The countries most vulnerable to climate change eked out a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/countries-agree-loss-damage-fund-final-cop27-deal-elusive-2022-11-20/" target="_blank">historic deal</a> at COP27 in Sharm el-Sheik, Egypt, as wealthier nations finally agreed to pay into a so-called “<a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2022/climate-finance-cop27-human-rights/756856" target="_blank">loss and damage</a>” fund that will provide payments to poor nations for losses and damages associated with disasters related to climate change.

Vulnerable nations are often the smallest-emitting countries, and for years they have been petitioning historically wealthy, high-emitting countries to help pay for natural disasters linked to climate change. Leading up to COP27, leaders from developing countries promised that the annual climate conference would not end with a final agreement unless their demands for loss and damage payments were met, and they emerged from the negotiations victorious. However, while negotiators agreed to help fund climate-related restitutions for vulnerable nations, they could not agree on language related to the phasing out of fossil fuels, so progress on global carbon emissions reductions remains stagnated.

<h2>Funding for loss and damage — and climate change adaptation</h2>

As the largest historical emitter of greenhouse gasses, the United States opposed loss and damage funding, because it feared that a commitment to funding climate damage mitigation in vulnerable nations could be construed as an admission of liability. However, as negotiations ran overtime, countries opposed to loss and damage funding, primarily the U.S. and European Union member nations, capitulated. The fund is likely years away from being operational, as negotiators have yet to determine who will oversee the funds and how they will be dispersed. 

Governments also made significant advancements in <a href="https://unfccc.int/news/cop27-reaches-breakthrough-agreement-on-new-loss-and-damage-fund-for-vulnerable-countries" target="_blank">adaptation funding</a> negotiations. Adaptation planning helps vulnerable countries become more resilient to climate change, and countries pledged over $230 million to the United Nations Adaptation Fund while at COP27. However, the U.N. estimates that it will take $4 billion to $6 billion to transition to low-carbon economies and adapt to a warming climate, and some participants expressed concern that developed countries have never met previously made financial commitments to fund climate transitions and adaptation measures in poor countries. 

<h2>COP27’s omission of emissions </h2>

Unfortunately, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/20/cop27-agrees-to-historic-loss-and-damage-fund-to-compensate-developing-countries-for-climate-impacts" target="_blank">approving loss and damage funding</a> came at the cost of updating emissions reductions targets. Language about phasing out the use of fossil fuels was rejected by oil-rich nations, and the agreement lacked an acknowledgment that global emissions must peak before 2025 to keep global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. 

At the <a href="https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2022-11-19/statement-the-secretary-general-the-conclusion-of-cop27%C2%A0-sharm-el-sheikh%C2%A0%C2%A0" target="_blank">close of the conference</a>, U.N. secretary general Antonio Gutteres expressed his disappointment in the outcome and said, “We need to drastically reduce emissions now – and this is an issue this COP did not address. A fund for loss and damage is essential – but it’s not an answer if the climate crisis washes a small island state off the map – or turns an entire African country to desert. The world still needs a giant leap on climate ambition. The red line we must not cross is the line that takes our planet over the 1.5 degree temperature limit. To have any hope of keeping to 1.5, we need to massively invest in renewables and end our addiction to fossil fuels.”

Current climate pledges and targets place the world on track to hit 2.5 degrees Celsius of warming by the end of the century. Prior to COP27, the 193 nations that signed the Paris Agreement were required to update their current climate targets, known as Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs, to keep emissions in line with a 1.5 degree Celsius warming limit. However, <a href="https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/11/23/cop27-whats-next-climate-now-debate" target="_blank">only 29 countries did so</a>. 

<h2>Where do we go from here? </h2>

While loss and damage funding is an enormous climate victory and an important milestone in the global fight against climate change, the omission of language surrounding the phasing out of fossil fuels and the need for drastic reductions in emissions is an embarrassment for COP27. Organizers dubbed COP27 “<a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2022/keep-paris-agreement-alive/758361" target="_blank">Implementation COP</a>,” but in reality, as countries ignored their commitments to update their NDCs and curb emissions, and lead negotiators refused to address fossil fuels as the main source of greenhouse gas emissions, there was little implemented that will slow humanity’s race toward catastrophic climate outcomes.

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/cs8Xa4t1hvc" target="_blank">Melissa Askew </a>via Unsplash

COP27 Addressed Some Effects, but Not Causes, of Climate Change

Climate-related disasters and natural hazards push 26 million people into poverty each year, according to the <a href="https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/we-can-do-more-help-countries-deal-climate-disasters" target="_blank">World Bank</a>. The plight of these vulnerable communities worsens without funding, technical skills and access to reliable sources of energy and electricity so citizens have the tools necessary to take on climate change.

In 2020, U.S. environmental nonprofits received only 2 percent of all charitable dollars, as discussed earlier this year by Michael Thomas of <a href="https://qz.com/2115902/climate-charities-deliver-the-most-charitable-bang-for-the-buck" target="_blank">Quartz</a>. But funding is only a small part of the equation. To accomplish long-term change, equipping these organizations with the tools and expertise necessary to drive societal outcomes is even more important. There is a huge need for these resources, and therefore, organizations must step up to help make an impact and effectively address climate change. 

<h2>A formula for taking on climate change</h2>

The power of science, technology and innovation can help communities most exposed to environmental hazards become more resilient in responding to climate change. 

While digital transformation is an important component of success for environmental organizations, <a href="https://omdia.tech.informa.com/OM020190/The-Omdia-Digital-Transformation-and-Innovation-Compass-A-Strategic-Growth-Tool" target="_blank">research from Omdia</a> indicates that up to 70 percent of existing digital transformation projects fail to meet their objectives. 

When it comes to communities and organizations working to respond to climate change, failure is not an option. Helping to ensure these groups can succeed is one of the most impactful ways organizations can help tackle these pressing challenges. 

<h2>Collaboration for transformation</h2>

In order to maximize success, addressing these issues must be a collaborative effort. We need to bring together the private sector, non-profits, governmental entities and individual employees.

For example, the <a href="https://www.ibm.com/impact/initiatives/ibm-sustainability-accelerator" target="_blank">IBM Sustainability Accelerator</a> is the company’s initiative to help global organizations and locally led environmental efforts build needed digital capacities and meet their goals. The accelerator leverages IBM technologies, such as hybrid cloud and artificial intelligence, and an ecosystem of experts to enhance and scale nonprofit and government organization interventions. 

Each year, the sustainability accelerator selects new projects and organizations to help communities tackle some of the biggest sustainability issues worldwide. IBM recently announced five new members of the program, all focused on accelerating clean energy projects. It supports the transition to help the world achieve SDG 7, with a focus on inclusive solutions to bring clean energy to the most vulnerable communities. The selected organizations for the clean energy cohort are United Nations Development Programme, Sustainable Energy for All, Net Zero Atlantic, Miyakojima City Government and Environment Without Borders Foundation. 

Through IBM’s work, the company developed a framework that could be used as a model for other organizations that would like to move forward on matching business capabilities with societal and environmental needs. The steps include:

Identify and align. Determine your organization’s capabilities, offerings, and resources. Then, hone in on sectors or activities that map well to those competencies. Understanding where you can make a differentiated impact is key. For example, IBM’s technology capabilities and subject matter experts allow it to provide tech tools and expertise to make a unique impact, specifically for vulnerable populations (where the need is the greatest). 

Define smart goals. Creating goals that are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound will provide a framework for your organization to track progress and remain accountable to its commitments.

Activate locally. Think globally, but scale and activate locally. Each community or region is unique, so it’s important to engage with local groups and individuals who can help you understand the nuances of the culture. Leverage your local employees and partners to interact with local organizations and volunteers, ensure projects are delivered with local resources, in local languages, and through local team members.

Ignite the passion. Today, employees hold their employers accountable for supporting issues they care about, and corporate responsibility initiatives are now an important talent acquisition and retention tool. So, tap into the passion and interests of your people. The causes you support as an organization should also allow employees to use their professional experience for good. 

Build connections. Collaboration is key to a successful endeavor in support of local environmental organizations. Find members of your network with similar interests and complementary capabilities that can expand or round out your projects. Call on partners, investors, universities, academic and governmental organizations that may have similar social and environmental goals.

<h2>Let’s create powerful change together</h2>

There’s real power in leveraging your organization’s expertise to help nonprofits address environmental challenges. Collaborating with other entities that have complementary capabilities and well-aligned goals creates the kind of synergy we need to make a lasting difference. IBM looks forward to expanding the Sustainability Accelerator and multiplying its impact with additional partners. The only way we can all solve these giant challenges is by working together.

Interested in having your voice heard on 3p? Contact us at <a href="mailto:editorial@3BLMedia.com?subject=pitch%20for%20guest%20article%20on%203p">editorial@3BLMedia.com</a> and pitch your idea for a guest article to us.

Image credit: <a href="https://www.pexels.com/photo/photograph-of-solar-panels-7527908/" target="_blank">Pexels</a>

How Technology and Expertise Can Scale Local Solutions to Global Climate Change Challenges

Sustainability is everywhere – and now it is coming for packaging. <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/survey-consumer-sentiment-on-sustainability-in-fashion" target="_blank">Studies show</a> that more than 60 percent of consumers in 2021 went out of their way to purchase products in environmentally-friendly packaging. And if consumer demand isn't enough to motivate brands to adopt sustainable packaging, then government regulations – already in force or being strongly considered in <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/paper-forest-products-and-packaging/our-insights/sustainability-in-packaging-global-regulatory-development-across-30-countries" target="_blank">countries all over the world</a> – will push companies to change their ways.

Plastic packaging, which nearly every sector and industry <a href="http://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/the-new-plastics-economy-rethinking-the-future-of-plastics-and-catalysing" target="_blank">relies on</a> to wrap, ship and protect their goods, accounts for more than a quarter of all plastic created annually – and more than 85 percent of that is thrown away. As <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregpetro/2022/02/18/gen-z-and-sustainability-the-disruption-has-only-just-begun/?sh=2d553d723eb7" target="_blank">consumers</a> — and <a href="https://sourcingjournal.com/sustainability/sustainability-news/recover-texiles-recycling-fashion-industry-regulations-waste-337870/" target="_blank">governments</a> — become more aware of these facts, the pressure on brands to adopt sustainable packaging policies will increase significantly. They will also need to understand the different options, especially the differences between recyclable and compostable materials, in order to choose the most effective packaging. 

“Sustainability in packaging” means different things to different people. To many, including those in the plastics industry, it means recycling; taking packaging that was already used once and reusing it, possibly numerous times. The idea of plastic recycling has, of course, been greatly advanced by various industries as the ultimate sustainable solution. But it turns out that plastic recycling is far less efficient than claimed; according to the <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/percent-of-plastic-worldwide-is-recycled-oecd-says-/6455012.html" target="_blank">Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development</a>, only 9 percent of plastics are recycled, with the rest either dumped in landfills or the oceans — or incinerated. 

Thin flexible plastic, often used to wrap everything from clothing to food for shipping to customers, is especially difficult to recycle, and is <a href="https://apps.npr.org/plastics-recycling/" target="_blank">often not actually recycled at all</a>.

Recycling plastic, including flexible plastic, is <a href="https://www.rts.com/blog/is-recycling-worth-it/" target="_blank">also not economical</a> in most use cases. Recycled plastic often costs more than new plastic because collecting, sorting, transporting, and reprocessing plastic waste is exorbitantly expensive. Furthermore, large amounts of plastic are sent to the dump because the items are <a href="https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/03/13/fix-recycling-america/" target="_blank">too dirty </a>to be recycled, or too mixed up with other types of waste. Sorting or cleaning it is often impossible and almost always not worthwhile economically.  As the petrochemical industry is rapidly expanding, the cost of new plastic will only get lower.

A better alternative would be the adoption of compostable packaging, which solves some of the challenges posed by recycling, and complies both with consumer and government demands for sustainable packaging. Nowadays, there is a growing awareness among consumers and governments that when it comes to sustainability, plastic recycling just won't do. That’s why brands have been considering compostable packaging – where the materials used mostly break down in the environment, leaving a footprint that is far smaller than that left by conventional plastic and even enriches the earth by producing an end-product of agricultural compost that <a href="https://www.compostingcouncil.org/page/PlantGrowthBenefits" target="_blank">helps soil</a> retain water, <a href="https://www.ioes.ucla.edu/project/carbon-sequestration-through-compost/" target="_blank">capture more carbon</a> and produce <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167880900002462" target="_blank">better crop yields</a>.

Around the world, brands are starting to adopt compostable packaging, often to replace traditional flexible plastic. Among those who have made the switch is apparel and accessory company <a href="https://www.gabrielahearst.com/blogs/stories/sustainable-practices-timeline" target="_blank">Gabriela Hears</a>t. For that brand, which makes products in limited numbers and from sustainably-sourced materials, compostable packaging was a natural next step and part of a larger commitment to protecting the environment. Sustainable textile company <a href="https://pangaia.com/pages/compostable-packaging" target="_blank">Pangaia</a> has also recently adopted compostable packaging.

Consumers have <a href="https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/15087-consumers-want-sustainable-products.html" target="_blank">made it clear</a> that they want sustainability in packaging – and brands are responding, with many <a href="https://recyclinginternational.com/plastics/meet-the-plastic-pioneers-in-our-top-100/45579/" target="_blank">implementing recycling programs for the plastic</a> they use. But as consumers become <a href="https://consent.yahoo.com/v2/collectConsent?sessionId=2_cc-session_0cdf56d4-016f-4ffe-9d8b-7e1a14c7ccd6" target="_blank">more aware </a>of the challenges with recycling, they will be seeking better end-of-life solutions. Companies that adopt those better methods will be better able to connect with consumers – developing for themselves a reputation as a company that truly cares about the environment.

Interested in having your voice heard on 3p? Contact us at <a href="mailto:editorial@3BLMedia.com?subject=guest%20article%20pitch%20for%203p">editorial@3BLMedia.com</a> and pitch your idea for a guest article to us.

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/pdFLNMuMuzk" target="_blank">Wander Fleur</a> via Unsplash

Consumers Want Sustainability in Packaging — But Recycling Isn't the Only Option

Earlier this month, more than <a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-strike-walkout-red-cup-day-386896c728bc4a66d1aa51aa002fb1ba" target="_blank">100 Starbucks stores</a> were met by picket lines on this year’s Red Cup Day — the one day per year that the chain’s highly sought-after holiday collector’s cups are available. Striking workers set out to make a point about their employer’s practice of chronically understaffing retail locations by staging their single-day walkout on one of the brand’s highest-traffic days. The strike was also meant to draw attention to the company’s <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/10/02/1124680518/starbucks-union-busting-howard-schultz-nlrb" target="_blank">“scorched earth” response</a> to unionizing efforts. Such efforts could be a sign that organized labor is headed for a comeback in the U.S. as employees from food service and retail industries with historically low unionization rates have attempted to bring collective bargaining power to their workplaces over the last few years — many of them successfully.

The Red Cup Day strikes were just the latest protest from food service employees frustrated with their working conditions. Workers at a <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/27/business/chipotle-workers-union-michigan" target="_blank">Chipotle Mexican Grill</a> in Michigan are among those who have done so, with more of the chain’s restaurants <a href="https://www.seiu32bj.org/chipotle-workers-union/" target="_blank">looking to follow the course</a>. Fast food services like Starbucks and Chipotle, or fast casual as the chain dubs itself, have long been thought of as almost impossible to <a href="https://www.marketplace.org/2012/11/29/why-fast-food-workers-struggle-unionize/" target="_blank">effectively unionize</a>. But a Burgerville in Portland, Oregon proved that it could be done — forming the <a href="https://www.eater.com/2019/12/10/20974744/food-service-bad-conditions-lead-to-more-unionizing-organizing" target="_blank">first fast-food union in 2018</a>. The following year <a href="https://pdx.eater.com/2019/3/18/18271068/little-big-burger-fast-food-union?_gl=1*1tuy9ck*" target="_blank">Little Big Burger</a>, a Portland based chain, formed the Little Big Union.

It isn’t just better pay and benefits that are motivating fast food and other food service employees to finally unionize. Chipotle workers have been spurred into the movement in large part by a need for better health and safety measures in their restaurants — for themselves as well as their customers. Likewise, workers at a small locally owned distillery and cocktail bar in Minneapolis, Minnesota – <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/19/dining/labor-union-restaurants.html" target="_blank">Tattersall Distilling</a> – unionized in the name of not just overtime pay but antiracism training and proper personal protective equipment. Employees at Anchor Brewing in San Francisco, California reportedly organized in part to <a href="https://splinternews.com/one-of-the-worlds-most-iconic-craft-breweries-is-unioni-1832439046" target="_blank">protect the brewery’s legacy</a> from being lost under new ownership. They’re also fighting to recover falling real wages and better labor conditions.

Working conditions are a big part of the union drive by Starbucks employees, which began almost a year prior in Buffalo, New York. Aaron Cirillo, who protested along with co-workers outside one of the Manhattan shops is quoted in <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/starbucks-us-workers-100-stores-plan-one-day-walkout-2022-11-17/" target="_blank">Reuters as saying</a>, "They're working us to the bone because we're so understaffed.”  While the barista reported that he originally did not want to pursue unionization due to the likelihood of retaliation by the coffee retailer he changed his mind after waiting indefinitely for equipment to be repaired and better benefits — “This is a hostile environment and we have to do something about it.”

Red Cup Day generally boasts a substantial increase in sales over previous days the same year and was 87 percent higher in 2021. Customer typically show up early and wait in long lines for the cups until they run out. Because of this it is also a day that employees report being run ragged beyond their usual fast-food hustle. This made Red Cup Day an ideal setting for unionized Starbucks workers to get their point across to customers, who were largely supportive of their efforts. And those customers still got to take home a red cup — but this one came with the Worker’s United logo and a grinch motif to represent Starbucks’ union busting.

Striking stores represent just 1 percent of the coffee chain’s 9,000 venues. Still – with most of those 1 percent forced to close by lack of staff while those left open were operated by management and borrowed crew – the union is hopeful that its actions will have a big effect. “With 100 stores nationwide on strike today, I think it will definitely make an impact,” employee <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2022/11/17/23464263/starbucks-workers-red-cup-rebellion-union-strike" target="_blank">Ash Macomber told Vox</a> from the picket line outside of the closed Starbucks near Portland Maine where she works. “Not only with profits, but to show the company that we are stronger together, and once we collectively take action, then maybe change can really be made.”

Image credit: <a href="https://stories.starbucks.com/reusableredcup/" target="_blank">Starbucks</a>

Red Cup Day Strike Spotlights Workers’ Grievances and Growing Unionization Interest

As with every global climate conference across the past three decades, expectations were high at COP27 <a href="https://unfccc.int/cop27" target="_blank">in Egypt</a> for countries to work with renewed fervor in the collective fight against climate change. The world was watching to see if we would finally make significant progress in two critical areas: phasing out fossil fuels from the global economy to mitigate harmful carbon dioxide emissions, as well as financing adaptation and recovery from loss and damage in the <a href="https://germanwatch.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Climate%20Risk%20Index%202021_1.pdf" target="_blank">regions most vulnerable to climate change impacts</a>. As a millennial who has now attended five U.N. climate conferences (COPs) across the past seven years, I witness the same story every time:

<ul><li>Fossil fuel lobbyists proposing false solutions, and delegates from developed countries touting themselves as leaders of addressing the climate crisis when they are the biggest current and historical polluters. </li>
	<li>A blatant disregard of grassroots voices from the Global South bearing the brunt of climate impacts which echo outside the negotiation halls during their daily actions. </li>
	<li>Negotiators working arduously day and night rewriting policy documents that would simultaneously satisfy all country, political and economic agendas while effectively and equitably addressing climate change. </li>
</ul>One of the other observations I made — now the topic of my Ph.D. dissertation — is the growing communication divide between climate scientists and policymakers in these spaces. For the 10 days I attended COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh, I spent most of my time at the pavilion hosted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), located on the other side of the venue from the negotiation rooms. 

While a few negotiations in the first week invited these experts to share with delegates their findings from the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/" target="_blank">IPCC’s sixth assessment report</a> on climate change, most of their insights were heard in their small pavilion and the occasional side events in front of an audience of mostly observer organizations. 

The IPCC sessions provided crucial information from the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/" target="_blank">Working Group II</a> and <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/" target="_blank">Working Group III</a> reports on the vulnerability to climate change and evidence-based options for climate adaptation and mitigation by a range of diverse, interdisciplinary scientists traveling from all corners of the world to share their insights. 

However, their sessions were frequently overshadowed by the large, flashy neighboring pavilions, some hosted by corporations and fossil fuel-rich countries. Technical difficulties and the tumultuous surroundings of the expansive “world climate fair” made it difficult to hear the IPCC scientists present the best available evidence on the multifaceted challenge we face and potential pathways our society can embark on, such as <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/about/frequently-asked-questions/keyfaq6/" target="_blank">climate resilient development</a>. The irony is that the COP is founded on these scientific findings and yet politicians and policymakers, particularly from developed countries, seemed not to be heeding their calls for more urgent action. 

I have seen a great deal of appreciation but limited attention and use of the findings from the IPCC reports by policymakers at the COPs. One potential solution is a redesign of the panel to make it more effective in meeting its mandate of directly informing policy. What could be helpful is <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1462901117304331" target="_blank">going beyond assessments</a> to have deeper interactions and a better two-way flow of information between policymakers and scientists, with science not sidelined away from policymakers. 

As I envision it, the IPCC would not only be communicating the science to the policy arena, but policymakers would also share their policy needs with the scientists. In the best-case scenario, we’d see more coherent, evidence-based decisions that are vital for tackling this climate emergency that my generation and following generations will inherit.

As a COP veteran, I see the difficulty of navigating these multi-stakeholder, inter-governmental processes where everyone has their own agenda and ideas on the best way to address climate change. It is frustrating to realize how long it has been <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement" target="_blank">since the Paris Agreement</a> came into force and how far we still are from limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. 

The <a href="https://unfccc.int/news/full-ndc-synthesis-report-some-progress-but-still-a-big-concern" target="_blank">minimal progress made by a majority of the countries</a> to achieve their nationally determined contributions is disheartening. As countries continue to disagree, holding climate talks hostage, many are on the verge of giving up on this process. 

It is reasonable to ask: Is this really the best way to address the complex problem of climate change? No one has a concrete answer. The one thing we can agree on is that, for now, this is the best we have. To create and collectively agree on an alternative mechanism that would be more effective and inclusive than the UNFCCC would take time that we unfortunately do not have. 

So, time and again, we all eventually return to this space to make countries accountable for their inaction on climate adaptation and mitigation. And, with the limited power that observers have, we try to enhance the equity and evidence base of COP decisions. 

I still hold out on hope that we’ll one day see results from the <a href="https://climatenetwork.org/2022/11/20/landmark-decision-at-cop27-to-set-up-loss-and-damage-fund/" target="_blank">relentless efforts of climate justice organizations</a> that have attended COPs since the very beginning. They played a huge role in bringing adaptation finance and loss and damage to the top of the agenda at COP27, so that we prioritize the most vulnerable groups in this climate crisis. The landmark decision of COP27 in establishing a funding facility for loss and damage is largely thanks to them pressuring negotiators since day one of international climate negotiations. 

I know I can’t speak for my whole generation, but my hunch is that most millennials are aware of the daunting challenge of climate change and prepared to carry on the good fight, taking a different approach than the generations before us who caused this mess. We will do our best to prioritize people over profit, kick the big polluters proposing false solutions out of these negotiations, facilitate a just transition, bridge the silos and enhance cooperation across sectors, halt ecocide and shift finance toward climate adaptation and recovery from loss and damage in vulnerable developing countries, and make this planet habitable for animals and humans alike. It may be far-fetched, and it certainly won’t be easy. But it’s better to hold onto optimism than give in to despair and climate anxiety. After all, what is the alternative? Ours is a future worth fighting for.

Image credit: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/32605673@N03/52507518446/" target="_blank">UNFCCC</a> via Flickr

Reflections from a Millennial Attending COP27: 30 Years Later and We are Still in Climate Limbo

Despite seismic government pledges to finance climate action in support of Indigenous, Afro-descendant and local community women and girls’ organizations, an overwhelming portion of the money has failed to reach these intended groups. <a href="https://rightsandresources.org/women-in-global-south-alliance/" target="_blank">Women in Global South Alliance for Tenure and Climate</a>, a new advocacy coalition of 41 grassroots women’s organizations from Africa, Asia and Latin America, hopes to reverse these funding deficiencies. 

The coalition launched at COP27, the U.N.’s climate summit held this year in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. The alliance seeks to create an equitable shift in the climate finance landscape to ensure that the local women on the frontlines of climate action and biodiversity conservation are receiving direct, flexible and long-term funding to support their communities. 

<h2>Climate financing isn't reaching intended organizations</h2>

Historically, Indigenous peoples have been slow to receive their share of money earmarked for climate protection projects within their communities. A <a href="https://rightsandresources.org/publication/funding-with-purpose/" target="_blank">new study</a> from two nonprofits focused on rainforest conservation — Rights and Resources Initiative and Rainforest Foundation Norway — found that just 17 percent of global climate funding meant for local, Indigenous communities is led by those populations. 

The money is instead <a href="https://grist.org/article/the-world-spends-billions-to-protect-indigenous-land-only-17-goes-to-indigenous-people/" target="_blank">funneled through larger organizations</a> who have the bandwidth and resources to jump over lengthy administrative hurdles introduced by donors and governments. Indigenous peoples and local community organizations receiving a fraction of the direct funding threatens to exclude them from making important decisions that can have an impact on their communities. 

The funding disparity is even starker for women’s Indigenous groups. A <a href="https://www.awid.org/publications/call-action-insights-status-funding-indigenous-womens-groups#:~:text=Search-,A%20Call%20to%20Action%3A%20Insights%20into%20the%20Status,Funding%20for%20Indigenous%20Women's%20Groups&amp;text=Indigenous%20knowledge%20and%20sustainable%20practices,sustainable%20management%20of%20natural%20resources." target="_blank">2017 repor</a>t tracking funding data from 2010-2013 revealed that only 0.7 percent of all human rights funding went to Indigenous women’s organizations. Omaira Bolaños, director of the Latin America and Gender Justice Programs at Rights and Resources Initiative, says the alliance will “rectify this historical gap in access to direct climate finance for women and girls.” 

<h2>Will more pledges equal more direct funding for Indigenous women’s groups?</h2>

Government and donor pledges for Indigenous rights and gender equality have ticked up in recent years. In 2021, at COP26 held in Glasgow, Scotland, the governments of Canada, the U.K. and U.S. committed more than $7 billion to invest at the intersection of climate action and gender. 

Funders also pledged $1.7 billion to support collective and territorial rights for Indigenous peoples and local communities. Reflecting historical funding patterns, however, <a href="https://www.devex.com/news/only-7-of-1-7b-cop-26-pledge-is-going-directly-to-indigenous-groups-104182" target="_blank">reporting from Devex</a> reveals that only 7 percent of the $1.7 billion land tenure and forest guardianship pledge has gone directly to those groups. 

<h2>An alliance to change the funding landscape</h2>

Despite this discouraging trend of channeling money through intermediaries, the increase in pledges presents a ripe opportunity for the newly formed Women in Global South Alliance for Tenure and Climate to influence the way the funds are ultimately dispersed. In the build up to COP27, the alliance members co-signed a <a href="https://rightsandresources.org/publication/our-call-to-action/" target="_blank">call to action</a> for governments to urgently provide direct funding to the groups who have been historically under-supported and under-funded.

Archana Soreng, a youth climate activist from the Kharia Tribe in India and a member of the U.N. Secretary General’s Youth Advisory Group on Climate Change, says Indigenous, Afro-descendant and local community women and girls should be “leaders of climate action, not victims of climate policies.”

“Climate finance must not leave Indigenous, Afro-descendant, and local community women and girls behind,” Soreng said <a href="https://www.alianzamesoamericana.org/en/at-cop27-41-grassroots-womens-organizations-launch-new-global-south-alliance-for-indigenous-and-local-women-and-girls/" target="_blank">in a press release</a>. “We are working on a global issue that needs global perspectives which is what the formation of this new women’s alliance is about.”

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/AQxl8gSYJ-c" target="_blank">Dulcey Lima</a> via Unsplash

Women-Led Alliance Launched at COP27 Demands Climate Finance for Indigenous Peoples

First came Black Friday. Eventually Small Business Saturday, Cyber Monday and Giving Tuesday arrived. But what about the Sunday after Thanksgiving? Online marketplace Poshmark has the answer: Secondhand Sunday, <a href="https://www.secondhandsunday.poshmark.com/" target="_blank">a new holiday</a> dedicated to “supporting secondhand sellers, circular fashion and the planet.” Poshmark is calling on people to buy used instead of new on Nov. 27 and to share their finds on social media with the hashtag #SecondhandSunday. 

While this new holiday has yet to grow into an actual social movement, it is another example of how <a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2021/thrifting-fast-fashion/724426" target="_blank">perceptions</a> of secondhand shopping are continuing to evolve. No longer is “buying used” something only done for oneself. It’s an opportunity to shop sustainably and affordably while buying unique, high-quality gifts for others, too. 

Call it what you will — secondhand shopping, thrifting, upcycling, vintage hunting, and so on — but consumers are buying previously owned clothing, shoes and accessories <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/14/secondhand-shopping-is-booming-heres-how-much-you-can-save.html" target="_blank">in record numbers</a>.  And the trend is expected to continue throughout the 2022 holiday retail season. 

<h2>Inflation’s influence</h2>

According to a <a href="https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/articles/us175738_holiday-retail-travel/DI_2022-Holiday-retail.pdf" target="_blank">September survey</a> conducted by Deloitte, the two most popular reasons people gave for gifting secondhand items this holiday season were “to save money overall” and “to afford something a little nicer." These results are far from surprising, considering the rise in costs of everything from utilities to groceries this year. Many consumers are looking to cut spending any way they can, and buying used is one way to stretch those budgets even further.

The same survey found clothing is the most popular secondhand gift category this holiday season, with more than half of respondents saying they are most likely to buy used attire.  

<h2>“Certified pre-owned” fashion</h2>

In response to this demand, many traditional fashion retailers are <a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2022/retail-consumers-meaning-2022/735601" target="_blank">entering</a> the resale market directly. In fact, 48 percent of retail executives in Deloitte’s survey said their companies “planned to sell refurbished/used products this holiday season.”

Websites like Poshmark earn revenue by charging a commission for each transaction individuals make on their online platform. What many fashion brands are doing now, however, is selling previously owned merchandise directly to consumers, just as they would with new products. This process is often referred to as “Resale as a Service” (RaaS). RaaS programs are often likened to “<a href="https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2022/05/10972011/fashion-brands-resale-secondhand-programs" target="_blank">certified pre-owned</a>” programs run by car companies. Both new and used merchandise are sold in the same branded retail setting (in person or online), and customers can be reassured that the used items have passed quality inspections before being resold. 

<a href="https://www.recommerce100.com/blog/thredups-recommerce-100-hits-100-resale-shops" target="_blank">ThredUp reports</a> that the number of fashion brands with RaaS programs has grown by 300 percent this year compared to 2021. Some of the biggest players entering the field include Tommy Hilfiger, Athleta, PacSun and Vera Bradley. 

As more sustainability-focused (as opposed to <a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2022/fast-fashion-sustainability/758481" target="_blank">fast fashion</a>) brands enter the RaaS space, the hope is that the stigma of “buying used” will dissipate, and consumers will look to resale first when searching for the perfect gift. 

<h2>Millennials and Gen Z: Secondhand shopping becomes second nature</h2>

For many consumers in their twenties and thirties, secondhand shopping is <a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2022/gen-z-millennials-secondhand/749476" target="_blank">already part of their routine</a>. PwC reports that 53 percent of millennials will include resale or upcycled items on their holiday shopping lists, compared with 37 percent of shoppers across all ages. (Specific numbers for Gen Z were not available.) 

Millennial and Gen Z shoppers are especially motivated by the “concern for and awareness of the environmental and social effects of the consumption process," Michelle Childs, an associate professor of retail merchandising and management at University of Tennessee, told TriplePundit. “These shoppers tend to think ahead about if their purchases and values align. They consider things like, ‘will this item end up in a landfill after only a handful of wears?’ or ‘was this shirt made in less than favorable conditions?’ They genuinely care about the impact.”  

Another important factor — specifically for Gen Z — when it comes to buying secondhand fashion, whether for themselves or others? Uniqueness. 

“Gen Z-ers have more discretionary income than previous generations do. They are often willing to pay more for secondhand items,” Childs said. “It used to be you only bought used because you couldn’t afford new. Now, it’s so you can be unique. Gen Z consumers participate in trends, but also want those one-of-a-kind finds. Secondhand shopping — especially vintage fashion — combines both of these desires while also helping the planet.” 

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/ycVFts5Ma4s" target="_blank">Hannah Morgan</a>/Unsplash

Secondhand Sunday is Fashion’s Latest Initiative in the Rise of Resale 

For years, we’ve been relentless in pondering the key questions about the impact of climate change: Do global citizens fear it? Are the structures we build able to withstand — and mitigate — climate change? And, who must take the lead in creating this infrastructure? 

<h2>What do citizens want done about climate change?</h2>

We rarely, if ever, get a real sense of what global citizens think about those questions. But, Edelman’s respected 22-year-old Global Trust Barometer, which the giant communications agency now employs to gauge sentiment on special subjects, has found some interesting and insightful answers in <a href="https://www.edelman.com/trust/2022-trust-barometer/special-report-trust-climate" target="_blank">securing the pulse</a> of 14,000 respondents worldwide about climate. 

The major takeaways:

Seventy-seven percent worry about climate change leading to drought, rising sea levels and other natural disasters, and 57 percent agree little or no progress has been made to address it. 

Seventy-one percent say we must move faster on climate change issues, and two-thirds say we’ll have to dramatically change our habits to address climate change because institutions alone cannot do it.

Fifty-two percent believe politics drives climate policy, edging out the 48 percent who think science drives policy. 

Fifty-four percent think national governments should take the lead in addressing climate change, followed by state/regional governments and local governments – and then comes business, media and NGOs.

<h2>Citizens aren’t seeing leadership on climate change</h2>

Yet, while respondents think governments must take the lead, a majority – 54 percent — contend governmental leaders are unwilling to pass tough legislation that would force businesses and individuals to make climate-related changes.

This finding about government action — or inaction — is disturbing when it comes to building the structures required to withstand climate change. Take what we know increasingly about local government regulation regarding green infrastructure. In rural and less-dense areas, the policy options for incorporating green infrastructure include ordinances that preserve or restore pre-construction conditions on development sites, plus ordinances that direct development away from sensitive areas such as wetlands, streams and significant natural resources. 

In cities, however, green infrastructure offers the way to protect and restore natural habitats. Such green infrastructure includes plants and permeable surfaces that infiltrate stormwater into soil, thereby reducing levels of urban runoff to city storm sewers. 

The proverbial carrot-and-stick approach – that combination of reward and punishment to induce desired behavior – proves particularly instructive in local regulations. 

Here’s a “stick” example: A zoning ordinance adopted in January 2018 by Norfolk, Virginia’s city council includes a unique “resilience quotient system” requiring housing developers to reach a certain point total, based on the size or number of units, by including various resilience measures in the project’s design. Stormwater management is one such measure, earning points for installing a green roof, rain gardens or other stormwater infiltration systems; or using pervious paving systems, tree planting or providing a community garden space, among others. 

In Washington, D.C., “the green area ratio” is a zoning regulation for environmental sustainability that sets requirements for landscape elements and site design to help reduce stormwater runoff, improve air quality, and mitigate urban heat. It sets minimum lot coverage standards for landscape and site design features to promote greater livability, ecological function, and climate adaptation in the urban environment. 

As for the “carrot” approach, Philadelphia encourages more stormwater retention and green infrastructure practices by creating subsidies, grants and rebates for both residential and nonresidential projects. The city offers a lower price for qualified nonresidential customers and contractors to design and install stormwater best management practices that reduce stormwater pollution and enhance water quality. 

In New York, a multiagency Green Infrastructure Grant program led by the Environmental Protection Department offers grants for up to $5 million to private property owners in combined sewer areas of the city who promise 20 years of maintenance. Funds are provided for green infrastructure projects that manage the first inch of rainfall, and they include blue roofs, rain gardens, green roofs, porous pavement and rainwater harvesting. 

The EPA offers a handy guide for overcoming barriers to green infrastructure as well as guides for site-scale green infrastructure practices. 

As for the Edelman Trust Barometer on climate, it maintains that institutions leading climate action must show the benefits to individuals “because people recognize the positive impacts of current climate change solutions on a societal level more than on a personal level.” 

That reminded me that in 2006 in Chicago, where I’m based, I worked with the City Council and developers to pass what may have been the first performance-based stormwater management ordinance that drove green roofs, permeable parking lots, tree planting and bioswales on private property. 

Today, my business and my community benefit from this greening’s positive impacts. Perhaps based on them, subsequent city administrations have been able to go further with green stormwater infrastructure in public capital projects, permeable alleys and natural "streetscaping."

This possibility proves instructive in contemplating a conclusion of the Edelman climate report about government’s responsibility: Regulating for green infrastructure, which grows in resilience benefit over time, even as climate change risks also grow, is one helpful opportunity. 

That message for governments is a simple one: Meet the needs of today — and build for tomorrow. 

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/Ps4SxKM15g4" target="_blank">Simon Hurry</a> via Unsplash

A Climate Change Message to Governments: Meet Today’s Needs and Build for Tomorrow

Consumer Reports presented an informational webinar on Wednesday, laying out the framework for a transition to cleaner transportation primarily via low-carbon fuels and electrification.

It’s a promising start — what with the variety of drop-in fuels that are hitting the market and price parity for electric vehicles <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/reuters-impact-envision-sees-cost-electric-cars-parity-by-202526-2022-10-04/" target="_blank">possible as soon as 2025</a>. The model has both government backing and the support of those automakers who have embraced its market potential, especially if that means convincing consumers to trade up sooner than later. But switching to EVs and low-carbon fuels ultimately fails to address the structural inefficiencies that result from dependence on the personal passenger vehicle as the primary mode of transportation in the U.S. 

As a result, the transition is less about meeting an immediate need for substantial emissions reductions and more about keeping the auto industry afloat — ultimately falling short of the overall transformation that is needed in the transportation sector to reduce the total number of passenger vehicles produced and on the road.

Transportation is the No. 1 source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, according to Consumer Reports, with passenger vehicles responsible for 57 percent of those emissions. The present school of thought aims to fix this scenario by simply swapping out vehicles with internal combustion engines (ICE) for EVs, with low-carbon fuels potentially acting as a stopgap in the meantime. The U.S. government is so confident in this plan that it is <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/president-biden-us-department-transportation-releases-toolkit-help-rural-communities" target="_blank">investing $7.5 billion toward a charging infrastructure</a> that will install 500,000 EV chargers across the country.

Still, gas-powered vehicles aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. Not only are many of today’s cars still going to be in operation over the next decade, but ICE vehicles are also expected to continue to constitute the <a href="https://evadoption.com/2030-20-million-more-ice-vehicles-will-be-on-the-roads-in-the-us-than-in-2021/" target="_blank">majority of sales through at least 2032</a>. This means <a href="https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200204005053/en/36-Million-More-Internal-Combustion-Vehicles-on-U.S.-Roads-by-2030-Predicts-Lang-Marketing" target="_blank">an estimated 20 million to 36 million more of them</a> could hit the road by 2030, which would put the number of personal vehicles in the U.S. running on fossil fuels at over 300 million.

Transitioning to low-carbon fuels may help lessen some of the sting from that many tailpipes, according to the information Consumer Reports presented last week. The idea is that drop-in fuels made from ethanol, biodiesel and hydrogen could have a lower overall carbon output. There are caveats, of course. Ethanol and biodiesel made from corn and other foods raise ethical concerns — though moves toward producing the fuels from waste products, algae and other non-food sources are promising. Likewise, e-fuels require substantial electricity to make, and <a href="https://www.transportenvironment.org/discover/only-enough-e-fuels-to-power-2-of-cars-on-the-road-in-2035-analysis/" target="_blank">the infrastructure to produce them is lacking</a>.

Regardless of whether a vehicle runs on gas or electricity, a substantial amount of carbon emissions are produced in its construction, with EVs actually responsible for a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-do-electric-vehicles-become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/" target="_blank">higher initial carbon output</a> (though they make up for it after being driven for a while). Not to mention the resources and environmental degradation involved in mining lithium — a necessary evil when it comes to electrification with current mainstream technologies. In fact, <a href="https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future" target="_blank">replacing fossil fuels with batteries</a> is starting to look a lot like swapping out one environmental catastrophe for another.

So, what’s the fix? Certainly, there comes a point where we have to accept that our Earth is finite. It does not contain unlimited resources, and it cannot absorb unlimited pollution and abuse. Transitioning to low-carbon fuels and EVs simply is not enough. What’s more, upgrading to electric while the ICE vehicle in the driveway is still running strong could <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/sep/23/carbon-footprint-new-car" target="_blank">do more harm than good</a> for the environment. The personal passenger vehicle as a primary mode of transportation is just not sustainable for a planet with 8 billion people living on it.  

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/H-0afhW6p8Y" target="_blank">Filip Filkovic Philatz</a>/Unsplash

Electric Vehicles Aren't Enough: We Need Fewer Cars on the Road

U.S. corporations are clamoring for renewable energy now more than ever before. At the same time, fossil energy stakeholders continue to lobby against progress. Their tactics range from buttonholing top-level policymakers at the COP27 climate talks on down to funding local citizen groups. Business leaders can push back against the obstruction by forming new alliances that support their needs for renewable energy.

<h2>Fossil fuel lobbyists rush to COP27</h2>

The global reach of the fossil energy industry was very much in evidence at COP27 in Egypt last week. 

The organization <a href="https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/fossil-gas/636-fossil-fuel-lobbyists-granted-access-cop27/" target="_blank">Global Witness</a> and its two partners, Corporate Accountability and Corporate Europe Observatory, compiled a list of 636 lobbyists directly connected to the fossil energy industry at COP27. The list is based on disclosure forms and other publicly available documents.

That was likely a significant undercount. Global Witness surmises that many lobbyists at COP27 declined to document their connections with fossil energy. The NGO also notes that the list does not include lobbyists from other fossil-related sectors including finance, big agriculture and petrochemicals.

<h2>Coalitions push back against fossil fuel lobbyists</h2>

Businesses that hope to accelerate the energy transition can support the work of organizations such as <a href="https://kickbigpollutersout.org/big-polluters-at-cop27" target="_blank">Kick Big Polluters Out</a> to help curtail the influence of fossil energy lobbyists at the next annual U.N. climate talks.  

Last week, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/10/big-rise-in-number-of-fossil-fuel-lobbyists-at-cop27-climate-summit" target="_blank">The Guardian took note</a> of a coalition of organizations that submitted a formal complaint against the fossil-friendly attendance policy at COP27.

The complaint was submitted to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the branch of the United Nations that organizes the annual COP climate talks.

The complaint charged that the COP talks would “continue to fail to meaningfully address the climate crisis” due to the substantial access of “polluting interests.”

“The framework should <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Agenda%20Item%202_Collated%20written%20submissions.pdf" target="_blank">prevent entities with private, polluting interests</a> from unduly influencing or undermining UNFCCC activities and processes through their engagement as representatives of non-governmental organizations,” the group stated.

Specifically, the group called upon UNFCCC to tighten up its access and accreditation process by applying established norms and procedures adopted by other U.N. bodies and international organizations.

<h2>Fertilizing the grassroots with big dollars</h2>

Fossil energy stakeholders are also working the other end of the scale. Local citizens can — and should — exercise their influence on local concerns. However, in the case of opposition to renewable energy, the hand of an organized, stakeholder-funded effort is at work. 

The independent news organization Popular Information took note of this under-the-radar lobbying effort <a href="https://popular.info/p/fossil-fuel-industry-dupes-media" target="_blank">in an article last week</a>. Under the headline, “Fossil fuel industry dupes media, quietly funds non-profits to block renewable energy,” reporter Michael Thomas listed three citizen groups opposed to offshore wind farms planned for the Atlantic coast: Save Our Beach View, Save Long Beach Island and Nantucket Residents Against Turbines. As Thomas reported, all three are affiliated with an organization called the Caesar Rodney Institute (CRI).

The CRI connection illustrates how fossil energy stakeholders can funnel influence to local organizations that push back against renewable energy development.

“As of this writing, the ‘Donate’ button on the Protect Our Coast NJ website redirects to a PayPal link that reads ‘Donate to Caesar Rodney Institute,’” Thomas notes.

The Delaware-based organization <a href="https://meetthepolluters.org/polluters/delaware-caesar-rodney-institute/" target="_blank">Meet the Polluters</a> describes CRI as having an outsized influence over state and regional affairs. “Despite its relatively small budget, the Caesar Rodney Institute has emerged as a cog in the State Policy Network’s coordinated attacks on clean transportation policy, even if they represent no one in the state but themselves,” Meet the Polluters states on its website.

Meet the Polluters describes CRI as a “a far-right, free-market advocacy group based in Delaware that receives considerable funding from dark money sources and the Koch-controlled State Policy Network.”

“The institute is a member of and funded by the State Policy Network, a network of right-wing organizations that the Koch network funds to promote junk science, climate denial, and corporate welfare,” Meet the Polluters writes.

“It is also funded by dark money foundations including Donors Capital Fund and DonorsTrust, two pass-through funds that have been called the “dark-money ATM of the conservative movement,” that mask donations from foundations controlled by Charles Koch,” the group adds.

<h2>Beware the junk scientist</h2>

Fossil energy stakeholders have a long, well-documented record of funding efforts to sow doubt and confusion over the scientific consensus on climate change, going back for decades. It is no surprise to find these efforts resonating in the citizen-scientist area today. It is also no accident. 

Ten years ago, local organizations in North Carolina began to follow the public speaking activities of one such person, John Droz, who was front and center in the pushback against offshore wind turbines.

While Droz cultivated a reputation as <a href="https://cleantechnica.com/2017/07/03/small-group-north-carolina-republicans-cut-off-wind-energy-nose-spite-face/" target="_blank">a citizen activist</a>, the organization Facing South noted that he was a senior fellow with the American Tradition Institute (ATI), “a conservative think tank that's part of a family of advocacy groups <a href="https://www.facingsouth.org/2012/05/nc-anti-wind-power-crusader-behind-plot-to-subvert.html" target="_blank">founded and funded by fossil-fuel interests</a>.”

Scientific American also <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-man-who-makes-sea-lev/" target="_blank">published an expose</a> on Droz’s activities back in 2013, taking note that his habitual bespectacled, sweaters-and-jeans attire helped to mask the political influencers supporting him.

“…this semi-retired real-estate investor and self-described environmental advocate spends much of his time quietly and effectively plying the halls of power in Raleigh, N.C., deflecting credit and avoiding the spotlight, observed Scientific American reporter James Borden.

Droz has ventured far beyond North Carolina in recent years. His organization “Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions” advises local groups on opposing wind projects. The fossil energy lobbying organization <a href="https://www.heartland.org/multimedia/podcasts/industrial-wind-how-to-fight-it-in-your-hometown-and-win-guest-john-droz" target="_blank">Heartland Institute</a> promoted Droz and the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions last February in a podcast headlined, “Industrial Wind: How to Fight It in your Hometown.”

<h2>Fight like a “woke”</h2>

Against this backdrop, it’s no surprise that Republican office holders and their allies have raised the “woke corporation” charge <a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2022/texas-blackrock-fossil-energy/754656" target="_blank">against businesses</a> that favor renewable energy. The Republicans’ newly won but slim majority in the U.S. House of Representatives will enable them to hammer out that canard on the national stage in the years to come.

However, U.S. businesses that value sustainability have been through waves of opposition before, and each time they have upped the ante instead of backing down.

Business leaders united behind the Barack Obama administration in force in the run-up to the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change. They also <a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2020/corporate-climate-action/704831" target="_blank">continued to double down</a> on renewable energy all throughout the Donald Trump administration, even as the former president attempted to <a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2019/common-ground-climate-change-us-labor-and-business-leaders-stand-paris-agreement/85811" target="_blank">bend U.S. energy policy</a> toward fossil energy. Within days of President Joe Biden taking office, business leaders also rallied for <a href="https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2021/unity-clean-power/717751" target="_blank">national unity on climate action</a>. 

The next two years will be challenging, but business leaders can seek new alliances with each other, as well as civic organizations and government policymakers, to keep the energy transition moving forward.  

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/kfDLx22qNUU" target="_blank">Katie Rodriguez</a>/Unsplash

Companies That Love Renewable Energy Have the Power to Stand Against the Fossil Fuel Lobby

Electrify America is making an <a href="https://media.electrifyamerica.com/en-us/releases/201" target="_blank">additional investment</a> of nearly $3 million to support four community-based organizations promoting electric vehicles (as in EVs, sometimes referred to as ZEVs or zero emission vehicles) education and awareness in low-income and disadvantaged communities in California. 

According to a recent press release, this new investment is part of the company’s overall commitment to environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices, and supports the company’s <a href="https://media.electrifyamerica.com/en-us/releases/140" target="_blank">plan to invest $200 million</a> in EV infrastructure and education programs in California through mid-2024.

“In the exciting race to electrify our transportation system, many communities have not had equitable access to the resources and information that can help establish adoption of electric vehicles, said Gabriela Herrera Gugiu, Electrify America’s corporate social responsibility senior specialist, in a public statement. “We believe it’s our responsibility to help create a future where zero emission vehicles can be accessible and affordable to Californians and communities across the country.”

With <a href="https://www.electrifyamerica.com/locate-charger/" target="_blank">nearly 800 charging stations</a> throughout the country, Electrify America is the largest open direct current (DC) fast charging network in the United States. Since 2018, the company has announced investments of more than $9 million to help accelerate electric vehicle adoption in California, which has <a href="https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-moves-accelerate-100-new-zero-emission-vehicle-sales-2035" target="_blank">mandated</a> that 100 percent of new cars and light trucks sold in California must be zero-emission vehicles (full battery-electric, hydrogen fuel cell, and plug-in hybrid-electric) by 2035. 

Electrify America’s new investment builds on four years of significant investments with community-based organizations (CBOs) and non-profit organizations (NGOs) in low-income and disadvantaged communities throughout California. The investments are intended to support a more equitable transition to EV vehicles. 

In addition, the community-based organizations will also focus on home charging education as well as building awareness and engagement connected with Electrify America’s $25 million <a href="https://media.electrifyamerica.com/en-us/releases/148" target="_blank">Green City investment</a> to bring charging infrastructure to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and help to electrify the tens of thousands of drayage trucks that enter the Port Complex each day.

More than 100 non-profit, private and public entities from across California were invited to submit proposals to support brand-neutral EV education in disadvantaged and low-income communities. The organizations receiving funding include:

<a href="https://www.breathesocal.org/" target="_blank">Breathe Southern California</a> will host ride-share driver EV educational sessions, a ride-and-drive EV event at a farmer's market, and a miniature EV competition for families. Activities will take place in and around the Long Beach-Wilmington area where the Green City initiative is centered.

<a href="https://evsforeveryone.org/" target="_blank">Ecology Action</a> will focus on ride-and-drive events including EV showcases, EV purchase support guidance and EV webinars throughout California’s Central Coast and beyond, intended to drive community awareness broadly across the state.  
  <a href="https://pluginamerica.org/" target="_blank">Plug In America</a> is supporting California-based EV education and engagement through ride-and-drive programs across California, EV test drives in rural communities, including the regions surrounding Green City efforts. 

<a href="https://valleycan.org/" target="_blank">Valley Clean Air Now</a> (VCAN) and key partners such as Charge Across Town will continue their comprehensive efforts that offer low-income and disadvantaged community groups in the San Joaquin Valley opportunities to test-drive EVs and to provide hands-on help with qualifying for EVs incentives through community clean car clinics and “Tune In &amp; Tune Up” events. VCAN will also begin to recruit new car dealers to join the California Resources Board’s “Clean Cars 4 All” program, as well as additional community and government collaborations to lower barriers to EVs ownership in disadvantaged communities. 

Electrify America’s new investment comes on the heels of the company’s May 2022 <a href="https://media.electrifyamerica.com/en-us/gallery/videos/883" target="_blank">announcement</a> that it entered into a 15-year virtual power purchase agreement (VPPA) to build a solar photovoltaic renewable energy generation project in San Bernardino County. Electrify America Solar Glow™ 1 is expected to generate 75 megawatts at peak solar capacity and produce enough completely renewable energy annually to help offset the energy used by Electrify America customers charging on its network.

The company is also investing in clean technology innovations to support sustainable and reliable operations, including more than 100 battery energy storage systems at charging stations throughout California to help stabilize the power grid and maintain pricing, while potentially maximizing renewable energy use from the grid.

Through 2021, Electrify America has invested $400 million in California, with nearly half of that supporting education, access, charging infrastructure and services to promote EV driving, including $18 million in education and marketing in marginalized communities throughout the state. 

Expanding EV access will have major social and environmental implications for marginalized communities that have been ignored when it comes to investments in transportation infrastructure except when it comes to building highways and rail lines through those areas. According to a 2019 report, “Expanding Zero Emission Mobility and Access” by the <a href="https://zevalliance.org/" target="_blank">ZEV Alliance</a> and the <a href="https://theicct.org/" target="_blank">International Council on Clean Transportation</a> (ICCT), low-income and disadvantaged communities face “disproportionately large” health impacts from climate change and environmental pollution. EVs offer great potential to benefit these communities by reducing pollution and improving public health, particularly for residents who are most vulnerable. 

“The unfortunate reality is that the fossil fuel industry lobbies against ZEV [zero emissions vehicles] policies by obscuring the benefits they can deliver to diverse communities and by spreading misinformation suggesting that [EVs) are for the rich only,” according to the ZEV Alliance-ICCT report. “From a moral and practical perspective, a large coalition is needed to support clean transportation, which cannot be done if [EVs] are perceived as an exclusive privilege.”

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/UrCV-U9hhCo" target="_blank">Ernest Ojeh</a> via Unsplash

Another Step Toward Bringing EVs to More Low-Income Communities

Last week during the COP27 climate talks, three major sustainability organizations partnered together to release the <a href="https://rightsandresources.org/wp-content/uploads/Land-Rights-Standard_Updated-04-2022.pdf" target="_blank">Land Rights Standard</a>, a new set of best practices and principles for respecting the land and resource rights of Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendent peoples and other local communities. The <a href="https://rightsandresources.org" target="_blank">Rights and Resources Initiative</a>, the <a href="https://www.globallandscapesforum.org" target="_blank">Global Landscapes Forum</a> and the <a href="https://indigenouspeoples-sdg.org/index.php/english/" target="_blank">Indigenous Peoples Major Group for Sustainable Development</a> launched the new standard at a sideline event during the U.N. climate conference in Egypt.

The new Land Rights Standard targets investors, companies, civil society organizations and institutions involved in landscape projects, encouraging them to better respect the rights of — and create partnerships with — local communities and groups, particularly those who have been historically marginalized.  

<h2>Centering territorial and resource rights for Indigenous communities</h2>

The standard seeks to respect the territorial and resource rights of Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples and other local communities — with the goal to promote the legal recognition of those rights, and require full collaboration in all programs, projects and initiatives.

Pasang Dolma Sherpa, executive director of the Center for Indigenous Peoples' Research and Development (CIPRED), emphasized the need for non-state actors to collaborate with Indigenous communities at the COP27 sideline event about the new standards. 

“Indigenous peoples, local communities, and Afro-descendent communities are crucial in the discourse of climate change, natural resource governance, and anything in relation to the land," Sherpa said. "Often, Indigenous issues and concerns are seen as a threat by state parties. It is important to have dialogue on how the role of Indigenous people and local communities could contribute to the sustainability of natural resource governance.”

To that end, the Land Rights Standard promotes conservation by local communities and encourages a rights-based approach to conservation projects, Sherpa explained. “The new standard is designed to help non-state actors, conservation organizations, and the private sector recognize the rights of the Indigenous people and local communities, and it encourages outside agencies to participate with local communities and gain consent for environmental projects,” she elaborated.

This new standard also seeks to include women’s voices. Cécile Ndjebet, president of the African Women’s Network for Community Management of Forests (REFACOF), said, “We can leverage the Land Rights Standard to promote responsible investment, but promoting women's equal inclusion and participation in governance and ensuring zero tolerance for violence and harassment is very, very important to this.”

Supporters of these new guidelines say they can assist companies and other non-state actors on how to mitigate obstacles for women, Ndjebet added. “We encourage actors to forge powerful alliances with women's organizations across all regions to ensure that their investments won’t leave the women who are on the frontier of climate mitigation and conservation behind,” she said.

<h2>Does sustainability need another standard?</h2>

When the Land Rights Standard was launched at COP27, it was immediately endorsed by other standard-setting organizations.

Dr. Solange Bandiaky-Badji, president of the Rights and Resources Initiative, acknowledged that there is a growing body of sustainability standards and principles. She told the COP27 audience: “Why is the Land Rights Standard necessary in the landscape of all the other [standards]? The other efforts have been uncoordinated and lack globally-recognized principles that are grounded in human rights law and informed from Indigenous peoples, local communities and Afro-descendent people. The Land Rights Standards are simple principles that reflect best practices in landscape-level actions and investments supported by institutions, companies, investors and activists.” 

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is one group that certifies sustainably managed forests. Kim Carstensen, the director general of the FSC, said the organization is committed to integrating principles from the Land Rights Standard into the next generation of FSC standards.

“We have been a standard carrying and developing organization for over 25 years. This new Land Rights Standard will be a new milestone around which we can further develop our standards," Carstensen said. "In our next revision, we will look at the new standards and ask what we can use as a guiding tool. We will integrate it into our thinking about the next generation of our standards, and we can all work together to make it something that is seen by and understood by the people who need to use it in the future.”

<h2>What’s next? </h2>

The founding partners are asking conservation organizations, companies and investors to consider endorsing the Land Rights Standard. Bandiaky-Badji noted: “These standards are not legally binding. They are voluntary. We hope [non-state actors] will promote it within their institutions and rights holders will contribute to promoting awareness of these standards.”

The Rights and Resources Initiative, works to advance the forestland and resource rights of Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant peoples and local communities, is also working to include the principles of the Land Rights Standard as a standing agenda item at climate-related events, Bandiaky-Badji said. 

Image credit: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/F3BBLFml5Hw" target="_blank">Azzedine Rouichi</a> via Unsplash

COP27 Addressed Some Effects, but Not Causes, of Climate Change

Prime Stories

Editor Curated

How Technology and Expertise Can Scale Local Solutions to Global Climate Change Challenges

Consumers Want Sustainability in Packaging — But Recycling Isn't the Only Option

Red Cup Day Strike Spotlights Workers’ Grievances and Growing Unionization Interest

Reflections from a Millennial Attending COP27: 30 Years Later and We are Still in Climate Limbo

Women-Led Alliance Launched at COP27 Demands Climate Finance for Indigenous Peoples

Secondhand Sunday is Fashion’s Latest Initiative in the Rise of Resale

A Climate Change Message to Governments: Meet Today’s Needs and Build for Tomorrow

Electric Vehicles Aren't Enough: We Need Fewer Cars on the Road

Companies That Love Renewable Energy Have the Power to Stand Against the Fossil Fuel Lobby

Another Step Toward Bringing EVs to More Low-Income Communities

Emerging from COP27: A New Standard for Protecting Indigenous Lands

LATEST NEWS FROM 3BL MEDIA

Editorial Team

We report the business case for sustainability.

Leon Kaye

Tina Casey

Mary Mazzoni