Strategic CSR - Concrete

I have long known that concrete is a material that is successfully recycled. The article in the url below suggests there is no reason why all concrete (100%) cannot be reused in some form:

"Concrete slabs, beams, columns and other elements from dismantled buildings can be safely reused in new construction, according to a new study. The analysis could facilitate incorporating concrete—currently responsible for as much as 9% of global greenhouse gas emissions—into the circular construction industry and make the building sector as a whole more sustainable."

If we can successfully recycle existing concrete, of course, we reduce significantly the need to produce more of the stuff:

"Building codes generally require concrete to be sound for at least 50 years. When buildings are torn down (even before the 50-year mark, as is increasingly the case) it's usually assumed that concrete's useful life is over. Old concrete either gets landfilled or downcycled into rubble for road construction or aggregate for new concrete production."

Instead, the researchers suggest there is no reason why it cannot be reused for its original purpose (or close to it):

"But until now, there has been no organized method to evaluate the potential of reusing salvaged concrete. The researchers ran thousands of computer simulations to predict the future lifespan of reused concrete, based on measurements of the condition of existing buildings."

There are calculations required in terms of how far into the future recycled concrete can last, depending on what it was used for initially, and under what conditions, but there are techniques to preserve and enhance its usable life:

"For example, a concrete slab that has been exposed to harsh elements for many decades may be best reused as an interior component. Repair and refurbishment techniques—such as waterproof coatings—can also extend the lifespan of concrete."

This is not as exciting as some sustainability topics, but seems essential if we are to make meaningful progress. Concrete is dirty stuff, but essential, so making as little of it as possible would be a big step forward.

 

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/

There's now hard evidence guaranteeing a second life for old concrete

By Sarah DeWeerdt

February 10, 2026

Anthropocene Magazine

https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2026/02/theres-now-hard-evidence-guaranteeing-a-second-life-for-old-concrete/

Strategic CSR - Cognitive dissonance

I enjoy reading Bloomberg's Green Daily newsletter. It is backed by a great deal of expertise and insight into the evolving environmental crisis we are imposing on the planet. My only suggestion would be that, more often than not, it reads like an extreme weather forecast — guess what, it is hot out there (except when it is cold)!

The newsletter sent on January 19 is notable because it clearly highlights the juxtaposition that is so often prevalent in sustainability discussions — we know what is happening and that we need to do something about it, but guess what … we are not acting nearly as quickly as is required.

This dissonance is highlighted initially by the headline article in the newsletter, which focuses on the market-driven costs to companies that ignore climate change:

"This month, a paper published by the European Central Bank found that banks with the greatest so-called transition risks now 'face significantly higher borrowing costs' in funding markets. That followed a December paper by analysts at the Central Bank of Ireland, which showed that companies facing physical climate risks are in a similar predicament, and will need to provide more collateral."

So far, so good. Unfortunately, a graph further down the newsletter, in a separate article about China's annual coal production, highlights the countervailing forces that, more often than not, cancel out any progress that is being made. Specifically, in spite of its amazing progress in generating electricity from sustainable fuel sources, China's demand for energy is such that it takes it from whatever source it can get it:

Oh well, half right.
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/
 

Banks Ignore Transition Risk at Their Own Peril, ECB Warns
By Alastair Marsh and Laura Millan
January 19, 2026
Bloomberg Green Daily
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2026-01-19/ecb-warns-banks-should-heed-transition-risk

Strategic CSR - Greenhushing

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

The other day, I was discussing with a friend the shift in public pronouncements by corporations about their equity and inclusion policies, and whether this reflected a similar shift in behavior (actions in addition to words). My sense is that many organizations are continuing as before (i.e., they are not fundamentally altering their mission and behavior), but are doing so surreptitiously. Perhaps a corollary is what is happening in the sustainability space, as explained in the article in the url below:

"Greenhushing is everywhere. While a rollback in green ambition has received a lot of attention in recent months, many speakers said companies were still pursuing their targets, just without talking about them in public. Peter Bakker, president of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, said that 91% of companies WBCSD surveyed globally said they are investing the same or more than they were last year in decarbonization. Similarly, Sherry Madera, CEO of the environmental disclosure nonprofit CDP, said its data shows that the majority of companies are either maintaining or increasing their climate ambition. But, she said those conversations are happening behind a closed door. "I don't think companies have the appetite to talk about this as much."

Of course, this reaction might evolve — stages of resistance and then submission, perhaps. In other words, perhaps organizations start out changing their words and labels, but continue their behavior. Then, as the pressure to change continues and new norms (and stakeholder expectations) emerge, behavior eventually follows.

To distort Warren Buffet's well-known quote about bankruptcy — change happens slowly, and then suddenly.

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/

Corporations Are Bringing Climate Talk to a Whisper

By Coco Liu

March 4, 2025

Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-03-04/corporations-are-bringing-climate-talk-to-a-whisper

Strategic CSR - Tariffs

The article in the url below frames the current U.S. administration's economic policy of raising tariffs on imports as an attempt to revive the habit of purchasing more expensive, higher-quality (and domestic) products that last longer, by forcing the U.S. consumer away from the mass purchase of cheaper, lower-quality imports that are often discarded after a few uses:

"Much of the clothing, homeware, tools and toys that Americans now buy is so inexpensive that it can be purchased almost without thinking. That has fueled an addiction to cheap stuff. No matter how quick the shipping time, the rush we get from our personalized phone cases and matching pajama sets is shorter: We throw many of these items out after only a few uses and start the cycle all over again. With the approach of Black Friday, the most visible display of America's shopping compulsion is just around the corner."

Whether the author is suggesting this was the primary motivation for the tariffs is unclear, but they are certainly making a strong connection between the two:

"President Trump's tariffs and his vision of restoring America as a manufacturing powerhouse are challenging this "buy now, worry later" mindset. According to the Tax Foundation, Trump has raised the average effective tariff on all imported goods from 2.5% in 2022 to 13% today—the highest level since 1941."

The gap in the argument, of course, is that, in order for the tariffs to have a net positive sustainability effect, the government would need to invest the money raised in sustainability-linked efforts. If that condition does not hold, the tariffs are essentially a tax that is merely redirected from one unsustainable effort (e.g., purchasing from Shein; see Strategic CSR - Shein + Boohoo) to another (e.g., subsidies for oil and gas R&D; see Strategic CSR - Fossil fuel subsidies).

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/

Will Trump's Trade War Break America's Addiction to Cheap Stuff?

By Rachel Wolfe

November 15-16, 2025

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

C1-2

https://www.wsj.com/economy/consumers/will-trumps-trade-war-break-americas-addiction-to-cheap-stuff-ff21df9e

Strategic CSR - COP30

In the article in the url below, which was used to frame this week's COP30 meeting in Brazil, the goal was to present a more positive spin on where we are at, in the face of some pretty clear headwinds:

"The US is now exiting [the COP21, Paris] agreement for a second time, with President Donald Trump calling climate change a 'hoax' and clean energy a 'scam.' Fewer heads of state are bothering to attend this year. Wall Street is walking back from past net-zero promises, and far fewer financial and business leaders are expected to turn up in the Amazonian city of Belém to participate in the summit."

In spite of this, the article draws on data to highlight the upward trend:

"The answer to the existential angst is in the data. Over $10 trillion flowed into the clean energy transition between 2014 and 2024, with a record $2 trillion spent last year in everything from renewable power to battery storage, cleaner shipping and grids. … That's hardly a snapshot of stasis."

Nevertheless, the chart that accompanied the article illustrates the gap between where we are and where we need to be:

And, to be clear, the projected green bars are annual investments — i.e., $5.5 trillion a year, from 2025-2030. The conclusion:

"Yes, the Paris goal to keep warming close to a 1.5C increase from pre-industrial times is now dead. But a worst-case scenario of 4C warming by the end of the century is no longer a likely outcome. The world is heading for warming of 2.8C by 2100, according to a new UN report."

And, remember, this was intended to be an encouraging story.

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 trillion dollar reason COP still counts

By Laura Millan

November 5, 2025

Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-11-05/what-the-initial-signs-of-climate-success-look-like

 

Strategic CSR - (In)coherence

The article in the url below demonstrates the intellectual incoherence of the ESG 'movement' or, more accurately, the investment community that is driving it:

"Can a weapons manufacturer be considered sustainable?"

Sure it can – whatever you want. Without any coherent definition of the thing itself, the industry ties itself in knots every time it is challenged intellectually:

"Consider rare-earth miners. Companies that once pitched themselves as suppliers of elements needed for wind turbines and electric vehicles are now seen as vital for the defense sector, providing material used in F35 jet fighters and missile technology."

In effect, if there is a change that poses a threat, then all you have to do is alter the underlying justification in order to rebalance the internal logic:

"There is a longstanding argument that investing in defense can't fit with strong socially responsible corporate values. However, in recent months, market participants in both sectors say that having a strong supply of energy, minerals and technologies reduces reliance on external sources and in turn creates more resilient supply chains able to play down new threats. That means more solar, wind and batteries being made and deployed inside state borders."

The graphic in the article demonstrates the real underlying driver of this revisionist definitional discussion. Needless to say, it is not construct clarity:

 

This demonstrates the futility in getting caught up in any excitement around the latest acronym or buzzword (see Strategic CSR – Buzzwords and Strategic CSR – Jeans). Is the latest "persistence" or "resilience"? Whatever it is, the associated conversation is a distraction. Instead, we need to focus on identifying the most productive solutions to the problems at hand, as well as scaling the viable solutions we currently have, rather than on (re)packaging the challenge in a way that is the most acceptable (or lest offensive) to all.

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/

Green Investors Eye Weapons Producers

By Yusuf Khan

April 22, 2025

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

B5

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sustainability-investors-eye-defense-stocks-as-geopolitical-tensions-rise-2754cea2

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

 

Strategic CSR - BlackRock

The article in the url below reveals the challenges for organizations responding to multiple stakeholders with competing interests:

"BlackRock Inc. has lost a mandate worth €14.5 billion ($17 billion) with one of the largest pension funds in the Netherlands, amid concerns the world's biggest money manager isn't acting in the best interests of clients when it comes to climate risk. PFZW, which oversees about €250 billion ($290 billion), will instead rely on Robeco, Man Numeric, Acadian, Lazard, Schroders, M&G, UBS and PGGM to oversee an equity portfolio worth some €50 billion, a spokesperson for the pensions manager told Bloomberg on Wednesday."

The article suggests that, having been so outspoken on climate change in prior years, BlackRock has now created this conflict due to its willingness to retreat on previously umambiguous positions:

"PFZW is the latest asset owner to voice discontent with US money managers that have retreated from climate alliances amid an all-out assault on net zero policies by the White House. PME, another Dutch pensions manager, told Bloomberg earlier this year it's reviewing its mandate with BlackRock, valued at some €5 billion."

And, of course, each of BlackRock's stakeholders has its own set of stakeholders that are helping shape decisions and priorities in a ripple effect:

"Dutch pension funds have been under pressure from a local nonprofit, Fossil Free Netherlands, to end their ties with BlackRock. The 'Break with BlackRock' initiative asked savers to urge their pension funds to act, and thousands have done so, according to the nonprofit's website."

Inauthentic values that are applied inconsistently can earn short-term gains at the expense of long-term credibility, and with very real costs:

"PME's senior strategist for responsible investing, Daan Spaargaren, told Bloomberg the €57 billion pension manager's concern was that BlackRock wasn't doing enough to distance itself from the anti-climate rhetoric of the administration of US President Donald Trump. BlackRock and other US asset managers 'aren't condemning what Trump is doing and how he is operating and how he is handling issues like climate change and demolishing the judiciary,' Spaargaren said at the time. 'We are worried about that.'"

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/

BlackRock Loses $17 Billion Mandate at Dutch Pension Fund PFZW

By Frances Schwartzkopff

September 2, 2025

Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-09-03/blackrock-dropped-by-pension-fund-pfzw-after-review-nrc-says

 

Strategic CSR - Earth Day

Ahead of Earth Day on Tuesday, some thoughts on recent developments around ESG.

When I criticize various sustainability policies or proposals, the response I often get is along the lines of 'well, at least we are trying.' To which I reply along the lines of 'well, good intentions do not substitute for good outcomes.' My general thought is that, kidding ourselves we are making progress is no help to anyone – if anything, it lulls everyone into a false sense of security through the illusion of progress, and that is a problem because it ensures even less progress than if we were sufficiently self-aware to know we were not really moving the needle.

The evolution of the resistance to ESG in the U.S., as reported in the article in the url below, demonstrates the danger of relying on good intentions. ESG, from the beginning, was clearly based on false assumptions and inconsistent logic, topped off with the desire to start making money as soon as possible. This could have continued for a while, except that the fragile intellectual foundation (characterized by incomplete definitions and inconsistent measurement) allowed ideological opponents to pick it apart. If ESG had rested on a sounder foundation, the ridiculous ideological attacks against it would have fallen flat. But, because ESG is inherently flawed, it was easy for those opposed to cherry-pick the flaws that best matched their arguments, to make their pushback sound more legitimate, even in the face of economic gain:

"Climate investors have warned the political right is winning a war against ESG investing. A recent poll shows American support for renewable energy and electric vehicles is fading. And yet, President Joe Biden's signature climate law is in many ways benefiting conservative red states the most."

I have said this many times, but I'll repeat for good measure – in my opinion, as a society, we are not serious about tackling climate change. In fact, I would go as far as to say that we have not even begun a conversation about planning how we might be serious at some distant point – as noted by Tad DeLay, quoted in the article in the second url below:

"Just by driving to get groceries you emit carbon dioxide … a fifth of [which] … will still be in the air in 500,000 years, killing species that haven't yet evolved."

You would think we would take all of this a little bit more seriously. All you have to do is realize that during the COVID lockdown, when none of us were going anywhere and the global economy had virtually shuttered, global carbon emissions dropped a mere 6% (see Strategic CSR – COVID-19). 6%! And we think we can get to net zero by 2050. It would be laughable if the implications of our self-delusion were not so serious.

Tackling climate change and creating the conditions for a more sustainable economic system will always require plenty of unconditional cheerleaders, not to mention brilliant minds who will innovate and provide encouragement along the way. It will also require those who can think critically about what we are doing, and work to prevent us from lulling into the false sense of security that is just as big a barrier to progress as sticking our collective heads in the sand.

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/

Climate Investors Warn the Right Is Winning the Way on ESG

By Alastair Marsh

February 28, 2024

Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-28/climate-investors-warn-the-right-is-winning-the-war-on-esg

'What if there just is no solution?' How we are all in denial about the climate crisis

By Maya Goodfellow

June 20, 2024

The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/what-if-there-just-is-no-solution-how-we-are-all-in-denial-about-the-climate-crisis

 

Strategic CSR - Energy

As the article in the url below starts off by saying, "Something strange is happening with utilities." Specifically:

"For decades, electricity usage in the US has been mostly flat. Even with more people starting to use more power for more things, much of that has been offset as buildings, factories and appliances become more efficient."

But suddenly that is no longer the case and, apparently, the utilities have been caught off-guard:

"Big tech companies need lots of electricity, for data centers and especially for artificial intelligence. Homes are using more electricity for heating and cooling. Factories need more electricity to shift away from fossil fuels."

As a result, ironically:

"… when faced with this sudden increase of load on the power grid, utilities are going to rely heavily on natural gas, and even coal."

This is not a minor or temporary shift, but something more fundamental:

"[Research predicts] demand to for electricity to climb almost 16% over the next five years, more than triple his estimate from a year ago. Utilities are expecting customers to need as much as 128 gigawatts of new capacity in 2029."

And, as is often the case when societies are asked to choose between economic growth and sustainability, it is the switch away from fossil fuels that is the primary casualty:

"That's really going to disrupt the green transition. Power providers that have made pledges to cut back or eliminate carbon emissions are now starting to reverse course. Duke Energy Corp. is extending the life of its largest coal-fired power plant, abandoning its plan to exit coal by 2035. FirstEnergy also will operate a pair of coal plants, stepping back from an earlier pledge to stop using the fuel by 2030. And energy companies in the US are planning new gas plants at the fastest pace in years."

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/

Coal-Black Swans Threaten the Green Transition

By Will Wade

December 17, 2024

Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-12-17/coal-black-swans-threaten-the-green-transition

Strategic CSR - Buzzwords

I am increasingly seeing headlines such as this one, which appeared recently in the article in the url below:

"Don't Call it ESG, Call it Resilience."

In particular:

"There's a new buzzword in sustainability circles when it comes to investing in renewables and clean technologies: resilience."

The pertinent term here, I think, is "buzzword," which implies exactly the right amount of thought that has gone into this latest phase of the environmental conversation. To me, it feels more like a reaction to what suddenly cannot be said (i.e., ESG) than reflecting any serious attempt to chart a measured and coordinated approach to tackling climate change:

"'In the beginning you had 'social' and 'responsible investing' and then it became 'ethical investing' and then a whole host of other things have sort of emerged from that,' said Jason Britton, chief product officer at asset manager Sphere. ''Sustainability' was a buzzword for a really long time then 'regenerative' and 'triple bottom line,'' he said. 'This is an industry's effort to describe an incredibly complex thing in a series of one or two marketing words. 'Resilience' is the bingo buzzword of the day.'"

As a result, we should expect a demise similar to all the other acronyms or "buzzwords" that have come and gone, whether CSR, SRI, ESG, sustainability, green, offsets, and so on. In my world, words matter because, when ill thought through, they reveal underlying biases and ignorance, or simply an attempt to greenwash (to borrow another fluffy phrase). The sooner we realize that trends or buzzwords are not the way to tackle a fundamental and existential threat to humanity (see Strategic CSR – Jeans), the greater the chance we will have to do something serious about it:

"For investors, 'resilience' is the new catch-all term for investments aimed at mitigating the effects of climate change on their businesses. Often seen alongside terms like 'adaptation finance' or 'transition finance,' ESG professionals are using the word increasingly in marketing and communications related to their investments."

The sentiment 'moving deck chairs around on the Titanic' comes to mind. Of course, climate change is not waiting while we decide whether we are serious.

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/

Don't Call it ESG, Call it Resilience

By Yusuf Khan

February 28, 2025

The Wall Street Journal

https://www.wsj.com/articles/dont-call-it-esg-call-it-resilience-067a2a9a

 

Strategic CSR - Mining

The article in the url below makes the case for reviving mining in the U.S. for the key raw materials required to transition to a more sustainable energy industry:

"Although America has abundant deposits of many of the critical minerals that go into our vehicles, electronics and buildings, these materials are mostly mined abroad in poorer nations where labor is cheap (or worse, workers are enslaved) and environmental laws are more permissive, rarely enforced or easily sidestepped with bribes."

The argument is that, by outsourcing much of this extraction, we currently focus on poorer societies where the materials can be mined more cheaply, primarily because the standards to do so are so low:

"The decline of domestic mining means that Americans are outsourcing the environmental and social costs of our inexpensive consumer goods to lower-income nations. More than 70 percent of the world's cobalt, sometimes called the blood diamond of electric vehicle batteries, comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo, where child labor and sexual violence are rampant in mines. About half of the world's nickel, another key ingredient in electric vehicle batteries, comes from mines in Indonesia, some of which have wiped out almost 200,000 acres of rainforest amid allegations of operating illegally on Indigenous land."

So, mining domestically would introduce higher standards, by definition; it is also required so that increased supply can match growing demand:

"A United Nations study found that meeting international climate goals by 2030 could require building as many as 80 copper mines, 70 lithium mines and 70 nickel mines to supply the materials for electric vehicles, solar panels and a host of other low-carbon technologies."

And, the article advocates for a consumer-led component to the economic equation, with individual customers willing to pay the (relatively) small premium that domestic production would generate:

"Many of us are already paying more for responsibly sourced goods, such as chocolate and coffee. We should demand the same for our smartphones and batteries. … Although mining will never be zero-impact, it has the potential to be fair and responsible."

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/

This Dirty Industry Is Better Off Operating in America

By Stephen Lezak

July 28, 2024

The New York Times

Late Edition – Final

SR8

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/23/opinion/lithium-copper-minerals-mining.html