As countries recognize and codify the need for legislation surrounding climate
action proposals — pushing corporations to reduce their carbon output and adopt
environmentally friendly practices and policies — there is a question that
remains largely unasked: Why do we have to create laws surrounding environmental
protection to get corporations to change?
We are nearing what the scientific community refers to as a point of no return
— we have 5-10
years
to drastically change how we produce, consume and dispose of consumer goods
before the effects of climate change become irreversible. Legislation is
undoubtedly a step in the right direction, but we should demand more from the
companies we support. While many corporations heavily rely on fossil fuels and
petroleum-based plastics, others are embracing alternatives — paving the way for
a new standard, largely driven by consumer preference. Alternative options that
embrace environmental safety already exist, and companies can still profit while
aligning with their customers’ personal
values.
So, why wait for regulation instead of doing better now? The answer is simple —
many businesses simply don’t want to, or don’t understand the benefits of
adapting to a more eco-conscious market.
Companies don’t have to wait for a Green New
Deal
to adopt policies that are better for the environment. We, along with the
majority of our Gen Z
peers,
are deeply concerned with the climate crisis and the corporate greed that
continues to drive profit. And yet, we are asked to sit back and wait — until
laws are put into place, until government officials recognize science, until
companies stop shifting the blame to their consumers for consuming the very
products they produce. We see a way to move the needle more quickly than with
regulation — action through spending habits and vocal opposition to corporations
that place shareholder interest over the collective good, starting with our own
entrepreneurial ambitions.
In August 2020, amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, we launched our company, Impact
Snacks — in large part, as a response to the
climate crisis and the alarming statistic that US consumers eat more than one
billion
snacks
every day. The goal has been simple: Make a healthy snack option that isn’t
environmentally harmful to produce, consume or dispose of. We immediately
recognized that we didn’t need to wait for regulation to force us to be more
environmentally conscious in our production and packaging methods. We could
simply start the type of business that we wanted to see — one focused on
planning for climate change, with consumer habits at the forefront. What that
means in practical terms is recognizing what technologies exist for better
packaging and services for offsetting carbon emissions existing throughout the
supply chain.
Cleaning up beauty's ugly impacts
Join us at SB'24 San Diego as Victor Casale — co-founder of Pact Collective and co-founder and CEO of MOB Beauty — shares insights from ongoing collaborations with materials innovators to create fully compostable, refillable, plastic-free, and easier-to-recycle packaging alternatives for beauty and wellness products.
It shouldn’t have to be difficult to make sustainable everyday purchases.
Sustainable packaging
solutions
are readily available. We should expect corporations to adopt non-plastic
alternatives,
even before legislation requires it. In 2015, a study found that our oceans
house 150 metric tonnes of plastic; and that number is steadily
rising.
While bioplastics cost more than traditional plastic packaging, we must demand
that companies relying on petroleum-based plastics change their packaging to
marine-degradable
bioplastics
before the effect on our planet is irreversible. If a snack startup in
Boston can handle the cost, surely industry giants can. Our generation
demands it. And, as demand increases for bioplastics production, the cost will
inevitably lower as it becomes easier and cheaper to produce. Biobased materials
already require less steps and total resources to produce than petrol-based
incumbents. The same realization happened with renewable energy — only a decade
or so ago, it was far too expensive to use at scale; but now it is cheaper than
fossil fuels in almost every major market.
Corporations are afraid of their production costs rising — shareholder interests
demand a high return on investment in order for companies to remain profitable
and competitive. The fastest way to meaningful change is by voting with our
dollar, demanding action from companies that have historically failed to meet
consumer expectations — or worse, used greenwashing as a means to make vague,
unmeasurable “commitments” to unwitting consumers. Through our buying habits and
boycotts, we get to choose where we spend our money; and with Gen Z representing
almost 40 percent of all consumers, that’s a big piece of the pie. 47 percent of
internet users have ditched brands that violate their personal values, with
protecting the environment topping the list of reasons why. It simply will not
remain viable to be a corporation that doesn’t address its impact on the
environment.
At Impact Snacks, we meticulously track our carbon emissions — and we believe
that other companies can and should as well, so they can offset those emissions.
There are systems in place that commercial products pass through, such as
shipping companies and post-consumer waste display boxes (90 percent recycled,
but still working toward 100 percent), that are unavoidable. We track it all,
from seed to harvest to production and shipment — as every company should. And
combating greenwashing is easy to do with transparency: Each of our superfood
bars creates approximately 0.37 lbs of carbon. Our carbon reclamation goal is
250 percent — which we meet by investing in clean energy infrastructure such as
solar farms, and reforesting communities across the world. In our first quarter,
we’ve planted more than 50,000 trees. It’s not difficult to do — and it’s what
consumers want from leaders in the food industry. We’re not waiting until we
have to.
The EU is banning all single-use
plastics
by 2025. California plans to ban the sale of gas-powered cars within 10
years. Canada is pushing for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. In
order to stay ahead of inevitable emissions regulations, companies are pledging
to achieve carbon
negativity.
You can either design products for inevitability or cease to exist. While
corporations as a whole haven’t traditionally built empires on altruism, markets
show that as consumers’ buying habits change, so do corporations. Products
marketed as sustainable grow 5.6 times
faster
than those that are not, making up over 50 percent of all CPG growth between
2013 and 2018. As Gen Z continues to gain buying power in the US economy, we can
expect this trend to continue.
With stakeholder fear as the driving factor for publicly traded corporations,
voting with our dollar really matters. Our generation, faced with the dire
consequences of previous generations’ (in)actions, expect better of corporations
that have traditionally been beholden only to finance — which is why we are
leading a movement, looking toward the future by embracing available options
immediately. In order to secure our future, we expect corporations to adopt
sustainable systems and methods that work with nature, rather than against it —
starting today.
Get the latest insights, trends, and innovations to help position yourself at the forefront of sustainable business leadership—delivered straight to your inbox.
Published Nov 9, 2020 7am EST / 4am PST / 12pm GMT / 1pm CET