Course on Reporting Environmental Performance

Every year, more companies across the globe are recognizing the importance of sustainability and CSR reporting for improved reputation and financial returns from customers and investors, in addition to increasing cost savings and risk aversion.  In 2008, 84 percent of the 250 largest global companies by revenue reported on sustainability performance, 75 percent of which used the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) framework for their reporting process[1].

The GRI provides a standard framework and guidelines for measuring and reporting an organization’s economic, environmental, and social performance.  The GRI framework yields reliable, credible and comparable metrics through its use of performance indicators in 6 key categories: Environmental, Human Rights, Labor Practices and Decent Work, Society, Product Responsibility, and Economic.  By reporting on the indicators most relevant to their operations, organizations can present their significant environmental, social and economic impacts and opportunities. 

But at first glance, the number of indicators within each category may seem intimidating and even confusing.  To help organizations understand what these indicators mean, as well as where and how to start their reporting process, BrownFlynn Learning provides its signature course, “The GRI Process”, and has recently partnered with Symbiotic Engineering to offer a comprehensive course on GRI’s 30 Environmental Indicators.

On February 11, 2010, BrownFlynn Learning will complement its training session for “The GRI Process” (February 9-10) with the one-day course focused on the GRI Environmental Performance (EN) Indicators.  Environmental engineers (bios below) will help participants garner an in-depth understanding of the standard protocols and methodologies for setting goals and for tracking and reporting environmental performance toward those goals.  Instructors will delve into how the environmental indicators relate to benchmarking, reporting GHG inventories and life cycle analysis, and addressing problems faced by participants.

“Beyond Green”

By Margie Flynn, Principal and Co-Owner of BrownFlynn

Originally published in Paperboard Packaging on March 1, 2009.

Many leaders today believe “going green” will enable their company to gain competitive advantage and market share, especially during a challenging economy. That may be true, but how deep does the commitment to “green” permeate their organizations? While manufacturing and selling environmentally friendly paperboard and packaging products can increase sales, generate efficiencies and potentially enhance your company’s brand, two key questions remain:

• Is your commitment to green authentic and core to your company’s culture and operations?
• Have you explored the benefits of thinking beyond green to reap the wide-ranging benefits of sustainability?

More consumers are seeking to buy green paperboard packaging, versus plastics and other forms of packaging, but that doesn’t mean they’re overlooking a company’s true intention in selling such products. If a company, on face value, appears to be committed to “green” environmental practices based on its product marketing, yet the majority of its operations and manufacturing processes are brown (far from green), then the company is “greenwashing.”

Greenwashing triggers increased scrutiny and criticism by a multitude of key stakeholders, including customers, shareholders, advocacy groups, and many more. Therefore, before going too far down the green path, be sure to align your internal practices with your external actions and intentions.

But, why stop at just green? Think beyond green. Think sustainability. Companies integrating sustainability into their business operations recognize the convergence of environmental, social and economic values will truly set them apart from the competition. In doing so, your company can create value for customers by providing packaging solutions they want and need to enhance their lives while reaping the benefits of sustainability.

A good example is MeadWestvaco Corp., named to the Dow Jones Sustainability Index for the fifth consecutive year, which believes sustainability is both a business strategy and an ethical imperative. The company sees it as the driving force behind its innovative products and environmentally responsible manufacturing processes. Most importantly, however, it describes sustainability as “the foundation of a company built on integrity, accountability and stewardship.”

In this tough economy, however, does it pay to be sustainable?