Zero-Carbon Transition Index (ZTI) 2016

Role: author

Summary
As the world moves into implementation of the Paris agreement, an agreement that is notoriously vague even by international environmental agreements standards, it is important to understand the broader context for a transition to a zero-carbon society. One of the most important factors that will decide the outcome of the Paris agreement is the kind of stakeholder that will influence the international agenda.

There are many ways that different stakeholders can influence the international agenda in many different ways, but based on historic experience international media, leading policy makers, key academic institutions, international organizations, etc. will act very much in line with the companies that are the most powerful and the agenda they promote.1 These companies does not only have significant investments in R&D and enormous PR /lobby budgets, they are also overrepresented in key fora, including industry groups and agenda-setting processes such as OECD, B20, and WEF.

Currently, and perhaps surprisingly, the domination by pro-fossil companies among the world’s top-50 companies is record high. The situation today is even worse than back in 1996, when the Kyoto protocol was negotiated. In other words, 20 years of negotiations, discussions and actions to reduce global carbon emissions have failed to deliver a new generation of proactive zero-carbon companies on the same scale as the old fossil companies. What we have today is a situation when the top-50 companies on the planet are dominated by fossil friendly companies on an unprecedented scale.

The zero-carbon transition index (ZTI) is a tool to enhance transparency regarding how biggest companies on the planet are likely to use their influence. The ZTI uses the revenue data from Fortune Global 500 to select the top-50 companies in the world as measured by revenue.2 These companies are then divided into five categories depending on how they invest, communicate and lobby with regards to the greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions needed to avoid dangerous climate change.

The five categories are “very obstructive”, “obstructive”, “neutral”, “supportive”, and “very supportive”. The companies in the category very obstructive are given the value -100, the obstructive -50, the neutral 0, the supportive +50, and the very supportive +100. The values are added together and then divided by the total number of companies to get the ZTI.

The ZTI for 1996 was -38, for 2008 -27 and now for 2015 it is -39.

Download the full report

The revolution from pre-Kyoto to post-Copenhagen (Article)

Role: author

Summary
To understand the current situation and the opportunities ahead, it is important to understand the different approaches companies have to take for a low carbon development and what kind of behaviour that different organisations and incentive structures promote.

Four different levels of innovation can be identified, see Figure 4. The first level of low carbon innovation is when focus is on incremental improvements that reduce the company’s own problems. This is where most of the attention has been focused by policy makers, NGOs and businesses themselves. The reason for the focus is twofold: it is easily noticeable and understandable. When emissions are

discussed, people usually think about a coal power plant or just a chimney with smoke coming out. This focus makes sense for big polluters and only if incremental changes are needed.

The second level, which has got a lot of attention today, is incremental reductions through out the value chain, including all suppliers, starting from the extraction of material from nature and then also looking at the use-phase & end-use of the products. For most companies which are not the major emitters, it is in these parts where the majority of the emissions exist. Among IT companies, retailers, biotech companies and the manufacturing companies, up to 98% of the emissions cannot necessarily be associated with their own direct impact.

Still it is common for companies to aim for “climate neutral” and offset the emissions as they focus on level 1. This is a reason why offsetting might be one of the worst innovation killers today, keeping the companies on innovation level 1.

The third level is when the company acknowledge that the way they produce

things is not sustainable and instead of trying to improve unsustainable production methods, it develops solutions that become part of the solution. This can be a manufacturer of furniture that becomes a net producer of sustainable bio-energy, or a car manufacturer who builds so many wind power mills as it constructs its manufacturing plant & becomes a net producer to ensure that it puts more renewable energy on the grid than used.

The fourth level, and the most important level for the 21st century, is when the company starts to focus on what it is providing to society through its products and services. The question on this level is if the services the company provides are helping people getting a better life while helping to reduce emissions society2 then obviously the other levels are needed as well. But unless we get more companies to focus on how their core business is contributing to a low carbon economy, it will be impossible to reach the reductions needed.

Some people are afraid that focus on the core business, and solutions that company provides that can help reduce emissions in society, will distract them from the need to reduce their internal emissions. Looking at the companies that have begun to explore this area are almost leading in level 1-3 as well. Probably, because the companies that link low carbon development to their core business, requires a commitment from the CEO and the board. And if one wants to be the company that helps the customers towards a low carbon economy, it is not credible if the company has its own emissions. If anything is true, it is probably that many of the current initiatives that focus on internal emissions are distracting from effort on the higher innovation levels and not the other way around.

Download the full report

From Workplace to Anyplace: Assessing the Opportunities to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions With Virtual Meetings and Telecommuting (Report)

Role: Co-author with Marco Muttazzoni, Andrea Rossi and Suzanne Pahlman

Summary
This report focuses on the opportunities to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in work-related contexts, thanks to the deployment of IT solutions that enable one or more individuals to work or collaborate remotely. In particular the report analyzes the potential associated with teleworking and virtual meetings to reduce carbon emissions from daily commuting by car and business air travel, and the conditions under which such potential could be realized. The goal of the report is to gain an understanding of the scale of the opportunities available while identifying the key drivers that may enable or hinder the full achievement of such opportunities. By analyzing different trajectories of possible future developments, this report provides insight into a future in which maximum GHG emission reductions could be achieved.

The premise for the analysis is that IT is best seen as a catalyst that can either be used in ways that reduce our environmental footprint or can be deployed within systems that ultimately result in an increased environmental footprint. Because the policy and economic environment in which IT technology is deployed largely determines its net impact on GHG emissions, this report outlines four scenarios for possible future developments, characterized by different roles and attitudes in policy makers and IT industry

Download the full report

Creating the First Sustainable Innovation Zone: SIZ (Leaflet)

Role: Project supervisor

Summary
The Sustainable Innovation Zone, SIZ, is an internal HP web portal engaging employees to share ideas on ICT applications that can help reduce CO2 emissions. Rather than focusing on how HP can reduce its own environmen- tal impact, the SIZ focuses on how HP can help custo- mers reduce their carbon footprint by using HP solutions.

The SIZ promotes ICT applications that signi cantly reduce CO2 emissions, the use of resources and improve service quality.

Download the leaflet

Re-think China's Outward Investment Flows (Report)

Role: Co-author with Baijin Long

Summary
Two hundred years ago, China was the largest economy on earth, and in a few decades, the country will most certainly reclaim that position. There can therefore be little doubt that the future of China will shape the global economy; the question is, in what direction?

This report sets out to examine one of the greatest challenges in the 21st century, namely, how to combine global economic development and a sustainable use of natural resources.

The objective is to encourage a constructive discussion regarding the rapidly increasing outward investment flows from China, from a global sustainability perspective. The report explores the roles of the different actors involved and the manner in which the underlying trends driving this outward investment can be directed to ensure sustainable resource use.

Download the full report

Arab Companies in the 21st Century (Report)

Role: Co-author with Tareq Emtairah and Suzanne Påhlman

Summary
The study, undertaken in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), is inspired by a series of initiatives undertaken by WWF with an intention to identify and to work with various proactive key players in emerging economies of the world like India,

China, Russia, Brazil and South Africa. This study focuses on the scope and potential for companies in the UAE and the rest of the Arab world to emerge as leaders in investment and export of sustainable goods and services, as well as becoming a key international actor in promoting and supporting sustainable development.

Download the full report

Indian Companies in the 21st Century (Report)

Role: Co-author with Mohmmed Saqib and Rajesh Sehgal

Summary
In a situation where the world requires innovative companies to address
the serious global challenges faced by humanity, including high resource consumption, pollution, population growth, demographic and geopolitical changes, India, with its rapidly changing business environment, may indeed prove to be one of the most important countries on the planet over the next several decades.5

This report shows that there exists significant interest within the Indian business sector in sustainable development and innovative solutions that can be applied to achieve this goal. The approaches utilised in this regard by lead- ers in the Indian corporate sector are well ahead of many of their western counterparts, which are often, and often erroneously, viewed as leaders in the eld of corporate social responsibility (CSR). A number of common denominators exist within the progressive approach of these Indian companies, and these have been collectively referred to by one Indian company as “third generation CSR”.

This third generation CSR is an approach where companies look to ensure that their core businesses deliver sustainable development results. This dif- fers from the rst generation of CSR, that looked at philanthropy as one way of using pro ts, and the second generation that was searching for ways of minimizing the negative impacts of the companies’ operations.

The most important element of the third generation CSR is that it examines the core activities of a company and determines means by which the company can evolve in order to ensure that it contributes to welfare, even if this does not translate into immediate returns. This approach means that environmental and social concerns are the starting point for the business activity, as opposed to being factored in at the end. Rather than compromising on pro t, companies provide information that allows government to proactively change business regulations in order to reward companies which deliver on social and environ- mental objectives, such as reducing the use of natural resources.

Download the full report

Chinese Companies in the 21st Century (Report)

Role: Co-author with Peng Lei and Baijin Long

Summary
This report is based on a survey of 182 of the largest and most important Chinese companies. WWF would like to highlight the following summarized results and outline possible steps forward.

1. A significant minority (22%) of Chinese companies say they are going beyond current regulation and some (13%) are even suggesting tougher rules. Many of these companies also have concrete suggestions that could help China become a leader in the provision of sustainable goods and serv- ices, not only in China but also for the rest of the world, and thereby move beyond the existing CSR discussion.

2. While one group of companies takes environmental issues seriously and is proactive, a large group could be described as almost hostile to environ- mental issues and do not even want to engage in discussions. 39% of respondents said “many” or “very many” Chinese companies were breaking the law, and 57% said companies were trying to lower standards.

3. There is a need to develop domestic solutions that support export of prod- ucts and services that help the environment, according to 78% of the com- panies surveyed.

4. 85% think traditional Chinese philosophical concepts like “union of nature and man” could help both Chinese and foreign companies become more environmentally friendly. 96% thought that the “circular economy”, a modern concept used widely in China today, also could be of help.

5. 85% of the companies said there is a need for stronger rules for environ- mental reporting, transparency and monitoring for large companies. Only 2% said there wasn’t and 13% said they didn’t know.

6. 53% said they would be willing to engage with NGOs like WWF in discus- sion about how sustainable development can be promoted, even though NGOs are not yet key actors in China and for many Chinese companies the idea of policy work with NGOs is new.

Download the full report