Beware, The Culture Warriors Have New Strawmen: Dangers of “ESG” and “Woke Capitalism”

Posted on March 8, 2023 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

End of February 2023

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

New threats to ESG detected in America’s Red-controlled states: The internal culture wars now include an unlikely frontal assault on the alleged “dangers” posed to institutional investors (state and city pension funds and the states; public financing) by professional asset managers who embrace sustainable investing approaches and who factor ESG analysis for their portfolio decision-making (in the management of client assets).

Corporate sustainability leaders and savvy investment managers are asking, “huh? “why”?

The threat of “ESG” joins such current strawmen as Critical Race Theory, “Woke” Capitalism, Don’t Say Gay (in the State of Florida), the allegations of certain “grooming” books being found in school libraries, and other specious arguments set up by political conservatives and Red state public sector leaders to gain points with the Republican base. And with right-wing media outlets.

The assault on ESG is mainly focused on the prominent asset management firms that serve state and city public employee pension plans and healthcare plans. These asset management firms are told to abandon ESG principles (and their focus on the risks brought by the climate change crisis to investments) and related portfolio management approaches — or lose the state and/or city investment and capital raising client.

Political leaders in such states as Florida, Texas, West Virginia, Louisiana, and Missouri are openly opposed to “woke capitalism” as they see it and have targeted BlackRock, State Street, Vanguard, and other large asset management firms embracing sustainable investment. (Consider that these three organizations have significant levels of investments in many publicly-traded companies.)

The leading ESG ratings firms are also in the cross hairs; 20-plus Republican state attorneys general also challenged ISS and Glass Lewis as both advisory firms expanded their traditional governance work to including “S” and “E” issues through a more comprehensive ESG lens. (These firms advise and provide services to public sector pension plans.)

Some Red state leaders are cutting ties with BlackRock and other firms and moving to prohibit the Wall Street organizations from management of state monies (such as their public employee pension systems).

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink fired back at the annual Davos gathering to say that his firm, while losing about $4 billion in the public sector pullback of funds to be managed, has seen the flow of new money into BlackRock to manage dwarfing that – new funds to be managed by BlackRock topped $200 billion in year 2022, he told the Davos crowd.

In his annual letter to corporate CEOs, Larry Fink wrote in 2022 that “stakeholder capitalism is not about politics, it is not ‘woke’, it is capitalism….” Helping clients transition their investments toward a lower-carbon economy is helping BlackRock (with $9 trillion-plus AUM) to attract new assets to manage, CEO Fink explained.

The underlying concern of the Red state officials is really about protecting fossil fuels interests – like their home states” oil, natural gas, and coal assets. Texas and Louisiana economics are heavily dependent on production of fossil fuels and that no doubt leads to the political opposition to ESG and minimizing recognition of the dangers posed by the climate crisis.

While BlackRock and other asset managers may not yet eliminating fossil fuels from the assets managed, or in products offered to investors, there is trimming going on (at other major asset management firms and in a number of state investment funds). There is also pressure being applied to traditional oil & gas firms to innovate and invest in renewable energy production.

Consider: in 2022, renewable sources accounted for 22 percent of energy production while coal accounted for 20%.

Responding to the misguided opposition to ESG in nine states, Democrats in the House of Representatives formed a sustainable investment caucus to advocate for ESG policies and actions.

Said caucus chair Sean Casten of Illinois to The Hill editors: “Given the significant growth of AUM in funds that prioritize ESG factors, Congress has a duty to craft policies that provide investor protection and transparency ofd information to market participants.”

In an opposition move, House Republicans at month’s end moved to block the Biden Administration action on “allowing” pension plan administrator’s to consider ESG factors in their management of fiduciary funds. The Republicans passed a resolution that would reverse the U.S. Labor Department rule that allows such consideration.

This is a see-saw event; depending on which party is in the White House, under ERISA rules, fund managers have been allowed to consider ESG/and prevented from using ESG considerations in fund management.

The House Republicans claim that using ESG would results in higher fees for “less-diversified” investments in “lower-performing” fund portfolios. (Read: less fossil fuel investments in sustainable funds.)

The Securities & Exchange Commission has a rule under consideration to mandate disclosure of GHG emissions by publicly-traded companies. It is expected that the Final Rule could be issued sometime in Q1 2023.

This move no doubt will set off a firestorm in Red state territory, and among the congressional delegations from those states. For public companies operating in those states that have, with sizeable operations in the European Union, new ESG disclosure rules are also being put in place in the EU.

This year we will see significant conflict in the culture wars over climate change measures at the national, state and even city levels.

The Federal government leads now in addressing the climate crisis, and Red state congressional leaders could challenge to the SEC’s legislative authority (to enact corporate ESG disclosure rules) when the Final Rule is issued (bringing legislative and judicial action).

The G&A team selected the Top Stories (below) on these conflicts. We’ll keep you updated throughout 2023 on the culture war battles focused on climate change.

We are at an important inflection point in the effort to seriously address the climate crisis, and in ultra-partisan power circles now, the question posed is: which side are you on?

Top Story/Stories

• This group is sharpening the GOP attack on ‘woke’ Wall Street (The Washington Post) https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/01/30/climate-change-sustainable-investing/
• House Democrats launch sustainable investing caucus (The Hill) https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/3830314-house-democrats-launch-sustainable-investing-caucus/
• Disclosure Rules On Track for Issuance by June (Thomson Reuters) https://tax.thomsonreuters.com/news/new-climate-and-sustainability-disclosure-rules-on-track-for-issuance-by-june/
• Politicians Want to Keep Money Out of E.S.G. Funds. Could It Backfire? (The New York Times – subscription required) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/30/your-money/red-states-esg-funds-blackrock.html
• What’s Behind The ESG Investment Backlash (Forbes) https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinero/2023/01/29/whats-behind-the-esg-investment-backlash/?sh=5929816c3158
• Davos 2023: BlackRock U.S. inflows dwarf $4 bln lost in ESG backlash -CEO (Reuters) https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/davos-2023-blackrock-us-inflows-dwarf-4-bln-lost-esg-backlash-ceo-2023-01-17/

COP 27 in Egypt: The United States Got Back To the Table

Posted on December 2, 2022 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

November 2022

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

The top stories in ESG and sustainability in November included the coverage of the annual global climate meetings that took place in Egypt – COP 27 (the Conference of Parties), convened by the United Nations.

These meetings of about 200 sovereign nations’ leaders and other global influentials began in Rio de Janiero in 1992 (President George H.W. Bush was in his last year in office).

The position of the United States in the global talks (and the agreements that result) have see-sawed over the years in terms of staying at the table, and exerting leadership or not. The welcome news for 2022 is that the U.S. is back at the table. And at least for now, attempting to lead.

This year’s meetings saw President Joseph Biden drop in to address the gathering. ormer Secretary of State John Kerry, now the U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, appeared to be playing a much more visible role than was the case during prior years (during when the Trump Administration was in charge and moving away from the COP talks and the Paris Agreement of 2015).

It is fitting for the United States of America attempting to lead in the global efforts to address climate changes and the challenges posed — the U.S. is the world’s largest economy and the second largest emitter of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Use of oil and natural gas define the American economy and the culture of the nation. The US is a major producer of and user of fossil fuel products.

In his remarks at COP 27, President Biden “reclaimed” the country’s role as global leader in climate change actions and committed to help to address global warming at home and abroad.

The Biden Administration’s “Whole of Government” comprehensive approach to climate change was the centerpiece of his commentary to the gathered at COP 27.

Emphasizing the U.S. commitment to address climate change, President Biden told the summit participants: “I introduced the first piece of climate legislation in the United States Senate way back in 1986, 36 years ago. My commitment to this issue has been unwavering.

“And today, finally, thanks to the actions we’ve taken, I can stand here as President of the United States of America and say with confidence: The United States of America will meet our emissions targets by 2030. We are racing forward to do our part to avert the ‘climate hell’ that the U.N. Secretary-General so passionately warned about earlier this week. We’re not ignoring the harbingers that are already here.”

For domestic U.S. audiences, President Biden had this important news: “The United States became the first government to require that our major federal suppliers disclose their emissions and climate risks and set targets for themselves that are aligned with the Paris Agreement.

“As the world’s largest customer, with more than US$630 billion in spending last year, the government of the United States is putting our money where our mouth is to strengthen accountability for climate risk and resilience.”

However, while the U.S. government could leverage almost US$400 billions committed by Congress and the Administration to make investments in climate change solutions, “missing” are major investments to help other less-wealthy nations in climate change mitigation.

Not that President Biden was unsympathetic about helping other nations — . he has pledged to help developing countries with $11 billion each year to 2024 for transitioning to wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources.

Who Will Pay? A Question Floating Above the Conversations

“Reparations” was the a key word circulating at COP 27 — who will help the less fortunate nations to address climate change issues? The expectations of less developed economies is that the rich peers, who generate the carbon emissions that affect the climate, will come to the aid of the nations they are negatively affecting.

While the U.S. expresses ambitions to help, with a divided U.S. Congress (keepers of the purse strings), the U.S. is not likely near-term to commit funds for other countries to address their climate change challenges. The present state of affairs in US governance poses the question of whether the nation itself can continue on course to meet the goals of the “whole of government” approach to addressing climate change over changes of administrations.

The “reparations” are about “loss and damage”. As The New York Times pointed out in its coverage of the COP meetings – determining “loss and damage” funding is very difficult to define and loaded with potential legal liability for donating nations (such as for the U.S. and European powers).

Not that President Biden was unsympathetic about helping other nations. He has pledged to help developing countries with $11 billion each year to 2024 for transitioning to wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources.

One of continuing stories we see as this conference (COP 27) ends and the almost 200 nations that participate in the Conference of Parties are back at home dealing with climate change will be increasing focus among the participants on the “who pays” question going forward. The G&A team will be being staying tuned and will keep you updated as we move toward COP 28.

President Biden’s Comments at COP 27:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/11/11/remarks-by-president-biden-at-the-27th-conference-of-the-parties-to-the-framework-convention-on-climate-change-cop27-sharm-el-sheikh-egypt/

Springtime in North America – A Time Featuring Corporate-Investor Engagement and Proxy Voting on Critical Issues

Posted on October 31, 2021 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

April 20 2021 Spring is in the air! Proxy Season 2021 getting underway. So how did we get here? Some history and springtime news.

by Hank Boerner – Chair & chief Strategist – G&A Institute

Springtime comes to the USA and and the Northern Hemisphere countries with pretty flowers in bloom, trees budding, the onset of warmer weather. And…

Asset owners and their managers participating willingly or reluctantly in the peak months of corporate proxy voting season in North America.

Typically, the corporate issuer develops the resolution(s) for voting by the shareholder base – for example, election of slate of nominees for the board and approval of the outside auditing firm.

And then… there are the resolutions prepared by the shareholders, and these are usually not to board and executives’ liking.

Thought you might be interested in some of the history of shareholder activism. In the earlier days of shareholder activism certain “gadflies” would offer up their resolutions for inclusion in the voting (typically then, by individual investors).

Brothers John and Lewis Gilbert and a few others of similar thinking would gin up their resolution drafts and then face the challenge by the target company could be expected.

Some still around remember the ever-present at annual meeting Evelyn Davis, a Dutch Holocaust survivor with strong feelings and lots to say about how companies she invested in were being managed .

The Gilbert siblings operated “big time” in proxy season; they owned shares in 1,500 companies and attended at least 150 corporate annual meetings each year. T

They were often characterized as showmen (kicking up a storm at companies like Chock Full o’ Nuts and Mattel and other companies’ meetings.) Right after WW II John Gilbert got the SEC on the shareholders’ side; the regulatory agency started to require that companies include relevant shareholder resolutions in the annual proxy statement (of course certain conditions applied then and now).

Over time, this process became more sophisticated as many institutional owners put corporate equities in portfolios and steadily a certain number became activist investors. (

It really helped that the US Department of Labor leveraging ERISA statutes and rules reminded US institutional investors that their proxy was an asset and voting was a clear responsibility of the fiduciary-owner.

In 1988, Assistant Secretary of Labor Olena Berg reminded pension fund managers of the “Avon Letter” that posited that corporate proxies are a pension plan asset and should be taken seriously and voted on.

One of today’s proxy voting / corporate governance experts with wide recognition and respect is California-based James McRitchie (principal of Corpgov.net).

In a communication to the US SEC in November 2018, he explained that he and other investors engage companies on ESG issues “to enhance their long-term value and to ensure corporate values do not conflict with the long-term interests of a democratic society.”

He suggested: “Corporations should welcome shareholders into the capitalist system as participants in major decision.”

In proxy season 2021, the “crisis stories” of 2020 and earlier years continue as public dialogue at least in the form of shareholder requests / demands / expectations of the companies that are in the portfolio on important societal issues.

Climate change action, racial justice/injustice, diversity & inclusion, inequality – these are high on the list for this year’s voting.

We have selected three Top Stories for you on the themes of 2021 voting. The not-for-profit Ceres organization, long active in ESG proxy voting issues, highlights the focus on science-based emissions reduction plans, and corporate policies aligned with the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement. There are 136 climate-related shareholder-sponsored resolutions submitted to public companies as of April 2nd for 2021 voting.

The good news is that a number of these have been resolved in investor-corporate dialogues at Domino’s Pizza, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, and other firms. Others were withdrawn at Duke Energy, CSX, and Valero.

Climate-related themes for resolutions include “Banking on Low Carbon”, “Carbon Asset Risk”, and “Say on Climate”.

Long-time shareholder activist Tim Smith is Director of ESG Shareowner Engagement at Boston Trust Walden and member of the Ceres Investor Network. Ceres continues to track such resolutions and information is available at www.ceres.org.

The authoritative Pensions & Investments publication shares news about a new website — Majority Action’s “Proxy Voting for a 1.5 C World”.

Four key sectors are in focus: electricity generation, oil & gas, banking, and transportation, with summaries of corporate current emission targets, capital allocations and policy activity relate to climate change. (Reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 is an example of issue in focus.)

The web site offers recommendations for voting against director nominees at companies failing to implement plans “consistent with limiting global warming” by industry/sector.

In banking the web site names Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan Chase. Issues in focus overall include Climate Change, Community Development / Investment, Gender Equality, and more.

Third – the Yield Positive web platform offers excellent background on shareholder resolutions and the current state of affairs following the dramatic events of 2020 – racial inequality highlighted by the killing of George Floyd; worker health and safety protections in the Covid pandemic; climate change issues – with examples of the resolutions coming up for vote in 2021.

These include Home Depot – Report on racism in the company; Target – Report on/end police partnerships; Wells Fargo – report on financing Paris Agreement-compliant GHG emissions cut, and more.

The 2021 spring season of corporate proxy voting and then the voting at company issues to Fall 20231 will be closely followed by business media and of course, the global investing community. We will continue to share news and perspectives about this annual exercise of “shareholder capitalism”.

TOP STORIES – April 2021

It’s Proxy Season 2021: Investors Focus on Climate Action

Investors seek greater climate action in 2021 Proxy Season (Source: Ceres)
Shareholder Voting: Vote for Racial Justice, Climate Action, And Corporate Accountability (Source: YieldPositive)
Majority Action issues proxy guide on companies’ climate-change actions (Source: Pensions & Investments)

FYI

James McRitchie’s letter to the Securities & Exchange Commission, November 2018 – worth reading as background.
The Olena Berg profile published in The New York Times (August 1993) is a look at a fascinating operative in the investing world and in the public sector who helped to shape today’s corporate proxy season environment.
Fascinating look at Evelyn Y. Davis – 2018 The Washington Post obit: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/evelyn-y-davis-activist-shareholder-and-queen-of-the-corporate-jungle-dies-at-89/2018/11/05/b95f82c6-e10e-11e8-8f5f-a55347f48762_story.html
What is the Avon Letter? Brief summary: https://blog.bdti.or.jp/en/2014/12/20/avon-letter-historical-background/
Lewis Gilbert obit – 1993 – The New York Times – good history of activism in proxy season: https://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/08/obituaries/lewis-gilbert-86-advocate-of-shareholder-rights.html

Turmoil in the USA / Washington Capitol Terror Attacks – Corporate Sector Responses to Threats to the Nation

Posted on January 27, 2021 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

Prepared January 20 2021 – Inauguration Day in the USA

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

These are troubled times in the United States of America. After the national elections in November 2020, political and social rhetoric became even more heated and widepread sharing of rumors and lies intensified than even in the weeks leading up to the ballots being cast by well more than 155 million citizens in the 50 states of the Republic. (There are more than 200 million registered voters in all of the states.)

Moving toward the inauguration of the new president the major social media platforms unfortunately served as rioter assembly stations and important [negative] information sharing tools that helped to spread lies, rumors, and volumes of false and dangerous information. The large platforms stand accused now of having helped to enable many thousands of protestors to travel to and assemble in Washington, D.C. for a January 6 rally that quickly spun out of control.

There will likely be short- and longer-term fallout here: What was a growing public debate on the role of social media and the focus on tech companies at the center of controversy (think of Facebook, Twitter, Google, others) quickly became a public ranting from all sides of the political spectrum.

The tempo of the public policy debate has sharply increased: What actions should be taken to address concerns about the tech leaders and their role in spreading false and dangerous-to-democracy content? (Stay tuned to this important public policy debate in 2021.)

To recap what happened: On January 6th, 2021 a mob of an estimated 8,000-plus men and women attended a rally and then took the point to travel with an even larger group behind them, along the major thoroughfares that lead from the White House and nearby National Mall to the Capitol Hill complex that houses the U.S. Congress (the House of Representatives and US Senate) -– ranting slogans and waving their flags along a brisk and angry 3.6 mile march (4.8 kilometers).

By the time the government complex on the hill was reached the point of the mob was out of control. The “tip of the spear” leadership group quickly pierced the Capitol Hill ramparts and the mob poured in behind to do their damage inside the halls of Congress.

The mob -– characterized by many now as being in fact domestic terrorists -– swarmed the complex, confronted a police force numbering about 1,400, swept past those guardians and into the Capitol Building to wreak havoc, steal items such as the Speaker of the House’s office laptop, and destroy government property.

They were there for hours. And much of this was broadcast live, on various news platforms and including on social media — by participants!

The mob even seemed to be threatening the very lives of the Members of House and Senate — and it seems, the well-being and maybe the life of the Vice President of the United States (Michael Pence) who also served as presiding officer of the US Senate during the crucial vote to accept the 2020 Presidential voting results. (The mob’s intention was to overthrow Congress and change the vote outcome to make Donald Trump the winner.)

The widespread criticism of these actions was immediate; much of the American public was outraged. Anger was directed at the mob, at the social media platforms helping to spread the messages of the insurrection leaders and participants, at the President of the United States and his political allies for encouraging the unrest.

24/7, major news media published, broadcast and telecast news and the volumes of criticism — and, indeed the collective outrage of most of the nation – out to all of the nation and world.

A Day of Infamy for the USA – and Corporate Response

In Utah, the Deseret News described this in its headline as “Jan. 6, 2021: Another day that will live in infamy for Americans”.

An important sea change: The corporate community, including major players in financial services sector industries, quickly became very visible among the critics. For some companies the silence about the “Steal the Vote” protests was a form of diffidence or even support. That changed!

Prominent corporate leaders and their trade associations blasted the actions, of both rioters and supporters, and took (and continue to take) actions in response to the horror that they witnessed. We bring you highlights of some of this initial response this week.

Following the attack there was dramatically expanding news of what was to come as a new legislative and executive branch was taking shape -– the days after January 6th were climaxed by the inauguration of the new president and vice president on January 20th (done!) and the convening of a new US Senate leadership team (in process as we write this).

All of this news and opinion was being shared in the context of the continuing threat posed to the American nation by homegrown, domestic terrorists.

This is usually a time of great celebration of the peaceful transfer of power, a 200-plus year tradition in the USA that occurs every four years following the presidential elections. Instead, these January days became a time of sorrow and sadness and disappointment. All that was being reported out to the world as well.

The days leading up to the January 20th inaugural event had most Americans very jittery, with media reports of continued threats (such as possible physical harm to the national and state capitals, more heated partisan political talk, even the possibility of threats to human life posed by armed citizens in so-called ragtag “militias”).

There were more U.S. military members present in Washington DC on Inauguration Day to protect our capital city than were present in the Middle East conflict zones.

The ongoing turmoil poses a serious threat to the American Experiment in Democracy as well as to the long-term symbolism of the Capitol Hill complex that many citizens of America (and even many in the world) consider to be a shining city on a hill, the citadel of democratic rule.

With this commentary we bring you some highlights of the immediate corporate sector response, and what some see as the responsibility of the corporate leadership to help move the nation forward. The tempo of the corporate response is quickening and we’ll share more with you in our G&A Institute’s Sustainability Highlights newsletter and in this blog.

TOP STORIES

Here is some of the immediate Corporate Sector responses to the mob’s January 6 attack on the US Capitol – with specific corporate responses that target the financial of candidate campaigns. The corporation’s role in society is in even sharper focus now.

Looking forward: The news media is now also focused on the future – there is a new administration in place now, led by President Joseph Biden, VP Kamala Harris, and a House and Senate led by the Democratic Party. The focus on ESG issues is intensifying:

Advocates promising big push in Washington on all things ESG (Source: Pensions & Investments)
Why Socially Responsible Investing Is Likely To Gain Momentum Under Biden (Source: Forbes)

We will be sharing considerably more news along these lines in the days ahead. Stay Tuned!

About “Stakeholder Capitalism”: The Public Debate

Posted on December 11, 2020 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

Here is the Transition — From the Long-Dominant Worldview of “Stockholder Capitalism” in a Changed World to…Stakeholder Capitalism!

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

October 2020

As readers of of G&A Institute’s weekly Sustainability Highlights newsletter know, the shift from “stockholder” to “stakeholder” capitalism has been underway in earnest for a good while now — and the public dialogue about this “21st Century Sign of Progress” has been quite lively.

What helped to really frame the issue in 2019 were two developments:

First, CEO Larry Fink, who heads the world’s largest asset management firm (BlackRock) sent a letter in January 2019 to the CEOs of companies in portfolio to focus on societal purpose (of course, in addition to or alongside of corporate mission, and the reasons for being in business).
Then in August, the CEOs of almost 200 of the largest companies in the U.S.A. responded; these were members of influential Business Roundtable (BRT), issuing an update to the organization’s mission statement to embrace the concepts of “purpose” and further cement the foundations of stakeholder capitalism.

These moves helped to accelerate a robust conversation already well underway, then further advanced by the subset discussion of Corporate America’s “walking-the-talk” of purpose et al during the Coronavirus pandemic.

Now we are seeing powerful interests weighing in to further accelerate the move away from stockholder primacy (Professor Milton Friedman’s dominant view for decades) to now a more inclusive stakeholder capitalism. We bring you a selection of perspectives on the transition.

The annual gathering of elites in Davos, Switzerland this year — labeled the “Sustainable Development Impact Summit” — featured a gaggle of 120 of the world’s largest companies collaborating to develop a core set of common metrics / disclosures on “non-financials” for both investors and stakeholders. (Of course, investors and other providers of capital ARE stakeholders — sometimes still the inhabiting the primacy space on the stakeholder wheel!)

What are the challenges business organizations face in “making business more sustainable”?

That is being further explored months later by the World Economic Forum (WEF-the Davos organizers) — including the demonstration (or not) of excellence in corporate citizenship during the Covid-19 era. The folks at Davos released a “Davos Manifesto” at the January 2020 meetings (well before the worst impacts of the virus pandemic became highly visible around the world).

Now in early autumn 2020 as the effects of the virus, the resulting economic downturn, the rise of civil protests, and other challenges become very clear to C-suite, there is a “Great Reset” underway (says the WEC).

The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window opportunity to “reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.”

New ESG reporting metrics released in September by the World Economic Forum are designed to help companies report non-financial disclosures as part of the important shift to Stakeholder Capitalism.

There are four pillars to this approach: People (Human Assets); Planet (the impact on natural environment); Prosperity (employment, wealth generation, community); and Principles of Governance (strategy, measuring risk, accounting and of course, purpose).

The WEF will work with the five global ESG framework and standard-setting organizations as we reported to you recently — CDSB, IIRC, CDP, GRI, SASB plus the IFAC looking at a new standards board (under IFRS).

Keep in mind The Climate Disclosure Standards Board was birthed at Davos back in 2007 to create a new generally-accepted framework for climate risk reporting by companies. The latest CDSB report has 21 core and 34 expanded metrics for sustainability reporting. With the other four collaborating organizations, these “are natural building blocks of a single, coherent, global ESG reporting system.”

The International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC, another of the collaborators) weighed in to welcome the WEF initiative (that is in collaboration with Deloitte, EY, KPMG and PWC) to move toward common ESG metrics. And all of this is moving toward “COP 26” (the global climate talks) which has the stated goal of putting in place reporting frameworks so that every finance decision considers climate change.

“This starts”, says Mark Carney, Governor, Bank of England, and Chair of the Financial Stability Board, “with reporting…this should be integrated reporting”.

Remember, the FSB is the sponsor of the TCFD for climate-related financial disclosure. FSB is a collaboration of the central banks and treasury ministries of the G-20 nations.

“COP 26 was scheduled for November in Glasgow, Scotland, and was postponed due to the pandemic. We are now looking at plans for a combined 26 and 27 meeting in November 2021.” Click here for more information.

There is a lot of public dialogue centered on these important moves by influential players shaping and advancing ESG reporting — and we bring you a selection of those shared perspectives in our Top Stories in the Sustainability Highlights newsletter this week.

Top Stories On Davos & More

Measuring Stakeholder Capitalism: Towards Common Metrics and Consistent Reporting of Sustainable Value Creation (Source: World Economic Forum)
Better Business: What Are the Challenges in Making Business More Sustainable? (Source: World Economic Forum)
New ESG Reporting Metrics Released by World Economic Forum (Source: Journal of Accountancy)
CDSB Welcomes WEF Report on Common Metrics (Source: CDSB)
IIRC Welcomes Report Towards Consistent Reporting on Sustainable Value Creation (Source: IIRC)

And then there is this, in the public dialogue on Stakeholder Capitalism, adding a dash of “reality” from The New York Times:

Stakeholder Capitalism Gets a Report Card. It’s Not Good (Source: The New York Times)

Looking Back to Look Ahead – The Promise of Biden-Harris Administration to Return to the Hopes of Action on Climate Change Issues

Posted on November 9, 2020 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

November 9, 2020

By Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

For almost four l-o-n-g, long years we have been watching – and decrying! – the antics of the Trump Administration in the attempt to roll back vital federal environmental protections that have been put in place (and protected) by elected representatives of both parties over five decades.

It was President Richard M. Nixon – a Republican and conservative leader – who signed the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) into the law of the land. NEPA was established by the 91st Congress and became law on January 1, 1970.

This also established the President’s Council on Environmental Quality. What flowed thereafter was important…

…the Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) was created;
…The Clean Air Act was enacted into law;
…The Clean Water Act soon followed; and then
…Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); and
…”Superfund” for clean up of contamination (actually, CERCLA-Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act); and
…Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act; and
…Endangered Species Act; and
…Federal Insectiside, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act; and
…Energy Policy Act; and
…Chemical Safety Information, Site Security and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act;
…and much more!

Beginning almost immediately as the Trump Administration took charge of the EPA and other cabinet agencies, these historic legislative achievements were being undermined and protections whittled away.

There will be new environmental overseers coming to town in 2021 and the great hopes pinned on the Biden-Harris Administration include rebuilding the important rules, oversight mechanisms and enforcement of the laws/rules by EPA, Interior, Energy and other agencies.

The New York Times today outlined the first steps that could be taken – issuance of presidential Executive Orders (EOs) and President Memoranda that would undo the same mechanisms employed by President Trump and EPA political leaders to undermine environmental protection measures.

We read in — “Biden Will Roll Back Parts of the Trump Agenda With Strokes of a Pen” – that on Day One, we can expect action on climate change, writes Michael D. Shear and Lisa Friedman.

That starts with notice to the United Nations that the U.S.A. will rejoin the Paris Agreement.

The move to revoke Trump era EOs and re-issue Obama-Biden Administration orders can be immediate; or, President Joe Biden in 2021 can issue new orders along the same lines of prior EOs addressing climate change issues.

Important: The new Executive Orders would create important policies for the heads and rank and file members of the departments – Defense, EPA, Labor, Commerce, Interior, SEC, and many others that in some way directly or indirectly are affected by climate change.

Attitudes do matter – and Presidential Executive Orders to heads of agencies really matter!

2021 is looking like climate change matters will move to front-and-center on the public policy agenda. The Financial Times today pointed out that candidate Joe Biden set a policy of having a target to reach zero carbon

While Donald Trump led the effort to isolate the United States from world affairs, China moved to pledge net zero by 2060 and Japan and South Korea set net zero targets.

With the USA back on board, real progress can be made toward meeting Paris Agreement goals. Exciting to consider: The United States of America as once again a leader in the drive to make the world a safer, healthier place for billions of us!

For a reminder of the Trump moves in 2017 to reverse a half-century and more of environmental protection, here’s my March 2017 look at what was underway just two months into the new administration, with a new leader (Administrator Scott Pruitt) at the helm of the EPA.

Let’s go back to March 2017 – Just two months into the Trump Administration – with bad news on climate change all around!

https://ga-institute.com/Sustainability-Update/climate-change-nah-the-deniers-destroyers-are-work-white-house-attempts-to-roll-back-obama-legacy/

Rising Heat & Humidity, Rising Sea Levels, Up & Down Shifts in Crop Yields, More Large Fires, Huge Human Migration Within the United States -– What We Are Learning Today

Posted on September 30, 2020 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

September 24 2020

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

There is so much going on in the global sustainability space that we could draw an apt analogy – it’s “like drinking water not out of a straw but a fire hose!”

Every week our team seeks out the news, feature and research items that will help you stay informed on developments in corporate sustainability and CSR, sustainable investing, the actions of governments and civil society leadership, activists, academics & researchers…and more.

For the past two or three years the pace of these developments has accelerated and so created a long list of many “possibilities” to share with you. Sometimes, certain news jumps up and shouts at us from the print or digital page.

Example: This week we see a powerful accounting of the impacts of climate change as assembled by ProPublica, an independent, nonprofit journalism organization focused on the major issues of the day. The collaborating journalists – at ProPublica and The New York Times with support from the non-profit Pulitzer Center — focused on “the compounding calamities of climate risk” and the projected impact on the continental U.S.A. over the coming decades.

The issues “stack on top of one another”, they write. Such as rising heat, excessive humidity, oceans rising, very large fires, crop failures, economic damages, and more…scary projections for the 2040-2060 timeframe. (That is starting only 20 years, or 240 months, just 1,000+ weeks away!)

ProPublica worked with data from the Rhodium Group, which when presented in the context of the report, tell a story of warming temperatures, and changing rainfall that will drive agriculture and temperate climates from south to north, as the sea levels rise and vast amounts of coastlines “are consumed” and dangerous levels of humidity “swamp the Mississippi River Valley”.

All of this will profoundly interrupt the way that we in this, the world’s largest economy, will live and farm and work later in this century. This could be an era to be marked by mass migration within the U.S.A., far outpacing the dramatic “Great Black Migration” with large populations moving from southern states to the north, profoundly reshaping this Land.

The data is presented in maps and county-by-county review; you can in the visuals presented see how the temperate zone marches north and more…for corn and soy production, harvests will decrease and increase, depending on location in the country.

Economic impact? (Serious projections to consider today while we experience dislocation now due to the Coronavirus pandemic include rising energy costs, lower labor productivity, poor crop yields, increase in crime and more.

Which counties will rise and which, fall? The maps tell the story.

This reportage was so important and timely that the NY Times published a comprehensive wrap up this weekend in the Sunday magazine (reaching well beyond two million print and digital subscribers). We present this important reportage for you in the Top Stories.

Timeliness: This is also Climate Week, with important digital and some physical meetings around the world to focus on climate change challenges. We’re sharing some of the coverage of that as well.

Top Stories

New Climate Maps Show a Transformed United States(Source: ProPublica)
Climate Change Will Force a New American Migration (Source: ProPublica)

As “Corporate Citizen” Working In Many Lands – This Can Be Challenging, As Corporate Experiences With China Show…

Posted on September 22, 2020 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

Another in the series The Corporate Citizen and Society – the Dynamics of the Relationship

Started in Autumn 2019 – drafting interrupted – further edited in June 2020 – and posted in September 2020.

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

Running a multi-national business today is quite challenging, especially for firms with “footprints” of size in countries beyond the homeland.

Recently we have been watching some critical events…at times crisis situations…that senior executives are navigating.

Of course, corporate leaders are responding to the Covid-19 pandemic – and civil protests in many cities and towns related to equality issues and objections to current methods of policing. – and the economic dislocations of the virus and more.

For large multi-nationals with a presence in many different nations – sourcing there, or with local facilities in operation, or with products and services extensively used in the countries, with partnerships established with the public sector or NGOs – the challenge of being a “good corporate citizen” is ever-present. And sometimes can be daunting.

Challenges? Think about those related to continuing “freedom to operate” or “social license” or actual regulatory license to operate that may be placed in jeopardy in some way or another.

Something done, something said (or published or communicated)…with the foreign governments objecting to that “something”.– and threatening to or taking action to limit the freedom to operate.

When I began drafting this commentary last fall, tiny bits of news about the Coronavirus was just beginning to be reported out of China, with very sketchy details. By year end, It was a kind of flu. Nothing to worry about.

In the news headlines at that time (summer into fall 2019) there were more obvious challenges being presented to non-Chinese tech companies as the Hong Kong people protests continued to build momentum, and the Communist government in the mainland began to put pressure on the corporate sector (perhaps pressuring foreign companies’ media that had China news coverage).

An example of this kind of threat came to us in October 2019 involving Apple — concerning its vital relationship with the “two Chinas” – and with significant production and retail stores on the mainland — the People’s Republic of China being the #2 global market for Apple sales.

Other non-China-based companies have also being feeling the pressures as well.

Just offshore from mainland China, trouble was quite evident to the world in the former British territory of Hong Kong, which is a kind of status aparte of the mainland. (That is similar to the status of Aruba in the Caribbean Basin to parent country The Netherlands.) China has maintained a “one country-two systems” approach to Hong Kong. Until now.

China gained re-sovereignty over the Hong Kong territory in 1997 with the execution of a treaty at the end of the United Kingdom’s 99-year lease. The treaty terms were meant to assure separate governance systems for the more advanced Hong Kong economy and territory’s political system of that era.

Early in October 2019, an Apple device software application – Hkmap.live – developed by an outside firm and sold through the Apple Store, was removed from the on-line store.

The concerns: Reuters News and Associated Press reported that the Communist Party’s main newspaper (the People’s Daily) had singled out Apple for criticism for having the third party app for sale (and used on smartphones) that reportedly enabled Hong Kong protesters to track the local police activity.

The People’s Republic of China’s propaganda arm (the publication) said this was a no-no – that is, Apple making the app available — and Apple removed the app because it “violated the rules,” according to the Reuters/AP report at the time. (Reason: the app could be used to ambush police and by criminals where police were absent – the Apple rules allow for removal when the app is found to facilitate illegal activity.)

Apple had first rejected HKmap.live — then agreed to make it available — and then as the protest mounted (and mainland China responded), the app came off the App Store.

Was it the People’s Daily targeting of Apple and the app…or what the company said (“…many concerned customers in Hong Kong contacted the company…”).

An MSNBC commentator (Kif Leswing) weighed in, pointing out that Apple also removed a news stream (Quartz) because the content is illegal in China. Quartz was covering the Hong Kong democracy protests.

This is/was not a new issue: Back in 2017 several U.S. Senators presciently charged that Apple was enabling the Chinese government’s draconian moves on censorship and citizen surveillance. (Which moves, according to news reports of today, involves collecting everyone’s DNA and placing cameras everywhere to track everyone – plus developing a “social profile” for tracking the movements of citizens — and meting out punishment where officials think it is merited.)

We note here that Google also quietly removed Hong Kong protest content from the Android store — without creating Apple-type headlines.

But – for those who had downloaded the app, it continued posting locations of police patrols, so said The Los Angeles Times.

MSNBC noted that Apple more than other tech companies has a very close relationship with China (where 200 million-plus iPhones are made each year) and China is an important market as well with tens of billions in revenue in total from the “three Chinas”. (For Apple, China is the #2 market for iPhones.)

The third China: the separate nation of the Republic of China, more generally known as Taiwan, and persistently claimed by the mainland as part of its territory. “China” is a complicated subject for many company managements. And then there is Hong Kong and nearby Macao, outposts of China mainland.)

Apple CEO Tim Cook sent a memo to Apple’s 130,000 employees to explain the move. And we can assume try to calm nerves internally.

US Senator Josh Hawley (Missouri) quickly posed the question: Who is running Apple…Tim Cook or Beijing?

If We Don’t Agree — We Will Name & Share – Beware of the China Leadership

Brands targeted by China’s rulers have been subjected to campaigns (name and shame) to alert local customers of issues with a company or organization.

This could become more of a threat to non-Chinese companies as the government continues to develop the “social profile” of its citizens. And captures their imagines on street cameras. Which company’s products they buy could become a major issue in the western democracies!

Further complicating life for execs — we’ve seen the rise of internal protest inside U.S. tech companies, when employees don’t like the work being done for customers –particularly government agencies, police departments, intelligence agencies, military branches, etc.

Business-society relationships are complicated. Sports is a big business in the USA. The National Basketball Association is a powerful sports enterprise now with global reach and the ownership universe (the key decision-makers) is made up of corporations and wealthy partnerships that own local sports teams.

So – when the manager of the Houston Rockets briefly voiced support of the Hong Kong protests — the state TV in China stopped the broadcast of NBA games. Pow!

Senator Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R_Kentucky) quickly weighed in: “The people of Hong Kong have risked much more than money to defend their freedom of expression, human rights and autonomy. I hope the NBA can learn from that courage and not abandon those values for the sake of their bottom line.” (The NBA apologized for the Twitter comment of the Houston team GM. It’s not comfortable being in the middle of intercontinental cat fight.)

Complicating matters: Majority Leader McConnell’s wife – Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao – is a Chinese-American born in Taiwan. She was Secretary of Labor under President George W. Bush (and therefore an overseer of U.S. fiduciary investment policy-making at the DOL, affecting decisions of many large investors.) More complications in public and private sectors, we could say.

The Houston basketball team has been very popular in China and a star player (Yao Ming) played for the team. The U.A. Senate majority leader is a constant critic of China policies. Complicated matters for companies doing business in and with China!

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) also weighed in: “We’re better than this. Human rights should not be for sale and the NBA should not be assigning Chinese communist censorship.” Remember, his father fled Communist Cuba to come to the U.S.A.

The aggravated condition of U.S.-China trade relations under the Trump Administration is also complicating things.

One, Two, Three Chinas – It’s Complicated

We should explain that the “ Two Chinas” policy of the United States government should now be considered as “three,” as the identification has traditionally meant the relationship of [mainland] Communist China and the offshore democracy of the Republic of China (Taiwan) to the USA.

The Nationalist ROC has governed the island nation since the end of civil war of 1949 when many mainland refugees fled to Taiwan as the Communists came to power.

With China moving aggressively toward Hong Kong independence-of-a-sort, the Trump Administration and members of Congress are talking about possible actions to attempt to ensure some independence of the little territory.

Another dustup: Hollywood’s Dreamworks and a China production company (Pearl Studio) collaborated to create an animated feature – “Abominable” (about a young girl meeting the Abominable Snowman or “Yeti”). The film features Asian-American actor and was quickly a hit on release in America.

The film debuted in Vietnam as well – and was quickly pulled from viewing. A map of China used in the animation showed the “nine dashes” – a no-no in China’s neighboring countries.

The Nine-Dashes – Complicating Matters in the South China Sea

What are the 9 dashes, you might ask? (I’m sure that question rapidly went ’round in Dreamworks’ Hollywood offices — what the hell!.) China attempts to impose its authority over the South China Sea with a series of dashes (not firm lines) to imply control or ownership.

Which angers neighbors — Vietnam, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia, and other nations with access to the vital sea lanes. And those nations are trading partners of the U.S. — and American companies have significant presence in them.

How many people in corporate suites are tuned in to the vagaries or subtleties of China’s diplomacy!

We recommend that you read Foreign Affairs and China-scholar Robert D. Kaplan’s excellent book on all of this — red warning flags flying! — “Asia’s Cauldron: The South China Sea and the End of a Stable Pacific.” Published in 2014 – available on Amazon.

Simply stated – “China” – it’s a complicated subject for corporate citizens.

The China – United State of America Relationship

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has said that the USA-China relationship with shape the international order for the 21^st Century and the countries will have to deal with serious cultural differences (like freedom of expression and the right to protest and the freedom to trade etc.).

We saw that the investors in the USA shrugged off the Apple dustup with China over the Hong Kong protests. The share price was up $6.00 (3%) and moving toward an all-time high as the China-Hong Kong-APPL news stories appeared… this is a US$1 trillion-plus company! (Well, after the coronavirus crash of March 2020, we did have to check again and the price is back up in high $300s.)

Challenge: Being a Good Corporate Citizen When You Are a Guest

For large corporations, in general, worldwide, being a “good corporate citizen” in many lands is always a concern and a challenge as well as a competitive advantage (the brand and reputation and consumer favor as a 21st Century moat) — but things can be very complicated in the execution of citizenship on the ground.

Complicated Challenge: Some companies operate in literally all but three or four nations of the world, excluding Iran, North Korea and perhaps a few others from their operations and marketing activities.

As we first prepared to finally publish this June 2020, dusting off the earlier Fall 2019 draft, we were in the midst of a global epidemic (COVID-19), and U.S. and global civil protests — with the news coverage all but eliminating the news out of Hong Kong on some days.

But China actions focused on western business organizations are very much in focus today. Recently several large news organizations (corporate-owned, of course, and at the top, corporate board and C-suite managed) saw their in-country journalists booted out of China because the Communist leaders objected to their news coverage.

Journalists employed by The New York Times (owned by The Times Company); The Wall Street Journal (owned by News Corp); and The Washington Post (now owned by Jeff Bezos, head of Amazon) were told to leave mainland China and the “regulated territories” of Hong Kong and Macoa.

In September 2020 we learned that Australian journalists had fled China to avoid detention.

The leaders of the People’s Republic of China, it is said, are angered by coverage of the coronavirus (and the Communist government’s response); coverage of Hong Kong protests; and the reporting of “shadowy business dealings” of the country’s government leadership.

In addition, Time magazine (now owned by Marc Benioff, head of Salesforce) and the Voice of America – AND the expelled media organizations — were instructed to turn over information about their operations to the government minders.

U.S. Retaliation Complicates Corporate Life

This is not happening in a vacuum – in Washington, D.C., President Donald Trump designated the five China media organization operating in the USA as government functionaries of China, limiting the number of Chinese citizens who could work in the U.S. as journalists. The five are propaganda tools, the charge goes. Their activities are being restricted.

And so here in the USA the tit-for-tat is targeting China’s main news outlets –– Xinhua, CGTN, China Daily, People’s Daily, China Radio.

The Trump Administration is also moving to de-list publicly-traded Chinese corporations (traded on American stock exchanges).

In all of the dustups, as U.S. business leaders are deftly navigating the tricky shoals where the seas of statesmanship meet the rocks of ideology and pose challenges to strategy and business models.

Some of the challenges in the US-China relationships are about freedoms. Such as our First Amendment freedoms. There are no China equivalents.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt set out four important freedoms for the peoples of all nations during the early days of World War II — freedom of speech and religion, freedom from want and fear. These have long been central to many elements of U.S. and western capitalism — and foreign concepts to the rulers of present-day China.

American companies have to carefully navigate the differences when they do business in China, with China, and other non-democratic nations.

An example getting news coverage this week: The Walt Disney Company, a U.S.-based global entertainment and communications company. The company has been a very able and savvy global marketer since the earliest days of Uncle Walt’s cartoon studio in sunny California. Founder Uncle Walt always innovated and marketed that innovation far and wide.

Consider that Disney has a $5 billion-plus investment in Shanghai Disneyland Resort (opened 2016) — co-owned by the Communist government — and an older Disney park in Hong Kong. China is an important market for various activities of the company, including motion pictures.

And so the anxiety we logically could expect in the Disney offices as a new dustup occurred. The company created “Hulan”, a movie about an important character (female) in China mythology, with a China-born female lead and a female director, and scenes filmed in China for accurate depiction of locations for the story.

One snippet of the 1 hour/50 minute film — the usual (traditional) roll of credits at the end named a number of governments within China as assisting. Including Xinjiang, rolling by in a long list. Where other American companies operated. And where in 2018 as the film was underway, the local government was locking up tens of thousands of Muslims in concentration camps! And so the September 2020 criticism of The Walt Disney Company — including by two dozen members of the U.S. Congress.

There’s a thorough, fair and balanced recap of all of this in The New York Times, Sunday, September 13, 2020 (“How a 1 Minute of Scenery in ‘Mulan’ Put Disney in a Bind Over China”). It’s an important read for you, I think, in the context of U.S.-China relations and for non-China-based companies operating in the country.

Thinking about “open” communication not being permitted today in China we are reminded of President Thomas Jefferson’s perspective: “The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure.” – Thomas Jefferson letter to the Marquis de Lafayette.

So true some two centuries later in our great democracy!

Important Crisis Talk About PPE – Personal Protective Equipment – Excellence in Corporate Citizenship #3

Posted on March 23, 2020 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute and the G&A team — continuing a new conversation about the corporate and investor response the coronavirus crisis…continuing the second week of the conversation… Post #3 – March 23 – first of two

Introduction
These are the times when actions and reactions to crisis helps to define the character of the corporation and shape the public profiles of each of the corporate citizens. For companies, these are not easy times.

Many important decisions are to be made, many priorities set in an environment of unknown unknowns — and there are many stakeholders to be taken care of.

The good news: Corporations are not waiting to be part of the solution – decisions are being made quickly and action is being taken to protect the enterprise. This is no easy task while protecting the corporate brand, the reputation for being a good corporate citizen, watching out for the investor base and the employee base — and all stakeholders.

What are companies doing? How will the decisions made at the top in turn affect the company’s employees, customers, hometowns, suppliers, other stakeholders? Stay tuned to our continuing commentary.

* * * * * * * *

Important Crisis Talk About PPE – Personal Protective Equipment

About those face masks…”PPE’s” for this conversation include protective clothing, gowns, face shields, goggles, face masks, gloves, and other equipment designed to protect the wearer.

These could be those PPEs especially designed for medical use (such as for use in surgery or dentistry) that are fluid-resistant, loose-fitting and disposable, for example. Many of the devices are regulated such as by FDA, or reviewed and registered with the agency.

Or the N95 that many refer to could be the ubiquitous industrial mask, tye disposable type, used in many industries. It’s important to note that the medical version (“S”) is desperately needed in the medical crisis, of course.

And the corporate sector is stepping up to fill the gaps.

Many PPE items are in short supply. Right now, FDA is collaborating with manufacturers of surgical masks and gowns to “better understand” the supply chain issues related to the outbreak, and to deal with widespread shortages of products.

The U.S. government has strategic stockpiles of surgical (medical) N95s filtering facepiece respirators that exceed the manufacturers’ recommended “shelf life” — and so the Agency is considering whether or not to release the equipment during the crisis.

The good news is that many of the devices tested should provide the expected level of protection to the user. This varies by manufacturer and shelf life.

Manufacturers identified by CDC in its communications include 3M, Gerson, Medline/Alpha Portech, Kimberly-Clark, and Moldex. Other makers include Cardinal Health, Ansell, DACH, CM, Hakugen, Shanghai Dasheng, Yuanqin, and Winner. The CDC is providing guidance at: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/release-stockpiled-N95.html

(Note: Kimberly-Clark also produces toilet paper, towels and diapers – items flying off consumer shelves these days.)

The N95 industrial mask is a different situation than the “s” model designed for medical use, since the N95 model is made for industrial and construction use (as examples) and not for medical care.

In a crisis such as this one, “something” would be better than nothing, or having medical workers fashion masks out of materials to try to be safe.

The “perfect” solution here would be the enemy of the good, as the saying goes. And so millions of N95 are pressed into action and industry is responding with donations. And companies are in high gear to produce masks.

Background: With the masks generally in short supply, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is saying that the usual N95 respirators are not recommended for use by the general public to try protect themselves from respiratory diseases, including COVID-19. Also, people who are well should not be using surgical (face) masks to protect themselves from the virus.

Worn properly, the surgical mask (the “s”) can help to block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays or splatter containing viruses or bacteria – but not small particles in the air transmitted by coughs, sneezes or medical procedures because of the loose fit (face mask, on the face). And the masks are suggested to be used just once and then discarded.

N95 Respirators generally are protective devices designed to achieve a fit tight and serve to filtrate airborne particles, exceeding the protection of the face mask. The design forms a seal around nose and mouth – as explained, there are both industrial and surgical version.

The industrial version is used in construction, food preparation, manufacturing, etc. The surgical version is the N95s, tested for various medical applications. Manufacture of these devices is regulated.

The N95s is in great demand for healthcare workers and the CDC is urging “conservation” of surgical masks and gowns (such as use of reusable gowns vs. single use) while supplies are being made available to medical professionals.

* * * * * * * *

3M – 24/7 Production Lines In Action

The company is the largest producer of the N95 respirator face mask – the global output was just upped to the target of 1.1 billion or 100 million monthly. Inside the U.S. the company makes 400 million-plus N95’s in a year. Investment is now being directed to produce 30% more over the next 12 months.

The company is advising consumers not to show up in stores for the masks – production should be directed to the front lines, those caring for coronavirus-infected patients.

In response to the crisis, 3M is striving to produce 100 million masks per month going forward (the global output). Current production is 35 million per month. Healthcare workers will receive 90% of the production, and the rest will go to other sectors of the economy (like food, energy, pharm companies).

This week 500,000 respirators are going to sent to New York State/City and Seattle. The company also produces hand sanitizers, disinfectants and filtration solutions, and is working with government officials, customers and distributors worldwide to address the supply issue.

* * * * * * * *

Honeywell is expanding production of masks at its Smithfield, Rhode Island eye protection products plan to make N95 masks – and hiring 500 workers immediately to support the effort. The products will go to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for the national stockpile. (VP Michael Pence talked about this in the weekend briefing – orders for “hundreds of millions of masks” were placed through the Federal Emergency Management Agency.)

* * * * * * * *

Dr. Anthony Fauci (head of NIH Allergy and Infectious Disease) said fresh supplies of masks will be reaching medical professionals in days, not weeks.

Note that the U.S. Congress expanded the U.S. PREP Act to ensure both types of N95 respirators will be available to hospitals and healthcare workers.

* * * * * * * *

Challenge: Mike Bowen, principal of Prestige Ameritech (a mask maker in Texas), told The New York Times that 95% of face masks are made outside of the U.S. including by U.S.-headquartered companies that moves production offshore. He’s getting 100 calls a day now for his products.

Challenge: Even for those companies making masks in the United States, we cite the example of Strong Manufacturing in Charlotte, North Carolina, making of 9 million masks each month. The raw materials come from Wuhan, China – ground zero of the coronavirus outbreak. The materials are not arriving (yet) – the boxes are on the dock in China.

Challenge: Just one facility here in New York City (the Columbia-Presbyterian system typically would use 4,000 N95 makes per day — and is now using 40,000 per day and expecting to double that in the crisis.

* * * * * * * *

And so — the Corporate Sector Responds

Apple: CEO Tim Cook is going to donate millions of masks to healthcare workers in the U.S. and Europe (according to his weekend Tweet) – Vice President Michael Pence said that on the weekend White House Task Force briefing and the company CEO then confirmed this:

“Our teams at Apple have been working to help source supplies for healthcare providers fighting COVID-19. We’re donating millions of masks for health professionals in the US and Europe. To every one of the heroes on the front lines, we thank you” (CEO Tim Cook).

Tesla – CEO Elon Musk donated a truckload of PPEs (masks, gowns etc) to a UCLA Health center in California. We know this from Twitter tweeting. Musk told California Governor Gavin Newsom that 250,000 masks will be donated to California hospitals.

Hanes Brands – President Donald Trump at the weekend briefing talked about Hanes, the clothing maker, that is retrofitting factories to make face masks. The goal is to make 1.5 million masks a week, and working with Parkdale Mills America (they make the yarn for Hanes) and a consortium of companies, will ramp up to 5-to-6 million makes every week.

The company’s experts in supply chain and product development worked with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to develop the products and FDA has given its approval to masks that are not the traditional N95 but a prototype that can be used in N95s are not available.

The Hayner Hoyt Corp, a local company doing construction work at St. Joseph Health, in Syracuse (upstate New York) donated 1,200 face masks to the hospital. “I encourage other construction businesses and construction supply companies to see if they have any PPE that they can give to our healthcare providers during this critical time,” says the firm president, Jeremy Thurston. The hospital itself has reached out to doctors, dentists and vet offices to ask for donations of masks, gowns, eyewear, thermometers and other PPEs – something we will be seeing all over the nation to help to meet local shortages.

* * * * * * * *

G&A Institute team note: We continue to bring you news of private (corporate and business), public and social sector developments as organizations in the three societal sectors adjust to the emergency.

The new items will be posted at the top of the blog post and the items today will move down the queue.

We created the tag “Corporate Purpose – Virus Crisis” for this continuing series – and the hashtag “#WeRise2FightCOVID-19“ for our Twitter posts. Do join the conversation and contribute your views and news.

Send us news about your organization – info@ga-institute.com so we can share. Stay safe – be well — keep in touch!

Excellence in Corporate Citizenship on Display in the Coronavirus Crisis – #2

Posted on March 20, 2020 by Hank Boerner, Chairman & Chief Strategist

Many important decisions are to be made, many priorities set in an environment of unknown unknowns — and there are many stakeholders to be taken care of.

Employees – Customers – Suppliers – Regulators – Partners – Investors – Lenders – Communities – Civic Leadership.

As the the arms of the Federal government rush to aid the American society, CEO Chuck Robbins of Cisco put things in perspective in the story: “It’s critical that D.C. do something fast for companies – if you get 80 percent right today, it’s better than waiting a week and getting it 90% right.”

The good news: Corporations are not waiting – decisions are being made quickly and action is being taken to protect the enterprise – no easy task while protecting the corporate brand, the reputation for being a good corporate citizen, watching out for the investor base and the employee base — and all stakeholders.

This continuing commentary in the first week of the crisis breaking through the barriers of doubt and with reality setting in. What are companies doing? How will the decisions made at the top in turn affect the company’s employees, customers, hometowns, suppliers, other stakeholders? Stay tuned.

* * * * * * * *

Friday, March 20, 2020 – Day Four of the National Shutdown in the Coronavirus Crisis… The Second Roundup of the Day – Evening Today

Walmart Responds – Setting the Pace for Mass Retailing

Walmart is the largest retailer in the United States of America, with branded stores, Sam’s Club stores, warehouses and other facilities in literally thousands of communities across the continent.

During hurricanes, floods, superstorms and the like, the Walmart men and women have stepped forward to aid their communities in various ways.

The company has a web site up for employees, customers and stakeholders to detail “Walmart’s Response to COVID-19″ (link below).

Among the steps announced so far:

The message from the CEO-President John Furner (Walmart U.S.) to his team members: “We are so grateful for your hard work. It’s been incredible to see Walmart associates step up to the challenge of serving America this month. During a very uncertain and stressful time, you have done your jobs with calm, compassion and excellence.”

Full message here: https://corporate.walmart.com/newsroom/2020/03/19/walmart-u-s-ceo-john-furner-to-associates-we-are-so-grateful-for-your-hard-work

Walmart’s Walking-the-talk reward for associates:

Every full timer in stores, supply chain and HQs will receive $300 and part-timers $150 in the bonus (on April 2^nd). The bonus payments for Q1 will be accelerated to be paid later in the month of April – the amount will be just as if the first quarter goals were reached. No associate will receive less than the first Q bonus payment. Cost to WMT: US$180 million.
Overall, $550 million will be going to WMT associates during this critical period. 2019 Q4 payments were made this week – so Walmart team members will be seeing money coming in March 19 – April 2 – April 30 – May 28.

We’re hiring! More associates are needed – the doors are open for up to 150,000 temporary workers for stores, clubs, distribution centers and fulfillment centers – some may convert to permanent jobs after the crisis. The 2-week application process is now 24 hours. Information is at careers.walmart.com

The company beefed up its COVID-19 emergency leave policy to encourage sick employees to stay home, or those “uncomfortable”, those who are quarantined, and associates with the virus.

Today (March 20) from 6 a.m. to 7 a.m. employees had an “associates-only” shopping hour with the usual 10% discount expanded to include vital grocery items.

Consider the lift: This company has 2.2 million associates worldwide.

Walmart has a huge footprint across North America and stretched into parts of the world. Each week (in normal times) 265 million shoppers (customers and “members”) visit 11,500 stores under 56 banners in 27 countries and eCommerce websites.

Says CEO-U.S. John Furner: “Thank you again for what you’re doing – America needs Walmart right now, and we have been at our absolute best.

Bravo, Walmart associates, for keeping us supplied as best you can in this emergency.

You can keep up with Walmart news at: https://corporate.walmart.com/coronavirus

* * * * * * * *

Give Us a Few Hours and You Will Have Your Hand Cleaner

LVMH, the luxury brand marketer, met France’s call for more hand sanitizer in just 72 hours. On a typical day the Orleans, France factory produces perfume (Christian Dior etc). This Monday, reports The Financial Times, the first lines of hand sanitizer in plastic bottles rolled forth, headed for doctors and nurses in Paris hospitals.

The government of France called on industry to help – that was last Friday – and Monday the bottles began to head for boxes for delivery to the besieged hospitals. (LVMH – Louis Vuitton, Moet Hennessey is the largest company in France.)

The company intends to produce 12 tonnes (!) of the gel to 39 hospitals in Paris (the APHP”) over the coming days and two other production lines (Givenchy, L’Oise and Guerlain Brand, Chartres) are coming on line.

Secret to the ramp up: FT writer Leila Abboud explains that sanitizing needs three main ingredients – purified water, ethanol and glycerine – and the company had these at the ready as the equipment was set up (cosmetics and pharma products being close cousins). The company makes liquid soap, moisturizing creams for the usual products – Dior, Givenchy, Guerlain.

Said the company: “LVMH will continue to honour this commitment as long as necessary.”

* * * * * * * *

In related news The Financial Times tells us that other French companies have joined the battle.

BNP Paribas donated 500,000 masks to Paris hospitals.
Renault loaned 300 autos for medical purposes.
L’Oreal is retooling factories to make millions of hand sanitizers destined for nursing homes and hospitals.

Keeping in mind: Makers of luxury goods will be hard hit in the current crisis, especially as the lucrative China markets shut down – both for sales and for production. (LVMH is not reliant on China for production, but sales, definitely.)

* * * * * * * *

Closer to Home – Bacardi in Puerto Rico Steps Up

Bacardi Limited, makes of popular rums, will help to supply the ethanol required for making hand sanitizers. The distillery in Catano, P.R. where 80% of the rums are made, is partnering with Olein Refinery to product raw materials that will contribute to the production of the products.

Target: at least 500,000 of the 10-ounce units of hand sanitizers – and these will be donated to local communities. Said Jose Class – VP-Supply Chain & Manufacturing: “This is a family-owned business sand we know what it means to take care of a community in need. In the 158 years of [the family-owned] Bacardi, we’ve endured our share of challenging times and have learned that resilience, optimism and community are what will help us come out stronger.”

We’ll hoist a glass to that! Make it BACARDI® – GREY GOOSE® – DEWARS® – BOMBAY SAPPHIRE® – MARTINI® – and other brands of this corporate citizen in a U.S. territory still struggling to recover from a devastating superstorm.

* * * * * * * * *

Reuters / Ethical Corp: Moving to the Online to Share Important Perspectives & Guidance

Ethical Corp / Reuters Events create “Reuters Events Ethical Corporation” events. While in-person meetings will be a zero right now and probably at minimum for a while, that does not mean that the sharing has to stop.

The partners are organizing a new webinar series of 60 minutes each to “deliver solution to key sustainability challenges”. Senior event speakers from Europe and the USA will present at the upcoming sessions:

Investors Engagement: Measuring Your Social Impact
Traceability & Visibility: Successfully Map and Monitor Across the Tiers
Best Practice Sustainability Supplier Engagement
Climate Disclosures – Accurately Reporting Climate Impacts, Risks and Future Opportunities

G&A Institute regularly partners with Reuters / Ethical Corp and G&A’s VP Amy Gallagher is the point person who alerts our connections about upcoming Reuters / Ethical Corp conferences. She’ll keep us posted on the webinar series – watch for our communications through the usual channels.

* * * * * * * *

Global Reporting Initiative – Staying Safe and Continuing on Course

Tim Mohin, Chief Executive of the GRI, updated the global community plugged into the standards organization with news from Amsterdam (HQs of the GRI):

Most employees have transitioned to remote work arrangements to continue the operations.
Virtual solutions are enabling stakeholder engagements through online platforms.
All air travel is restricted for the GRI workforce.
Employees are being updated and informed through messaging apps, video, collaboration tools.

The GRI organization’s three priorities: (1) the wellbeing of all employees worldwide; (2) continuing the work with partners; (3) meeting new challenges with resilience, dedication and hard work.

You should know: Timothy J. Mohin was senior director of CR for Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and former chair of the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC) before joining GRI as chief executive. He’s the author of the best-seller, “Changing Business from the Inside Out: A Treehugger’s Guide to Working in Corporations”.

Earlier in his career Tim was founder/leader of Apple’s Supplier Responsibility program, and also led Intel’s sustainability functions.

G&A Institute is Data Partner for the GRI in the United States of America, the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland (an EU state). We value our long relationship with the GRI team and with Tim Mohin and our decade-long collaboration with GRI.

* * * * * * * *

The National Geographic Shoulders On – Facts and Science in the Forefront

The National Geographic Society has assembled the magazine’s COVID-19 “scientifically-accurate” information for subscribers (online). This includes text, graphics, photos, videos, “fake news” exposes, data sets, and much more. Also, resources for families (“for facts geared toward kids and ideas on how to occupy their minds while they are out of school – at “Nat Geo Kids”).

All of this is in addition to the usual broad fare of science, geography and other content that the National Geographic offers. The society’s national office in Washington D.C. is closed until at least March 31^st

Says NatGeo: “The work continues in these uncertain times. It must. Earth’s last wild places and millions of species are on the brink of being lost forever. If anything, this pandemic shows what happens when science and the experts are ignored. We need solutions to the biggest challenges threatening our planet now more than ever. We can’t afford to pause our work, and we’ll do the best that we can to build a better future together while maintaining the health of all.”

* * * * * * * *

G&A Institute Team Note:
We will continue to bring you news of private (corporate and business), public and social sector developments as organizations in the three societal sectors adjust to the emergency.

The new items will be posted at the top of the blog post and the items today in this first blog post will move down the queue.

We are creating the tag “Corporate Purpose – Virus Crisis” for this continuing series – and the hashtag “#WeRise2FightCOVID-19“ for our Twitter posts. Do join the conversation and contribute your views and news.

Send us news about your organization – info@ga-institute.com so we can share. Stay safe – be well — keep in touch!

Sustainability Update

Insights & Perspectives for Your Sustainability Journey

Tag Archives: The New York times

Beware, The Culture Warriors Have New Strawmen: Dangers of “ESG” and “Woke Capitalism”

COP 27 in Egypt: The United States Got Back To the Table

Springtime in North America – A Time Featuring Corporate-Investor Engagement and Proxy Voting on Critical Issues

Turmoil in the USA / Washington Capitol Terror Attacks – Corporate Sector Responses to Threats to the Nation

Looking Back to Look Ahead – The Promise of Biden-Harris Administration to Return to the Hopes of Action on Climate Change Issues

Rising Heat & Humidity, Rising Sea Levels, Up & Down Shifts in Crop Yields, More Large Fires, Huge Human Migration Within the United States -– What We Are Learning Today

As “Corporate Citizen” Working In Many Lands – This Can Be Challenging, As Corporate Experiences With China Show…

Important Crisis Talk About PPE – Personal Protective Equipment – Excellence in Corporate Citizenship #3

Excellence in Corporate Citizenship on Display in the Coronavirus Crisis – #2