Lessons from Gothenburg

After returning from the 6th Lifecycle Management Conference in Gothenburg, where I delivered one of the keynotes dedicated to “Sustainability Beyond Growth”, I noticed that some of the talks and topics really stuck with me. Especially two presentations remain notable. One was from Danone and their new tools for calculating their Carbon Footprint in the supply chain. With their yoghurts they can now see perfectly clear that the “original producers” aka “the cows” are responsible for most of it. I asked a very simple question: if they have ever calculated different scenarios, what would for example happen if Danone made a switch to non-animal based inputs like soy or others. Apparently there are some people at Danone thinking about these issues. However, this would then involve developing a new marketing strategy and attracting the consumers who are used to dairy products away from them. Without somehow influencing consumers such a change in the supply chain that would really lead to a significant reduction in Carbon Footprint is not possible. Strangely this remains a touchy issue for companies, although they influence consumer behavior all the time and there is rarely any fuss about that. This leads to the second talk I enjoyed very much, the one from Unilever. Since the appointment of Paul Polman as new CEO in 2009 Unilever moved a great deal towards greater awareness of their sustainability impact and responsibility. They now calculate their Carbon, Water, and Waste Footprints for products in their different brands. By doing so they found at that in the case of CO2 almost 2/3 of their ecological impact comes from consumers using their products, which means that Unilever can only control 1/3 directly. If they want to be serious about their responsibility towards the natural environment, they have to do something about the 2/3 which also involves focusing on consumer behavior. Half of this Carbon Footprint imposed by consumers is due to shampoo and other hygiene products used in the bath room, especially because of showering for too long, using too much water and electricity to heat the water. It would be a “natural” expansion of their brands to go into sanitary equipment like water-saving shower heads, probably giving away discount vouchers for them with the purchase of a Unilever shampoo. They could also move a step further and provide some form of energy saving consulting for end consumers or even provide some form of “green” water and electricity. My conclusion from these talks and the discussions are that in order to take up corporate responsibility, companies need to focus on consumer behavior, expanding their profile towards that and engage more actively with them and make real change on the ecological front happen. Just looking on the part of the supply chain that they can control directly does not suffice. And maybe by expanding the view towards the consumer there is even a business opportunity waiting. If the companies on the pitch are not doing it, I am sure that some new competitors will.