The CSR Newsletters are a freely-available resource generated as a dynamic complement to the textbook, Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation.

To sign-up to receive the CSR Newsletters regularly during the fall and spring academic semesters, e-mail author David Chandler at david.chandler@ucdenver.edu.

Showing posts with label markets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label markets. Show all posts

Thursday, October 16, 2025

Strategic CSR - Paper straws

The trouble with plastic is that it is really useful and really cheap, which means it is very difficult to replace:

"Most plastic alternatives have an element 'that doesn't work very well, or isn't biodegradable, or it could just be way too expensive,' said Dillon Baxter, chief executive of PlantSwitch, which uses rice husks—the sheath that protects a rice kernel—for its plastic replacement. 'If you're a company that wants to do the right thing, it's pretty hard' to find a workable option, he said."

The work of PlantSwitch, which is featured in the article in the url below, makes clear that replacements are challenging. This is true along multiple dimensions, but cost is preeminent:

"The issue is that effective sustainable plastic replacements are still few and far between, and cost a lot more than their counterparts derived from fossil fuels. … Dallas-based PlantSwitch, for example, makes substitutes for plastic straws, containers, cutlery, plates and bowls. It does so by blending the husks with a bio-based polymer synthesized by microorganisms to create a resin that can be molded into the final product. An ordinary plastic straw costs around 0.7 cents, while the PlantSwitch version is 1.4 cents, the company said."

Fortunately, the legal context is shifting, which should incentivize companies to come up with an effective solution more quickly than they otherwise might:

"Meanwhile, businesses are bracing to meet new requirements including a packaging waste directive in the European Union. The rule will require all packaging to be recyclable, among other things. In the U.S., some states are adopting laws intended to make manufacturers financially responsible for where plastic ends up, but overall the country has taken a lighter touch."

Customers provide an even bigger incentive, which I would argue is the more important driver of lasting change:

"… some companies are opting for alternative materials to meet the demand of consumers seeking nonplastic options. A July survey from sustainability consulting firm Aura found that more shoppers in the U.S., Canada and Europe are eschewing certain products if the packaging doesn't seem sustainable. … Aside from concerns about pollution, consumers are increasingly unnerved by the impact plastic and tiny microplastic particles have on human health."

But, in order for customers to shift, efficacy is essential:

"The right packaging depends on what product it is supposed to be protecting. 'Cucumber wrapped in plastic extends the shelf life, so why wouldn't you do that?' said Ken Bowles, chief financial officer at Dublin-based sustainable packaging company Smurfit Westrock. 'But if you're using [corrugated board] for strawberries or raspberries, there's no impact on shelf life.'"

In essence:

 

"A nonplastic product has to be just as functional as plastic to catch on. Plastic producers say the material is essential for modern life, and other options can pale in comparison."


Given the challenges (which includes the overall economic context), companies are walking back some of their public sustainability commitments:


"Gartner said in a late July report that 75% of organizations with sustainable-packaging targets will roll them back, and look instead to comply with coming legislative guidelines. Coca-Cola faced criticism in December when it walked back a commitment to make 25% of its products with reusable packaging by 2030. The company also said it may be more reliant on plastic following tariffs on aluminum."


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/



Alternative Materials to Plastic Struggle to Get Off the Ground

By Clara Hudson

August 12, 2025

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

B2

https://www.wsj.com/articles/plastic-waste-is-piling-up-but-alternative-materials-struggle-to-get-off-the-ground-f53bc6e3

 

Tuesday, September 30, 2025

Strategic CSR - COP 21

In the midst of the largely pessimistic review of progress on climate change since COP 21 in Paris in 2015, the article in the url below contains a ray of sunshine:

"It took almost 70 years from the invention of the solar cell, in 1954, for the world to install its first terawatt of solar power, in 2022. The second one came two years later. The third? Perhaps later this year. In 2024, renewables provided more than 40 percent of the world's electricity, and twice as much money was invested in them than in fossil fuels — even though renewables offer, generally speaking, less return on investment. Ninety-three percent of new power worldwide came from clean sources, meaning that for every new unit of dirty capacity brought online in 2024, there were 24 units of the good, clean stuff. This is not yet enough to push global emissions downward. But in a battle between old energy and new, it represents an obliterating margin. As soon as next year, it is estimated, renewables will be the world's largest source of electricity."

The article suggests that, in spite of the current political climate that discourages some of the scientific rhetoric around the threats posed by climate change, progress on the transition to carbon free energy sources continues:

"… global leaders may be talking less about the risks of warming and the necessity of limiting it, these days, but on the ground, decarbonization is nevertheless racing ahead."

Nevertheless, the article also concludes something that seemed obvious even a decade ago:

"In certain ways, the story is one that moderates and skeptics long predicted: that decarbonization could not be reliably imposed from above on moralistic terms and would have to be powered instead by market forces, private investment and the informed consensus of a price-conscious public."

Or, in other words:

"Polls show that voters don't actually prioritize decarbonization and, crucially, aren't willing to pay much to bring it about."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


It Isn't Just the U.S. The Whole World Has Soured on Climate Politics
By David Wallace-Wells
September 16, 2025
The New York Times
 

Thursday, January 23, 2025

Strategic CSR - Cows


Welcome back to the Strategic CSR Newsletter!
The first newsletter of the Spring semester is below.
As always, your comments and ideas are welcome.
 

This statistic blew my mind when I read it in the article in the url below:

"The average dairy cow in America produces 30 litres of milk a day; a cow in Africa, only 1.6."

Such a disparity speaks volumes, in my mind, of the power of the market to deliver societal progress. As the article continues:

"This 19-fold difference—call it the dairy divide—has enormous consequences. Closing even some of it would ease poverty, help children grow up better nourished, reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and perhaps even make civil wars less likely."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


Bridging the dairy divide
December 14, 2024
The Economist
Late Edition – Final
50
 

Tuesday, September 10, 2024

Strategic CSR - Incentives

An indication that society in general (and business in particular) is not serious about addressing climate change is the extent to which we are happy to wave through superficial statements or attempts at action, without serious oversight or follow-up. Instead, the approach seems to be 'let's all pretend we are doing something and not look too hard at the details, in case we remind ourselves that we are really not doing much, at all.' The article in the url below does a good job of highlighting the ongoing disconnect between words and action:

"An evaluation of more than 1,500 climate policies in 41 countries found that only 63 actually worked to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

My reading of the press coverage of this study is that the threshold to count was 'any at all.' In other words, the report is not saying that 63 policies failed to produce a lot of greenhouse gasses, but that they failed to produce any at all – nothing. This is shocking, if you sit down to think about it for more than a second. Helpfully, the article notes what does and does not tend to work. Perhaps not surprisingly, we need to incorporate economics into public policy in order to understand how to incentivize behavior that might make a difference:

"Subsidies and regulations—policy types often favored by governments—rarely worked to reduce emissions, the study found, unless they were combined with price-based strategies aimed at changing consumer and corporate behavior. ... The fraction of policies that worked combined financial incentives, regulations and taxes, according to the study."

'Hope,' it seems, is not a strategy!

"The study found the nations' overall climate emissions will exceed the Paris target by 23 billion metric tons of CO2 by 2030."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


Most Climate Policies Are Ineffective at Cutting Emissions, Study says
By Eric Niller
August 22, 2024
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
A3
 

Tuesday, September 3, 2024

Strategic CSR - Chocolate

I have long thought that any research done on consumers' willingness to pay for ethical products suggests that they are not (willing to pay). In general, when presented with two identical items, but plenty of labelling advertising that one of them was made with sweatshop-free labor (and is therefore slightly more expensive) and the other without specific labelling (and is slightly cheaper), that the cheaper version is selected. What is important about the article in the url below, therefore, is that it presents evidence that this is not always the case (or that what had previously been true is changing):

"In April, the British grocery chain Waitrose added a small yellow label to nine of its store-brand chocolate bars. 'Tony's Open Chain: Together, we'll end exploitation in cocoa,' it read."

What is interesting is that the supermarket (Waitrose) did not make a big deal about this, but it seemed to have been noticed by customers:

"The rollout wasn't accompanied by in-store advertising, and press coverage was relatively quiet. The price of the bars rose from 2 British pounds (about $2.50) to £2.20. Still, sales shot up by 43% year over year in the week after the launch, and averaged 34% in the first six weeks."

These results therefore clearly counter what has currently been accepted about consumers' unwillingness to pay for ethically produced products:

"In surveys, consumers frequently express a willingness to pay extra for products they perceive to be sustainable, but actual shopping behavior tells a different story. A 2022 study by the consulting firm BCG found that while 80% of respondents said they cared about sustainability, less than 7% actually paid extra for sustainable products."

One explanation for this is that the product is more of a treat or luxury good, which might mean consumers don't want to feel as guilty as they consume it. Or, it could mean that social mores are shifting and there is growing support for more ethical supply chains. Central to the Strategic CSR framework is the idea that companies and capitalism is neutral – mere tools that we have devised to allocate scare and valuable resources. This means that all organizations merely reflect the collective set of values among all stakeholders. In this case, if consumers are willing to pay more for ethically produced products, then that is what companies will produce, and global supply chains will adapt. The key, if true, is how wide is this effect, and how much of a price premium will consumers be willing to pay?

"It is even less clear how rich a 'sustainability premium' people are willing to pay. Recent research has put the number between roughly 10% and 25%."

On the other hand, given that Waitrose is a higher-end supermarket:

"At Waitrose, customers appeared willing to pay extra for ethical cocoa sourcing—though it is also possible shoppers didn't notice the difference. Inflation, and an attendant preference for store brands, might have played a role."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


Grocer's Chocolate Sales Soar After It Vows Fair Pay to Farms
By H. Claire Brown
June 4, 2024
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
B1, B2

Thursday, February 29, 2024

Strategic CSR - Allbirds

The article in the url below records the rapid rise and equally dramatic fall of Allbirds – the once trendy "eco-friendly wool sneakers worn by Silicon Valley tech bros." The story also highlights the obvious fact about business (life?), which has always been true – good intentions do not necessarily lead to good outcomes. And, in particular in the marketplace, good intentions do not replace the need to have a great product:

"It turns out that not everyone wants to dress head-to-toe in merino wool, which although better for the environment than nylon or polyester, isn't as durable. Customers complained of holes in their sneakers months after buying them. And the leggings, which were made from a blend of wool and other fibers, in addition to being see-through, didn't hold their shape, the people said. Allbirds said the sheerness was limited to one light color and that it was a minor issue caught at an early stage."

The case is an insightful story of how to attract a loyal following among customers, and then lose it just as quickly:

"[Co-founder] Zwillinger has a saying: Customers will accept one degree of weirdness, but not two. Iterations of existing styles are preferred over brands pushing too far into new categories. He said in an interview that shoppers who came to Allbirds for its original shoes weren't ready to buy technical gear such as running shoes or workout clothes from the brand. He acknowledged problems with the leggings and other workout clothes. 'You've got to get [the] fit right,' he said."

The ultimate takeaway has implications well beyond the lifespan of a marginal apparel company:

"Allbirds said it isn't changing its commitment to sustainability, even though it doesn't always drive shoppers to buy its products. Emails sent to customers touting the environmental benefits of Allbirds shoes and clothing produced fewer sales than messages that prioritized comfort among other attributes. Environmental concerns are among the least important attributes consumers look for when buying shoes and clothing, according to a survey in March of 750 U.S. consumers by Wedbush Securities. Comfort and price are among the most important."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


How a Hot Allbirds Lost Its Way
By Suzanne Kapner
July 17, 2023
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
A1, A10
 

Tuesday, February 27, 2024

Strategic CSR - Plastic bags

The article in the url below presents a great example of a well-intentioned market intervention that produced unintended consequences:

"Almost a decade ago, California became the first state in the United States to ban single-use plastic bags in an effort to tackle an intractable plastic waste problem."

Predictably, the market reacted:

"Then came the reusable, heavy-duty plastic bags, offered to shoppers for ten cents. Designed to withstand dozens of uses, and technically recyclable, many retailers treated them as exempt from the ban."

But, less predictably, the consequences generated by the adaptation produced the exact opposite of what was originally intended:

"But because they didn't look much different from the flimsy bags they replaced, lots of people didn't actually reuse them. And though they came emblazoned with a recycling symbol, it turned out that few, if any, actually were recycled."

Ultimately:

"Last year, Californians threw away more plastic bags, by weight, than when the law first passed, according to figures from CalRecycle, California's recycling agency."

In short, the mainstream CSR discussion in action.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


California Hopes to Fix Flawed Plastic-Bag Ban
By Hiroko Tabuchi
February 18, 2024
The New York Times
Late Edition – Final
p20
 

Thursday, November 30, 2023

Strategic CSR - COP 28

In recognition of the COP 28 meeting (an attempt to layer binding global policies and targets on top of national regulation and practices), which started today in Dubai, the article in the url below argues that "the biggest obstacle to saving rainforests is lawlessness." The area of ground that law enforcement agents are expected to cover is so great, that illegal mines and logging operations are easy to hide in plain sight. Even when authorities are able to identify an illegal operation, arriving in time without first alerting the perpetrators is next to impossible:

"The pickup trucks left before dawn. Their occupants—six military police and nine agents from Brazil's national parks service—wore bulletproof vests. Their target was an illegal gold mine deep in the Amazon. To save the rainforest, Brazil's new government is trying to catch the criminals who cut it down. First, though, it must find them. Satellite images had revealed the location, 140km from Itaituba, a city in the state of Pará. After seven hours of driving, two men on a motorbike spotted the convoy and sped off to alert the miners. The trucks gave chase, but got stuck in knee-deep mud. Five kilometres from their target, the forces of law and order had to turn back. That gave the wildcatters time to hide their equipment, which the agents would have torched. A follow-up raid is unlikely."

But, given that the article appeared in The Economist, there is a market-based solution:

"The destruction of the world's rainforests is not only a scandal; it is a colossal market failure. Rainforests brim with biodiversity and help regulate the water cycle. Most importantly, the forests are giant carbon sinks. Deforestation accounts for 7% of global carbon-dioxide emissions. … clearing and burning a hectare of the Amazon pumps 500 tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. It each tonne causes $50 of harm by accelerating global warming, … then the total damage is $25,000. Set against this, the profits are puny."

Thus, the way to prevent the criminal activity is some form of upfront compensation (that exceeds the likely profits, but is less than the likely harm) to incentivize the protection of the forests, rather than their destruction. This is where "lawlessness" reenters the conversation:

"If rainforests were in countries where property rights were clear and the rule of law was strong, it would be straightforward to pay the landowners to conserve them. Where property rights are muddled and the rule of law is weak, however, whom do you pay, and how do you know he or someone else won't chop down the forest anyway? Alas, rainforests are often in the second kind of country."

The article provides examples of how difficult it can be to introduce obvious market solutions in Brazil, Indonesia, and Congo, given the contextual poverty and political instability. The graphic accompanying the article shows the amount of rainforest in these three countries that was lost between 2000 and 2020. There is still a lot left, of course, but the physics of tipping points suggests that we do not have much room for further loss:


Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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 rule of saw
March 4, 2023
The Economist
Late Edition – Final
52-54
 

Thursday, October 26, 2023

Strategic CSR - Markets

The article in the url below is a reaction to the UK Prime Minister's recent announcement scaling back his government's commitment to phasing out internal combustion engines in cars:

"The science is simple: halting the rise in global temperatures requires getting to net-zero emissions. But the politics is hard: getting there will require every one of us to end the use of many carbon-emitting devices. And so pundits viewed it as a mere political maneuver last week when UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced he will be delaying the end date for the sales of fossil-fuel powered cars from 2030 to 2035. The prime minister argued it should be market demand — not government bans — deciding the pace of EV uptake."

What I found particularly interesting is that the graph in the article presents a comparison between the predicted adoption rates of EV cars, in the UK, for government-mandated coercion vs. market-based consumption. In other words, it shows the adoption rates if the government bans fossil fuel combustion engines in 2030, versus the expected adoption rate if market forces drive consumer decisions (through efficiencies and lower prices, increased technology and design, etc.). 


This is interesting because I don't think I have seen such a direct comparison, before. The element missing from the analysis in the article is what markets are best at – identifying the optimal technology. In others words, if we rely on government mandate, the 'wrong' (or sub-optimal) technology may be forced on everyone. In contrast, if market forces are allowed to play out, a competing technology might emerge as costs decrease, technological awareness increases, along with competition among firms to develop the 'winning' design.

In other words, while government intervention might be the quickest pathway to full adoption, it might not be the 'best' pathway and, even worse, might generate unforeseen consequences that have other negative implications.

The other factor, of course, is whether we have the luxury of allowing the market to decide, given that we have waited so long, to date, and have distorted the market through things like fossil fuel subsidies, for so long.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


Why Ban CO2-Emitting Cars if the Market's Moving Against Them Already?
By Akshat Rathi
September 26, 2023
Bloomberg
 

Tuesday, May 2, 2023

Strategic CSR - Climate anarchy?


This is the last CSR Newsletter of the Spring semester.
Have a great summer and I will see you in the Fall! 


The article in the url below is structured around analogies for three different geopolitical pathways for how climate change evolves, from our current starting point:
  1. "Green Globalization, where major powers coordinate closely to implement solutions, putting the world on track to meet climate goals.
  2. Climate Anarchy, where self-interest takes the form of protectionism and mercantilism, pushing the world in the wrong direction on emissions.
  3. Green Cold War, where the world splits into two or three rival camps that create regional trade barriers, producing emissions that land somewhere between the two extremes of the first two scenarios."

The characteristics and related outcomes of these three pathways are summarized in the article in terms of various risks:


The article concludes that the "Green Cold War" is the most likely outcome, while global cooperation ("Globalization") is "unlikely" and anarchy, thankfully, is "very unlikely." One option that is closer to the globalization pathway, but is not considered in this framework, instead revolves around competition (rather than cooperation). My sense is that this option is both more likely (than the "unlikely" globalization) and would be more beneficial in terms of innovating solutions (than the "likely" cold war; see Strategic CSR – Markets). Whether market-based competition is more likely than counterproductive protectionism (the "Cold War" pathway), though, is harder to determine.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


Green Cold War or Climate Anarchy? Together We Can Decide
By Akshat Rathi
January 25, 2022
Bloomberg
 

Tuesday, September 20, 2022

Strategic CSR - ESG

The article in the url below demonstrates the challenge for investing in inserting altruistic or ideological motivations in place of market mechanisms. The danger is that the returns are diminished and that only a certain percentage of the market is willing to compromise their return on investment. This has been playing out with ESG funds for some time now, but reality appears to be catching up. As investigations by regulators into, first, Deutsche Bank (in Germany) and, soon after, Goldman Sachs (in the U.S.) were announced over the summer, the reality of the ESG façade has become increasingly apparent. Ultimately, it cannot be solved until we first agree on what needs to be measured (the E, S, and G), and then develop effective metrics of those constructs (many of which do not currently exist). For now, it should be painfully apparent that the majority of the ESG (or SRI) investment craze is not moving us any closer to a more sustainable economy and, in fact, might be doing more harm than good if it lulls us into the belief that we are actually making progress. At present, of course, all progress on tackling climate change appears to be put on hold as we deal with the consequences of the conflict in Ukraine:

"So far in 2022, the S&P 500 is down more than 13 percent, and it briefly dipped more than 20 percent below its peak, putting stocks in bear market territory. Dismal as the stock market may be, the situation looks even worse if you are worried about the future of the planet. The fact is that only one broad stock sector has provided consistent returns over the last year: old-fashioned fossil fuel, and the companies that extract, refine, sell and service it."

More specifically:

"In fact, when I looked at a performance table of the top companies in the S&P 500 for 2022, I found that 19 of the top 20 spots belonged to companies connected, in one way or another, with fossil fuel. The best performer was Occidental Petroleum, with a gain of 142 percent."

And, what is worrying is that this trend looks set to continue:

"Russia's assault on Ukraine and the mounting Western sanctions are improving prospects for fossil fuel, Bank of America noted in a report to clients on Thursday. 'Our commodity strategists expect that a sharp contraction in Russian oil exports could trigger a full-blown 1980s-style oil crisis,' with energy prices rising much higher, the report said. 'Not owning energy is becoming more costly,' it said. 'With China reopening, peak driving season and favorable positioning/valuations, we see more upside' for energy prices."

The whole point about strategic CSR is that a firm's self-interest is determined by its stakeholders. Thus, creating value for those stakeholders is what makes the firm successful. The moral challenge of that reality (the framework is descriptive, not normative) is when the stakeholders (i.e., all of us) want something that is not necessarily 'good' for us.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


Fossil-Fuel Shares Lead the Stock Market. How Awkward
By Roxane Gay
June 5, 2022
The New York Times
Late Edition – Final
BU3
 

Thursday, September 15, 2022

Strategic CSR - Markets

The article in the url below injects some reality into the frothy reception that the recently passed climate bill in Washington has been receiving. In particular, it contrasts that piece of good news, with the breakdown in climate negotiations between the U.S. and China, which happened the same weekend (due to disagreements about Taiwan):

"This month's biggest climate milestones happened over one weekend. On Sunday, the US Senate approved hundreds of billions of dollars in climate and clean-energy spending. Just two days before, climate cooperation between the US and China — the world's largest economies and emitters — came to an abrupt halt."

The article is interesting, I think, because it presents the negotiations these two (largest polluting) countries had been having since COP26, in a competitive light. More specifically, it made the argument that competition between these two giant economies as to who could 'out-green' the other as essential to the planet's climate goals:

"Having the US and China feel like they're competing to do more on climate change in order to write the new global order is the strongest position the world could be in," said [Taiya Smith, a senior associate … at the environmental think tank E3G]."

To me, this reinforces the strength of market forces in propelling progress and identifying optimal outcomes (given all the usual qualifiers about imperfect markets that are required when making such a statement).

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


The US-China Rift Moves Climate Politics Into an Era of Competition
By Akshat Rathi
August 9, 2022
Bloomberg Green
 

Thursday, April 14, 2022

Strategic CSR - Fossil fuels

Announcing calls and setting targets to get rid of fossil fuels are easy; actually getting rid of them is incredibly complex and challenging, as the article in the url below reports:

"Oil and natural gas aren't needed to only generate energy. They're also critical for an array of products including face masks, diapers and vegan leather."

The article contains many examples, but here is only one – fertilizer. Making fertilizer is not possible without fossil fuels and the implications of the constraints currently being imposed on oil and gas (together with events like the war in Ukraine) ripple throughout the food supply chain:

"Consider fertilizer, which is produced using hydrogen from natural gas (the molecule CH4). Natural gas accounts for about 75% to 90% of fertilizer production costs. Russia and Belarus are large producers, and uncertainty about sanctions has reduced their exports. But skyrocketing natural-gas prices in Europe have also pushed fertilizer producers such as Norway's Yara and Hungary's Nitrogenmuvek to curtail production. Some suspended operations last fall when Russia slowed natural-gas deliveries. As a result, fertilizer prices last month hit a record. Many farmers are scaling back land in cultivation. Some say they plan to use less fertilizer, which could reduce crop yields. Others are switching from planting corn and wheat to soybeans, which require less fertilizer. The fertilizer shortage couldn't have come at a worse time. The war is disrupting grain shipments from Russia and Ukraine, which account for a quarter of global wheat exports. Wheat prices last month hit a record. While Americans will have to pay more for cereal and pasta, Africans could experience severe food shortages. At the same time, food manufacturers report that the cost of plastics for containers and packaging is soaring. Plastics are made from oil and natural gas, which are in short supply globally."

In short, while the article is not exactly sympathetic to the cause, it is making the extremely valid point that we are in no way prepared to phase out fossil fuels from our economy. The problem, of course, is that we needed to have phased them out many years ago:

"The inconvenient truth for progressives is that petrochemicals are ubiquitous and indispensable. … As much as progressives loathe fossil fuels, they can't live without them. Drive an electric car or ride a bike? Streets are paved with asphalt, which is made from petroleum bitumen. The cost of asphalt, by the way, is also soaring in tandem with oil prices."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


You'll Miss Fossil Fuels When They're Gone
By Allysia Finley
April 5, 2022
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
A15
 

Friday, March 18, 2022

Strategic CSR - Sharing

I like the article in the url below because it explains how market forces are being used to solve a societal problem. The problem is the misallocation of resources (people have more of certain things than they need and other things they don't want), but solves it through the barter system (instead of the exchange of money):

"Who on earth wants fish tank wastewater, chicken poo, tumble-dryer lint, loo roll tubes, 'a plaster mould of a Komodo dragon's foot' or half a broken toilet? No one, you might think, but the Buy Nothing community begs to differ: these are all real 'gifts' snapped up by more than 5 million members worldwide, who give away their unwanted items in the local community."

For example:

"There is nothing unique or original about giving and getting stuff for free. It's a practice as old as humanity. The juggernaut giveaway network Freecycle was founded in 2003 – but what distinguishes the Buy Nothing project … is that the emphasis is less on stuff, per se, and more on community. In what Buy Nothing describes as its 'hyperlocal gift economies,' users are encouraged to let items 'simmer' rather than giving them away to the first person who asks, perhaps suggesting they share a joke or provide a story explaining why they would like the item. In addition to 'gifts' and 'asks,' users are encouraged to post 'gratitude,' with a message or a picture showing what a gifted item has meant to them."

The project has radical roots:

"It's a 'social experiment,' explain the project's founders, Rebecca Rockefeller and Liesl Clark, from their respective living rooms in Washington state, effecting a fundamental shift in our attitude to material goods by building a sense of community, and treating items as community-owned and shared. 'If you come at it from an angle of joy and human connection,' says Rockefeller, "you're more likely to inspire lasting change than when you come at it from telling people: 'You have to do without this.'"

And, the underlying philosophy appears to be realistic, rather than idealistic:

"There's no expectation or even aspiration that users will somehow forge a fully cashless economy. Indeed, during the pandemic, Buy Nothing changed its rules to allow members to give gifts of cash. 'Quite literally, that's a lifesaving gift you can give another person in a lot of cases,' says Rockefeller. 'This was never meant to be an exercise in purity: that doesn't serve us well. What serves us well is flexibility. A banana, a chunk of concrete or $10 – those are all good gifts.'"

For more on the buy nothing phenomenon, see: https://youtu.be/T2Saa_NVotY

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/

'A banana, concrete – these are good gifts': The recycling group turning strangers into friends
By Emma Beddington
January 13, 2022
The Guardian
 

Tuesday, March 15, 2022

Strategic CSR - Meat

An issue that has long been frustrating with the U.S.-centric model of capitalism is the declining level of competition within industries. Less competition today has been caused by antitrust regulators failing to enforce antitrust regulations over decades. In the face of this concentration, how do we begin to turn back the tide? The article in the url below tackles that question in the context of the meatpacking industry, where competition is woefully lacking:

"Corporate concentration is a growing problem across the economy, but meatpacking is especially afflicted. Four companies produce more than 80 percent of the nation's beef, and their dominance has come at the expense of cattle farmers, meatpacking workers and American consumers, who eat an average of 55 pounds of beef each year."

In response, a single cattle farmer (Chad Tentinger) is attempting to rally a number of small farmers to build their own meatpacking facility. The challenge is that, while the potential payoff is large, the effort requires a sizeable investment, at considerable risk to the individual farmers:

"The price tag for the plant is $450 million, about a third of which Mr. Tentinger hopes to raise from other farmers. He says he'll start building this spring with or without federal support, but government subsidies, in the form of grants, low-cost loans or loan guarantees, would improve the chances of survival."

The project is also challenging in ways that are not simply financial:

"It won't be quick … Mr. Tentinger doesn't plan to open his meatpacking operation until 2024. It also won't be easy. The government still needs to tighten regulation of existing producers, not least to prevent the big firms from buying up new meatpackers or pushing them out of business. And the Biden administration's approach is less likely to find a foothold in the chicken and pork industries, where corporate concentration has left fewer independent farmers."

Among the attempts to make the possible facility more friendly for farmers and workers, there are a number of innovations being considered. What caught my eye is that:

"Mr. Tentinger's company, Cattlemen's Heritage, aims to process about 400,000 head of cattle per year, or roughly 1 percent of the nation's beef. It's not the volume that makes the plant so intriguing — it's the business model. The company is offering a better financial deal to farmers, and if it succeeds, it's not hard to imagine other groups of farmers organizing to build more plants. (Indeed, a group in Nebraska already is working to build a similar plant.) Mr. Tentinger also is offering a better deal to workers. He chose Council Bluffs in the hopes of wooing workers from meatpacking plants across the river in Omaha with the promise of higher wages and better working conditions, including on-site day care. Consumers could benefit too. If productivity rises, prices could fall."

The project requires the vision to see past the upfront costs and hassle associated with innovation and through to the other side to a better meat processing industry. And it is better simply because it would make the industry that much more competitive.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


Building a Better Meatpacking Industry
By Binyamin Appelbaum
January 16, 2022
The New York Times
Late Edition – Final
SR8
 

Thursday, March 3, 2022

Strategic CSR - Carbon capture

The article in the url below reports renewed interest from venture capitalists in carbon capture technology. The same article, however, also reveals how difficult it can be to produce such innovation and, perhaps what matters most, scale it for meaningful impact:

"More than 80% of proposed commercial carbon-capture efforts around the world have failed, primarily because the technology didn't work as expected or the projects proved too expensive to operate, according to a 2020 study."

These projects are generally not super expensive (in the larger scheme of things) and, of course, are well-worth the effort, but the overall record is not encouraging:

"The U.S. has spent $1.1 billion on carbon-capture demonstration projects since 2009, with uneven results, according to a December report from the Government Accountability Office. None of the eight coal projects selected for $684 million of the funding during that time is operating, the researchers found. Projects to capture carbon from heavy industries met with some success."

One challenge that I had not considered is the market value of the carbon that is being captured. To the extent that it is a useful material, it would encourage greater effort to innovate. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the case:

"While some early projects have demonstrated that it is technologically possible to collect carbon from power plants and industrial sites—or even directly out of the air—they have generally been very expensive. Many face a fundamental problem: there is no economic use for the carbon they capture."

Let's hope we are willing to alter our collective behavior and not rely 100 percent on science/technological innovation to bail us out of this mess.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© 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/


Carbon-Capture Efforts Resurface
By Jennifer Hiller and Collin Eaton
February 7, 2022
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
B2