As the urgency to combat climate change continues to grow, so does the importance of having a robust and credible climate strategy and net zero roadmap. Getting this right is key to the success of your organisation’s wider corporate sustainability strategy. Here are my 10 top tips for developing, implementing and evolving your climate strategy and driving meaningful change within your business.
1. Make the business case
Before developing your climate strategy, make sure your key stakeholders understand the business case for it. Use stakeholder mapping and analysis to find your champions and hear from your challengers. Clarify the benefits for the planet, and also for your business — gain competitive advantage, improve reputation, meet customer and investor expectations and retain and attract employees.
2. It’s all about the data!
Your net zero roadmap is only as robust as your greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory. And your GHG inventory is only as accurate and complete as the underlying data — such as energy consumption, travel, supply chain and waste data. Improving your source data gathering, verifying, and storing processes is essential to an accurate and reliable climate strategy.
3. Understand the science
A solid grasp of climate science is key when developing your net zero roadmap and overall climate strategy. Stay informed about the latest research, frameworks, trends, and projections to make informed decisions, align to reporting requirements and set science-based goals.
4. Set ambitious, but realistic goals
Establish clear and measurable targets aligned with the latest science-based criteria. Aim for ambitious GHG emissions reductions while ensuring feasibility within your organisation based on capabilities and resources.
5. Engage your stakeholders throughout the process
You can’t do this alone. Effective climate action requires collaboration with stakeholders across your full value chain. Engage leaders, employees, suppliers, customers and partners to gain and maintain buy-in, gather diverse perspectives, and combine collective expertise. Fostering cooperation and setting shared goals will support you to implement your plan and successfully manage change.
6. Start with quick wins
This may sound like an obvious one, but focusing on the quick wins should show return on investment and positive results early on. This will help with stakeholder buy-in and future requests for resourcing and investment as you scale up the programme and shift the focus to longer-term initiatives.
7. Prioritise renewable energy alongside energy efficiency
Transitioning to renewable energy sources is the foundation of any climate strategy. Explore opportunities to invest in and generate new solar, wind, hydro, or other renewable energy, alongside procuring renewable energy contracts. In parallel, implement measures to optimise energy efficiency. Upgrade equipment, improve insulation, and adopt smart technologies to reduce energy consumption and costs.
8. Embrace innovation
Encourage innovation and creativity to deliver solutions for your climate challenges and develop opportunities. Embrace emerging technologies, explore alternative materials, and think outside the box — for example, by partnering with disruptors and peers, and testing out new business models.
9. Manage your climate-related risks
Climate change brings risks and uncertainties — such as extreme weather events, resource scarcity and supply chain disruptions. Assess, monitor and mitigate your climate-related risks as part of your wider risk management procedures, resilience planning and adaptation measures.
10. Stay agile and adapt
Establish robust monitoring and reporting mechanisms to track your climate goal progress. This will help you evaluate performance and identify areas for improvement. Remember that your net zero roadmap is not a static plan until you achieve your net zero target. As legislation, frameworks and climate science evolve, so will your strategy. Keep agile and adapt your strategy as needed.
Cashmere, once a rare emblem of luxury, now lines the shelves of the fast fashion giants. Demand for the fabric has skyrocketed over the past few decades, and it’s no surprise. A tenth of the width of human hair and reportedly eight times as warm as sheep wool, cashmere is renowned for its sleek softness and warmth. It takes a single goat four yearsto produce enough cashmere for a jumper. However, the cost of this premium fibre goes far beyond its price tag. Unbeknown to most shoppers, increasing demand for the fabric has wreaked environmental devastation in the countries that produce it. This is most apparent in Mongolia, which produces around 40% of the world’s cashmere.
Herding livestock semi-nomadically is the traditional way of life in Mongolia. A third of the population rely on cashmere for their main source of income. The country’s extreme environment is key, as the goats grow thick fleeces to survive temperatures as low as -40°C. Mongolian herders traditionally grazed sheep and goats in a 3:1 ratio to protect the land from the goats’ over-enthusiastic grazing habits. However, the high demand for cashmere has prompted a dramatic increase in the number of goats. With numbers of sheep and goats now almost equal, the land’s ability to regenerate is impaired.
Until the 1990s, Mongolian heads of state moderated goat numbers. The fall of the communist government saw the removal of these restrictions, and the number of goats skyrocketed from 5 million in 1990 to 27 million today. Around 70% Mongolia’s grasslands are now severely degraded, turning the land into desert and increasing dust storms in the region.
Decades of overgrazing means there’s now less grass to eat, and an undernourished goat is a vulnerable one. This is especially true when compounded by the impacts of climate change. Mongolia is heating faster than the rest of the world – the average temperature has risen 2.1% since 1940 – and their increasingly extreme and unstable weather is bringing more droughts and harsher winters. Mongolian livestock has evolved to survive extreme environments, but this goes beyond what they can handle and goats are dying in huge numbers. The particularly harsh 2009/2010 winter took 22% of Mongolia’s livestock, with severe social and economic impacts — extreme winters can result in losses of up to 12% of Mongolia’s GDP. Many herders have been forced to leave their traditional way of life, moving to cities or slums to find other work.
Herders face a catch-22. They can increase herd size as a precautionary measure, but this makes it harder to feed their animals. It also affects the product: undernourished goats produce lower-quality cashmere, which is shorter, less fine, and less valuable. These goats in turn give birth to goats that produce less cashmere.
Of course, people and livestock aren’t the only ones that depend on Mongolia’s landscape. Wild animals, such as elk, camels, and ibex, need to eat too. As these wild species decline, the impacts ripple across the food chain. Starving snow leopards are more frequently forced to attack domestic animals to survive, creating conflict with herders who may kill them to protect their herd.
What will the future hold for Mongolia’s cashmere industry? The Mongolian government, fashion companies, and we as consumers each have a part to play in solving the crisis.
Mongolia’s government is unlikely to regulate herd sizes any time soon. It would be a highly contentious issue amongst herders, whose votes rural politicians depend on. The government hopes to reduce overgrazing by processing more cashmere in-country so it can be sold at a higher price. Currently, Mongolia sells around 90% of its cashmere to Chinese companies, who process it and mix it with Chinese cashmere. In late 2023, the Mongolian cashmere producer Gobi received a US$30 million loan from the Asian Development Bank to up its processing capacity.
Shifting towards less environmentally damaging materials is vital to undo the impact our shopping habits are having in places like Mongolia. Some companies are now only using cashmere certified by the Good Cashmere Standard (GCS) or the Sustainable Fibre Alliance (SFA), which require certain herding or farming practices with the aim to reduce negative impacts. Using recycled cashmere, or forgoing cashmere altogether, reduces the demand for the virgin fibre and its associated production impact. Replacing cashmere with the wool of less destructive creatures, such as yaks, would be a win for Mongolia’s grasslands. Another traditional member of Mongolian herds, yaks also shed warm, soft fibres, but they produce more of them while leaving grass roots unharmed.
The future of Mongolia’s land will likely depend upon a holistic approach taken by the government, fashion companies, and consumers alike. If we can shift market demand towards options with lower environmental price-tags, Mongolia’s land may be allowed to breathe again.
Aisha Shillingford, an artist and strategy consultant from Trinidad and Tobago, asked a room full of suits in New York last month to imagine their “Happy Place.” “Close your eyes,” she whispered. “Think of a place that holds meaning for you. Now, envision it in the year 2223.”
Shillingford was speaking at a recent event during Climate Week NYC. Her mission? Help people see how world building, a creative process of building future worlds used in video games, books and movies (think post-apocalyptic like The Last of Us or fantastical like Harry Potter) can help society innovate.
I’m a corporate sustainability consultant with a special interest in encouraging companies to rethink the way they impact people and the planet. When prompted to envision my “Happy Place,” I immediately thought of Cape Cod, Massachusetts. In particular, I thought of Truro, the place I first visited when I was three. We stayed at a small house on a marsh. My mom hauled me and my two brothers around on a bike trailer. We ate saltwater taffy as she pedaled up hills and along the shoreline path of Route 6.
My mom first went to the Cape with her mother. My grandmother, after escaping the Holocaust in Germany, found serenity in a place of extreme beauty. She passed along her love of the Cape to her daughter, and my mom passed it along to me. It is a place that is ingrained in my family’s culture, and even now as I sit in my small, New York City apartment, I can smell the Rugosa Roses and the spray off the Atlantic.
Over the years, the Cape has changed. It’s become increasingly expensive, driving out many low-income residents. Short-term rentals have exploded over the past decade, disrupting what were once tight-knit neighborhoods. The Cape is facing significant climate-related threats. Rising sea-levels, storm surges, flooding, erosion, strong winds, wildfires and scorching summer temperatures are damaging natural habitats and communities. By 2100, vast portions of Cape Cod could be underwater.
Following Shillingford’s exercise, I imagine a better Cape Cod in 2223. In my world, warm sun bathes the landscape, thanks to heat-absorbing sidewalks. McMansions have disappeared, offering everyone breathtaking views of the sparkling sea. Bio-based structures, mirroring the resilience of coral and oyster reefs, are barely visible under the water, a new development to act as coastal barriers and prevent erosion. On the horizon, a wind farm powers the peninsula, designed with high-tech features in low-carbon steel frames to protect local bird and fish populations. Short-term rentals are history, replaced by affordable options. Over two centuries, community-driven innovation has transformed Cape Cod into a place that is more inclusive, just, and resilient.
Shillingford asks participants to share their imaginings. Someone says that they’re invigorated by these speculative futures that could become reality. Her point is that we can use world building to brainstorm a future that doesn’t currently seem possible. Companies, non-profits, and governments can use Shillingford’s framework by applying a three-step process: 1. Identify a problem. 2. Envision potential solutions. 3. Develop tools, technologies, and processes to bring these solutions to life.
At least one company already employs this technique. Superflux, a London design studio and consultancy, uses world building to bridge the gap between future uncertainty and present-day decision-making. As an example, Superflux worked with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) government to help it make better future energy policy decisions. Together, they recruited policy makers, nonprofit partners, and other stakeholders to explore potential energy-related scenarios to inform their future energy strategy.
The group identified five future scenarios. For each, they made a model metropolis to help decision makers see the future world and how it could be impacted by new energy policies. These included renewable energy technologies, new means of public transport like low-carbon trains, and peer-to-peer energy trading that can democratize energy generation. Participants could also track a future happiness index, monitor energy diversification, and observe the affordability and sustainability of each future. Each scenario offered different costs and carbon emissions based on these factors. The group saw how society would shift based on the consequences of each decision made. Following the exercise, the findings significantly shaped the UAE’s National Energy Strategy 2050, leading to substantial investments – including $163 billion in renewables, making up roughly 44% of their energy sourcing.
Shillingford’s bottom line to the NYC event participants is that the future isn’t set in stone. Reality is shaped by what we imagine now.
Countries are banning animal testing for cosmetics, while the UK and EU are backpedalling. This year Brazil, Canada and the US state of Oregon banned the practice — joining 42 other countries and nearly a dozen US states. Meanwhile the EU and UK have started allowing animal testing, despite banning the practice a decade ago. They say it’s sometimes necessary to safeguard workers manufacturing cosmetics.
Annually some 500,000 animals are used to test cosmetics. Rabbits, mice and rats are the most commonly tested animals. Tests can involve rubbing chemicals into the skins and eyes of animals and force-feeding them chemical substances. Many animals die. Those that survive are killed anyway, usually by asphyxiation, neck-breaking or decapitation, all without pain relief. These tests, which are used in other industries like medical, pharmaceutical, and chemicals, are widely condemned by NGOs and activists.
Animal rights groups like PETA, Cruelty Free International and Humane Society International (HSI) say tests are cruel, unnecessary, and results can be inaccurate due to species differences. They say companies should use chemicals already tested as safe, or use computer modelling or other methods involving human cells and tissues, all of which are becoming more common and effective.
In the late ‘90s in the UK, PETA and The Body Shop called for bans on cosmetic animal testing, after which UK regulators made it illegal to market or sell cosmetics where the finished product or ingredients had been tested on animals. After spending €238 million to fund animal testing replacements, in 2013 the EU banned the testing of cosmetic ingredients and the sale of animal-tested cosmetics.
Other countries followed suit. In 2014, India banned cosmetic animal testing. Guatemala banned it in 2017. In 2023, Brazil introduced a testing ban for cosmetic ingredients after years of campaigning by animal rights groups. Canada outlawed cosmetic animal testing and the sale of animal-tested cosmetics in June, labelling it cruel and unnecessary. Oregon became the 11th US state to ban the sale of animal-tested products in August, following California, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, New York and Virginia.
Countries that have passed laws banning cosmetic animal testing, or are considering such laws.Source: HSI
Public opinion is firmly against cosmetics animal testing. 85% of Brits oppose it, 67% of Americans, 85% of Australians, 87% of Canadians, 87% of Southeast Asians, and 73% of Brazilians.
As the rest of the world steps up, the EU and UK are backtracking. The main reason given for cosmetic animal testing is to protect workers who are more exposed to the chemicals than consumers. A ruling by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) in 2020 said that chemicals used exclusively as cosmetic ingredients must be tested to safeguard the workers manufacturing them. ECHA claims animal tests are sometimes needed to measure long-term health effects, and that cosmetics-related regulations were only protecting consumers and not workers. The UK started secretly issuing animal testing licenses in line with the EU chemicals law, despite leaving the EU in 2020.
Opponents say ECHA is taking an outdated, bureaucratic approach to chemical safety, as modern alternatives are more effective than animal testing. Other campaigners argue the UK government should prioritise animal welfare and the views of the public.
Companies and citizens heavily criticised the loosening of EU and UK regulations. In August 2021 organisations such as Unilever, The Body Shop and PETA launched the European Citizens’ Initiative Save Cruelty Free Cosmetics to uphold the EU ban. 1.2 million people signed it. When news broke in May that the UK had secretly issued animal testing licences, more than 80 brands including Boots, Dove and Simple signed a letter to appeal the UK’s decision, saying the government is following the EU’s ‘retrograde’ approach.
In response, the EU and UK have made some new commitments to stop cosmetics animal testing, which critics callinadequate. In July, the EU Commission published commitments they say are aimed at phasing out animal testing. But these don’t promise to uphold the full 2013 ban. The EU Commission says the EU won’t make legislative changes before the EU Court of Justice has considered the laws. In May, the UK reinstated a partial form of its original ban, which outlaws the testing of chemicals used ‘exclusively’ as cosmetics ingredients, rather than all chemicals used in cosmetics.
The overlap between the cosmetics animal testing ban and chemicals law is being judged in two ongoing court cases. Meanwhile, the EU Commission continues funding the development of non-animal alternatives.
Healthy soil is vital to our planet. It’s key to supporting human health and food security, and to fighting poverty and climate change. In recent years, dirt — a once under-examined area — has risen on sustainability agendas. It’s been rebranded under the terms ‘regenerative agriculture’ and ‘natural carbon sink’. As we look towards the UN Climate Change Conference (COP28) this month and World Soil Day on 5th December, it’s worth reminding ourselves why soil matters and why it needs to play a central role in solutions to our interconnected global challenges.
Healthy soil…
…keeps people healthy.
95% of the food we eat comes from soil. Healthy, nutrient-rich soil produces nutritious food, free from pollution, while the reverse is true for unhealthy soil. Degraded soil (caused by deforestation, unsustainable agricultural practices, urbanisation and industrial pollution) is less effective at filtering harmful contaminants and keeping pollutants out of waterways, which can damage human health. Globally, it’s estimated that soil pollution contributes to more than 500,000 premature deaths.
…is vital to food security.
Nutrient-rich soil translates to higher crop yields and better quality produce. Sustainable soil management has the potential to produce up to 58% more food, which is vital given the world’s growing population. Maintaining and supporting soil health promotes biodiversity, helps to control plant disease and pests, recycles essential plant nutrients, and ultimately improves crop production. Soil degradation and erosion impacts the quantity, price and quality of food, which has a detrimental effect on global food security. Estimates suggest soil erosion can lead up to 50% loss in crop yields.
Soil is a natural carbon sink. Nutrient-rich and biodiverse soil enhances the earth’s capacity to capture and store carbon. Scientists estimate that healthy soils can sequester over a billion additional tonnes of carbon each year. Since 1970 the global average temperature has been rising at a rate of 1.7°C per century, compared to a long-term decline over the past 7,000 years. As the planet warms at a rapid rate, improving the health of our soil is vital to combatting climate change. In turn, climate change reduces soil moisture, which impacts food production, exacerbating effects on food security and poverty. The IPCC finds that all pathways that limit global warming to 1.5 degrees depend on some quantity of carbon removal via natural solutions, such as soil and trees, as well as technological solutions, such as direct air capture.
Those are just four reasons to love dirt. Not to mention the role healthy soil plays in sustaining our supply of natural materials for clothing and shelter, providing a home for vital insects and microorganisms, promoting biodiversity and much more. Whilst the world continues to tackle these interconnected global challenges, governments and businesses have a vital role to play in supporting and investing in nature to save our soil.
