where it is weighed at the point of collection. Initial scares about privacy will be avoided as no personal data is stored and you yourself choose if you want to participate.

Points can be redeemed for rewards like money off products and services from participating local and national reward partners including retailers and service providers, or donated to local schools. RecycleBank already has 116 UK reward partners, including Marks and Spencer, Coffee Republic and Cineworld.

SustainIT Solutions offers a window into the next level of response for businesses committed to becoming sustainable and creating sustainability strategies. If you think this subject will impact your business please get in contact with Simon Pyne on 01275 774168 or email s.pyne@sustainitsolutions.co.uk.

Read full newsletter >>

SustainIT employee Ian Gallagher abstained from washing for a few days earlier this month and attended the Glastonbury festival, the biggest music event on the British calendar. Whilst there he decided to check out some of the environmental initiatives employed when hosting an event that attracts 177,550 attendees over 4 days. Surely any event attracting so many visitors to a 900 acre farm over the same weekend is bound to have a significant environmental impact?

The first and one of the most noticeable impacts can be seen from over 10 miles away; traffic! 10hrs to travel to the festival from areas as close as Birmingham is not unusual. However, festival organisers are combating this issue by encouraging festival goers to lift share, travel by train/coach and use the shuttle bus service provided between Bristol Temple Meads railway station and the site.

Once at the site, the emphasis on recycling can be seen everywhere with the 40,000 colour coded bins for both recyclable waste and waste to landfill. Glastonbury Festival is proud to be amongst the greenest and cleanest events held throughout the world boasting that in 2008 they managed to recycle 863.32 tonnes of waste which is around half of the total waste generated by the festival.

It’s not just the festival goers who have to take responsibility for their environmental impact but the festival traders are also encouraged to trade as responsibly as possible.

Ian understood that anyone trading at the festival must:

• Separate recyclable and non-recyclable waste;
  
• Compost all food waste at a composting facility at Castle Quay which is within 5 miles of the festival;
  
• Use wooden (not plastic) cutlery and all plates and cups must be made from a compostable material; and
  
• Use fair trade tea, coffee and sugar products only.

All in all it seems that despite the obvious inevitability of such a large event impacting the environment, festival organisers do all they can to minimise this impact and are ahead of the game in terms of the polices they employ to reduce their impact. Whilst at the Festival Ian saw large scale initiatives such as using solar generators to power areas of the festival as well as smaller initiatives such as encouraging festival goers to drink the tap water rather than bottled water thus reducing plastic waste. Glastonbury’s organisers defiantly take a pro-active roll in making the festival as sustainable as possible. On his return, Ian stated “It is really inspiring to see such a large scale festival like this can be so environmentally aware, the challenges must be enormous but Glastonbury appears to be setting a great example to the rest of the country.”

Read full newsletter >>