Tag: corporation

Interview: ‘The Better World Shopping Guide’

  • (Photo provided by Dr. Ellis Jones)

A lot of people want to know what
they can do to be more environmentally friendly.
Ellis Jones says you make a vote on environmental
issues every time you pull out your wallet.
Jones is a sociologist at the University of
California Davis. And he’s written a pocket-sized
booklet called ‘The Better World Shopping Guide’
that grades companies that make the things we buy.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham talked to
him about the guide:

Transcript

A lot of people want to know what
they can do to be more environmentally friendly.
Ellis Jones says you make a vote on environmental
issues every time you pull out your wallet.
Jones is a sociologist at the University of
California Davis. And he’s written a pocket-sized
booklet called ‘The Better World Shopping Guide’
that grades companies that make the things we buy.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham talked to
him about the guide:

Ellis Jones: “I think that people will use this guide to make sure that the companies that
are doing good work get their dollars. And the companies that are not doing good work,
they don’t get their dollars until they improve.”

Lester Graham: “I chose three topics. One of them is gasoline. No one gets an A+? But
you did give an A to Sunoco and you gave an F to Exxon-Mobile. Can you tell me really
quickly what went into those grades?”

Jones: “It includes everything from how polluting their petroleum refineries are, what
their human rights records are when they deal with communities abroad, how they deal
with consumers, what their advertising is like and how they do or don’t ‘greenwash’ – to
really give a sense of, you know, the difference between the good guys and the bad guys
in gasoline.”

Graham: “I also looked at bread, and you gave an A+ to local bakeries.”

Jones: “Supporting a local bakery is really about as good as it gets. Far above and
beyond what you can get supporting even the most organic bread company.”

Graham: “The third thing I looked at was water, because bottled water is such an issue
these days. The A+ was given to tap water, which, in most communities, is as good as
anything you can buy in a bottle.”

Jones: “The most powerful difference a consumer can make is actually avoiding the
product all together. So, anything to really minimize the impact because this industry
itself is inherently problematic.”

Graham: “Just casually flipping through looking at who rated an F in your guide, often it
seemed like it was the most recognizable name. Kraft, Nabisco, Libby’s. Those kinds of
companies. Why is it these really large corporations tended to do so poorly in your
guide?”

Jones: “Well, you know, I think this really points out a kind of inherent problem within
our current economic system. And that is that the way to get ahead in the system is to
grow larger, to gobble up smaller companies, to basically out-compete the other
companies around you by cutting costs wherever you can by using larger economies of
scale. And the process that gets lost in the system is the impact on the people and the
planet.”

Graham: “I’m wondering how this changes your view of things when you go shopping
now.”

Jones: “Well, let me tell you, I really have put in as much research as a human being can
into this. And I am still filled with questions. These questions are out there and we need
to keep companies accountable and the government accountable to be able to provide us
with good data so we can make smart decisions as consumers.

Graham: “So your guide doesn’t let us off the hook, we still have to do some of our own
homework.”

Jones: (laughs) “Exactly. We have to actually make do with the information that we
have now, make the best choices available, and then as new information comes in, then
we’re responsible to make even better choices. But in that process we have to build in
quite a bit of forgiveness, because one thing this book is not about being perfect or pure
in the world. It really is about trying to make the best choice at any given time in any
given place.”

Related Links

Study: Going Green Without Going Broke

  • A study finds that companies can be environmentally friendly and still make a profit(Source: Man-ucommons at Wikimedia Commons)

Critics of environmental regulations
often say the restrictions are bad for a
company’s bottom line. But Rebecca Williams
reports a new study finds companies can find
ways to offset the costs:

Transcript

Critics of environmental regulations
often say the restrictions are bad for a
company’s bottom line. But Rebecca Williams
reports a new study finds companies can find
ways to offset the costs:

Researchers looked at more than 2,000 manufacturing plants in seven countries.

Nicole Darnell is an assistant professor at George Mason University and the
study’s author.

She says it’s true that the tougher the regulation, the more it tended to lower a
company’s profits. But she says some companies were able to break even.

“Those companies that are proactive and seek to do right by the environment
can offset or eliminate the cost of regulation and potentially get ahead of the
curve.”

Darnell says that’s still a pretty rare case. But she says some of the most
successful cases are companies that reduce energy and water use in their
manufacturing processes.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Toxic 100 Companies

  • A layer of smog over upstate New York at sunset on October 21, 2000 (Photo courtesy of the Earth Science and Image Analysis Laboratory, Johnson Space Center)

Researchers have identified the top corporate
air polluters in the country. Mark Brush reports:

Transcript

Researchers have identified the top corporate
air polluters in the country. Mark Brush reports:

The Environmental Protection Agency identifies what factories around the country are
polluting. But sometimes it’s hard to know who owns those factories.

Researchers at the University of Massachusetts sorted that out. They name the
companies on their Toxic 100 list. Turns out – a lot of the companies that make the most
money, are often making the most pollution.

DuPont, Nissan Motor, Archer Daniels Midland, the Bayer Group, and Dow Chemical
top the list.

Michael Ash is the co-director of the Political Economy Research Institute. He says
everyone has the right to know who is polluting their air.

“So in terms of the citizen seeing this report, I hope that she or he could use this as a tool
for thinking about exposure in her own community and to limit that exposure.”

But to limit your exposure – Ash says you first have to know what company is
responsible.

For the Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Big Biz Snapping Up Green Companies

Clorox is best known for selling bleach. But the company
recently purchased the natural cosmetics line Burt’s Bees.
That billion dollar sale is part of a growing trend of big multi-
nationals buying up small natural products companies. Julie
Grant reports:

Transcript

Clorox is best known for selling bleach. But the company
recently purchased the natural cosmetics line Burt’s Bees.
That billion dollar sale is part of a growing trend of big multi-
nationals buying up small natural products companies. Julie
Grant reports:

Matt Kohler is a brand manager for Clorox. He says every
day the company is getting greener. It recently bought Burt’s
Bees, which is known for its beeswax lip balms, lotions, and
shampoos. But nearly as important to many people – is that
the company was started by a man who just loved tending
bees. They like seeing a picture of the thick-bearded bee-
man Burt Shavitz on each label. Clorox’s Kohler says
consumers want to buy into that ecologically minded spirit.

“Well, I think if you look at marketplace right now, and where
we’re seeing growth, two of the major trends that are driving
growth, one is health and wellness, and then the second
piece is around sustainability. The nice part is where you
can have products that actually overlap both of trends. They
cover health and wellness and they cover sustainability at
the same time. That’s kind of the sweet spot for growth in
company.”

Kohler says Clorox can help Burt’s Bees – by getting it on
the shelves at Wal-Mart and other big stores. But he says
Burt’s will remain semi-independent…so it can maintain its
own spirit and culture.

“I’m excited about it. I think it really offers not just potential
growth for company. But products that we love and believe
in and that consumers are passionate about.”

But the online buzz about the purchase has not been
favorable. A health blog on The Chicago Tribune
website is similar to many others. Comments range from,
quote, “Say it ain’t, so,” to “I was horrified,” to “We will be
dropping Burt’s from our shelves since we don’t feel the
‘mission’ of the new owners aligns very will with the mission
of our retail operations.”

“You know it’s certainly raised a lot of eyebrows, I think,
within the environmental community.”

Alex Scranton is with the group Women’s Voices for the
Earth.

“I think a lot of people are looking at it differently because
Clorox does own it. And they’re a little bit concerned that
Clorox may not be able to keep to all the commitments that
Burt’s Bees originally had. So I think there are certainly
some consumers who are wondering where the
accountability is and how do we make sure that Burt’s Bees
stays as true as it had been?”

There have been lots of similar buyouts of natural products
companies in recent years. Colgate-Palmolive, one of the
biggest oral care companies in the world, purchased Tom’s
of Maine, a niche toothpaste company known for decades
for using only natural ingredients. Leading cosmetics
company Estee Lauder acquired Aveda, an environmentally
friendly skin and hair care products line, and multinational
giant Unilever bought socially-conscious Ben and Jerry’s ice
cream company.

Tom Lyon is the Chair of Sustainable Science, Technology,
and Commerce at the University of Michigan Business
School. He says the bigger companies can give smaller
companies stronger financial security without changing the
products. But in some cases, like at Ben and Jerry’s, lots of
employees leave.

“They don’t feel that the Ben and Jerry’s that operates within
Unilever is the same company, the same small company,
that it was years ago. And it’s not. Small companies have
to adjust when they’re bought by larger entities. And the
culture is going to change.”

Lyon says the sense of shared commitment at a small,
socially-conscious startup company can make it feel like a
family. He says many people attracted to that type of
workplace aren’t at home in a large conglomerate. So he
says Ben and Jerry’s, for example, lost lots of its committed,
innovative employees.

As consumer demand for natural products grows, Lyon
expects more big corporations will buyout small, green
companies in the future.

“And every time it happens we’ll feel a little bit bad about it.
But I think the consolation is that we’re gradually seeing the
overall market become much greener. And so we take a
little comfort in that.”

JG: “Why do you think we feel bad about it?”

“When we see a small company get bought up I think we feel
like there’s a loss in the culture somewhere. It’s almost a
kind of biodiversity that’s lost. And yet there are some gains
at the same time as that product becomes more widely
available.”

As Burt’s Bees becomes more widely available, Clorox is
anticipating growth from Burt’s. Like a lot of big corporations
that are acquiring smaller green companies, it’s expecting to
cash in on the growing interest in the ideals and practices
that built those small environmentally-friendly companies.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

Putting a Price Tag on Urban Trees

  • Volunteers with the Greening of Detroit plant about 4,000 trees each year in the city. (Photo by Sarah Hulett)

Money might not grow on trees. But researchers at a think tank devoted to saving America’s forests say dollar signs can be attached to all those oaks, maples, and sycamores. They’re hoping their environmental calculus can help convince local governments that it’s in their best interest to protect the trees they still have, and to plant new ones.
The GLRC’s Sarah Hulett reports:

Transcript

Money might not grow on trees. But researchers at a think tank devoted to saving
America’s forests say dollar signs can be attached to all those oaks, maples, and
sycamores. They’re hoping their environmental calculus can help convince local
governments that it’s in their best interest to protect the trees they still have, and to plant
new ones. The GLRC’s Sarah Hulett reports:


If trees could unionize, they’d be able to put together a pretty compelling case for hefty
compensation packages from the cities where they work. That’s the general idea behind a
series of reports put together by the advocacy group American Forests. The organization
looked at the amount of tree-covered land in several US cities and for each city, it put
together a dollars-and-cents case for their protection.


Trees in Detroit got a recent appraisal from the group. Trees shade more than 31 percent
of the city. Besides helping to keep the city cool, the report says Detroit’s trees take out
two million pounds of pollution out the air every year. That’s worth about five
million dollars. And it said if the city’s trees were gone, the city would have to build 400
million dollars worth of storm water drains. That’s because trees act as buffers during
heavy rains, and help control flooding.


Cheryl Kollin is the Director of Urban Forestry at American Forests. She says the bottom
line for politicians and city planners is money. She says they’re not going to save trees
just because they’re nice to look at:


“And I think it’s really building that awareness that trees — as wonderful and beautiful as
they are for their aesthetic qualities — it’s so important to connect the ecological
properties that they have and the economic benefits they provide. Because it really is going to
be that economic argument that makes decision-makers do things differently.”


Like a lot of cities, Detroit relies on a non-profit group to raise money for urban
reforesting. Today, the Greening of Detroit is planting trees around a recreation center in
one of the most polluted areas of the city, where diesel soot from heavy truck traffic
contributes to a high asthma rate.


Rebecca Salminen-Witt is the director of the Greening. She says this is a critical time for
this struggling rust belt city:


“We want to see some development in Detroit. We want to prove to outsiders that good things are
happening here in a visual way. Any development is good development, right? And, you know, that
is simply not true.”


Witt says as the city seeks to rebound, the focus can’t just be on new buildings. She says
it’s important that planners and developers figure trees and green space into Detroit’s
future and she says the American Forests’ economic data and satellite images will help
her make that case:


“Having those statistics, and having that visual representation of this is what it looks, you know, here’s your
heat island effect with trees and without trees.”


That visual picture of tree loss proved especially powerful in the nation’s capital.
American Forests surveyed Washington, D.C.’s trees in 1999. Its report said the city lost
nearly two-thirds of its tree cover between 1985 and 1997.


The Washington Post published the before-and-after satellite photos. They showed huge
swaths of black gobbling up what a dozen years earlier looked green from far above the
earth. It looked like a cancer had wiped out the healthy parts of the city whose slogan is
the “city of trees.”


“That got the attention of a variety of people. One person in particular was Betty Casey.”


That’s Dan Smith of the Casey Tree Endowment Fund. The group was established thanks
to a 50 million dollar contribution from Betty Casey, the widow of developer Eugene B.
Casey:


“And I believe the contribution was if not the largest gift ever for environmental action,
certainly one of the largest.”


That sort of cash gift is a dream for most cities. But the Greening of Detroit’s Rebecca
Salminen-Witt says she does expect to be able to use the information from American
Forests to raise money. And she says it will also help her small organization figure out
which parts of the city are the most in need of trees:


“We have to decide where we’re going to allocate our resources. And having a tool that makes
allocation of resources in an area where there’s a great need easier, or make more sense, is
really important to a non-profit organization.”


Witt says her first pitch will be to the corporations and civic leaders planning a
redevelopment along Detroit’s riverfront. Witt says the plans she’s seen call for some
trees and green space. But armed with satellite pictures and economic data, she hopes
she’ll be able to make the case for a few more trees.


For the GLRC, I’m Sarah Hulett.

Related Links

Putting a Price Tag on Urban Trees (Short Version)

A non-profit group devoted to saving America’s forests is putting a dollar value on cities’ trees in an effort to convince local planners
to save existing trees and plant new ones. The GLRC’s Sarah Hulett has this report:

Transcript

A non-profit group devoted to saving America’s forests is putting a
dollar value on cities’ trees in an effort to convince local planners
to save existing trees and plant new ones. The GLRC’s Sarah
Hulett reports:


The group American Forests has compiled reports for more than
two dozen US cities. The studies use satellite images to see how
most cities are losing trees over time. They also put a price tag on
the work trees do for a city.


Rebecca Salminen-Witt is the director of a non-profit tree planting
group called the Greening of Detroit. She says people appreciate
the beauty of trees. But she says they need to be shown there’s an
economic need for trees:


“They want us to come, they contact us constantly, they give us
their time and their money. So we know how important it is to
them. But the evidence we really have is anecdotal.”


American Forests says it can show that cities’ trees can be worth
hundreds of millions of dollars for the work they do cleaning
pollution out of the air and helping to control storm water.


For the GLRC, I’m Sarah Hulett.

Related Links