SA’s SME s go green

The small and medium enterprise (SME) market is considered a vitally important business segment as far as South Africa’s economy goes – and now it’s becoming an engine for sustainability as well. The SME Survey 2015 is expected to confirm that there is a growing maturity in the SME sector in its approach to green issues. The complete survey results are due out mid-year.
SME Survey is the original and largest representative survey of SMEs in South Africa and, since 2003, has contributed ground-breaking research into the forces shaping SME competitiveness.
According to Arthur Goldstuck, MD of World Wide Worx and principal researcher for SME Survey, the last time SMEs were asked whether sustainability was important to their businesses, the responses were extremely non-

Book to attend in June!

Book to attend in June!

committal.
“Around nine years ago, the Survey asked SMEs how important environmental sustainability was to them. The responses were so disinterested that we were unable to even provide a measurement in proportional terms. This indicated that, at that time, SMEs felt they had many concerns more important than green issues,” says Goldstuck.
“In the past, then, SMEs obviously viewed sustainability as more of a nice-to-have, rather than a necessity. However, since then, things have changed somewhat. This year, when asked whether green issues were important and whether they believed their businesses must operate in a sustainable fashion, an overwhelming majority said yes.”
A total of 86% of SMEs either agreed or strongly agreed on the importance of sustainability. In total, he adds, only 12% disagreed.
“This indicates a massive swing towards environmentally friendly approaches and is very encouraging news, coming from this sector. It demonstrates a growing awareness from SMEs of the fact that they do not live in a bubble. These entities are clearly beginning to consider the bigger picture and understand that their organisations need to play a part in driving environmental sustainability.”
Ethel Nyembe, head of Small Enterprise at Standard Bank says, “It is encouraging to see quite a number of SMEs being open-minded about adopting sustainable practices into their business operations. Now that SMEs understand the importance of sustainability and environmental responsibility, more needs to be done to help them incorporate these sustainable practices into their core business processes, regardless of their sector.”
“Furthermore, implementing sustainable business practices will give SMEs competitive advantages when dealing with larger corporates which now prefer suppliers that complement their sustainability objectives,” says Nyembe.
Goldstuck adds that part of the reason is the B-BBEE scorecard having the unexpected knock-on effect of driving businesses to become more aware of their responsibilities in terms of the environment.
“The B-BBEE legislation has forced many companies to look at their activities from a much broader perspective, and to think about the role and responsibilities of the business within their community and environment. They are realising that they can no longer just be in it for themselves.”
“Associated with this, there is also a much greater awareness among SMEs of climate change and its environmental impact. SMEs are becoming more conscious of their place in the world and are realising that, even if their own role in the larger sustainability picture is a tiny one, it remains important.”
Source: it-online


Book your seat here to attend the Green Business Seminar at Sustainability Week


 

Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

[symple_button url=”https://twitter.com/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Twitter[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.facebook.com/alive2greenmedia” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Facebook[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]LinkedIn[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://plus.google.com/103917244232576476638″ color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Google +[/symple_button]

View more

SA ‘not ready for carbon tax’

South Africa isn’t ready to launch a carbon tax because there are insufficient alternatives to fossil fuel energy, a City of Tshwane official said.

“Ninety-five percent of our energy requirement is still very much fossil fuel-based,” Dorah Nteo, the chief sustainability specialist for the municipality, said this week. “We have not allowed the infiltration of enough renewable” power sources, she said.
A proposed carbon tax would be delayed from this year to 2016 to allow time for public consultation and the drafting of legislation, former finance minister Pravin Gordhan said in 2014. Draft legislation on the levy will be published later this year, his successor, Nhlanhla Nene, said in his budget.
Eskom is struggling to meet demand with aging plants following years of underinvestment. While the department of energy has approved 79 renewable power projects from private companies with a capacity of 5 243MW, Eskom is also building two coal-fired power plants with a potential combined output of 9 564MW.
“A carbon tax can play a role in achieving the transition to a low carbon economy and South Africa’s commitment to help in the international efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” the committee said in April.
“These commitments and aspirations should also take into account any possible negative economic and social impacts of the carbon tax.
“What has been introduced effectively is the fuel levy for your motor vehicles, rather than your broader carbon tax,” Nteo said. “That is because with cars you have a choice between big cars or small ones, there are alternatives.”
Source: The Citizen


Harnessing market forces to drive innovation towards sustainability is the only way to redirect the planet away from its current cataclysmic path and the wheels are already in motion. How do we harness the market to a significantly greater de- gree to drive SA towards the green economy – is the key question this session will seek to answer.

Harnessing market forces to drive innovation towards sustainability is the only way to redirect the planet away from its current cataclysmic path and the wheels are already in motion. How do we harness the market to a significantly greater de- gree to drive SA towards the green economy – is the key question this session will seek to answer.

 Attend the Green Business Seminar on 25 June in Pretoria

Book your seat here | Join the Discussion on LinkedIn here


 Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

[symple_button url=”https://twitter.com/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Twitter[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.facebook.com/alive2greenmedia” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Facebook[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]LinkedIn[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://plus.google.com/103917244232576476638″ color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Google +[/symple_button]

 

View more

Materiality matters: why don't companies have to disclose sustainability risk?

Given that disclosure of financial risk always has been a difficult mandate for publicly-traded companies, requesting the voluntarily disclosure of sustainability risks may seem like a nearly Sisyphean task.
Currently, the Securities and Exchange Commission, under rule 405, requires disclosure of anything considered “material” through annual or quarterly filings.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board defines materiality as “the magnitude of an omission or misstatement of accounting information that, in the light of surrounding circumstances, makes it probable that the judgment of a reasonable person relying on the information would have been changed or influenced by the omission or misstatement.”
Accountants often rely on what is known as the 5 percent rule, meaning that if something could affect the company’s net income by 5 percent, it is material. The SEC has stated that this should just be used as a rule of thumb.
However, with the exception of some mandates on climate change and conflict minerals sourced from the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, sustainability disclosures largely have been omitted by SEC regulation.
Although more companies are disclosing sustainability information, there are few standards and the reporting is often vague and subjective.
The casual reader of SEC annual filings might find the concept of materiality — or the mandatory disclosure of anything vital to the investment making decision — and large-scale sustainability issues, such as fossil fuel use, climate change or massive droughts, as slightly paradoxical.
For example, for a company in the food and beverage industry, future profitability is directly linked to climate change and natural disasters, which would make those potential events material. Yet, under current SEC regulations, these factors are not deemed as material.
According to Michael Muyot, president of the sustainability analytics firm CRD Analytics, companies “will keep doing it [not disclosing sustainability information] as long as they can get away with it. I don’t know if they don’t think it’s not material.”
“It’s just that it’s so fragmented within the large corporation that there’s no central strategic accountability,” he added. “They’ll keep doing it, especially in B2B because the penalties aren’t there.”

Enforcing disclosure

This leaves sustainability non-profit accounting boards such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the Sustainable Accounting Standards Board (SASB) and the International Integrative Reporting Council to ask companies — at least in the U.S. — to voluntarily disclose information.
SASB was formed in 2012 with a mission to “develop and disseminate sustainability accounting standards that help public corporations disclose material, decision-useful information to investors.”
The organization specifically focuses on sustainability disclosure on SEC annual and quarterly public filings known as a 10-Ks and 10-Qs. According to Doug Park, SASB’s director of legal policy and outreach, working with companies to disclose this information on its 10-Ks provides a way to hold companies accountable for the accuracy of their disclosures.
“The company has to sign a certification saying that the information in the 10-K or 10-Q report is accurate and complete and does not misstate anything,” Park said.
“The company has to make these certifications under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. And the penalty for making inaccurate or incomplete or misleading statements are civil penalties — in terms of fines — as well as potential criminal liability.”
While the SEC has few requirements about sustainability reporting, the SEC did propose guidelines for companies to disclose climate change information in 2010. It seems few companies actually have followed through, and it is rather left up mostly to the companies themselves to determine what event or damage from climate change is material.
According to a 2014 report by the sustainability non-profit Ceres, “41 percent of S&P 500 companies failed to address climate change in their 2013 filing.”
Ceres also scored the quality of the companies’ climate change disclosures in their 10-Ks. The organization scored the quality of disclosures in 2013 as lower than in 2011 even though the number of companies that disclosed information increased.
“I think you can only go so far with voluntary [disclosure]. Then you’re relying completely on the carrot and that could take anywhere from five to 10 years,” said Muyot. “I think the combination of both the carrot and the stick — with the regulatory stock exchange listing requirements and direct investor shareholder return reward — can be done in less than five years.”
In several countries outside the U.S., regulatory agencies mandate more disclosure of sustainability information by companies. In South Africa, the Johannesburg Stock Exchange requires all listed companies to adhere to a strict set of guidelines for sustainability disclosure.
“Regulation around the world is playing an increasing role in driving behavior change and disclosure,” said Kristen Sullivan, a partner at Deloitte and Touche LLP and head of Sustainability Reporting, Assurance and Compliance Services in the U.S. “An example would be the passage of the EU directive back early last year in 2014 that will mandate non-financial disclosure.”
In 2014, the European Union issued a directive that requires sustainability reporting for companies with over 500 employees. In 2017, over 7,000 companies in Europe will report “on environmental, social and employee-related, human rights, anti-corruption and bribery matters.”
Although the U.S. does not have mandatory disclosure policies like the EU, voluntary disclosure is becoming more prevalent. However, there is little enforcement to ensure that the information that companies are reporting on is accurate and has quality.
“In the last three to four years the numbers of companies that have been disclosing information about sustainability and sustainability efforts has been increasing,” said Park.
According to a Reuters article, “Comments by SEC Chairman Mary Jo White and Commissioner Daniel M. Gallagher indicate that the Commission does not view sustainability reporting as a priority.”
In regards to ensuring that these standards will be upheld, Muyot said, “It’s a challenge. But it’s kind of just like with sports; a $10,000 fine to LeBron James doesn’t mean anything. The fine and the penalty has to actually hurt.”

The risk of stranded assets

Some companies have been under increasing pressure to disclose sustainability information from investors in part due to increasing concerns over the risk of stranded assets.
According to the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University at Oxford, “Stranded assets are assets that have suffered from unanticipated or premature write-downs, devaluations, or conversion to liabilities and they can be caused by a variety of risks.”
The risk of assets being stranded is a particular concern for energy companies involved with fossil fuels such as oil and coal. These companies hold substantial fuel reserves, but with evolving federal regulations to meet climate change and environmental goals these reserves will become unburnable.
A study by the University College London Institute for Sustainable Resources stated that up to 80 percent of coal reserves could become unusable by 2050.
“Companies have known this for a while; they are just trying to get as much out of these assets as they can. But I think the writing is on the wall,” said Muyot.
Source: GreenBiz


Book your Green Business Seminar Seat here.

Join the Green Business Discussion on LinkedIn here.

 

Harnessing market forces to drive innovation towards sustainability is the only way to redirect the planet away from its current cataclysmic path and the wheels are already in motion. How do we harness the market to a significantly greater de- gree to drive SA towards the green economy – is the key question this session will seek to answer.

Harnessing market forces to drive innovation towards sustainability is the only way to redirect the planet away from its current cataclysmic path and the wheels are already in motion. How do we harness the market to a significantly greater de- gree to drive SA towards the green economy – is the key question this session will seek to answer.


View more

Carbon tax to hurt growth, socio-political stability and exacerbate unemployment

The carbon tax will have a serious negative impact on the goods-producing sectors of the economy, particularly mining, manufacturing and agri-processing by making the country less competitive in the global economy.
Econometrix submitted a report on the 2013 update to the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for Electricity, IRP 2010 to 2030.
We have updated the report and it spells out the damage the carbon tax would do to the local economy. Included in the report is comment on the futility of introducing a carbon tax or any other envisioned carbon tax-trading scheme.

The intervening period has only reinforced these views.

The facts to back this up include: the failure of such schemes in Europe and elsewhere, the false promises by most leading nations regarding the real steps they will take to mitigate carbon emissions and that there has been no real decline in carbon emissions during this period.
The exception to this has been the US, where greater use of gas has led to a slowdown in their growth in carbon emissions.

Environmental concerns

The annual growth increase of China’s carbon emissions has been 520 million tons a year over a ten-year period compared to South Africa’s total annual carbon emissions of 440 million tons in 2013.
A saving of 20 percent in South Africa would amount to 88 million tons but India’s annual growth in carbon emissions over ten years exceeds 90 million tons a year.
Any decline in the growth of carbon emissions in China and India is unlikely in the period up to 2030 as they continue to pursue economic growth.
Furthermore, the argument regarding global warming has changed considerably over the pastfew years. The global temperature has not increased materially for more than 18 years.
Econometrix is not an expert in this field but it would appear that there are extremely strong arguments and indications that the impact of man-made global warming has been vastly exaggerated. Certainly, South Africa should not be leading the pack in curbing its own carbon emissions at substantial economic and personal cost when the rest of the world is flagrantly disregarding the same set of rules. This is particularly true when South Africa’s likely contribution to any reduction in carbon emissions will be less than measurable.

Passing on costs

A carbon tax will increase the costs of electricity and the products of many important industries. These costs will be passed on through price increases to business and consumers. Downstream business and industry will be faced with these increased costs and will in turn pass these costs on to its consumers.
Certain industries will be faced with a carbon tax of their own and in turn their increased electricity costs and carbon tax costs will also be passed on to their consumers and users of their product.
Ultimately, demand will decline as the price increases faced by consumers will reduce their disposable income. In the case of export industries trading in the global competitive market they will either face a decline in demand and/or reduced prices with resulting lower returns. In turn, imports would become more competitive and import sensitive industries would suffer.
The complex impacts of unnecessary real price increases would result in a further deterioration in the current account of the balance of payments, already at an excessively high level.
Furthermore, there would be a decline in the return on investment of the affected business and real investment would decline. At present, it is already running at below required levels capable of sustaining an acceptable economic growth rate.
Each industry would need to be examined on its merits. An example of the damage it could cause would be the motor vehicle industry. Current exports total more than R100 billion an annum and total employment exceeds 100 000. The competitive damage to this industry alone could be significant.

Economic impact

Econometrix has calculated the economic impacts of these effects. The carbon tax would slow gross domestic product (GDP) growth by 0.4 percent a year, resulting in a 6.5 percent reduction in the size of GDP by 2030, or R350bn, and a reduction of almost 1.4 million in the number of jobs available.
The number of dependents affected is therefore estimated at almost 5 million. This is a sizeable effect on an economy with a population estimated to be approaching 70 million by 2030.
Significantly, it will reduce the cumulative taxes collected by 2030 by R750bn due to the slower growth. It will require a large and costly bureaucracy to run this complex, cumbersome and highly inefficient tax. The reduction in taxes is likely to be greater than the net taxes that will be collected.

Overseas experience

The argument that the tax will be neutral because this money will be funnelled back to develop the green economy must be treated with great suspicion.
There are a number of economic arguments that strongly suggest that this will not be the case.
It amounts to a tax on existing industries and effectively a subsidy for new ventures many of which are less efficient with higher cost structures.
It consequently will foster higher costs and inflation. Bureaucracy is not the best means of fostering economic efficiency.
This is the task of market forces in order to develop a more efficient and effective economy. The experience overseas supports this argument. For example, there are substantial question marks regarding the policy and Germany’s “Energiewende” is a well-documented case in point.
Electricity prices there are the highest in Europe because of the move to renewables and that the development of the new transmission grid has fallen well behind schedule resulting in localised rolling power cuts and has required substantial unforeseen investment.
As a result, certain key electricity-intensive industries are considering moving to the US.
It is worth noting that Germany is in the process of building a number of coal-fired power stations to correct the imbalance that renewables have caused for electricity supply.
Finally, carbon tax and higher prices of the large input cost increases from electricity price increases runs contrary to the country’s own beneficiation policies, where some companies are now expanding elsewhere because of the non-competitive electricity costs in this country. It is noteworthy that one of South Africa’s key global competitors, Australia, has scrapped plans to introduce such a scheme.

Damage to potential

Econometrix has recently estimated that South Africa should, with the correct policies and adequate and secure electricity growth, have a potential sustainable growth rate of GDP of 4.1 percent a year.
As a result of a number of policy issues, insufficient security of supply and non-competitive prices of electricity, the carbon tax and the switch to more costly renewables and other investment adverse policies, the sustainable GDP growth of South Africa is unlikely to exceed 2.5 percent a year .
This will have a detrimental impact on the country’s goods producing industries, particularly mining, mining beneficiation, manufacturing and its agri-processing sectors.
By 2030, this would result in GDP being R1.4 trillion less than what should be achieved, while employment levels could be roughly 5 million lower than the levels actually possible and required.
Carbon tax will play a substantial role in this poor economic performance, which will have a detrimental effect on the standard of living, unemployment and the social and political structure of South Africa.
More particularly it would make the country’s important goods-producing sector less competitive.
This will cause further structural problems for the current account of the balance of payment, which already has a substantial deficit.
In the latest global competitiveness report, out of 144 countries, South Africa has fallen to 113th in terms of its labour market efficiency, 89th on its macroeconomic environment and has fallen 11 places to 56th in the overall competitiveness index.
The carbon tax will only exacerbate these trends. Most importantly it will more than likely result in a further deterioration in South Africa’s sovereign rating with serious consequences to South Africa’s cost of capital, ability to raise capital and its ability to attract foreign investment.
Rob Jeffrey, is the managing director and senior economist of Econometrix
Source: IOL


 

Harnessing market forces to drive innovation towards sustainability is the only way to redirect the planet away from its current cataclysmic path and the wheels are already in motion. How do we harness the market to a significantly greater de- gree to drive SA towards the green economy – is the key question this session will seek to answer.

Harnessing market forces to drive innovation towards sustainability is the only way to redirect the planet away from its current cataclysmic path and the wheels are already in motion. How do we harness the market to a significantly greater de- gree to drive SA towards the green economy – is the key question this session will seek to answer.


 

Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

[symple_button url=”https://twitter.com/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Twitter[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.facebook.com/alive2greenmedia” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Facebook[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]LinkedIn[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://plus.google.com/103917244232576476638″ color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Google +[/symple_button]

View more

GRI ANNOUNCES AFRICA REGIONAL CONFERENCE 2015 IN JOHANNESBURG

Attracting and retaining investments can present myriad complexities for business, governments and local communities, as Africa’s doors of opportunity swing open ever-wider. In order to explore ways to maximise these opportunities in a manner that benefits all of Africa’s stakeholder groups, GRI is convening the Africa Regional Conference, on 12 and 13 May 2015, at the EY offices in Johannesburg, South Africa.

“Robust and transparent reporting is one of the essential means by which businesses can demonstrate their commitment to operating responsibly on the continent and across the globe”, said GRI’s Director Regional Networks and Sustainable Development, Alyson Slater. “The GRI Africa Regional Conference will bring together hundreds of experts and provide a platform for enhancing the value of sustainability reporting and encouraging greater levels of corporate disclosure and accountability.”

GBS header

Book your seat

 
On 12 May, attendees can take part in half-day masterclasses that will deliver specific practical guidance on issues such as supply/value-chain reporting, stakeholder engagement, materiality, integration and the boundaries of accountability.
On 13 May, there is an exciting programme planned; with plenary sessions featuring renowned sustainability specialists and parallel tracks focused on driving economic transformation in Africa through greater transparency, as well as reporting as a source of innovation, trade and development.
For more information and to register to attend the GRI Africa Regional Conference please visit the GRI website here or you can contact GRI’s Media Relations Manager Davion Ford (ford@globalreporting.org). For any additional questions or media requests, please contact either Jane Appiah-Yeboah (jane@rair.co.za) or Jeneth Ndlovu (jeneth@rair.co.za) or contact Russell & Associates on +27 11 880 3924.
Source: Just Means


 

Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

[symple_button url=”https://twitter.com/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Twitter[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.facebook.com/alive2greenmedia” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Facebook[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]LinkedIn[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://plus.google.com/103917244232576476638″ color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Google +[/symple_button]

View more

The Benefits of Reporting for SMEs

A sustainability report provides information on your company’s most important impacts – positive or negative – on the environment, society and the economy. GRI’s Sustainability Reporting Guidelines are the most widely used, comprehensive sustainability reporting standard in the world.
Your company can use these Guidelines to develop your sustainability report and in the process can generate reliable, relevant and standardized information on your sustainability impacts and performance. This information can then be used to assess opportunities and risks, and enable more informed decision-making – both within your business and among your stakeholders, such as your clients.
By developing and communicating your understanding about the connections between sustainability and your business, your company can measure its performance and manage change. This will drive improvement and innovation inside your company.

Interested in a corporate sustainability reporting workshop? Read more here.

In recent years, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) in various regions have begun to publish their sustainability reports. GRI has followed this movement through a number of projects since 2008. SMEs that have participated in these projects say that the value of the reporting process was much greater than they had anticipated at the beginning of the process.
They found that sustainability reporting helped them to identify their most significant issues to focus on and from there improve productivity and make cost savings. In addition, their competitiveness often improved after gaining access to new markets and new clients.
Value of Sustainability Reporting - GRI Image
To conclude, GRI’s experience is that many SMEs believe that there is a clear connection between sustainability reporting and achieving real change within their company.
GRI Ready to Report: https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/Ready-to-Report-SME-booklet-online.pdf
Source: GSA Campbell


Green Business Seminar

Book your seat here.

Join the discussion here.


Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

[symple_button url=”https://twitter.com/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Twitter[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.facebook.com/alive2greenmedia” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Facebook[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]LinkedIn[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://plus.google.com/103917244232576476638″ color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Google +[/symple_button]

View more

MTN Group reveals latest Sustainability Report

MTN Group’s efforts to advance social development in its markets through the integration of sustainable business practices into day-to-day activities, is yielding positive outcomes, according to the company.
The company’s Sustainability Report for the year ended 31 December 2014 was released on 26 March 2015 and details how MTN’s voice and data products and services are creating sustainable economic value in its markets.
MTN Group President and CEO, Sifiso Dabengwa, states in the report that a concerted effort is being made to adapt the business in order to enable digital innovation to drive socio-economic change. “The ubiquitous availability of mobile devices means people can now drive digital innovation from anywhere in the world. This level of transformation demands a shift in thinking, a change in traditional ways of working and delivering services,” he said.
For its part, MTN has made significant developments in enabling digital inclusion and access to basic financial, m-health and m-insurance services across MTN’s markets. In this regard, 1,9 million affordable handsets were made available to customers, and 4 000 farmers received payment for cotton produce via MTN Mobile Money in 2014. In Nigeria, MTN offers Y’ello Life insurance for affordable cover to individuals and Y’ello Biz for easily accessible small business insurance protection, while m-health services are available in in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Ghana, Rwanda, Uganda, South Africa, Yemen and Zambia.
Also contained in the report is information on how MTN is contributing to sustainable societies by ensuring safe and healthy living and working environments for employees, customers, communities and operations, as well as the strides made by MTN towards becoming a more eco-responsible business.
To this end, the company reduced and avoided more than 29 000 tonnes of greenhouse gases in 2014, which is the equivalent of taking 3 249 diesel cars off the road for one year. The report states that in the year, MTN realised R49,6 million savings from energy efficiency and green energy investments. In addition, 326 tonnes of electronic and electrical waste was handed over to small and medium sized e-waste handlers and recyclers.
Dabengwa states that while progress has been made, the company has a long way to go before comfortably addressing all of its material sustainability prerogatives, and MTN will continue to focus on these.
“We will continue to improve our environmental governance and management efforts to mitigate our physical, financial and regulatory risks and impact. We also want to further invest in digital skills development to improve our technical capabilities for more accessible, affordable and quality communications for our customers. Business partnerships remain a critical element of ensuring we can have a positive impact around scale and scope, and to extend the benefits of the digital society to all sectors,” he said.
The full MTN Group Limited Annual Sustainability Report for 2014 is available on www.MTN.com
Source: IT News Africa


 
Green Business Seminar
 

Book your seat here.

Join the discussion here


Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

[symple_button url=”https://twitter.com/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Twitter[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.facebook.com/alive2greenmedia” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Facebook[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]LinkedIn[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://plus.google.com/103917244232576476638″ color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Google +[/symple_button]

View more

SA gets Climate Innovation Centre

The Innovation Hub yesterday opened its Climate Innovation Centre (CIC), in partnership with the World Bank’s InfoDev programme for supporting entrepreneurs.
The CIC is a strategic green economy initiative founded through collaboration between the Gauteng Department of Economic Development, The Innovation Hub and InfoDev.
The centre will facilitate the development of technologies to reduce the environmental impact of the South African economy, said McLean Sibanda, CEO of The Innovation Hub.
It will provide environment-focused entrepreneurs with the resources they need, such as financing, technical and business advisory and information services, and facilities such as office space and connections with laboratories, Sibanda explained.
The CIC will form part of a network of locally-owned climate innovation centres in seven countries, including Ethiopia, Kenya, Morocco and Vietnam.
In linking the CICs together, their benefit increases “many folds”, as countries can exchange information and link their markets, said Jonathan Cooney, programme director of InfoDev’s Climate Technology Programme.

New opportunities

While climate change is a tremendous threat to countries around the world, it also represents tremendous opportunities for the development of new markets and technologies, said Cooney.
The Climate Technology Programme is designed to help developing and middle-income countries proactively pursue new technologies and the market opportunities they present, rather than wait for technologies to be transferred to them from more developed economies, Cooney explained.
He added that each country focuses on different solutions depending on their particular needs and context.
“To go to a country and say ‘these are the technologies you need’ is not the right approach. The people who know how best to solve the problems of a country are from that country,” he said.

SA challenges

In SA, the most pressing environmental concerns are energy, water and waste management, said Sibanda.
“One cannot start to talk about modernising the economy without looking at issues of energy and water.” SA needs to develop environmentally-minded technologies to meet the economy’s increasing energy demands, he noted, adding that converting the byproducts of waste into energy is an avenue worth consideration.
The centre will also focus on improving the quality of life in Gauteng’s townships by pursuing energy and waste management solutions in these areas, said Sibanda.
The CIC hosts its inaugural conference at The Innovation Hub in Pretoria this week.

Source: IT Web


Green Business Seminar

Book your seat here.

Join the discussion here.


Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

[symple_button url=”https://twitter.com/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Twitter[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.facebook.com/alive2greenmedia” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Facebook[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]LinkedIn[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://plus.google.com/103917244232576476638″ color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Google +[/symple_button]

View more

Comparative Advantage: Using the Reporting Process to Amplify Differentiation in the Value Chain

By Lloyd Macfarlane

Michael Porter, one of the world’s most respected management theorists, argued that there are only two ways for firms to compete: by charging a lower price, or by differentiating their products or services from those of their rivals.


On the Reporting Calendar:  Enhancing Market Competitiveness – The case for sustainability reporting and marketing | A free half-day workshop for business managers interested in taking s first step in corporate sustainability | Limited to 50 delegates | Read more here


The modern value proposition increasingly incorporates factors that are not just related to the product or the service (such as price, quality or relevance) but to factors associated with the organisation itself, such as reputation, transparency, accountability and corporate performance against sustainability targets, for example.
Companies that have embarked on a sustainability journey can use the reporting process to distinguish themselves in the value chain by targeting and marketing points of differentiation.

Differentiation – Product, Service and Company

Companies spend time and money trying to differentiate their offerings under the abovementioned [showad block=null]headings, in order to be more attractive to their target markets. Differentiation is a basic economic principal that promotes competitiveness, and one that has been focussed on by many of the classic theorists, such as Edward Chamberlin (Theory of Monopolistic Competition, 1933).
Customers make purchases based on the value propositions presented by their suppliers. A value proposition (in this context) is quite simply the unique value offering that the customer will receive from a transaction (as compared to value propositions from others).
A number of factors go into the assessment of value and in the first instance the product or service is usually assessed for relevance (or usefulness), desirability, price and quality. However, the product or service is delivered by a company whose profile is of increasing importance in the procurement process. This means that the assessment of value is being broadened to include factors that relate to environmental, social, governance or empowerment (SA) credentials. Far more opportunities for brand and company differentiation are emerging in the value chain.

Drivers of differentiation

Forces and pressures are usually responsible for innovation and creativity. If there is no need to change, re-package or improve then there is unlikely to be much differentiation.

Some of the forces/ circumstances in which differentiation is more likely to occur:

Mature markets or sectors:

Companies in mature markets or sectors are more evolved and value propositions are more similar, so there is a greater need for differentiation, particularly with service providers that have less opportunity for tangible innovation.
Take established cellular service providers for example – call costs and network coverage of competing companies can be almost identical and yet these companies spend millions letting you know how different they are by building a corporate identity that you can relate to. Conversely, in new markets or new sectors (and in good economic times) less differentiation is apparent – there is less need for differentiation when there is no threat from competition.

Economically stressed markets:

When margins are tight and procurement budgets have been cut, buyers look more closely at the value proposition and sellers tend to increase levels of innovation and differentiation. The world has been on a tough economic treadmill since the collapse of the financial markets in 2008/9 and this has seen the emergence of new ideas and not surprisingly corporate sustainability has enjoyed prominence in this regard.

Regulated markets or sectors:

Regulation or supply chain policies can elicit forced (e.g. tax or incentive) or voluntary (e.g. reporting) responses from suppliers. Government can use incentives to speed up change and perhaps the best example of this is carbon taxation which will be introduced in South Africa in January 2016.
Carbon tax will see the need for more measurement and management of carbon across value chains and this will bring about procurement policies that require suppliers to measure their carbon footprint. These policies may further evolve to specify an acceptable range of carbon emissions per unit of output or per square metre of operations in any given sector, for example.

Supply Chain Sustainability

The real power of the economy lies in procurement. The quantity and availability of products and services is directly affected by demand and because demand is affected by supply chain/procurement policies, the supply chain can be a most powerful agent of change.
Companies are introducing sustainability into their supply chains not only because it’s the right thing to do, or because they are under pressure to do so, but because they see the value of doing so in the context of their medium to long term strategies.
The United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) is encouraging corporate leadership in this regard and many businesses use the ten UNGC principles to inform their supply chain policies. Similarly, the recently launched Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) G4 Guidelines contain much emphasis on supply chain sustainability, traceability and chain of custody.

The next big opportunity – supply chain differentiation

The most significant recent step up in corporate sustainability is the increased emphasis being placed on sustainability in the supply chain.
Procurement policies that encourage and even enforce certain key sustainability principles can meaningfully affect markets and should be noted by suppliers looking for opportunities to differentiate.
Importantly, supply chain policies take a closer look at indicators relating to companies and not simply their products or services.
This is placing more emphasis on environmental, social and governance issues and represents an exciting new opportunity for differentiation for those companies that are first to move.

Risk, reputation and leadership

Large customers are auditing suppliers using various criteria, but generally these audits will seek to establish:
• Whether there are any risks in an association, based on how the supplier’s business is conducted.
• Whether the supplier has a reputation that could cause any harm.
• Whether the supplier’s reputation could add value
• Whether there are any examples of leadership that could be amplified for mutual advantage.

Screen Shot 2015-03-18 at 1.37.29 PM

Figure 1: Supply chain forces

Supply Chain Differentiation – Strategic Approach

Sustainability plan

Any random approach to differentiating under sustainability indicators is unlikely to succeed in the medium to long term. This is mostly because customers are beginning to use sustainability frameworks and systems to determine a holistic and materiality- based set of procurement indicators in their supply chains.
Therefore, an authentic approach must be driven by a sustainability plan that includes clear statements of objective and vision, where these have been informed by a process of identification and assessment of material issues for the company.

Sustainability reporting

Companies are increasing the degree to which they report on sustainability in their supply chains. They are reporting on the sustainability impacts of their suppliers and on the influence that they have had in changing the sustainability performance of their suppliers.
This means that an opportunity exists for suppliers (and potential suppliers) to:

  • Target (or report on) internal interventions that will be acknowledged by customers as meaningful to report on.
  • Package sustainability information for large customers and other stakeholders.
  • Strategically target key customers and new prospects using this information.
  • An authentic sustainability/integrated reporting process will adhere to certain principles that are important in the identification of real opportunities for performance and therefore differentiation. The process of identifying and reporting on material indicators, particularly if inculcated in functional centres, will:
• Highlight data for comparison with competitors
• Highlight opportunities for intervention and performance management
• Establish targets, which can form the basis of future differentiation

Internal capacity and stakeholder engagement

Key stakeholders are engaged by various employees in various ways. Many of these engagements can be opportunities for communication of the company’s primary points of differentiation.
It is therefore necessary that key employees in functional centres of the business are familiar with the terms and tenets of corporate sustainability, the company’s sustainability plan and the role that they can play in the strategic approach.
Building this capacity in the organisation is important to the success of the overall plan.

Sales and marketing

Any sales and marketing plan should incorporate a customer needs analysis. As the needs and the requirements of the customer begin changing to incorporate sustainability indicators, it is important for suppliers to be ahead of this process.
This is only really possible with an engagement process that elicits information that can be used to for innovation and differentiation. This engagement process will ensure that targeted areas of differentiation are aligned with customer requirements.

After the requirements are known, a marketing plan should consistently reinforce messages that are directed at the
establishment of the desired ‘profile’ for the company. A multi-media approach can be effective to leverage packaged information to establish a desirable corporate image – one that is aligned with the ideals and requirements of the targeted customer.

Become a contributor – Have content to submit on Reporting? We are calling for authors to submit content for The Integrated and Sustainability Reporting Handbook Volume 2.

Submit content here.

Source: The Integrated and Sustainability Reporting Handbook Volume 1


Green Business Seminar

Book your seat here.

Join the discussion here.


 Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

[symple_button url=”https://twitter.com/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Twitter[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.facebook.com/alive2greenmedia” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Facebook[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/alive2green” color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]LinkedIn[/symple_button][symple_button url=”https://plus.google.com/103917244232576476638″ color=”blue” button_target=”_self”]Google +[/symple_button]

View more

Make the Circle Bigger

Supply chain sustainability takes effort and collaboration, as many companies are learning

Some companies are leveraging a reputational high ground as a result of certain meaningful interventions and policies in their supply chains.Others are haemorrhaging brand value in the wake of nonsustainablerevelations – scandals which could in many instances have been easily avoided. According to those that are getting it right, supply chain sustainability is only achieved with massive levels of collaboration.
Companies should be engaging properly with key stakeholders and forging partnerships in the supply chain (and even across multiple networks) to make the supplier engagement circle bigger. With up to 60% of a company’s carbon footprint residing in its supply chain, the pressure from large firms for suppliers to act more responsibly is not surprising. However, the threat of reputation damage is seriously intensifying this pressure.There have been a few local examples of ‘breakdowns in the supply chain’ in recent years. South African consumers reacted strongly to meat industry revelations during this last year, and the
sector has been forced to introduce much more control.
Large and multinational retail firms are conducting formal interviews with suppliers that may have an impact on risk and reputation. Similarly, the more
progressive firms are looking for suppliers that can add positively to reputation by identifying areas of leadership that can be used in association or in
collaborative marketing initiatives.Supply chain pressure is coming from all four corners it would seem. “Resource scarcity, investor and consumer demand and reputation management are driving the pressure firms are placing on their supply chains to adopt responsible sustainability approaches,” says Judith Lütz, procurement specialist and owner of Kitherley Consulting “Media scandals have also led to greater consumer awareness – a factor which
escalates the risk to businesses with supply chains that have poor social or environmental standards.” Social media in particular is amplifying issues that were previously swept under the carpet and this is leading to an increase in activism by the consumer.
Competitive Advantage
So what about the business case for supply chain sustainability? In 2012, Deloitte reported that a few major retailers, working with a shipping supplier to
pilot a “slow steaming” project, achieved fuel reductions of some 3,500 tons. Savings are an obvious business benefit of supply chain sustainability; however
product development and innovation can also result from a collaborative approach. Procter and Gamble, in working through its sustainability scorecard, recently received innovative ideas from nearly 40% of its responding suppliers. The business case for sustainability in the supply chain must be made and must become ‘best practice’. The separation of doing good and doing well is no longer possible in the integrated supply chain. “The pressure on organisations
to gain or retain competitive advantage means that sustainability is no longer about the good of society and the environment.” Says Lütz, “It is about commercial success cost savings associated with wholelife- costing procurement methods, waste reduction and innovation. It’s also about a robust supply base through ethical sourcing and supplier management, and it’s about reducing risk.”
The Larger Circle
Risk mitigation and, value creation in the supply chain count among the key benefits of more, and more extensive collaboration between stakeholders. In an interview with the Harvard Business Review, Peter Senge (founder of the Society for Organisational Learning and an MIT Sloan School of Management faculty member), touched on collaboration as he underlined two steps for achieving change across supply chains:
“First, you focus on the nature of the relationships. In most supply chains, 90% of them are still transactional. If I’m a big manufacturer or retailer, I pressure my upstream suppliers…”. Such “pressure” usually takes the form of influence through policies, incentives and reward-based approaches, many of which are becoming mainstream and part of a universal template of best practice. Senge describes his second step as follows: “… you work with NGOs and other non-business entities for access to expertise that you can’t grow fast internally. Coca-Cola cut the water used to make a liter of Coke from over 3 liters to 2.5 liters.
But it was overlooking the 200-plus litres it took to grow the sugar that went into that Coke. It found that out because it partnered with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), which knew how to analyse the water footprint of the value chain. No business knows what Oxfam does about the plight of farmers, or
what the WWF knows about biodiversity and watersheds. The best businesses don’t just hire the sharpest people; they also keep expanding their expertise by (for example) partnering with NGOs that have deeper and broader knowledge.”
The Balancing Act
Senge later expands on the importance of the right people by adding. “If people (employees) are stuck in the mind-set that a company exists to maximise ROI,
with an emphasis on short-term financial performance, they won’t get far. Lütz agrees with this and comments that on the one hand stakeholders are demanding results that benefit the bottom line, and on the other there is pressure to generate benefits for society and the environment.
“To successfully achieve supply chain sustainability, procurement and supply chain professionals need to balance these demands” says Lutz. In order to give effect to this ‘balancing act’ and in order to see the successful application of great policies in the supply chain we will need the involvement of employees with specific attributes – real supply chain professionals. Such professionals would have, among other skills, exceptional networking and communications capabilities and an integral understanding of the business context and the business case. On whether there is sufficient focus on supply chain sustainability
training in South Africa, Lütz says: “There is still a lack of knowledge on how to integrate sustainability with other priorities such as cost, service and quality.
There are a number of platforms, questionnaires and reporting initiatives that encourage sustainability in the supply chain. There is, however, a lack of effective training resources to enable companies to implement and improve on sustainability via meaningful programs that integrate with business strategies.” However, it would appear that even the most skilled professionals would battle to achieve their goals in the absence of collaboration.
It is encouraging to picture a future where broad, inclusive and responsive relationships across stakeholder groups in the supply chain are leveraged for collective benefit.. At the heart of these relationships will be an appreciation of social and environmental impacts, but this will not be the focus. The business landscape will change because of a much greater force which is based in the fundamental notion that most businesses must evolve to avoid risk and to compete
 

View more