The winner of the Best Sustainable Luxury Performance in Latin America in the fashion and accessories category was Pachacuti. The British-based company works with indigenous communities in Ecuador to produce fairly traded high-end panama hats. The Paris-based Ainy won the award for beauty company. It works with Latin American producers to sustainably harvest key ingredients. Argentine company Perma Hue won the award in the tourism sector. An eco-resort in Patagonia, Perma Hue seeks to promote the wellbeing of their visitors through re-connecting with nature. In the jewellery sector, a special mention was given to Oro Verde, not as a company, but as a community cooperative, pioneering the production of ethical gold. They work with Afro-Colombian communities to support small-scale alluvial mining operations in the Choco region of Colombia. Oro Verde™ have pioneered an environmentally sustainable, socially responsible form of artisanal mining that seeks to preserve the unique and vital virgin rainforest ecosystems while providing a fair, regular source of income to miners, their families and their communities. Also for work on jewellery, a special mention was made of Ian Doyle, from Lifeworth Consulting, for his research on a new agenda for responsible jewellery, focusing on social development. A spanish version of his report “Uplifting the Earth” was launched at the awards.

Dana Thomas presenting at the awards

The award to Perma Hue was presented by Maria Eugenia Giron, former CEO of Carrera y Carrera, and author of “Inside Luxury”. Award winners received a leaf bowl of Palo Santo wood carved by the Wichi aboriginals of the Argentine North East. The awards were judged by Maria Eugenia Giron (IE Business School), Dana Thomas (best-selling author), Eduardo Escobedo (United Nations, UNCTAD), Summer Rayne Oakes (Source4style),

Awards Judge Maria Eugenia Giron with winners from Perma Hue

The main Argentine newspaper covered the event and the winners. Awards organiser Miguel Angel Gardetti announced that the awards would stay in Argentina for one more year, but extend their reach in nominations and coverage. Further information on the winners, the speakers, the awards, and others working on sustainable luxury, is available at: http://www.authenticluxury.net

Professor Gardetti and Professor Bendell, founders of the awards

Nominations for the 2012 Sustainable Luxury Awards should be sent to www.lujosustentable.org

“I want to thank the team at the Wellness Summit for making sustainability a theme this year. It has been rather challenging times for many in the industry these past 2 years, and that could have led some to focus purely on the near term, rather than providing a space for reflection on what it is we are doing and why. The location is also refreshing. We do not have to put ourselves in concrete jungles to be smart and serious. We are part of nature, and when we are in sight of nature we are more relaxed and thus more creative… and the science on that process is in.

I am here because I think wellness professionals can be leaders in the transition to a fair and sustainable world. You can be part of what I term in my latest book, The Corporate Responsibility Movement – A movement that is pursuing a transition to a fair and sustainable economy through new approaches to enterprise.

I was invited partly because of a report I researched and wrote about sustainable luxury, for the environmental group WWF. In Deeper Luxury, we mapped out the sustainability challenge, and how luxury brands perform, the commercial reasons why they can do more, and some examples and tips for companies. The report took off around the world. I even ended up pictured in Tatler; a dubious indicator of success for an environmentalist perhaps.

Wellness services target the same market as many luxury brands, and many wellness services are themselves luxury brands. The luxury industry has been under an increasing spotlight on its social and environmental performance. From the sourcing of metals and stones in jewellery, to the working practices for models, to the use of endangered species in its products. More and more luxury brands have made steps to improve practice, and some luxury groups have even decided to make major investments in buying niche ethical luxury brands, such as LVMH buying half of Edun, which focuses on ethical clothing. The trends they are responding to are trends that also affect wellness industries – a growing realisation amongst people around the world of social and environmental malaise and how our consumption affects that, and how our choices at work matter. If you are in a business where the products and services are highly discretionary, and where personal motivation of staff is key to your success, then these broader public issues affect your business, because they affect customer and staff mood.

I’m new to wellness, and I need some. Having flu at my first wellness conference maybe tells me something I need to hear. I’ve been working on sustainability for 15 years and it is a huge agenda. It can seem complicated, with more stuff to have to think about, to check on, and so on. But actually its quite simple. At its most basic sustainability is about people being in harmony with nature, including our own natures. As our societies have developed our work and ways of living have separated us from that harmony with nature, with each other and with our true selves. You have likely heard that before. Right now I’d like us to take a moment to sense what restoring that harmony could feel like. You may find it helpful if you close your eyes for the next few moments.

So, now with you eyes shut, try to recall a moment when you think you won an argument, or clinched a deal, or got promoted. Think of how it felt at the time.

Still with your eyes shut, next, try to recall a moment when you were in nature, perhaps looking at a sunset, or where you completely lost yourself in the moment of something you enjoy doing. Try to taste that feeling.

Now contrast that feeling with the first – the feeling generated within you when you won out on something.

Consider whether that first feeling is one of self-promotion – a worldly feeling, while the second feeling comes from somewhere else, something some would call your soul.

This is a reflection recommended to us by Anthony De Mello, a Jesuit priest from India. He says the worldly feelings control us, and make us controllable, and don’t provide the nourishment and happiness from when one contemplates nature or enjoys the company of one’s friends or one’s work. He suggests we are weighed down by these worldly motivations for approval, popularity, and power.

That is also a sustainability message. Because sustainability is not so much a challenge out there, but in here. It comes down to how mindful we are in our work. A sustainable wellness industry will flow from a sustainable wellness profession of people inspired by creating experiences that generate well-being for everyone involved, not just the client, and restoring the biological diversity and balance of our planet in the process.

The good news is that more and more people want that from us.

This time tomorrow you will hear from Adam Horler of LOHAS Asia, some new data on consumer attitudes to the environment and consumption, from across South East Asia. So I wont go into the data I have from last year. The positive news is that contrary to myth, middle class urban Asian consumers are concerned about the environment and would prefer better options on that issue. But today, Ill share with you some statistics on why it is so important we try to meet those consumers’ aspirations and help them turn it into behavioural change.

Since the conference opened here at 9am yesterday morning, just 24 hours ago, over 80,000 acres of tropical rainforest have been lost. Over a million tonnes of toxic waste have been released into our environment. Since 9am yesterday, 98,000 people on our planet died of starvation, tens of thousands of them children. In just a day, 137 species have been driven into extinction. In that time, up to 200,000 sharks have been killed, many of them endangered species, by removing their fins to flavour our soup. Perhaps it is no wonder then that an estimated 2 million people around the world took a day off work yesterday due to stress or depression.

We are exposed to bad news in the media on most days, and it seems so abstract and unconnected to us. It can make us numb, partly because we don’t know what to do. But if we repress certain feelings then that can come out in other ways, damaging ourselves and others. The numbness can also hold us back from acting on what we know and what we care about. There’s an American poet Drew Dellinger, who I particularly like for the way he reaches through this numbness. Suffering with this flu, I was bored in bed and listening to his poetry. One poem reached me in the middle of the night. It goes something like this:

“It’s 3:23 in the morning
and I’m awake
because my great great grandchildren
won’t let me sleep
my great great grandchildren
ask me in dreams
what did you do while the planet was plundered?
what did you do while the earth was unravelling?
Surely you did something when the seasons started failing
when the animals, reptiles and birds were all dying?
Did you fill the streets with protest when democracy was stolen?
What did you do?
Once you knew…”

When that touches us, even if its painful, we can be grateful for that, because we are feeling our extended self, our fuller self, expressing itself.

We are lucky we are not one of the people who suffered in the last 24 hours. We are probably lucky we are not our great great grandchildren. But we are also guilty. Not of inaction or apathy. Because we are already active in causing the problems I’ve described, through what we buy and what our savings get used for, who or what we work for or on. The problems in the world are not there from an absence of human action, but because of human action, in pursuit of profit and pride. The building, the lights, the food, our clothes, credit cards, the works, its all of us involved in all the difficulties I’ve just described.

Am I making you feel well? The sustainability agenda must make us question what we mean by wellness.

Some may cynically surmise that such malaise may mean a growth in demand for wellness services. But wellness seems to be more than health, moments of happiness and thin veil of calm. Rather, wellness is a form of contentment and balance, a way of being where one is both healer and whole. Providing people opportunities to awaken to their higher selves can be part of the wellness agenda. It might be unsettling, but ultimately can be deeply affirming. In any case, new evidence confirms that personal wellness and well-being is often affected by collective wellness and well-being.

Personal and collective wellness are connected in two key ways – environmental and social. A US government study published last month found a strong, consistent correlation between adult diabetes and particulate air pollution. There are also scientific studies published this year that correlate levels of air pollution, such as nitrous oxides, with levels of personal happiness. Studies also correlate more traffic congestion with less sense of well-being. We probably didn’t need scientists to work that one out.

Our proximity to nature also matters. Studies have found that post-operation patients housed in rooms with views of nature require less time in hospital and require fewer pain killers. In a study by the University of Illinois “those who lived in housing units with no immediate view of or access to nature reported a greater number of aggressive conflicts with partners or children than their peers who lived near trees and grass.” Our natural world is our common well-being.

The second way that personal and collective wellness is connected is through social factors. One study reported this year finds that if you are not in a good relationship, your injuries will take twice as long to heal, than if you are in a positive and nurturing relationship. Studies show correlations between unemployment, or poverty or economic inequality, with higher rates of crime. It is not surprising then that one study found that in the most economically unequal of states of the USA, 35 to 40 percent of the population feel they cannot trust other people, compared to only 10 percent in the more equal states. Not trusting each other, and being anxious of our rank in society, and what will happen if we slip back, is one explanation for why growing GDP has not correlated with growing levels of happiness, beyond a fairly low threshold. Even UN studies report more unequal societies are more unhappy, top to bottom.

Can one be well when many are not? Apparently not.

There are two major implications for the wellness industry from recognising this connection between personal and collective wellness, or from now on, between personal and global wellness. First, are implications for the relationship with the client. Second, the relationship with everyone else involved, and the environment.

Let’s consider the client. Instead of retreat many people seek reconnection. Jeorg DeMeuth, who runs Organic Spa and who you heard from yesterday, told me that he finds more “people are looking for a holistic experience, where they experience soul, mind and body. The new Spa is a kind of dreamland for new ideas and life concepts”. For those clients who don’t yet have this awareness, as professionals with access to the latest science on the relation between personal and global wellness do we have a responsibility to help lead more people towards that thinking, as it is in their own interests? Serving people by proposing something they don’t yet know they want is an old challenge. Henry Ford knew it well when he famously said, “If I asked my customers what they wanted, they’d tell me a faster horse.” We can serve customers by seeking to lead them.

How to lead customers in this way is an important questions. I want to learn about that, and am looking for examples to include in my next book, on sustainable luxury, so Id welcome chatting after, if you have tried it. I think one subtle way of leading consumers is to communicate how you are providing your services in more responsible ways. Demonstrating a practical manifestation of values can be a good teacher. This also connects to the the second main implication of the connection between personal and global wellness – unless you are supporting collective wellness through the actual operations of your wellness business, you are not really helping your clients’ individual wellness. If the products you use have no contaminants but their manufacture polluted the air we breath, rising our rates of diabetes, destabilising our climate, then that’s not so ‘well’.

I hear that there are many companies embracing this agenda, and some of them we are hearing about at this conference.

There are a variety of initiatives bringing people together to make this happen, such as The Campaign for Greener Healthcare, The Green Occupational Therapy Network, The Green Yoga Association and the Authentic Luxury Network which I launched with some people in the luxury world. There are also initiatives such as Green Globe’s standard for environmental management of Spas, which the luxury resort chain Six Senses developed with them. What is exciting is that we do not have to only focus on making less impact on the planet and people, but we can create products and services that make a positive impact on people and nature. For example, I’m an advisor to The UN’s Biotrade initiative, which is working with skincare and fragrance companies to develop product lines that create new revenues to pay for the conservation of species and their ecosystems. One participant is the Swiss fragrance firm Firmenich, who worked with the NGO Care International, to improve the lives of Vanilla farmers in Uganda, and incorporate that into the brand proposition for a new perfume by Estee Lauder and Donna Karan, called PureDKNY.

This is not about companies offering charity. It is about upgrading normal business operations. The sustainable wellness agenda is about how you make your money not how you give it away. It may seem complex but you can start anywhere, for instance by empowering your staff to become aware of issues and how they relate to their values and their healing practices, and then together discover ways of reducing negative impacts and making more positive contributions. You can look for guidelines and standards, and you can take lots of notes during Jeorg’s skills development session tomorrow.

In summary, I think wellness professions are important to sustainability and vice versa. It will soon be impossible to separate personal wellness from working on collective or global wellness. We will only integrate these properly if we have a heartfelt intention to serve all life through our work. That is an intention most of us share, but it gets covered up with all the stresses and strivings of everyday life. The reflection from Anthony de Mello at the start, helps us see that our world needs from us simply what we deeply need for ourselves. To be authentic, soulful and purposeful. We don’t have to be whole to heal – we just have to be on the way. Thank you.

[References to the data mentioned will appear in my forthcoming book, “Higher Ends”. Thanks to Lifeworth's Hanniah Tariq and Sara Walcott for research assistance, and comments from Matthew Slater and Ian Doyle on an earlier version. A video of the talk will appear soon].

View the summit at http://www.wellnesssummit.com

So, the field of measurement and disclosure of CSR and sustainability has become a bit funky. So, with that in mind, I was asked by Ethical Corporation contributor Rajesh Chhabara for my thoughts on the new disclosure agenda…

When considering the implications of the new ideas and interests, it is important to remember what CSR measurement and disclosure has been good for until now. Social and environmental reporting serves both internal and external communications functions. A reporting process is helpful for motivating people in an organisation to share information with each other. For that reason a deadline for an annual report works well. However, for external communications, not only is an annual report flawed, any report is flawed, because hardly anyone other than CSR consultants and ESG analysts actually read such reports.

Therefore, for internal communications reasons and to establish a baseline, all organisations should at some point complete a social and environmental report, but such a stand alone report does not need to be annual one. In saying that I’m not letting Chiquita off the hook – revelations in 2007 about relations with paramilitaries would have prompted many companies to appear concerned enough to do a stock-take of the company’s CSR. But a specialist annual report is not essential, because each stakeholder group has different interests, and can be engaged in different ways.

Action and performance on many environmental, social and governance issues are important to the commercial success of a business, and so they should increasingly be reported on in financial reports. Such reports should be annual, not quarterly, as constant reporting to investors encourages short-term and superficial targeting, as the board of Unilever have expressed more clearly than most. With such integrated reports, it is important for investors to receive information on actual impacts and performance, rather than only evidence of management systems. For instance, it needs to include hard data on actual carbon footprints, gender equality in pay, the number of court cases brought against the employer, and so on. There is more work to be done on the generation of credible protocols for producing such hard data, which is one of the conclusions of the recent UN’s Investor and Enterprise Responsibility Review, that I guest edited.

Integration is not everything, however, for at least three reasons. First, because not all environmental, social and governance issues are important to the commercial success of a business, yet are important to some stakeholders or wider society. For instance, child labour is of commercial importance due to reputational risk, while the absence of freedom of association and collective bargaining might be a root cause and potential solution to child labour, yet doesn’t present the same reputational risk and is therefore less relevant for understanding commercial performance implications. Consequently if all issues are viewed solely in terms of financial performance, some issues may be marginalised. Second, for good communication we should not whittle everything down to narrow metrics, as the field of corporate responsibility is always evolving and involves conversations between business and society. Third, because annual or even quarterly cycles of communication will not be useful for some stakeholders. Therefore, although integration of financial and other reporting is a useful trend, there is still a need for more open and engaging forms of communication on the social and environmental performance of business. Online tools and working with other organisations makes a lot of sense for achieving more interactive and exploratory conversations with stakeholders.

Companies can therefore benefit from releasing data and invite advice on various issues on a regular non scheduled basis through various online networks. They can even develop their own micro sites and smart phone apps for such initiatives, but it makes more sense to reach out to existing communities, such as JustMeans, 2Degrees and NetImpact. In time it is those independent non commercial and free websites that may be seen to host the most independent engagements with companies. I would be pleased to see a major company seek to engage the public through WiserEarth, for instance. And if you worry about not being able to control or turn off the debate if it turns bad? Forget it, the debate will happen somewhere at some point anyway.

Which brings me to the hottest part of the disclosure agenda, the deeper impacts of social networks on society and therefore any organisation. That means we should not limit our thinking to only looking at how a communications strategist may decide how a company reaches out. The changes from social networking challenge that view entirely.  Now your staff can interact outside the company with a wider range of informed professionals and the public on a daily basis. People always used to chat to people about work outside of work, but now this is wider as geography does not limit us, narrower as networks and search make relevant people easily identifiable, constant as the interactions can occur during work, and recorded as interactions often use text. Therefore staff need to be supported with the means to engage in such networks in productive ways, and that will be a major focus area for corporate responsibility professionals in firms in future, as companies begin to open up to the inevitability of needing to enable their staff to engage social media for their work.

This measurement and disclosure agenda is made all the more spicy by the rising criticism of the credibility and efficacy of the industry of environmental, social and governance analysts. Whether its NGOs, UNCTAD, industry insiders or CSR thinktanks, the ESG analysts have been coming in for some stick this autumn. The problem for the analyst firms is that as most keep their methodologies confidential, they don’t have much with which to respond. Their new owners might be wondering whether what is under the hood will be strong enough to drive through the storm, when the real issue is opening up the hood to improve the engine, and find new business models for analysis. We will look at that in issue 40 of the Journal of Corporate Citizenship.

In closing the seminar in Singapore, Mark Goyder of Tomorrow’s Company, reminded the audience that in all these debates and initiatives we shouldn’t take our eye of the real reason for working on measurement and disclosure… and that is to improve our practices in line with our values. Unless we start with clarity on our values, and how we impact others, then changes to forms of measurement and disclosure will not get to the heart of the matter, and not create real change. And heartfelt change is what makes something sexy, and what we must strive for if warranting the funky ‘chicks’ and ‘blokes’ self-image many assume in this field.

Now we are pleased to be participating in and promoting a new initiative to encourage sharing between brands on their CSR. Organised by Christopher H. Cordey, who is the founder of sustainable luxury consulting firm WholeBeauty and an associate of Lifeworth, the “Atelier for Sustainable Excellence” meets for the first time in Lausanne in September. Participating includes the Gucci Group, Jaeger-LeCoulture, Rosy Blue Diamonds, WWF, HEC Lausanne University and other luxury brands, as well as NGO and Corporate Responsibility experts.

Lifeworth’s Ian Doyle will be speaking about “Social Innovation in the Ethical Sourcing of Precious Gemstones”. He will describe trends in consumer and industry interest in ethical sourcing of gemstones, the key issues and action areas, including the importance of traceability, relationship building and a development focus, before presenting some examples of social innovation in practice.

More information on the event is at www.amiando.com/sustainableluxury20

Celebration is justified, as the UNGC has done more than any initiative to globalise the idea that voluntarily enhancing the social, environmental and ethical performance of business can be both good for business, and important for the world. But introspection is also justified, for two main reasons. First, the relationship between business and society has not improved markedly in the last 10 years, with problems including spiraling inequality, steeply rising carbon emissions, commodity inflation and speculation, and financial crises, all suggesting ineffective economic governance. CR practitioners need to grapple more clearly with these systemic problems if we are to provide significant solutions for sustainable development. Second, as CR is now an established agenda and there are hundreds of CR initiatives worldwide, so the role for the UN in the CR space needs to evolve. Therefore the UNGC could further clarify its role, specifically what the UN brings to CR and what CR brings to the UN. Given that the UN is our premier global political forum, and the UNGC is about business, so global economic governance would appear a natural and needed niche for the UNGC to embrace. Therefore, to coincide with the anniversary, the Journal of Corporate Citizenship published my analysis of the currently limited role of the UNGC in addressing economic governance.1 I argued that as it enters the 2nd decade the UN Global Compact must enhance its role in the transformation of economic governance for a fair and sustainable world economy. (footnotes to this blog can be downloaded as pdf from the bottom of this page)

The 10th anniversary has prompted others to discuss the role of the UNGC, both past and future.2 The Leader’s Summit reflected some of that thinking, with emphasis placed on the need to reach a “tipping point” in corporate responsibility and sustainability. Yet the UNGC needs to evolve its approach, including changing some of the approaches that have served it well in the first ten years, if it is to be effective over the next ten in encouraging that tipping point. Three things in particular could change.

First, the UNGC has had a member-recruitment orientation where it has sought to appear a safe and trusted partner to most corporations. That approach has helped it to grow. However, it has also meant that some more challenging issues have been sidestepped or sidelined. To achieve greater change these difficult issues need addressing, which will mean some companies become nervous or critical. Yet the UNGC now needs to show a strength of leadership to press ahead in concert with true global leaders.

Second, the UNGC has relied on the pro bono input from established consulting firms to build its programmes, with the consulting firms receiving high profile access and acclaim in return. This approach has helped the UN to speak the language of business, and be understood. However, the established consulting firms rarely challenge large corporations as they seek to serve them, and they rarely innovate ideas with impact because their business model does not allow time for a depth of reflection and research. Going forward, the UNGC needs to reach out beyond the conservative consulting firms in order to better encourage learning on how to reach a tipping point.

Third, the UNGC has stayed clear of issues of trade and investment policy. This approach has allowed it to move the CR agenda forward without protracted and highly politicised debates about trade agreements. However, the time has now come for core economic governance issues to be addressed, as well as the influence of business over related policy making, if a tipping point in CR is to be reached.

It is time for the UNGC to take more leadership on a transformative agenda. Previously the international reach and pulling-power of the UN flag was enough to make the UNGC a remarkable contribution, but in future it needs to add a third strength: interfacing CR with economic governance challenges. In doing that its secretariat and participants will need to enhance their understanding of four interlocking areas: social change processes, the ethics and accountability of new governance mechanisms, ways and means of reforming economic governance towards sustainable development, and the evolving role of the UN in world affairs, including economic affairs. Arising from this time of reflection, we need to see the same level of boldness and the creativity that gave rise to the Compact in the first place. Only then will it move from a global compact to a global impact. My experience at the Leader’s Summit suggested the ambition for a wider impact is only just beginning – hence my reason for writing this column.

The current limitations of the UNGC were illustrated by (not within) the report on CEO opinions on CR and sustainability, by an international consulting firm, which set the tone for the Leader’s Summit. On the one hand, it had some useful analysis of cross-cutting changes that are needed to mainstream CR, such as changes to the investment practices and regulations to internalise more externalities.3 It is promising to see such ideas expressed by CEOs, as hitherto they had only been discussed by more critical analysts, such as in these World Reviews and the Lifeworth Annual Reviews (particularly the review of 2005 “Serving Systemic Transformations”, and the 2006 “Tipping Frames”).4 On the other hand, the report and the research behind it was clearly designed to make the participating businesses feel comfortable, avoiding challenging questions. And oh, how comfortable the 766 CEOs who responded then appeared, with 81 percent agreeing that CR issues are “fully embedded into the strategy and operations of my company.” We are not told the identity of those CEOs, so we can only speculate whether BP’s Tony Hayward was one. Over 5000 other CEO members of the UNGC clearly felt comfortable enough not to even respond to this key survey requested of them by the UN. Some delegates thought the questions were rather bland, with delegate Dr Ven Pillay of the University of Pretoria wondering why CEOs were not asked direct questions like whether they would have their remuneration linked to independent measures of their firm’s social and environmental performance: surely not a worry for them if CR is embedded in strategy and operations already?

The report was what one would expect from a consultancy that seeks to tickle not ruffle the feathers of c-suite executives. That 81% figure may do wonders in drumming up new business from CEOs feeling they are behind the game. The past decade the UNGC has utilised the pro bono support of management consultants to establish its work programmes, and been keen to appear a trusted and careful partner of business. Yet might the UNGC have reached a stage after 10 years where it need not concern itself with appearing corporate-friendly and focus more on setting an ambitious change agenda, generating and disseminating methodologically sound, incisive and informative data on the realities of corporate responses to sustainable development? If so, are the academics up to it? There is less institutional self-interest in a university spending resources on a CEO opinion survey – they can not leverage the relations and profile in the same way after such a study.

The hope of having a wider systemic impact was expressed by the UNGC secretariat, in part by their increasing use of the terminology of sustainable development as an integrated goal for economy and society, that corporate responsibility initiatives should work towards. This new emphasis was captured well by Professor Malcolm Mc Intosh during the leaders’ commentaries posted on the summit website.5 A goal of reaching 20,000 members in 10 years was presented by the UNGC as a vision in keeping with its new emphasis on systemic change, which raises questions about people’s understanding of “systemic”. However, the Deputy Director of the UN Global Compact, Gavin Power, expressed a more ambitious call that “companies and investors must now work together to identify and overcome the barriers that prevent sustainability from being permanently embedded into the majority of global business activity.”6 In releasing The Blueprint for Corporate Sustainability Leadership the UNGC sought to define what it wants to see from participants, though they made it clear this document did not constitute a new requirement. The blueprint includes some useful emphasis on “taking action in support of broader UN goals and issues” including “advocacy and public policy engagement”.7 It is a start in outlining the importance of contributing to a movement for a transformation in economy, but it provides thin advice on what is a highly complex area. The phrase “tipping point” was used throughout the Leaders Summit, which was appropriate given we were in the city home to journalist Malcolm Gladwell who popularised the term. However, as any social scientist who has read his book understands, there is no clear theory of what a ‘tipping point’ is or how it is reached. If our topic here is how to create systemic change, where sufficient numbers of individuals or organisations change in order to re-pattern the way most of us behave, then there are many of fields of social science that we can draw upon. Draw on them we must, if we are to be serious and not rhetorical about seeking systemic change.

Insights on social change processes (in society and in meetings) can come from organisational change management, marketing, innovation and entrepreneurship, behavioural economics, social movements studies, network sciences, systems theories and cybernetics, institutional theory, social psychology, sociologies of power, design thinking, theories of art practice, and more. As sustainability and CR professionals begin to talk more explicitly about catalysing change in society, we need to find ways to draw upon such fields, integrate their insights and make them practical for practitioners and policy makers.

Currently the fields receiving the most attention are those that are most known to management consultants – such as marketing (the basis of most of the evidence in the book Tipping Point), and organisational change management (for instance the current popularity of the U-process to structure the design and facilitation of change-oriented meetings). It is not certain that the leading management consultants recognise the wealth of knowledge on social change. For instance, in April, McKinsey published a matrix on social change, suggesting it as a new contribution,8 when it was an unintentional recycling of philosopher Ken Wilber’s four quadrant model of the locations of change.9

If the Leaders Summit marks the beginning of a wider acknowledgement amongst the CR and sustainable business professions of the need to serve systemic transformations, then it needs to be followed rapidly by a new awareness about where to learn about such change. The famous management consultancies may not be the places to look for the relevant expertise, as there is a level of conceptual development required that costs time and money. My own experience of seeking insight from relevant intellectual traditions suggests a lengthy process for contributing to what could be termed a “social change management” agenda. First I had to increase my knowledge of the variety of intellectual traditions connected to change and which ones that seemed to hold particular potential for my work in CR. Then I had to immerse myself in the relevant academic literature, while discerning the key lessons for a wider audience, rather than the noise of self-referential debates that plague so much academic study. The third step I took was to share the results of this inquiry, as a workshop and publication, as part of a process of discovering its relevance for change makers. This process of translating social theories into relevant and usable tools is not only time consuming, but not often funded, as I discovered when attempting it with social movements theory10, network sciences11, and institutional theory. The strategic planning guide for transformative partnering that we are releasing latter this year is one output from this work.

As becoming smarter about social change processes is a key imperative for the UNGC and its members, then being smarter about the ethics of shaping such change is also key. The UNGC is said by some, such as conference blogger and leading CSR academic Dirk Matten, to be a part of an emerging global governance architecture.12 If initiatives like the UNGC and other private regulatory initiatives do achieve such power that governance is a useful term to describe their role, then this raises issues of accountability and fairness. In whose name do they govern?13 A prerequisite for addressing this issue and developing appropriate processes is for it to be recognised as warranting attention. Too often when people raise these issues, including at the Leaders Summit, senior business people cite how their business-like approach means they do not have time for such philosophical debates. That comes over a bit rich, given most are 100% dedicated communications professionals, unlike us small entrepreneurs.

To become smarter about the new mechanisms of governance, we could look towards the political economists who have been looking at business-state relations in depth for decades. The UN’s own research institute on development issues published a book in 2010 looking at precisely this issue.14 Through conceptual and historical analysis, as well as case studies from Brazil, Chile, India, Mexico, Peru, Russia and South Africa, this book examines the means by which corporations influence social, labour market and development policy, the reasons for their positions and the scope of their influence. It demonstrates how, under appropriate conditions, and with the right guidance, the inevitable political influence of large firms can be prevented from undermining inclusive development. Such in-depth examinations of the issues have not found a place within the debates and initiatives of the UNGC these past years. One reason for this is the interests of the political economists themselves, where the focus is on academic publishing rather than engaging policy makers, civil society and companies to see how their insights are relevant to practice. Another reason appears to be the limited interest from UNGC participants and conveners in engaging with intellectually challenging analyses, where synergies with voluntary corporate action are not immediately obvious. If these silos persist for the next 10 years then we will not progress far in enhancing the accountability and ethics of the emerging forms of private governance.

A third area to become smarter about is economic governance. The question at the heart of CR in general and the UNGC in particular is the impact of business and finance on society. The most important changes in that relationship have gone unaddressed by the UNGC. In recent years the financial crisis has highlighted the social impact of changes in market governance. Key issues include monetary reform and commodity market regulation, as recognised by the G20 French Presidency. Large corporations and their associations have an impact on those policy deliberations, so their positions on these issues should be under examination and discussion within the UNGC, as I explained in some detail in the JCC article.15 The UNGC has increased its work on the public policy dimensions of CR, for instance with Bertlesmann Foundation.16 This will be important scale up; indeed, it should be the start of a more comprehensive engagement with economic governance issues.

A fourth and related area for smarter action in future is the role of the UN in global economic governance. Since its creation post World War II the UN has been marginalised on economic issues by the traditional economic powers. Countries in the OECD and G8 have worked for the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organisation (WTO) and Bank of International Settlements (BIS) to be the key agents of global economic governance, because that is where they dominate the agenda and/or decisions. The UN is the closest we get to a democratic process representing interests of governments of the world, and so its initiatives on economic governance issues have the backing of the majority of the world’s governments, unlike the institutions mentioned above, or latterly the G20 club of powerful nations. Various parts of the UN system have sought a voice on the recent financial crisis, and been roundly ignored by the world’s largest economies. Indeed, recommendations from its agencies such as UNCTAD would, if heeded, have averted the current levels of economic inequality and instability that arose from a market fundamentalism enforced on nations by the IMF and World Bank. Some officials within the UNGC may have their own views on economic governance, trade and development, but the UN has in its mandate a role on economic governance. Moreover, as economic power continues to shift from the West to the rest, it is likely that as we emerge from this financial crisis, the majority of UN member states will no longer acquiesce to the dominance of global economic governance by institutions that are not representative of their interests. Therefore, if thinking ahead about the future of the UN, it would make sense for the UNGC to consider whether the interests of the majority of its business participants will best be served by a revamped role for the UN in global economic governance. That agenda may not be interesting to some company members based in the OECD or G8 countries, that have been the traditional leaders of CR and active in UNGC. However, the majority of UNGC members are from the rest of the world, and together could become the new leaders in a new phase of CR focused on systemic change in economic governance, that revitalises role of the UN in a more multi-polar world.

Simply through its existence, the UNGC has provided us new opportunities to imagine pathways towards sustainable futures for the planet. That is due to the incredible efforts of Georg Kell and his dedicated band of professionals and volunteers, who have been inspired by the idea that this could be a historic and game changing initiative. Ten years in, now is the time for the same level of bold creativity that gave rise to the Compact in the first place: to move from a global compact to a global impact. Some bureaucrats close to Ban Ki Moon regard him more as an administrator than a visionary leader.17 If that means we wont see the UNGC secretariat leading the way in addressing economic governance issues, then it will be necessary for the progressive participants to join together and form smaller groups that can learn together about social change, governance accountability, pressing economic challenges, and a revitalised role for the UN in global economic governance. If the UNGC does not address these areas in tangible ways in the coming years, then, unfortunately, it may be those people who argue the UNGC was designed to avoid core economic justice issues who will be the ones writing its history.

We’ve decided at Lifeworth to do our bit, and donate some time to systems change initiatives, which we announced at the Leaders Summit… click on the video to see my commitment from New York.

-
“From Global Compact to Global Impact”, by Jem Bendell, August 1st, 2010
For the references for this blog post, download it as pdf http://www.lifeworth.com/consult/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/globalimpact.pdf

Deadline July 16th.

Walpole is a not for profit organisation that furthers the interests of the British Luxury industry. Its membership comprises of over 130 of Britain’s most prestigious companies, including Asprey, Alfred Dunhill, Daks, Gleneagles, Jimmy Choo, Wedgwood, Burberry and cultural bodies such as the Sadler’s Wells, Somerset House, BAFTA and Victoria & Albert Museum.

Each year Walpole holds an award ceremony in London to celebrate the best of British luxury and culture. Luxury organisations from within the UK and internationally, put forth their nominations to win awards for various categories including; Best British Luxury Brand, Best Luxury Brand Online, International Luxury Brand, Best Luxury Brand Overseas, British Luxury Design Talent, Corporate Social Responsibility, Luxury Craftsmanship and more.
Through the awards Walpole aims to recognize and celebrate the most deserving businesses and individuals, who have achieved the pinnacle of excellence in their respective areas, and who have set a standard for business and industry within the UK. The awards truly bring together the most talented British luxury brands and most experienced British entrepreneurs and luxury industry figures. The 2009 judging panel included the likes of Stephen Fry, Lucy Yeomans, Dylan Jones, Anne Pitcher of Selfridges, Lucia van der Post, Gillian de Bono of How to Spend It, Brent Hoberman, and Richard Lambert of CBI.

Lifeworth’s CEO, Dr Jem Bendell, is a judge for the the Corporate Social Responsibility award. If you would like to be considered for an award, or propose another brand for consideration, please email one page on your case to jb@lifeworth.com and Kirstee.wilson@thewalpole.co.uk by July 16th 2010.

More on Walpole:

Walpole’s remit covers promotion of the luxury industry, the development and fostering of a community for the exchange of best practice ideas, shared experience and joint opportunities, to facilitate business development within the UK and internationally, representing members in Westminster and Brussels, to combine resources to improve issues such as IP and legislation affecting the industry alongside European counterparts, a developer of thought leadership for the industry and to promote and develop emerging brands and nurture the smaller crafts industries. The Walpole Awards this year will take place on Monday 15th November at the Banqueting House in Whitehall.

See www.thewalpole.co.uk for more information.

More on Luxury CSR Award Judge, Dr Jem Bendell

Associate Professor Jem Bendell is an advisor, educator, researcher and writer with fifteen years at the forefront of innovations in business responses to sustainable development.

With a PhD in international policy, over 100 publications (including four books and four United Nations reports), Dr Bendell is an award-winning international authority on business-society relations, lecturing in fifteen countries, and quoted in media such as The Financial Times, International Herald Tribune, El Pais, Tatler and on CNBC.

Since graduating from the University of Cambridge, Bendell has sought collaboration with people who seek to contribute to, and benefit from, the transformation of markets to promote global well-being.

Director of Lifeworth Consulting, coordinating a team of sixteen associates, Dr Bendell works with UN agencies, international charities, universities and luxury businesses, in over a dozen countries, having lived and worked in eight. He has helped create innovative initiatives, including: the Marine Stewardship Council, to endorse sustainable fisheries, The Financial Innovation Lab, to promote sustainable finance, founded and runs CSR Geneva, a network of over 700 professionals in Geneva, and the Authentic Luxury Network, for professionals promoting responsible luxury goods and services.

As an academic, Dr Bendell has lectured at business and design schools around the world, worked with the Dean of a business school in Australia to make it a leading sustainability school in the Asia Pacific, and been an academic convenor for three international conferences on this subject (in the UK, Switzerland and Australia).

Bendell’s current focus is the potential of luxury brands, international finance, management education and inter-organisational collaboration, to promote a movement towards global well-being. His “Deeper Luxury” report for WWF, on the responsibility of luxury brands, appeared in over 50 newspapers and magazines worldwide in the month of its release and continues to appear in fashion and business press today. Bendell’s fourth book, The Corporate Responsibility Movement, was published in 2009.

“Sustainable Fashion. The future of Luxury “

June 3, 2010, at midday.

Registration required: http://events.constantcontact.com/register/event?oeidk=a07e2ohoocub7bd368f

Why listen to Jem? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/26/style/26iht-luxury08-bendell.18173199.html

What else do we do on this? http://www.lifeworth.com/consult

Want to read about the topic? http://www.deeperluxury.com

Want to work on this topic? http://www.authenticluxury.net

If you would like a seminar on this topic for your own organisation, email connect[at]lifeworth.com to arrange a time to discuss.

See Jem in a CNBC documentary on this topic:

Click here to view the embedded video.

More info on these CSR Thursday lunchtime talks is at www.corporateresponsibility.ch

One participant, Pamela del Canto, who is a leading light in the sustainable luxury scene in Paris, and works with Business for Social Responsibility, is organising an informal drinks in Paris on May 7th. We are in town because of the 1.618 sustainable luxury fare, where Lifeworth Consulting’s Ian Doyle will be speaking about consumers and sustainable luxury.

Come join us. No need to confirm.

7:00 – 9 pm on May 7th, 2010

La Gare
19, Chaussée de la Muette
75016 Paris
Metro: La Muette (9)

And don’t forget to check out the show, if you are in town. http://www.1618-paris.com/

A note from Pamela Del Canto to send to your French speaking colleagues and friends follows below.

*********************

Chers membres,

Vous êtes cordialement invités à un apéritif organisé par Jem Bendell, fondateur du réseau Authentic Luxury Network et auteur de l’étude du WWF ‘Deeper Luxury’.

Occasion:

Il s’agit d’un apéritif informel organisé par Jem Bendell pour rencontrer les membres du réseau basés à Paris. Jem se rend à Paris pour assister au salon 1.618 où son collègue de Lifeworth Consulting, Ian Doyle, est invité à parler sur la consommation et le luxe durable.

Quand:

De 19h à 21h, le 7 mai, 2010

Où:

La Gare

19, Chaussée de la Muette

75016 Paris

Metro: La Muette (9)

Qui: Membres du Authentic Luxury Network basés à Paris.

J’espère que vous serez nombreux !

Chaleureusement,

Pamela del Canto

“I have been supporting a Pakistani investment fund in becoming aware of and familiar with the United Nations Principles on Responsible Investment (UNPRI)[1]. The aim is to help this fund in becoming a signatory and actively support the network and agenda in the Pakistani context.

At the beginning of the process, a dialogue was initiated with:

a) The Chairman/Managing Director and;
b) The Head of Corporate Governance and Corporate Affairs

(Both these players were kept in the loop from the beginning to insure upper level championing as well as implementation support during the process of signing up if the initiative was to go ahead).

The initial meetings were carried out with both to gauge the level of interest/ awareness in the organization about their principles regarding responsible investment and the benefits of signing up to the UNPRI. The process was then continued in an informative fashion with briefs prepared covering:

* Influence on returns
* Influence on brand
* Costs of signing
o staff,
o financial and;
o implications for fiduciary duty
* Internal Procedure for signing up

The information was then collated and presented for consideration to the Board of Directors on the 20nd of January 2010. The issue was passed unanimously and the Board was pleased to allow the company to become a signatory to the UNPRI. The matter was resolved further in the decision taken by the Board to authorize the Managing Director to be able to approve all necessary steps, measures and actions necessary to comply with the formalities needed to join the signatories of the UNPRI.

I am pleased to mention at this point that the fund that I have been talking about is the National Investment Trust limited (NITL), Pakistan’s first open ended mutual fund established in 1962 with the objective of stabilizing and developing the equity markets in the country. Over the course of its existence it has evolved into the country’s largest Asset management company, operating a number if funds in the category of Equity, Bond and Income.

The fact that the NITL has taken the step to become the first signatory in the region to this voluntary initiative on responsible investment has various positives.

Positive implications:

For the fund:

Influence on returns: Implementing the Principles will lead to a more complete understanding of a range of material issues, and this should ultimately result in increased returns and lower risk. There is increasing evidence that ESG issues can be material to performance of portfolios, particularly over the long term[2] .

Performance: through signing on the UNPRI the fund will have access to the latest research and tools for assessment of ESG issues and frameworks.

Influence on brand: The NIT would be the first asset owner to sign up not only in Pakistan but all of South Asia, and hence has the opportunity to emerge as a leading voice on environmentally and socially responsible investment as well as serve as an example and a conduit for UNPRI and other potential signatories in the region.

Networking: Building networks at the PRI in Person Annual Event bringing together signatories.

For the investment environment of the country:

Increase the visibility of the principles and environmental, Social and governance issues in the country’s investment landscape:

* With investments in Equity of 430 companies and Directorships in 140 companies, the NITL can have influence in improving the ESG structure if a significant population of the country’s companies.
* Considered a leader in the Mutual fund industry of Pakistan the NITL can influence other investment management companies in the country to consider supporting responsible investment in the country

Increase the visibility of the Pakistani investment industry in the globalised context and the international responsible investment dialogue through having an opportunity to be part of a global forum on the issue.

Platform for advancing north-south dialogue: At the PRI in Person Annual Event signatories get the oppurtunity to unlfuence the dialogue on responsible investment through brainstorming on implementation strategies, network and partners.
For the Initiative/ partnership

Local platform for engagement: Through having this large mutual fund as a signatory the UNPRI has a platform in Pakistan for increasing its visibility as the NITL can

* have influence in increasing awareness of the initiative in its investees and directorships
* can use its influence with other investment management companies in supporting the UNPRI.

Next steps:

Following the approval of the board, a letter to intent signed by the Chairman/ MD has been sent to the Executive director of the UNPRI secretariat. The next steps under way at the NIT include internal research on the following themes (staff time and my consultation time has been allocated to formulate a report covering the following by 5th Feb 2010):

* Gauging level of gap in current practice towards implementing the 6 principles in NIT operations
* Understand the types of activities that are suggested in the Principles,
* Investigate how other investors have used them

This information will then be used to begin the implementation process of the principles in the NIT from the date of approval of PRI membership.

So summing up…

Pakistan is now ready to have its first ever organization to step up in the international arena and voluntarily commit to integrating the consideration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues into its investment decision-making and ownership practices.

With more funds and management companies signing up, the country’s the investment environment could not only be able to project a responsible image globally but begin to shape what ESG means to themselves if enough interest is generated to be able to create country network. Ones present at the moment in Brazil, South Korea and South Africa are shaping the agenda by (in addition to promoting the principles in their regions etc) by committing to capture evolving best practice on how to factor ESG issues into investment processes and to implement the Principles[3] in their own contexts.

[1] www.unpri.org

[2] http://www.unpri.org/faqs/

[3] http://www.unpri.org/files/SA_network_final.pdf

Hanniah can be contacted via our contact form.

http://www.lifeworth.com/consult/connect/

In 2008 Lifeworth’s director Dr Jem Bendell had just finished giving a little talk on a cat walk, at an eco fashion show in Hong Kong run by EcoChic Fashions. Earlier that year, by Lac Leman, Louise Barber of the UNOG had told him that 2009 was to be the international year of natural fibres (yes, really, it was), and 2010 the international year of biodiversity. So, he thought, why not hold an eco fashion show at the UN, to promote these ideas, and encourage industry engagement. And, of course, have the fun of seeing a cat walk in the middle of the UN.

Its been a while in the pipeline but its now upon us, thanks to Eduardo Escobedo at UNCTAD, and Christina Dean at Green2Greener, and their dedicated colleagues… And.. you can attend! If you register. See below.

Redefining Sustainability in the International Agenda: Inspiring Greater Engagement in Biodiversity Issues

January 20–21, 2010

Room XIX – Palais des Nations, UN

Geneva, Switzerland

UNCTAD and Green2greener invite you  to come and join the more than 500 prominent figures from government, international organizations, and industry as they meet in Geneva on 20-21 January to call for action against the rapid loss of the world’s biodiversity.

This timely seminar will provide a collaborative platform to discuss the need to redefine sustainability. Through the viewpoint of the fashion and luxury industries, participants will gain a unique insight into the role that governments, businesses, and consumers can play in supporting biodiversity conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources.

Through interactive panel discussions and in-depth case studies, the 1.5 day seminar will cover issues such as

·         Redefining Sustainability: Why Biodiversity and Why Now?

·         How to Implement a Successful Sustainability Strategy

·         Educating and Engaging Consumers in Biodiversity Issues

·         The Rise of the Ethical Consumer and Eco-Fashion in the Mass Market

·         Luxury Brands as Sustainable Role Models

·         Environmental Traceability, Accountability and Certification

·         The Role of the Creative Industries in Developing Economies

·         The Role of Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships

·         Paving the road towards the CBD COP 10 and the revision of the International Biodiversity Targets.

Confirmed participants include representatives from business, international organizations, government, media and NGOs such as:

·            Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

·            Willen Wijnstekers, Secretary-General, Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES)

·            Dermot Rowan, Managing Director, Orla Kiely

·            Burak Cakmak, Director CSR, Gucci Group

·            Giulia Di Tommaso, Director of Legal Policy and International Relations, Unilever

·            Jean-Fraçois Fournon, Global Creative Director, Saatchi & Saatchi Simko

·            Hans Steisslinger, Head R&D Natural Cosmetics, Weleda Group AG

·            Peter Ingwersen, Founder, Noir

·            Tamsin Blanchard, Style Director, The Telegraph Magazine

·            Sarah Ratty, Founder and CEO, Ciel

·            Alphadi, President & Founder, Festival International de la Mode Africaine

·            Jean-Luc Ansel, Director General, Cosmetic Valley

·            Isabel Berz, Director Fashion School, Istituto Europea di Design Madrid

·            Kate Dillon, Model and M.P.A. in international development

·            Tamsin LeJeune, Founder, Ethical Fashion Forum

·            Erin O’Conner, Model

·            Summer Rayne Oaks, Model and Sustainability Strategist, SRO

and many others….

This must-attend event has been co-organised by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and Hong Kong charity Green2greener as part of the 2010 International Year of Biodiversity.

All activities will take place in Room XIX in the Palais des Nations (E-Building, third floor).

Pre-registration for the seminar is essential.

For further information, please contact Eduardo Escobedo at +41 22 917 5607 or by email eduardo.escobedo@unctad.org or visit www.unctad.org