Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

  • Advertisements

Mainstream firms go 'green,' but with very little fanfare

Companies embrace 'sustainability reports' as central to their reputations



  • Print
  • E-mail
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Digg
  • Add This
  • Permissions

By Amanda Paulson, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor / April 22, 2002

"Sustainability" is a big buzz word these days Â- for environmental groups, activists, government officials. And now, corporations.

More large companies, from auto giants to airlines, are producing "sustainability reports" in addition to Â- or as part of Â- their traditional annual reports. In them, they provide a detailed accounting of the firm's environmental and social performance. McDonald's released its first such report last week, and Shell came out with its fifth report a week earlier.

It's easy to be skeptical. The reports are voluntary, and a few of the fledgling efforts have an aura of "greenwashing" (putting an environmental spin on less than exemplary practices). But many seem to be legitimate, transparent, often self-critical reports.

They come in response to a growing demand for information from shareholders, socially responsible investment (SRI) funds, governments, and concerned citizens.

Companies are also receiving assistance in how to conduct these reports. This month, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) was formally inaugurated at the United Nations. The multinational effort, which aims to standardize sustainability reporting procedures, was conceived in 1997 by the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES), a Boston-based group that encourages companies to adopt environmental practices. The GRI guidelines emphasize what is sometimes referred to as the "triple bottom line" of economic, environmental, and social indicators.

Already more than 100 organizations Â- including Ford, Canon, Proctor & Gamble, and Nike Â- have released reports that use these guidelines. "We are astonished by how rapidly this has been embraced around the world," says Robert Massie, director of CERES and a member of the GRI board of directors. He gives a variety of reasons for the trend, including recognition that a good reputation is critical. "If you think of reputation as a powerful asset, then this is a form of protecting your asset," says Mr. Massie. "Companies that ignore this completely sometimes pay a big price."

Many companies agree. General Motors, for example, has produced sustainability reports for eight years now. GM wants the consumers to know that the company has nothing to hide, says spokesman Dave Barthmuss. "What we're doing Â- it's a brand reputation," says Mr. Barthmuss. "We want people to feel good about the GM plant in their community, about the product they've purchased, about the dealer down the block."

Increased interest in socially responsible investing has fueled the fire even more. "That started as a little dribble, and has come on like gangbusters in recent years," says Bill Blackburn, vice president of corporate environment, health, and safety for the pharmaceuticals firm Baxter International.

He adds that requests for the type of information found in sustainability reports Â- a company's greenhouse-gas output, or waste-management system for instance Â- have increased rapidly.

Baxter is somewhat unusual in that it began environmental reporting 10 years ago, as a private, internal project.

Page: 1 | 2 Next Page

  • Print
  • E-mail
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Digg
  • Add This
  • Permissions