tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post4337867350540239109..comments2024-03-19T12:59:20.494+02:00Comments on csr-reporting: Mind the Gap! in Sustainability Reportingelainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07433863039389159395noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-36109429542949217972012-12-05T16:36:23.697+02:002012-12-05T16:36:23.697+02:00Hi Elaine, Long time since we spoke. Nice to see f...Hi Elaine, Long time since we spoke. Nice to see friends in this boat. I have been working with Bill and Mark for the last year on context-based sustainability. It seems to me to be the only route that offers a framework that indicates sufficiency of effort in a meaningful context.The masters dissertation seems absolutely right to my eyes (but then what would you expect from Prof Robert's students?!). I do not believe CBS needs to be so tough to comply with. Its implementation needs to be sensitive to the context of the host organisation. However, I do acknowledge that the whole learning journey will last well beyond our working lives. What makes you think it could be shorter? Regards, MartinMartin Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04665016327127253727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-12555832871437225472012-11-27T23:07:37.387+02:002012-11-27T23:07:37.387+02:00Hi all,
a collection of links to articles / websi...Hi all,<br /><br />a collection of links to articles / websites about "sustainability context" is here: http://www.nfrcsr.org/international/reporting_guidelines/index.htm#_Toc287203324<br /><br />Best,<br />JernejJernejhttp://www.nfrcsr.org/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-7937832286461502422012-11-20T18:48:36.630+02:002012-11-20T18:48:36.630+02:00Hey Elaine & Henk,
Great to see a blog about ...Hey Elaine & Henk,<br /><br />Great to see a blog about this exciting research. And thanks to Elaine for invoking me, which I'll take as an invitation to comment.<br /><br />Let me start with where we agree: yes, we do indeed need to improve performance toward sustainability.<br /><br />However, we have a longstanding disagreement on how we improve sustainability performance. My starting point is to define sustainability in a disciplined way, by positing a line between sustainability and unsustainability (which can be adapted to respond to better information as it becomes available.) Without such a line, how do companies know when they've improved performance sufficiently? And more importantly, how do they prioritize the allocation of scarce (human and financial) resources toward the sustainability impacts most in need of improvement? Without measuring progress toward sustainability, companies might throw all sorts of resources at the sustainability of their water management when they are actually performing sustainably there, but are not paying sufficient attention to the sustainability of their mitigation of solid waste, which may in fact be much more unsustainable. This is obviously an illustrative hypothetical example, but I trust you get what I mean. <br /><br />As well, at a fundamental level, GRI tells organizations that they need to report their performance according to the sustainability context principle. No ambiguity there. So the idea that we can postpone addressing sustainability context until after our lifetime simply doesn't square with GRI's guidelines. Logically speaking, GRI would need to delete its sustainability context principle, or else it makes sense to expect organizations to measure, manage, and report on their social, environmental, and economic impacts "in the context of the limits and demands placed on environmental or social resources at the sectoral, local, regional, or global level" (to quote GRI). It makes no sense to have a Principle that you expect those using your guidelines to ignore.<br /><br />Have you seen the G4 Public Comment Letter Submitted by 66 members of the Sustainability Context Group advocating for more guidance on susty context (and providing a functional specification, as well as general and specific examples)? http://www.sustainableorganizations.org/SCG-GRI-G4-Comment-Submitted-9-24-12.pdf <br /><br />Or the Public Comment letter from the SustyContextGroup on the GHG Emissions Thematic Revision? http://www.sustainableorganizations.org/SCG-GRI-G4-GHG-Submitted-11-12-12.pdf<br /><br />I spoke with GRI directly, and they said that this input is factoring into several Working Group discussions, a fact confirmed independently by Working Group members.<br /><br />As for the mistaken belief that a context-based approach to sustainability is too complex to implement, have you seen the work on this front by BT, Autodesk, EMC, Mars, Ford, Cabot, and Ben & Jerry's? See the links in the GHG Emissions letter for more on this work.<br /><br />As well, did you hear about the partnership between WBCSD and the Stockholm Resilience Centre for integrating SRC's 9 Planetary Boundaries work into WBCSD's Vision 2050 work. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/business-solutions-based-scientific-analysis<br /><br />Elaine, I trust that this is sufficient documentation to make a solid case for the necessity and viability of implementing sustainability context. I look forward to hearing back from you on this case.<br /><br />Best,<br />BillBill Bauehttp://www.linkedin.com/in/billbauenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-53953036035375982142012-11-18T21:20:45.487+02:002012-11-18T21:20:45.487+02:00Hi Henk, thanks for reading and commenting. I thin...Hi Henk, thanks for reading and commenting. I think I always acknowledged that the theory of context-based sustainability holds some appeal and is theoretically a valid option, and I respect your views on this (as well as those of Bill Baue who never misses an opportunity to remind me of this also!). My issue is with the practicability of applying that concept to businesses, and the validity of the calulations which may not take other mitigating factors into account. It's a resolution that most businesses will not be able to achieve satisfactorily, not in my lifetime anyway,and my view is that it may serve to move us away from the bigger issue which is improving performance not benchmarking it. So, I acknoweldge the student team's need for context in their thesis, and agree with it, but I choose to interpret it in a less rigorous way, which is closer to the current GRI approach today. At present, the G4 exposure draft does not move in this direction.... do you know something that I don't know? :) Thanks for good wishes, doing our best to stay safe here, managed ok so far:) Look forward to meeting up in Amsterdam in May. elaine elainehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07433863039389159395noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-28308739976523236012012-11-18T15:02:22.625+02:002012-11-18T15:02:22.625+02:00Nice post Elaine, also touching on the context of ...Nice post Elaine, also touching on the context of Context. I'm reading their thesis right now. I respect your "open-mindedness". Did I notice some movement on your part? Perhaps we will even be discussing a context-based GRI-G4 guideline in Amsterdam next year, with this new generation ;-)<br /><br />Best wishes, be well and take care in these troublesome times<br /><br />HenkHenk Haddersnoreply@blogger.com