Strategic CSR - Scale

Scale matters. Sure, it's nice that Patagonia cares about the environment, but time has taught us that the collective actions of smaller companies are only substantive when they alter the behavior of much larger companies. Among that subset of companies, there are none much larger and more influential than Walmart and, as the article in the url below reminds us, when Walmart acts, the whole country is affected:

 

"Walmart is taking the biggest step yet to overhaul ingredients used in America's food supply. The country's largest grocer said Wednesday that it was working to remove synthetic dyes from all its store-brand foods, including Great Value, Marketside, Freshness Guaranteed and Bettergoods. Walmart also plans to eliminate 30 other ingredients, ranging from certain artificial sweeteners to preservatives."

Whatever the motivating factor and stakeholder influence, and clearly politics is influencing this decision, when Walmart decides to do something there is a ripple effect far beyond the firm and throughout its supply chain:

"Walmart's heft makes its plans likely to trigger further changes throughout the nation's food-supply chain, from ingredient suppliers to other food makers and retailers. Great Value alone is one of the largest consumer brands in the country, with billions of dollars in sales each year."

This influence has grown larger in recent years, as consumers shift to buying more store brands to save money:

"Retailers are boosting investment in their in-house brands, with Walmart last year launching Bettergoods, a food line with trendy flavors and more natural ingredients."

The article also reveals how long it can take shifting stakeholder values to influence corporate decisions:

"For years, Walmart's customer data has shown that more shoppers want simple, natural ingredients, said Scott Morris, senior vice president for food and consumable private brands at Walmart U.S. More than 50% of Walmart shoppers now flip over a food package to look at ingredients, he said."

But, when that decision is made, especially in a company Walmart's size, we have the opportunity to make meaningful progress:

"Walmart plans to tweak more than 1,000 products across its stores gradually, in part to give ingredient suppliers time to meet its volume and cost needs, Morris said. Supplies of natural ingredients are still constrained, but growing."

Have a good weekend

David

 

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

 

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e  

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

 

In Nod to MAHA, Walmart Ditches Dyes, Other Artificial Ingredients in Its Food Brands

By Jesse Newman and Sarah Nassauer

October 2, 2025

The Wall Street Journal

https://www.wsj.com/business/retail/walmart-ditching-dyes-other-artificial-ingredients-in-its-food-brands-d475076d

 

Strategic CSR - Meat

The article in the url below presents an interesting discussion around the environmental impact of our collective diet. In particular, it focuses on the impact of eating as much meat as we do:

"Food systems account for about a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, driven largely by animal farming, which is a major source of methane and a drain on land and water resources. Even if the world transitions away from fossil fuels, food alone could push temperatures past the 1.5°C threshold needed to limit warming. The onus falls disproportionately on the wealthy: The richest 30% of the world's population are responsible for more than 70% of food-related pressures."

And this says nothing of the negative health impacts to us, individually. But, it is challenging to see how this turns around any time soon, especially with this statistic about the number of cows in the world (see also Strategic CSR – Chickens):

"1.5 billion: The number of cows on the planet. Nearly 60% of agriculture's greenhouse gas emissions come from animal-based products, with cows among the biggest culprits."

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e  

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Dinner without a side of global warming

By Agnieszka de Sousa

October 2, 2025

Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-10-02/eat-less-meat-is-still-the-message-from-flagship-diet-report

 

Strategic CSR - Apologies

The article in the url below demonstrates the value of transparency in business, combined with authenticity:

"Andrew Benin wrote the email in a few hours and didn't bother proofreading or showing a draft to anyone before he sent it to 35,544 people. He was unusually eager to say the most dreaded word in business: sorry."

Specifically:

"Mr. Benin is the chief executive of Graza, a startup that has turned squeezable bottles of extra-virgin olive oil into hot kitchen staples, delighting people who never knew they could have strong feelings about healthy liquid fat. But some of those customers were disappointed when their holiday gifts arrived late and badly packaged, and Mr. Benin felt that he should apologize. To all of them. So he contacted everyone who had ordered Graza's olive oils in the previous 60 days to ask for a second chance."

There is something powerful in apologizing, voluntarily and unreservedly. It reminded me of a crisis communications seminar I sat through recently. A valued part of the event for participants was hearing from guest speakers in the industry who, let's say, are paid to make problems disappear. The lasting impression for me, though, was that the professionals do this via distraction – they are playing a game. That is, the goal is to wait out the media, make sure they do not get the information they are seeking; delay long enough until the next crisis comes along and the journalists move on to that story. Concepts such as right/wrong, fault and accountability seemed irrelevant – don't lie, but don't say anything interesting, either.

In contrast, I favor standing for something, for being 'interesting' – putting your values into action to achieve an outcome that, from your perspective, makes the situation better than it otherwise would have been. To me (and to anyone seeking to implement strategic CSR), that is the way to secure lasting, trust-based relations with key stakeholders, who will be more likely to remain loyal, in return. My sense is that Mr. Benin sees business that way, too:

"The mea culpa from a one-year-old company with the subject line 'Learning from our mistakes' was just about the opposite of a typical corporate response. It explained in plain English and candid detail what went wrong and why. It took accountability for those errors and offered a discount on future orders. It was raw, transparent about uncertainty and messy with typos and misspellings. It was also oddly entertaining and strangely charming."

The result:

"Mr. Benin watched the replies come back within minutes. First one, then another, then 866 more. 'Thanks for your honesty,' wrote one. 'I wish more businesses did the same.' 'I won't be using the discount,' wrote another, 'but I will be reordering.' 'These messages go a long way,' wrote someone else. … The average open rate of Graza's regular marketing emails was already exceptionally high at 58%. This one reached 78%."

The key takeaway for anyone looking to lead in business, in my opinion (with a note to those who would sooner rely on A.I. to bail them out – the 'average of the internet' is usually not very impressive):

"'All you need to do is dig deep, reflect on all the things in marketing and brand communication that piss you off, and do the exact opposite,' Mr. Benin said. Corporate statements about falling short and vowing to do better are so formulaic that most of these apologies could be written by ChatGPT."

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e  

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

What Happened When the Olive-Oil Startup Apologized

By Ben Cohen

January 12, 2023

The Wall Street Journal

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sorry-graza-olive-oil-apology-11673476845

 

Strategic CSR - McDonald’s

This photo, which features in the article in the url below, is ironic for a couple of reasons:

 

First, McDonald's has installed stationary bikes instead of seats for some of its customers. So, they are 'exercising' while also eating food items from the calorie-laden McDonald's menu. Second, the bikes use the power generated by the pedaling to charge the customers' cellphones, which enables additional screen time and further encourages a more sedentary lifestyle:

"The company has created quirky promotions appealing to younger customers that have gone viral on social media. One is a combo meal that comes in a 'cat box' made for felines to play in. In some stores the chain also unveiled exercise bikes equipped with trays, allowing riders to munch their meals while pedaling to wirelessly charge their mobile phones."

The main point in the article accompanying the photo is the push by McDonald's to more than double the number of their stores in China, to over 10,000 by the end of 2028. While, for all customers, the effect of a store visit is likely to be a net gain in calories, for some customers at least, the deficit might not be as large as it would have been if these bikes were not in place.

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

McDonald's Is Supersizing Its Presence in China

By Newley Purnell

April 30, 2024

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

B1, B2

https://www.wsj.com/business/hospitality/mddonalds-china-expansion-240c14b0

 

Strategic CSR - Sesame

File the article in the url below under the category of unintended consequences (see also Strategic CSR – Jevons Paradox; Strategic CSR – Dodd-Frank; and Strategic CSR – Unintended consequences). The issue is sesame allergies in children, and the responsibilities companies have to clearly label their food products with all ingredients and prepare them in a way that is consistent. On January 1, this year, the government introduced legislation in the U.S. that was designed to strengthen these responsibilities. In other words, if there was no sesame in the ingredients, companies were compelled to adequately clean their equipment to eradicate the possibility of contamination. Crucially, the new higher standards only applies to products that already have sesame as an ingredient. Straightforward, right?

"On Jan. 1, a law intended to safeguard the more than 1.5 million Americans with a sesame allergy … took effect. The law mandates, among other things, careful cleaning to prevent cross-contact between food products with and without sesame."

Apparently not. Because the companies felt a zero-tolerance approach to compliance was too difficult for them to guarantee, they instead started adding small amounts of sesame to products that normally did not have any as a way of skirting the law. This change has had predictable consequences for children who have sesame allergies:

"The result? Foods that sesame-allergic kids and adults have eaten safely for years are now potentially life-threatening."

What is interesting about this legislation, though, is that it is far from unique:

"The Food Allergy Safety, Treatment, Education and Research (Faster) Act mandates careful cleaning of manufacturing equipment to ensure foods are sesame-free or clear labeling of all foods with sesame — many foods previously were labeled only as containing tahini, which is made from ground sesame, for instance. Similar laws have protected millions of Americans allergic to peanuts, tree nuts, milk, eggs, wheat, soy, fish and shellfish for nearly two decades. Like those foods, sesame can provoke allergic reactions from mild to life-threatening."

Whatever the explanation, companies are being explicit about the response they made, seemingly with little concern for the implications for those who the legislation was intended to protect – allergic children:

"Some in the food industry say adding sesame flour is the safest path forward. They contend that they can't sufficiently clean their equipment to guarantee it is free of sesame, as the Faster Act requires. And, under federal labeling rules, they can't state that their products contain sesame unless the items actually contain it — so they're adding sesame and labeling it."

And, of course, they are not doing anything illegal. There is nothing to say that a product cannot contain sesame, as long as it is clearly labelled. The frustrating thing for parents of children with these allergies, however, is that they are now forced to re-check all the food products they had previously determined were safe for their kids. Needless to say, the companies do not advertise their change; they simply alter the ingredients listed on the label:

"Because companies are adding sesame in the form of flour, not seeds, the added allergen is invisible to the eye, making it more dangerous — especially when food is served in group settings, like schools and summer camps, where labels aren't nearby, advocates say."

The fact that legislation like this is far from unique makes the corporate response more frustrating is it appears to be the first time it is happening (whereas, previously, they complied). It could be that the legislation is more onerous in this case, but that is not suggested in the article. More likely, it seems the companies just could not be bothered to comply and that adding a little bit more of another ingredient to the product (even though there is no beneficial impact in terms of that product) was the easiest response:

"'There was no hint that this would happen, because companies had not done this with the other eight allergens [specified in federal law], and this isn't happening in other countries that label for sesame,' said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), one of the bill's co-sponsors."

As a result, the only reason that sesame flour is now an ingredient in many products (there are lots of examples in the article) is because it helps companies avoid complying with a law that would increase their costs. The companies themselves, of course, are presenting their response to the legislation as an attempt to increase customer safety:

"The American Bakers Association did not respond to questions about adding sesame flour. Instead, it provided a statement from Lee Sanders, its senior vice president of government relations and public affairs: 'The wholesale baking sector prioritizes consumer safety. Baking companies are working with their customers, including restaurants, to transparently disclose any allergen labeling changes to help ensure consumer safety.'"

The response of parents with allergic children who are now threatened, is slightly different:

"Manufacturers 'could have done the right thing, and they didn't,' said Brubaker-Flood, the mom from Michigan. 'They had ample time to come up with new procedures to prevent cross-contamination, and instead they took the crazy route and deliberately added an allergen instead.'"

For more on this issue, see the article in the second url below.

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

To comply with a new sesame allergy law, some businesses add – sesame

By Karen Weese

April 11, 2023

The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2023/04/11/sesame-allergy-law-consequences/

Sesame Labels Backfire for Allergic

June 15, 2023

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

A6

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sesame-allergy-sufferers-wanted-warning-labels-they-got-more-sesame-283c70ce

 

Strategic CSR - Unintended consequences

The article in the url below is interesting because it demonstrates what can happen when good intentions disrupt well-established market practices/solutions:

"When one of the best-known supermarket chains in the U.K. decided to remove plastic from its products, it hadn't anticipated a spike in shoplifting. Yet that is what happened when Iceland Foods Ltd. started selling steak in recyclable paper trays. Some customers bent the pliable containers in half and stuffed them down their trousers, executives said. Such theft wasn't as easy when the steaks came wrapped in more rigid plastic packaging."

Such unintended consequences have arisen at the supermarket (named Iceland), in part, because the company has pledged to remove single-use plastic (e.g., packaging) from "its hundreds of store-brand products" by the end of 2023. This tight, self-imposed deadline has resulted in the implementation of rushed solutions that haven't yet been tested properly:

"Disentangling plastic packaging from food can be exceptionally hard in the best of times. A surge in demand for plastic-wrapped food during the pandemic and recent supply-chain disruptions caused by the war in Ukraine are making this objective even harder. More-expensive paper packaging is proving to be a liability at a time of rampant inflation, particularly because Iceland typically caters to more price-sensitive consumers."

But, aside from cost-related issues, I find the unintended consequences to be far more interesting:

"When Iceland wrapped bananas in paper bands instead of plastic bags, the fruit rotted more quickly or snapped off. When it packed bread in opaque paper bags, sales fell as shoppers balked at buying something they couldn't see. When it punched holes in paper bags filled with potatoes to make the contents more visible, the bags ripped."

Plastic has become as widely-used as it is for a very good reason. Single-use plastic, in particular, is extremely important, especially in any scenario were hygiene (food) or cleanliness (healthcare) is a priority. If there were better options out there, you would think they would be used instead. So, now that we realize the damage plastic is doing, firms are being rushed into optimistic, perhaps reckless deadlines (something that could easily be a metaphor for the whole climate change conversation), without having ready solutions in place. So, the innovation timeline is being forced, with the resulting consequences we are witnessing:

"Plastics and food have a long and complex relationship. After World War II, plastics such as cellophane played a pivotal role in creating the modern grocery store, allowing retailers to bring precut, pre-wrapped meat, fish and produce under one roof and obviating the need for counter-staff at butchers, fishmongers and greengrocers. Concerns about a lack of recycling, litter and greenhouse gas emissions from plastics began swirling in the 1970s, accelerating toward the end of the following decade and picking up momentum again in recent years."

In spite of knowing these negative consequences since "the 1970s," countries like Britain are late to the game in trying to implement change, with all the trial and error consequences we would expect. The popularity of plastic today, merely increases the scale at which change must be introduced. The article, therefore, is not a critique of Iceland, which is actually being more creative than most in terms of trying to find a solution, quickly; more, it is reflective of the scale of the challenge and demonstrates how unprepared we are currently to meet it:

"Scrapping plastic is particularly tricky for a number of products Iceland offers. Bacon that isn't wrapped in plastic quickly discolors, salad leaves wilt and unwrapped cucumbers rot more quickly. When Iceland first replaced the roughly 10 million plastic bags it used for bunches of bananas with paper bands, the switch lasted just a couple of months. The bananas shrank 20%, snapped off and rotted more quickly. The grocer scrapped a separate trial selling loose bananas and other produce after customers found it inconvenient and sales dropped 30%. … The greasier the product, the more plastic it needs to stop the grease seeping out of the pack. A paper bag for frozen shrimp needs a thinner coating than one for chicken nuggets, for instance."

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

The Price of No Plastic? Stolen Steak

By Saabira Chaudhuri

June 18-19, 2022

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

B6

https://www.wsj.com/articles/one-grocer-wanted-to-give-up-plastic-it-got-rotting-bananas-11655482334

 

Strategic CSR - Chick-fil-A

The article in the url below is superficially a story about the local nuisance being caused by a popular fast-food drive-through lane, during the COVID lockdown:

"Business has boomed for Chick-fil-A franchisee Travis Collins during the pandemic, thanks to surging appetite for chicken sandwiches from his drive-through window. Now he's throwing the works at controlling the lines of cars spilling onto surrounding streets. The city council in this affluent coastal city has proposed declaring his drive-through a public nuisance. Neighbors and city officials say customers hungry enough to brave the crowded lot for Chick-n-Strips or the signature sandwich of chicken with pickles on a buttered bun have caused so many traffic jams, bus delays and hazards on the city's main drag that something must be done."

Apparently, this is not a problem that is restricted to California, but is more common to Chick-fil-A's across the country:

"Businesses in Toledo, Ohio, and Beaumont, Texas, have filed lawsuits against Chick-fil-A franchises over mushrooming drive-through queues. In the Township of Union, N.J., a judge ordered another Chick-fil-A location to temporarily close its drive-through, after a competing restaurant next door said its customers couldn't get around the line."

And, it is officially, a thing:

"In a 14-page memorandum titled 'Traffic Conditions Associated with Chick-fil-A Queuing' sent to city officials in January, Santa Barbara's chief transportation engineer, Derrick Bailey, wrote that the drive-through snarled traffic for an average of 70 minutes on weekdays and 92 minutes on Saturdays. The backup on the busiest day of the study period was 2½ hours."

The article offers no real explanation as to why this is such a problem at Chick-fil-A restaurants, other than hinting that the current "labor shortages" are resulting in a slower service. Implicit in the story, however, is that this is happening at Chick-fil-A and not other fast-food restaurants, which results from the greater popularity of this chain.

Whenever I see a story about Chick-fil-A, however, I can't help but think of the values at play. In short, it is a complicated company – on the one hand, a poster-child for an era (not so long ago) of homophobia in the U.S. (see Strategic CSR – Chick-fil-A); on the other hand, it is also a company that treats its employees extremely well and has a progressive franchise model (only one store per franchisee).

So, what does this say about the importance of values to a company? Or, perhaps more importantly, the importance of values to the company's stakeholders who, in theory, are seeking meaning in their interactions with the company? How much are they aware of the values that define this company (and that their support is a tacit endorsement), or are they simply thinking in more shallow terms (I like the sandwiches, or I want a job, etc.). There are three options, as far as I can see. People either:

1. Don't know.
2. Know and don't care.
3. Agree.

This seems relatively important because, if it is #1 or #2, it is harder to make the argument that values matter to stakeholders, and there is value to firms of publicly stating their values and taking sides on issues of social relevance and importance. If, in fact, stakeholders don't know or care to find out (or, worse, know and don't care), then the more traditional model of CEOs striving to remain 'neutral' in the social battles of the day will be a missed opportunity for society to progress.

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Chick-fil-A's Drive-Through Crowds Get Neighbors Squawking

By Christine Mai-Duc

April 25, 2022

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

A1, A10

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chick-fil-a-santa-barbara-drive-through-in-n-out-11650718828

Strategic CSR - Sharks

Here's a good thought for the day – a relatively simple innovation that makes a difference:

"LED lights can save more than energy. A first-of-its kind study found that when attached to fishing nets, they dramatically reduce the incidental killing of sharks and other top predators that help keep marine ecosystems healthy and seafood on dinner plates."

The problem:

"Global shark populations have plummeted 71% since 1970, largely due to overfishing and the inadvertent capture of the species in fishing nets."

An extremely simple, yet effective, solution:

"The biomass of this 'bycatch' of sharks and rays, however, fell 95% when researchers placed green LED lights on more than 16,000 feet of nets off Mexico's Pacific coast."

Moreover:

"The researchers from the United States and Mexico found that overall bycatch declined 63% compared to control nets that were not lighted. That included a 51% drop in the killing of endangered loggerhead turtles and an 81% drop in the capture of giant Humboldt squid, another top predator. That meant that fishers improved their productivity as they spent 57% less time untangling unwanted species from their nets, according to the researchers."

But, one frustrating reason why this effective solution will probably not be widely adopted:

"[The] fishers in Mexico embraced the LEDs as the drop in bycatch allowed them to return to port faster and more profitably sell their catch as it was fresher. Still, obstacles to the widespread deployment of the lights remain. Each LED costs about $7 and runs on batteries that must be frequently replaced by fishers."

Some hope:

"[The researchers] have developed a solar-powered LED that can operate for a week on an hour of sunlight and is currently being tested in Mexico."

And, future research that is currently being planned:

"'There are critical questions that need to be answered — namely what wavelengths of light work best and how do different species respond to different wavelengths,' … 'Some are attracted to light, others are repelled by light — hence this could cause complications in some mixed species fisheries.'"

Hope you have a good weekend

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

How the Fishing Industry Can Save Sharks and Seafood with LED Lights

By Todd Woody

January 25, 2022

Bloomberg Businessweek

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/led-lighted-nets-reduce-bycatch-of-sharks-species-threatened-by-climate-change

 

Strategic CSR - Food waste

Following on from Tuesday's newsletter, the article in the url below profiles the CEO of Apeel – James Rogers, who was a Ph.D. student in materials science when he founded his company dedicated to the reduction of food waste in food supply chains around the world:

"Mr. Rogers … company, Apeel, applies an edible, plant-based coating to fruits and vegetables that extends their shelf life without refrigeration. Apeel-treated avocados, limes, apples and cucumbers are already in some of the largest grocery chains in the U.S. and Europe. The startup now plans to expand into markets in Asia, Africa and Latin America, thanks to a $30 million investment from the International Finance Corp., the World Bank's private-sector arm. The company Mr. Rogers launched in 2012 as a Ph.D. student is now valued at more than $1 billion."

It is clear that there will be demand for his services for many years to come, since there is currently no shortage of food waste:

"'Perishability governs every element of the food system,' Mr. Rogers says. Fruits and vegetables start to lose their value once they are picked, and producers, suppliers, retailers and consumers all race to get those berries and leaves into someone's mouth before they spoil. This urgency forces trade-offs. Most retailers arrange produce in unrefrigerated displays, which sells food faster but ensures that everything rots sooner. … Despite this haste, there is plenty of waste. More than a third of the food produced today is never eaten, at a global cost of $2.6 trillion a year, according to the U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organization."

I found Rogers' description of how he problematized the global food supply chain fascinating. Specifically, he talks in terms of the "time value of food" in an attempt to answer the question, "Why do so many people go hungry when there is so much food in the world?":

"The answer, he discovered, is that food is an intermittent asset ('Either it's in season and you have more than you know what to do with, or it's out of season and there's not enough'), and most farmers lack the time and wherewithal to bring their harvest to market. If produce took longer to spoil, poor farmers could sell their wares to distant customers. But how, he wondered, could he 'create more time for food?'"

More specifically:

"He began to study the differences between foods that 'had time,' such as lemons and oranges, and those that didn't, like strawberries and cucumbers. He discovered that the exteriors of both sorts of fruit are composed of the same molecules, just arranged differently. He hoped to use the lessons of lemon peels to sustain strawberries, but he wasn't sure how. To move forward, he needed money."

This is where it gets a little technical:

"All fruits and vegetables spoil by the same process—water goes out, oxygen comes in—but creating an invisible barrier that locks in moisture requires a different formula for each one. Using the lipids and glycerolipids of existing peels, seeds and pulp (i.e., things we already eat), Apeel has created a safe, flavorless, FDA-approved solution for dozens of products, which it applies while wet to the surface of harvested produce on specially outfitted conveyor belts just before everything is packaged for export. This invisible 'peel' can double or triple the lifespan of a product, the firm says."

The next task was to convince producers and retailers that it is in their interests to increase the shelf lives of their food products:

"But adding shelf life to produce is one thing; convincing suppliers and retailers that this time has value is another. 'What we found was there wasn't a market for longer-lasting produce,' Mr. Rogers says with a chuckle. Most businesses told him that perishability kept their customer coming back for more."

Then, he had to wrap his head around the complexity of the global supply chain for food:

"He has discovered, for example, that every fruit and vegetable has its own idiosyncratic supply chain, and Apeel works to pinpoint where time has the most value. He has also learned that delivering avocados to Europeans throughout the year means working with lots of different countries (Chile, Israel, Morocco, South Africa, etc.), each of which has its own unique supply chain, regulatory hurdles and distinct avocado."

The key to his business model (and Apeel is now valued at more than $1 billion) is to differentiate on quality and efficiency, and purpose:

"Because these deals save retailers money, Apeel products aren't pricier than more perishable alternatives, Mr. Rogers says: 'We're saying when you purchase this item for the same or lower cost, you are voting for a food system that will look after more people and our planet.'"

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

James Rogers

By Emily Bobrow

January 9-10, 2021

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

C6

https://www.wsj.com/articles/apeel-ceo-james-rogers-wants-to-extend-the-shelf-life-of-your-avocados-and-oranges-11610128693

 

Strategic CSR - Food

The article in the url below is a review of a recently published book that seeks to highlight the state of the food that we eat:

"America's eating habits have changed radically over the past 40 years. We consume more and more food of less and less nutritional value. The nation's adult obesity rate is now 42.4%."

One of the reasons this shift toward unhealthy eating has occurred, the author argues, is demographic (many more two-parent working households, leaving less time to cook), while another is technological:

"The microwave oven gave birth to an industry of highly processed foods larded with fats and oils."

Rather than preparing foods that the industry knows we like or might be healthy, however, the author of the book proposes a more cynical explanation of how we got to where we are:

"In Hooked, Michael Moss, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and the author of Salt Sugar Fat (2013), [asks:] What if the foods we're scarfing down have been designed and marketed to become addictive?"

In essence, Moss argues that food is more addictive than other substances we consume, such as tobacco or even hard drugs, because of the way that it enters our bodies:

"Mr. Moss notes that, while it takes 10 seconds for the brain to feel the effects of cigarettes, sugar's effects are felt 20 times faster—and salt and fat don't take much longer than that. The disparity stems from nicotine needing to enter the bloodstream to reach the brain, while sugar and salt take a shortcut through the taste buds. But the tongue is outmatched by the nose when it comes to driving our eating decisions. While there are 10,000 taste buds, there are 10 million olfactory receptors, and they can detect hundreds of scents."

While food itself can be addictive, the processed products that are manufactured by the modern-day food industry are designed specifically to prey on these weaknesses. The industry achieves this by featuring heavily those substances that are the most addictive (i.e., salt, sugar, and fat) in combinations that are most effective and, as a result, have become everyday staples:

"Those foods are the highly processed and sweetened concoctions that dominate the American diet: cereals, sodas, fruit juices, cookies, packaged meats, as well as the many condiments (like salad dressings and pasta sauces) that are packed with sodium and sugar. Consuming these items delivers intense and immediate pleasure and creates a need that fits Mr. Moss's broad definition of addiction."

Crucially, however, the author argues that this is a deliberate approach, rather than something that has simply happened over time:

"Mr. Moss argues that the industry's growth has been enabled by its 'manipulation of our instinctual desires,' not least through marketing and sales strategies. He describes companies super-sizing their products (such as the 'Double Stuf' Oreo) and creating packaging that can remain upright (thus easing consumption while, say, driving). One byproduct of these strategies, observes Mr. Moss, is that snacks—often processed products high in convenience but low in nutritional value—now account for about 25% of daily calorie consumption. Social norms have adjusted themselves accordingly: It has become 'socially acceptable to eat anything, anywhere, anytime,' Mr. Moss writes."

And, in a nice twist of irony, having created the problem of obesity, the same food companies then seek to capitalize on the guilt associated with the overconsumption of their products:

"Mr. Moss notes that as nutrition-less eating expanded our waistlines, food companies acquired low-calorie food lines (like Lean Cuisine) and diet franchises (such as Weight Watchers). It's as if 'Philip Morris had cornered the market on nicotine patches,' he writes. He says that food companies lobby to keep nutrition labels practically meaningless to most Americans."

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Lured into Gluttony

By Matthew Rees

March 12, 2021

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

A13

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hooked-review-lured-into-gluttony-11615505415

Strategic CSR - Beyond meat ...

I like the passive-aggressive nature of an advertisement by Lightlife Foods, which appeared in today's national papers here in the U.S. (NYT + WSJ, hyperlinked):

 

 

According to its website (https://lightlife.com/our-story/), Lightlife declares:

 

"We're proud of our roots. For over forty years, we've been committed to sharing our love for plant-based food and leading a balanced life. That's why you'll find our food is delicious and nutritious. Plus, we're always looking for ways to improve our food and the impact we have on the planet. We will always be open and honest with you—ask us anything."

Today's ad is an indication of that honesty and the firm's commitment to creating healthy food. Specifically, the letter is aimed directly at Lightlife's competitors, Beyond Meat (https://www.beyondmeat.com/) and Impossible Foods (https://impossiblefoods.com/). The opening salvo of the letter gives you a sense of the overall tone:

 

"Enough. Enough with the hyper-processed ingredients, GMOs, unnecessary additives and fillers, and fake blood."

 

In contrast to their portrayal of the products manufactured by the "food tech companies," Lightlife presents its own products (and governing philosophy) in a very different light:

 

"People deserve plant-based protein that is developed in a kitchen, not a lab. Our burger has only 11 ingredients. That's it – not 18 or 20. Our ingredients are clean, recognizable, and simple to pronounce. There are no fillers, GMOS, additives like synthetically produced 'soy leghemoglobin' for flavor and color. These just aren't necessary."

 

For more information on Lightlife's commitment to make a "clean break from the 'food tech' companies," see https://lightlife.com/cleanbreak/. And, for more on the firm's history of confronting Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat, see https://www.adweek.com/agencies/hollywood-fun-loving-couple-dax-shepard-kristen-bell-kids-lightlife/.

 

Take care

David

 

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020

 

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

 

An Open Letter to Beyond Meat & Impossible Foods

By Dan Curtin (President, Lightlife Foods)

August 25, 2020

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

A5

For additional commentary on the ad, see: https://vegconomist.com/marketing-and-media/lightlife-launches-campaign-against-impossible-foods-beyond-meat-enough-with-the-hyper-processed-ingredients-and-fake-blood/

 

Strategic CSR - Meat

The article in the url below raises the possibility of extending the idea of a Pigovian tax (a tax on an activity that causes a negative consequence – i.e., a sin tax) to eating meat. In other words, meat would be taxed as a 'sin' in the same way that cities and states are beginning to tax a range of products, from plastic bags (e.g., Strategic CSR - Kenya) to sugar (e.g., Strategic CSR – CSR Threshold):

 

"Meat could be a target for higher taxes given criticism of the industry's role in climate change, deforestation and animal cruelty. … The idea is still its infancy and faces a lot of opposition from farming groups, but it's emerging as a trend in Western Europe. … If taxes gain traction, it could encourage more people to switch to poultry or plant-based protein and help drive the popularity of meat substitutes."

 

Such a tax has been advanced as a way to address animal welfare, as well as reduce meat consumption:

 

"In Germany, some politicians have proposed raising the sales tax on meat products to fund better livestock living conditions. A poll … showed a majority of Germans, or 56.4%, backed the measure, with more than a third calling it 'very positive' and some 82% of voters for the environmentalist Greens in favor."

 

This article coincides with another report from the IPCC recently on climate change and the land (https://www.ipcc.ch/report/srccl/), documenting the waste and damage associated with our current farming/land-use methods:

 

"The loudest argument against meat at the moment is not based on health but climate change. In a report this month, the United Nations said agriculture, forestry and other land use contributes about a quarter of greenhouse emissions."

 

In the face of the scale of the problem, a tax on red meat seems as though it will not get us all the way to there from here. The principle is important, however. If you believe that the market is the most effective means of allocating scarce and valuable resources (which I do), then sin taxes are the way to account for negative externalities in the pricing of products. Get the pricing right, and demand/supply will balance at the 'appropriate' level. In my opinion, this lifecycle pricing (together with technological innovation) is the only way we will combat climate change and have some hope of preserving a planet on which we can live.

 

Take care

David

 

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020

 

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Red Meat Could Be the Next Sin Tax After Sugar, Fitch Says

By Olivia Konotey-Ahulu

August 13, 2019

Bloomberg Businessweek

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-13/red-meat-could-be-the-next-sin-tax-after-sugar-fitch-says

 

Strategic CSR - Farming subsidies

The article in the url below summarizes a report by the Food and Land Use Coalition (https://www.foodandlandusecoalition.org/), which demonstrates the scale of the market distortions currently being distributed by governments in the agricultural sector:

 

"The public [worldwide] is providing more than $1m per minute in global farm subsidies."

 

What is worse is that almost none of these subsidies are promoting sustainable production processes. On the contrary, they are encouraging extremely damaging practices:

"Just 1% of the $700bn (£560bn) a year given to farmers is used to benefit the environment, the analysis found. Much of the total instead promotes high-emission cattle production, forest destruction and pollution from the overuse of fertiliser."

 

The best way to do this, the report argues, is to redirect these subsidies to more sustainable farming practices:

 

"The security of humanity is at risk without reform to these subsidies, a big reduction in meat eating in rich nations and other damaging uses of land, the report says. But redirecting the subsidies to storing carbon in soil, producing healthier food, cutting waste and growing trees is a huge opportunity, it says."

 

Specifically:

 

"A series of major recent reports have concluded the world's food system is broken. It is driving the planet towards climate catastrophe while leaving billions of people either underfed or overweight, 130 national academies of science and medicine concluded in November. Another report found that avoiding meat and dairy was the single biggest way to reduce your environmental impact on the planet, with livestock using 83% of farmland to produce just 18% of calories. The 'planetary health diet' published by scientists in January requires an 80% cut in the red meat eaten by Europeans and North Americans. Adopting this diet in coming decades would mean 60% of today's pasture could be used for wildlife or other purposes, an area similar to the size of Brazil."

 

In spite of these warning signs, the report:

 

"… couldn't find any examples of governments using their fiscal instruments to directly support the expansion of supply of healthier and more nutritious food. Overall, [the report] said the damaging way the world currently produces food and uses land causes $12tn a year in hidden costs to the environment, human health and development."

 

The report looked at agricultural subsidies worldwide, but also covered food production and the R&D that goes into improving the food supply chain:

 

"The subsidy analysis in the report was done by the International Food Policy Research Institute, using OECD data. It found three-quarters of the $700bn annual subsidy is paid directly to farmers and that 15% supports measures such as research on higher yielding crops and road building in rural areas. It analysed subsidies in 51 nations and includes most, but not all, of global subsidies."

 

While the report is highly critical of existing government support for big-ag, it finishes on a high note by mentioning some examples of the (rare) good practices that it found:

 

"Benefits from reforming subsidies has been seen in some places. Farmers in the European Union have reduced greenhouse gas emissions from fertiliser by 17% while yields rose, and China is phasing out support for fertilisers."

 

Take care

David

 

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020

 

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

$1mn a minute: The farming subsidies destroying the world

By Damian Carrington

September 16, 2019

The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/16/1m-a-minute-the-farming-subsidies-destroying-the-world

 

Strategic CSR - Waste

Here are some fascinating facts and figures about three types of waste from the article in the url below. First, food waste:

 

"According to a 2013 study from the University of Minnesota's Institute on the Environment, just under 40 percent of global crop calories are used to feed animals, most of them from corn and soybeans grown at an industrial scale. It's a particularly inefficient way to feed people: It takes about 100 calories of grain to produce just three calories' worth of beef, or 12 of chicken."

 

Second, clothing waste:

 

"The Rainforest Action Network has found that about 120 million trees from existing forests are cut down for textiles every year. … one study showed that about 2,900 gallons of water can be produced to make a pair of jeans."

 

Third, e-waste:

 

"About a third of the global population was expected to have an internet-connected phone by 2017, according to a report from eMarketer. In the United States, the typical home has 65 electronic appliances, according to a study from Natural Resources Defense Council."

 

And, the following two quotes are from the article in the second url below, which focuses on the waste being generated by food-delivery apps in China:

 

"Scientists estimate that the online takeout business in China was responsible for 1.6 million tons of packaging waste in 2017, a ninefold jump from two years before. That includes 1.2 million tons of plastic containers, 175,000 tons of disposable chopsticks, 164,000 tons of plastic bags and 44,000 tons of plastic spoons. Put together, it is more than the amount of residential and commercial trash of all kinds disposed of each year by the city of Philadelphia. The total for 2018 grew to an estimated two million tons."

 

As a result:

 

"China is home to a quarter of all plastic waste that is dumped out in the open. Scientists estimate that the Yangtze River emptied 367,000 tons of plastic debris into the sea in 2015, more than any other river in the world, and twice the amount carried by the Ganges in India and Bangladesh. The world's third and fourth most polluting rivers are also in China."

 

Take care

David

 

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020

 

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Small Steps Take Aim at a Global Threat: Waste

By Tatiana Schlossberg

May 28, 2019

The New York Times

Late Edition – Final

B3

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/climate/waste-not-if-you-want-to-help-secure-the-future-of-the-planet.html

China Chokes on Takeout Plastic

By Raymond Zhong and Carolyn Zhang

May 28, 2019

The New York Times

Late Edition – Final

B1, B5

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/28/technology/china-food-delivery-trash.html