Planet under Pressure

GLOBAL GOALS 

GLOBAL GOALS 

YEARBOOK 

YEARBOOK 

2020 

Planet under 

Pressure 

Global Goals Yearbook 2020 

1

This publication is kindly supported by: 

Arab African International Bank 

Audi 

BASF 

Bayer 

Beaulieu International Group 

Bosch Group 

Business Keeper 

CEMEX 

Clariant 

EDF Group 

Elomatic 

E.ON 

Green Delta Insurance Company 

Inditex 

iPoint-systems 

Knorr-Bremse 

K+S 

KYOCERA 

macondo foundation 

MAN 

Merck 

MTU Aero Engines 

Netafim 

Nomura Group 

pervormance international 

Philip Morris International 

Sakhalin Energy 

SAP 

Symrise 

Vonovia 

Wilo Group 

The Global Goals Yearbook is a product of macondo publishing GmbH in support of the Sustainable Development Goals, and the advancement of 

corporate sustainability globally. This publication is intended strictly for learning purposes. The inclusion of company names and / or examples 

does not constitute an endorsement of the individual companies by the United Nations. 

2 Global Goals Yearbook 2020

H.E. António Guterres 

The Covid-19 pandemic has plunged us into an 

UN Secretary-General 

acute health and economic crisis, the severity of 

“ 

which has not been seen in nearly a century. 

Secretary-General's remarks to 

High-level segment of the United The socio-economic impacts will likely unfold 

Nations Economic and Social Council 

for years to come. The crisis risks halting and 

on July, 17, 2020. 

reversing progress on poverty eradication, 

food security, gender equality and other Sustainable Development 

Goals. The pandemic has exposed and exacerbated vulnerabilities and 

inequalities within and among countries. It has reconfirmed that the 

systems on which we depend – food, trade, health, climate – are not only 

increasingly interdependent, but increasingly fragile. 

Indeed, the pandemic has underscored the world’s fragilities not just 

in the face of a health emergency, but in confronting the climate 

crisis, lawlessness in cyberspace, and the still-very-real risks of nuclear 

proliferation. As we strive to respond and recover, we must reexamine 

many longstanding assumptions and reconsider the approaches that 

have led us astray. 

We must also reimagine the way nations cooperate. The pandemic has 

underscored the need for a strengthened and renewed multilateralism: 

A multilateralism based on the powerful ideals and objectives enshrined 

in the Charter and in the agreements defined across the decades since. 

A multilateralism built on trust, that is based on international law 

and is geared towards the overarching goals of peace and security, 

human rights and sustainable development. We need a networked multi- 

lateralism, in which the United Nations and its agencies, the international 

financial institutions, regional organizations and others work 

together more effectively with stronger institutional links. And we need 

an inclusive multilateralism, drawing on the critical contributions of civil 

society, business, foundations, the research community, local authorities, 

cities and regional governments. 

This, in turn, will help lead to an effective multilateralism with the 

mechanisms it needs to make global governance work where it is needed. 


3

QUOTE 

3 H.E. António Guterres, 

United Nations 

Secretary-General 

6 PLANET UNDER 

PRESSURE 

RESILIENCE 

10 Resilience in the Time of 

Pandemic 

Dr. Elmer Lenzen 

50 Covid-19 Makes ESG Factors 

More Financially Relevant 

Meaghan Muldoon 

54 The Corona Effect 

Four Future Scenarios 

ECOLOGICAL LESSONS 

60 We Are Creating Conditions 

for Diseases such as Covid-19 

to Emerge 

John Vidal 

66 Caught on Film 

Actor & Activist Edward Norton 

James Evans 

70 Paradigm Shifts, Reactance, and 

Fighting Our Demons 

Prof. Dr. Harald Welzer 

REVIEW 

148 Review to the Global Goals 

Forum: Berlin – October 10, 2019 

2030 Agenda: Are we running 

out of time? 

17 The Planetary Momentum 

Prof. Dr. Dr. Stefan Brunnhuber 

22 "The most radical decelerator of 

our time" 

Hartmut Rosa 

POLITICAL LESSONS 

26 The EU Recovery and Resilience 

Plan 

Interview with EU Commissioner 

Paulo Gentiloni 

 

10 

Resilience in the Time 

of Pandemic 

32 10 Theses on the Coronavirus for 

the State and Society 

Dr. Markus Engels 

36 Global Governance vs. National 

Sovereignty: To Whom Does the 

Amazon Belong? 

Dr. Dominic Lenzi 

ECONOMIC LESSONS 

42 Guidance and Arguments for a 

More Sustainable World During 

Covid-19 Recovery 

Interview with Emily Auckland, 

Pietro Bertazzi, 

Prof. Dr. Maja Göpel, and 

Julian Hill-Landolt

26 

Interview with 

EU Commissioner 

Paulo Gentiloni 

GOOD PRACTICE 

78 Arab African International Bank 

80 Audi 

82 BASF 

84 Bayer 

86 Beaulieu International Group 

88 Bosch Group 

90 Business Keeper 

60 

We Are Creating Conditions 

for Diseases such as 

Covid-19 to Emerge 

92 CEMEX 

94 Clariant 

96 EDF Group 

98 Elomatic 

100 E.ON 

102 Green Delta Insurance Company 

104 Inditex 

106 iPoint-systems 

110 Knorr-Bremse 

112 K+S 

116 KYOCERA 

118 macondo foundation 

122 MAN 

124 Merck 

66 

Caught on Film 

Actor & Activist 

Edward Norton 

126 MTU Aero Engines 

128 Netafim 

130 Nomura Group 

132 pervormance international 

134 Philip Morris International 

138 Sakhalin Energy 

140 SAP 

142 Symrise 

144 Vonovia 

146 Wilo Group

Planet under 

Pressure 

The 2020s are the make-or-break decade 

for the Global Goals. We say this every 

decade, but this time it really is true. 2020 

ought to be a super year for nature issues. 

That's why we have chosen to focus on 

PLANET. But then lockdown came. Since 

then the world as we know is rapidly 

changing before our eyes. The Covid-19 

pandemic is a profound stress test for all 

life on earth. Many of the sustainability 

successes already achieved could fall victim 

to the crisis. That's why we have added 

the word PRESSURE. Now begins the time 

for a fresh start: Recover better, recover 

stronger, recover together. Three questions 

will be in the focus: What are the 

principles that will organize the future? 

How do we safeguard the path change to 

sustainability? How do we learn to deal 

constructively with asymmetric shocks, 

disruptions and conflicting goals? That 

means living on a planet under pressure. 

JUNE 

Originally planned 

timeline 2020 

UN Ocean Conference in Lisbon, Portugal 

“Scaling up ocean action based on science and innovation 

for the implementation of Goal 14: stocktaking, partnerships 

and solutions” 


JULY 

High-level Political Forum, in New York, USA 

"Accelerated action and transformative pathways: realizing the 

decade of action and delivery for sustainable development" 

SEPTEMBER 

Climate Week NYC 2020, in New York, USA 

... will explore what lessons we can learn in the pursuit of a 

net-zero future through just transition. 


7

SEPTEMBER 

Uniting Business LIVE 

Combining 3 in-person events to one virtual roundup: 

Private Sector Forum, Global Impact Forum and 

SDG Business Forum 

SEPTEMBER 

75th Anniversary of the UN 

"The Future We Want, the UN We Need: Reaffirming 

our Collective Commitment to Multilateralism" with 

pre-recorded statements by heads of state and government 


OCTOBER 

UN Biodiversity Conference (COP 15), in Kunming, China 

Thematic consultation on the sustainable use of biological 

diversity for the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework 

NOVEMBER 

COP26 UN Climate Conference, in Glasgow, UK 

The run-up to see if countries make long-term commitments 

to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. 


9


RESILIENCE 

Resilience 

in the Time of Pandemic 

How can we handle increasingly frequent shocks? What can a resilient society and 

economy that is in line with planetary boundaries look like? What options do we have, 

and which ones are already being implemented in practice? Can this work without 

risking our prosperity? 


11

Dr. Elmer Lenzen 

Publisher 

Global Goals Yearbook 

The Covid-19 pandemic is keeping 

the world in suspense in 2020 and 

beyond. By declaring a “lockdown,” 

countries around the world have temporarily 

frozen their social, economic, 

and cultural lives in order to slow the 

spread of the virus. 

When such unexpected events occur, 

experts speak of “asymmetric shocks.” 

However, the pandemic is not the only 

crisis in recent times: The last decade 

has been characterized by a whole series 

of severe shocks. The intervals between 

them appear to be getting shorter and 

shorter: the financial crisis in 2008/2009, 

the refugee crisis in 2015, Brexit (and, as 

a result, an EU integration crisis), unbelievable 

losses of biodiversity, increases in 

extreme weather events due to climate 

change, to name but a few. And it will 

not be the last crisis: In the aftermath of 

the lockdown, there are already signs of 

an impending global food crisis that is 

due to destroy supply chains, and a debt 

crisis – right up to national bankruptcy 

– due to the economic consequences of 

the pandemic. 

Living with the crisis: “The new 

normal“? 

If such crisis-like external influences are 

to a certain extent unavoidable, then 

the logical question is: What about our 

ability to adapt to such shocks? The ideas 

of vulnerability and resilience have recently 

gained a high level of prominence 

in the current economic and political 

debates. Specifically “resilience” has 

become a standard term in the OECD, 

the EU, and the G20 conference formats. 

In addition, in the Anglo-Saxon world, 

numerous grassroots movements have 

formed – participating in what they call 

“community resilience” – and are closely 

linked to the sufficiency, degrowth, and 

commons movements. 

Purely in terms of the number of mentions, 

the concept of “resilience” is in 

the process of supplanting that of “sustainability” 

due to the frequency with 

which it is being used in (economic) 

political discourse. However, the term 

also runs the risk of becoming a filler 

word to give new emphasis to old demands. 

The Bertelsmann Foundation 

rightly points this out in a study from 

2017: “However, the virtually inflationary 

use of the resilience concept has 

been accompanied by a lack of precision. 

In particular, there is often no 

clear understanding that alongside its 

static interpretation (retention of a system’s 

existing functions in the case of 

a crisis), crisis resilience also includes 

an adaptive dimension (adjustment to 

new surrounding conditions).” 

What exactly does resilience mean? 

The term “resilience” comes from the 

Latin resalire (to jump back). The English 

translation “resilience” is commonly 

translated as “resistant.” Many interpret 

this resilience to mean that one returns 

to the starting position after an external 

impact. This corresponds to the image of 

a pendulum. This is catchy and visual, 

but nevertheless wrong, because it does 

not take into account dynamic changes 

in the society: People can, for example, 

learn from past events and prepare for 

imponderables to come. In a natural system, 

processing shock is predetermined 

(natural curve); in a man-made system, 

we can shape it (learning curve). 

The Bertelsmann study therefore concludes: 

“Resilience thus no longer necessarily 

refers to the ability of a system to 

return to the old and unchanged state 

after a short deviation. Rather, adaptive 

resilience is based on the ability to make 

a transition to a possibly new state that 

is no less satisfactory than the old state.” 


RESILIENCE 

THE DISCOURSE ON VULNERABILITY 

AND RESILIENCE 

Connections to other discourses 

► Anthropocene: The debate about the Anthropocene shares similar 

approaches with the discourses on vulnerability and resilience – especially 

regarding socio-ecological systems. 

► Planetary boundaries: The discourse on planetary boundaries is strongly 

linked to the debate about the Anthropocene and was mainly established 

through the Stockholm Resilience Center, which was also involved in the 

popularization of the resilience discourse in the context of socio-ecological 

systems. 

► Good life: The debate about a good life – for example in the context of “Buen 

Vivir” in Latin America or Gross National Happiness in Bhutan – is gaining 

importance on the political level in Germany as well as internationally. 

► Security: While the vulnerability concept can be traced back to military 

research, the discourse on resilience is increasingly taking up room in 

debates on security policy. This is especially evident in the intense 

psychological debate on vulnerability and resilience of soldiers in the 

United States, and it is finding prominence within their training programs. 

Source: UBA 2017: Nachhaltigkeit 2.0 – Modernisierungsansätze zum Leitbild der 

nachhaltigen Entwicklung Diskurs „Vulnerabilität und Resilienz“ 

Back to the future or past? 

Already in ancient times, the philosopher 

Heraclitus knew that you cannot go into 

the same river twice. And so it is with 

the return to normality after an external 

shock event. If one keeps this in mind 

– and at the same time remembers the 

frequency with which the concept of resilience 

is used in politics – it is surprising 

that most definitions are extremely 

imprecise. A recent working paper of 

the European Central Bank, for example, 

says: “Resilience is understood here as 

the capacity to minimise output losses 

once an adverse shock hits the economy.” 

This equating of resilience with the reduction 

in growth impacts does not help 

us. The definition is backward-looking, 

and there is no reflection on how the 

“new normal” can look and be assessed 

after a crisis. A one-dimensional growth 

path is easy to measure, but that is no 

longer enough to explain a world that 

knows planetary boundaries, conflicting 

goals, and development goals. Let’s >> 

EFFECT OF A MASSIVE IMPACT ON THE SYSTEM 

Massive disturbance 

e.g. revolution 

System 

Tipping point 

System 

The degree of resilience is measured by the strength of the 

shock absorbed by the system before the original equilibrium 

is finally destabilized (“tipping point”). 

Damped vibrations 

after regime change 


13

take a closer look at the example of the 

Covid-19 pandemic: In retrospect, the 

pandemic mercilessly exposed the weaknesses 

of our globalized world. These 

include, in particular, the insights that 

• those at the bottom of the wealth and 

income spectrum are being hit the 

hardest by Covid-19; 

• there is underinvestment in almost all 

healthcare systems around the world; 

• (multilateral) institutions have badly 

eroded; 

• flattening the infection curve means 

also flattening the economic heartbeat; 

• there has been too big a focus of many 

company leaders on “just in time” production. 

At the same time, the discussion about 

the lessons of the crisis is gaining momentum. 

Economic recovery packages 

of well over $4 trillion have been 

launched all over the world to revive 

local economies. This is a once-in-ageneration 

opportunity; there will probably 

never be so much money available 

again in this century. Will we use this 

money in the short, medium, or long 

term? Are we going to use the thousands 

of billions for a very concrete, 

ecological-social transformation of the 

economy? A different, better future 

seems possible – with more solidarity 

and sustainability as well as a fundamentally 

rethought society. 

But the defenders of the old world order 

are also active: Lobbyists, industrial associations, 

and political parties are at 

their best worldwide. On the agenda 

are therefore not only sustainability 

goals, but also demands for subsidies, 

tax cuts, the weakening of climate goals, 

the postponement of the National Action 

Plans on Business and Human Rights, etc. 

These two opposing positions raise a 

number of fundamental questions: Do 

state interventions aimed at sustainable 

economic transformation fit in a time 

when many companies are struggling to 

survive? Why should we spend billions 

of dollars and euros to save jobs in the 

automotive, tourism, and aviation industries 

when such sectors may not have a 

future in a low-carbon world anyway? 

How do we know which industries will 

no longer be needed in the future? Are 

we using the crisis as an opportunity 

for change, or is it immoral to mix the 

plight of the crisis victims with social 

goals and desires? 


RESILIENCE 

How does resilience work in 

practice? 

The answers to these questions will be 

crucial in determining the strategies for 

the post–Covid-19 world. 

1. Economy 

The main issue now is to realign supply 

chains. Many experts suspect that there 

will be a de-globalization. Production 

will move closer to the sales markets 

again. It is no longer a question of “just 

in time,” but also “just in case.” However, 

we must not forget the consequences for 

workers in developing countries who 

could be affected by de-globalization. The 

American economist Barry Eichengreen 

therefore warns: “But this is a small 

problem compared to the impact on 

labor. In other words, while there has 

been no destruction of physical capital 

in the pandemic, the risk of damage to 

human capital is significant.” 

2. Society 

An exclusive interview with EU Commissioner 

Paolo Gentiloni, who is responsible 

for economic affairs as well as 

the SDGs, highlights the link between 

society, economy, and the environment. 

We talk about state opportunities, global 

interdependencies, and the dilemma 

of sustainability as a community and 

generational task. 

The state and its international communities 

play the leading role in absorbing 

external shocks, writes Markus Engels, 

Secretary-General of the Global Solutions 

Initiative, in his essay. But for the 

future, we need a debate about what 

kind of protections we want to retain 

for basic rights following this crisis. The 

good news is: Populist heads of state and 

government are part of the problem, not 

the solution. 

In a White Paper, The Zukunftsinstitut 

describes four possible scenarios of how 

the corona crisis 

can transform the world. They are based 

on two central basic coordinates that 

describe the possible directions of development: 

Successful relationships versus 

unsuccessful relationships (optimistic 

versus pessimistic), and local versus 

global (disconnected versus connected). 

This brings us to the important point that 

crises not only change systems, but also 

the people in the system. If acceleration 

is the problem, then the solution, argues 

the well-known sociologist Hartmut Rosa, 

lies in “resonance.” The quality of a 

human life cannot be measured simply 

in terms of resources, options, and moments 

of happiness, Rosa explains in an 

interview in this Yearbook. Instead, we 

must consider our resonance with the 

world. Resonance and resilience can 

perhaps be used synonymously. 

3. Agenda 2030 

What will be the new normal? What 

will happen after corona? These are 

frequently asked questions, but they do 

not go far enough. 

We had better ask ourselves: What are the 

principles that will organize the future? 

Guiding ideas such as “just transition” or 

“leave no one behind” continue to play 

an important role in this context. From 

a sustainability perspective, “keep it up” 

cannot be an option. Climate change, 

planetary overexploitation, and a lack 

of distributive justice speak against it. 

From a transformation point of view, the 

moment when there is less stability is 

the moment when there is a potential 

for much deeper and stronger change. 

Everybody feels that the future is much 

more open than it used to be. How that 

moment of instability is used depends 

on who is putting forward what kind of 

ideas, who has influence, and who gets 

more to say and to decide. A very vivid 

panel discussion with Emily Auckland 

(UKSSD), Julian Hill-Landolt (WBCSD), 

Maja Goepel (Scientists for Future), and 

Pietro Bertazzi (CDP) clearly shows the 

connection between sustainability, crisis, 

reconstruction, and pitfalls. 

4. Global megatrends 

What is important in all of this is that 

we not only grasp the current crisis, but 

also think about the other existing crises 

and the coming crises. Only then will 

our future be resilient. 

a) Loss of biodiversity 

Recent UN reports show that 1,000,000 

species are threatened with extinction. 

The IPBES Chair, Sir Robert Watson, says: 

“The health of ecosystems on which we 

and all other species depend is deteriorating 

more rapidly than ever. We are 

eroding the very foundations of our 

economies, livelihoods, food security, 

health, and quality of life worldwide.” 

This has an economic aspect: According 

to UN studies, the monetary value of 

goods and services provided by ecosystems 

is estimated to amount to about 

$33 trillion per year. The other aspect is 

health: As habitat and biodiversity losses 

increase globally, the novel coronavirus 

outbreak may be just the beginning of 

mass pandemics, says John Vidal. In >> 


15

his article, he warns that we are creating 

conditions for diseases such as Covid-19 

to emerge. 

b) Climate change and consumption 

In his essay, Harald Welzer warns that 

the ecological problems of the present 

day, and climate change too, are ultimately 

due to the fact that expansive 

luxury consumption unleashes its 

destructive power, especially when it 

becomes mass consumption. We as individuals 

do things that we know to be 

wrong but we cope with it astoundingly 

well. Changing behavior means "fighting 

our demons." 

But there is hope: Project Civilization 

is not over and continues still today. 

But neither does it have a finite goal or 

an ultimate solution. Society must be 

adaptable to changing conditions and 

requirements and deal with mistakes 

and collateral damage – and therefore 

be correctable. 

c) Multilateralism 

believes that the Amazon fires show 

why we need global governance in the 

Anthropocene. 

d) The efficiency trap 

The WBCSD states in a recent study: “In 

the coming months and years, companies 

will need to prioritize resilience-building 

to ensure they are better prepared for the 

next shock when it comes. For many, this 

will mean establishing a better balance 

between efficiency and resilience in everything 

from supply chain configuration 

to financial management.” 

Unconsidered efficiency becomes a risk: 

Overly complex systems and supply 

chains are very sensitive. Agriculture 

also teaches us that although monocultures 

are very efficient, they also 

lead to high vulnerability. Eichengreen 

concludes: “For firms, enhanced security 

and certainty will mean higher costs and 

lower productivity, which will translate 

into higher prices for consumers.” 

The planetary limits of growth play another 

important role. In our world, dealing 

with limited resources is a constant reality, 

and therefore normal. Mario Schmidt 

writes an essay on the importance of efficiency 

for sustainability: “In the market 

economy, the profit motive of individuals 

is used to accomplish this task. However, 

the maximization of profits by companies 

is only a means to an end and not, as is 

often circulated, the goal in itself. An 

economy that does not fulfill its social 

function is ultimately impractical.” 

The road to recovery is paved with uncertainty, 

agrees EU Commissioner for 

Economy, Paolo Gentiloni. And he adds 

in his detailed interview that the EU 

will continue defending multilateralism 

while working to adapt it to the new 

realities of our highly connected and 

digitalized world economy. 

A practical example of this debate on 

multilateralism, the borders of the 

nation-state, and the obligations of the 

global community is the dispute over 

the protection of the Amazon. Lenzi 


The Planetary 

Momentum 

RESILIENCE 

Asymmetric shocks, global mental 

preparedness for change – the paradigm 

shift and the economics of anti-fragility 

Prof. Dr. Dr. Stefan 

Brunnhuber 

Professor for Sustainability 

and Psychology 

Member of the Club of Rome 

Asymmetric shocks are the “new normal” 

I Asymmetric shocks are shocks that hit human societies even 

though we think we have done everything right, and even 

though we believe we have not caused this shock. II Asymmetric 

shocks affect human societies in an uneven manner, 

hitting some harder than others. III Asymmetric shocks affect 

entire systems in disruptive and extreme ways, requiring 

interventions that go beyond well-known conventional tools 

and instruments. Covid-19, global warming, financial crises, 

loss of biodiversity, plastic waste, forced migration, terrorist 

attacks, failed states, and ongoing deforestation are examples 

of such asymmetric shocks. 

These shocks can hit anybody on this planet, irrespective 

of where they live, how old they are, how much they earn 

– anytime and anywhere. In general, any system hit by an 

asymmetric shock experiences stress and is put under >> 


17

pressure to adapt to the new circumstances. Depending on 

the severity of the stressor, its duration, and the system’s own 

configuration and resilience, systems either have to readjust 

the given rules to improve their governance in order to better 

cope with the stressor, or they have to question the rules 

of the game themselves in a more radical manner. In this 

second alternative, the system needs to find new ways of selforganization, 

a new set of rules, and new ways of doing and 

processing. As a world community, we presently find ourselves 

in such a situation. Asymmetric shocks have become the new 

normal, and this requires us to change the rules of the game. 

A 

B 

Rules of the game 

identifying the rules 

under which governance 

should play out 

Playing the game 

improving, operating, 

competing, and following 

the rules of the game 

Two forms of governance: 

A rules of the game 

B playing the game 

Governance 

Process governance 

remaining agnostic about 

the results like chess, 

monopoly or market 

Goal governance 

determined by the targets 

to be achieved like social 

and enviromental projects 

Though humanity has always experienced crises, catastrophes, 

and conflicts, this time is different: As a world community 

in the 21st century, we are better equipped with empirical 

scientific evidence than ever; we have a deeper and better 

understanding of complex, non-linear systems; we have dozens 

of new disruptive digital technologies at hand that can help 

us to navigate this Kairos moment; and we have a strong third 

sector involving millions of non-governmental organizations 

able to step in with their expertise and hands-on experience, 

well-placed to change the world. In fact, this Kairos moment 

helps us to better understand that, historically, globalization 

started some 100 years ago with the trading of goods, followed 

first by the exchange of capital flows all over the world, and 

then by the exchange of services. Until 1989, globalization 

followed the aim of increasing national wealth and well-being. 

Following the 1992 Washington Consensus, however, globalization 

became an end in itself, with isolated agencies and 

individuals able to benefit, and nations themselves becoming 

a means of enriching this globalized elite. This overstretching, 

which lasted almost three decades, is now over. Now we are 

entering “Globalization 4.0,” where we not only share goods, 

capital, and services, but also where we are poised to share 

common values such as trust, cooperation, reciprocal tolerance, 

and agnostic solidarity. about We are starting to understand that we 

remaining 

the need results a failure-friendly like chess, environment in which we can make 

monopoly mistakes or market and accept advice from others without losing face 

– all on a global scale. It is this form of Globalization 4.0 that 

will provide us with the required humility and grace, grit, and 

determined by the targets 

mindfulness to move forward toward a new era. 

to be achieved like social, 

enviromental projects 

Dealing with uncertainty: Dancing with the system and 

finding the right attractor 

Global mental preparedness for change: The “Kairos 

moment” 

Any changes to the rules of the game require the mental readiness 

to do so. For the first time in history, we are witnessing 

a collective mental readiness across the globe for change for 

the 7.5 billion humans on this planet. The viral pandemic has 

triggered this preparedness. Governments all over the world 

have proven they are willing to take radical steps and bold 

decisions, embracing more far-reaching perspectives than 

ever before. However, there are now two ways to go. One way 

takes us back into a business-as-usual scenario, whereas the 

other leads us forwards toward new thinking, making a new 

paradigm possible. Humanity has not experienced an opportunity 

like this for decades, if not centuries. This is a kind of 

“Kairos moment.” In Greek mythology, Kairos was the god of 

the right moment and the perfect opportunity. We are now 

experiencing such a Kairos moment. 

Never in history have we been confronted with so much 

information, so much ignorance, and so many unknown 

factors at the same time, and never have we had to take so 

many relevant decisions under such uncertainties and time 

pressures. The uncertainties we face are not entirely quantifiable, 

and probability statistics will not help us to put a price 

tag on them. They are not complicated puzzles we can solve, 

but rather complex mysteries we can discover. These uncertainties 

form part of the systems dynamic of every complex 

system. They will not go away, but rather require us to adopt 

a different attitude. There are several ways of dealing with 

such uncertainties. The most prominent way is to create a 

false illusion of control through increased regulatory efforts 

and more data. Another way is to start avoiding complexity 

through denial. A third prominent way is to adopt the so-called 

fight or flight mode. 

Either way, these approaches are insufficient and inappropriate 

for coping with non-linear, complex systems. They 


RESILIENCE 

Degrees of globalization 

Globalization 1.0 

Trading of goods (terms of trade) 


Globally shared values 


Trading of services – digitalization 


Free capital flow – foreign direct investment (FDI) 

◄ 1920 1980 1990 2020 ► 


Sustainability 

100 

Optimum 

Anti-fragile zone 

Natural ecosystems 

will then start to engage and deal with 

the dilemmas and paradoxes that will not 

go away, we will begin to accept that the 

unknown is part of any decision-making 

and is sharply distinguished from purely 

statistical probabilities, and we may end 

up with the capability to distinguish 

between “relevant” and “less relevant” 

issues. If this assessment is correct, then 

identifying singular cause–effect relations 

through isolated experimental and 

analytical designs that only rarely occur 

in complex living systems will provide 

us with little additional information to 

solve complex problems. 

Acknowledging this scenario, it will become 

more rational for our risk assessments 

to look into the future and identify 

so-called attractors. Attractors are like 

funnels that pull all of a system’s major 

variables toward the future, rather than 

these variables being pushed by singular 

causal links from the past. Our financial 

system, digitization, and shifts in our 

gravity of consciousness constitute such 

fundamental attractors. 

Toward an anti-fragile economics: 

Improving through failure 

0 

Resilience 

diversity + interconnections 

The anti-fragile zone: Improving through failure 

cause asymmetric shocks, Black Swan effects, uncontrollable 

exponential developments, unexpected knock-on effects, irreversible 

tipping points, and feedback loops that nobody can 

foresee. Instead, we need to learn to “dance with” or “ride” 

the system. This might require us to take a mental pause and 

embrace failure-friendly procedures that allow us to explore 

new territories and engage in outside-the-box thinking, where 

revision, critical public discourse, the introduction of new 

ideas, and a new paradigm become the game changers. We 

Efficiency 

streamlined 

Living in a complex, connected, and 

constrained world in which non-linear, 

non-sequential effects prevail and interdependencies 

and multiple perspectives 

dominate – a world in which we have to 

operate within planetary boundaries and 

are equipped with imperfect information 

to change the course of history – we have 

a collective interest not only in moving 

out of the current crisis, but also in solving 

the associated problems that caused 

the crisis in the first place. The time after 

one asymmetric shock is quite literally the time before the 

next asymmetric shock. Acknowledging this, we can see that 

complex systems find their optimum not in an ever-increasing, 

expanding, and streamlined throughput per time, referred to 

as “efficiency” (measured in global value chains), but rather in 

a balance between efficiency and “resilience” (measured in the 

amount of diversity and interconnectedness), sometimes called 

the anti-fragile zone. This zone describes a situation in which 

we can start to improve and gain from failure. 

>> 


19

The question is: How does this antifragile 

zone translate into concrete 

steps? 

We will start considering new forms of 

risk management whereby “total cost 

analysis,” which takes the liability of 

the entire value chain into account, becomes 

more relevant. This would, in 

consequence, honor circular “forms of 

economy,” where we look at our business 

not as a river, where everything downstream 

is depreciated and outsourced, 

but rather like a lake, where we need 

to take potential negative externalities 

into account. We will begin to decouple 

business from globalization and reach 

out to more local, regional, and national 

clients and supply chains instead of 

global ones. Multi-channel supply chains 

and more regional markets will become 

key. This process of “regionalization” 

already started after the 2008 financial 

crisis. Fifty percent of China’s trade is 

now with Asia itself, and 70 percent 

of the EU’s trading partners are other 

EU members. The same is true for the 

Americas. This trend will continue. 

In such a situation, where less efficiency 

and more resilience is required, we will 

look very carefully at the concentration 

and size of private businesses and 

ensure that they are not “too big to fail,” 

which would force the public sector and 

taxpayer to bail them out when the next 

crisis comes around. Instead, we will 

favor small but high-performing businesses 

(from SMEs to hidden champions). 

This could also include new forms of regulated 

credit default swaps that help private 

companies to better hedge their risks. 

Taking this argument one step further 

would mean that there will be a renaissance 

of governance, administration, and 

regulation. This should include a new 

mandate for monetary regulators (green 

Quantitative Easing, parallel digital currencies, 

sovereign green bonds), a new 

set of antitrust laws that guarantee fair 

market competition, higher quality, and 

lower prices, especially for the digital 

platform economy. This renaissance of 

governance and regulation will put the 

perverse subsidies of the agricultural sector 

on the table and set up a new form of 

political economic agenda, enabling and 

ensuring that system-relevant industries 

(healthcare, pharmaceuticals) and public 

affairs (research and education, public 

infrastructure) are properly regulated 

for the good of the citizens. 

Where digitization will further penetrate 

our daily lives, our work places, and our 

businesses as a whole, where millions 

of jobs will potentially become replaced 

by robots and automated industries, we 

need to reframe the social fabric in an 

intelligent manner by starting to provide 

an unconditional basic income. This 

would send the message that there are 

no more “useless” people, instead turning 

them into those “needed, wanted, 

and required” for a new age and a new 

society. 

In a more general sense, we will need 

to address the topic of commons and 

clarify what a private good and service 

is and what is better managed as a public 

good. Healthcare, education, and infrastructure 

are examples of the latter. This 

would include a shift in our energy sector 

away from the centralized fossil industry 


RESILIENCE 

Where digitization 

will further penetrate 

our daily lives, our 

work places, and our 

businesses as a whole, 

where millions of jobs 

will potentially become 

replaced by robots and 

automated industries, 

we need to reframe 

the social fabric in an 

intelligent manner by 

starting to provide an 

unconditional basic 

income. 

toward more decentralized and regionalized 

renewables. Social entrepreneurship will 

gain momentum over Big Pharma, Big 

Banking, Big Farming, and Big Energy, 

where downsizing and rightsizing will 

generate a sense of “small is beautiful” 

that will become the new standard. This 

could even mean that we shift away 

from a more production-based economy 

toward a more care-based economy, where 

human-centered services (nursing, social 

work, cultural creatives) are honored 

and properly reimbursed. Any necessary 

production will be done by a robot 

anyway. This anti-fragile zone does not 

stop at the societal level, but includes 

new consumption patterns and lifestyle 

modifications on a personal level, too. 

There are countless examples, including 

traveling on public transport, riding 

a bike, becoming a vegetarian, being 

engaged in neighborhood activities, and 

so on. The following table summarize 

major changes in the corporate business 

model and in consumer behaviors to 

ensure the shift. 

This altogether will finally change our 

gravity of consciousness, where mindfulness, 

gratitude, humility and forgiveness 

will set the path toward a fairer, greener 

and more sustainable future. All this is 

not an easy task, but it will help us to 

better discriminate between the parallel, 

multiple worlds we are living in simultaneously 

that require different forms of 

responsibilities. We might conclude that 

instead of being observers and spectators, 

we already have become indispensable 

players who have the skin in the game. 

This is the planetary momentum we 

have right now to change the world. 

The four "Rs" 

Examples 

Risk assessment 

• Total cost analysis (TCA) 

• Taxonomy, Recording, Disclosure (ESC-criteria) 

• Regulated credit default swaps (CDS) 

Regionalization 

Regulation 

• Decentralized energy supply and business value chains 

• From production-based to care-based economy 

• Circular economy 

• Decoupling business from globalization 

• Small is beautiful 

• Renaissance of governance (taxation, surveillance, stress tests) 

• Redefining the commons (healthcare; education, environment) 

• New social fabric addressing digitalization (unconditioned income) 

• Extended central bank mandate (green QE, parallel currencies, CBDC) 

• Avoiding ‚ "Too big to fail" (anti-trust laws) 

Reshaping behavior 

• Individual mobility 

• Diet preferences 

• Housing and living 

The four "Rs": risk assessments, regionalization, regulation, and reshaping individual behavior 


21

Sociologist Hartmut Rosa 

“ 

on Covid-19 

“The most 

radical 

decelerator of 

our time 

The uncontrollable coronavirus has people worldwide 

feeling uncertain, says sociologist Hartmut Rosa. But 

the crisis may also harbor an opportunity. An interview 

conducted by Elena Matera.” 


RESILIENCE 

Professor Rosa, in your books you write about 

social acceleration in the modern age. What 

effect is the coronavirus pandemic having here? 

The virus is the most radical decelerator 

that we have experienced in the past 

200 years. There have been moments 

like this from time to time in the past, 

for example after September 11, or after 

the volcanic eruption in Iceland. In both 

cases, air travel came to a halt temporarily. 

They were partial decelerators. Public 

life was not affected. 

It is historically unprecedented for the 

modern age, which constantly feeds off 

of acceleration, to decelerate as radically 

as it has now. It’s as if it had stomped on 

the brakes. What’s fascinating about it, 

in fact, is that we are the ones stomping 

on the brakes. It’s not as if the virus were 

eating up our airplanes. We are placing 

restrictions on ourselves as a precautionary 

measure, which is remarkable indeed. 

What are these restrictions doing to people? 

For us, many things that were a matter of 

course until just recently are now out of 

reach: Businesses are closed, events are 

canceled. As a result, our global reach 

has grown much, much narrower, both 

physically and in terms of time. 

My theory is that we are always looking 

to broaden our global reach, move faster, 

go further. Right now, the physical reach 

for most people is dwindling down to 

their own four walls. And when it comes 

to time, no one knows what things are 

going to look like a week or two from 

now. The virus is the epitome of a monstrous 

unavailability. 

Care to elaborate? 

We try to make our world fully controllable, 

predictable, reachable. Strangely 

enough, these attempts tend to make 

unavailability return in a monstrous way. 

We’re experiencing that right now with 

the virus. It’s new; we don’t know exactly 

where it comes from, how it acts, or how 

we can get it under control medically. 

We can’t control it politically or regulate 

it legally, and it has incalculable consequences 

economically. We can’t see 

it, hear it, or smell it. It is beyond our 

everyday grasp. And society is acting as 

one might expect: It’s trying to frantically 

restore availability. 

How do you mean? 

We absolutely want to get the virus under 

control. To do so, society is even 

accepting massive restrictions. It’s fascinating 

to watch, and we can all see it 

in ourselves. I believe we are currently 

in the midst of a huge experiment. It is 

narrowing the global reach of the physical 

world in a totally unforeseen way. 

Is the widespread panic buying an attempt to 

maintain our global reach? 

You could say that. By setting our global 

reach a certain way, we want things to 

be available. Now people see a threat. So 

they want to make sure that basic things 

are available in case something happens. 

Up to now, we’ve been sure that there 

will be enough toilet paper in stores. 

Now there’s this uncertainty that the 

store might be closed tomorrow. We’re 

finding out that not everything is available, 

and now we have to learn to live 

with it. But right now, we’re still in the 

mode that we’re used to. 

What do you mean by that? 

You could call it “rat race mode,” where 

we constantly need to check items off 

our to-do lists. In this crisis, we can no 

longer physically live out this habit of 

“I need to go here real quick right now, 

I need to go there real quick right now.” 

But we can digitally. We’re saying, “I 

need to post something here and post 

something there, what’s in the news, 

what are the stats?” We’re continuing 

to accelerate in the digital world, with 

even greater strength. 

What impact is this shift in acceleration to the 

digital world having? Are we going to miss 

having contact with people in the long run? 

I would say so. The big question is: Can 

video conferencing or social media replace 

real contact? I think it’s important 

to have such options. But this kind of 

communication doesn’t seem to have 

the same quality as physical contact. >> 


23

That’s why I believe people are currently 

feeling that something is missing – 

they’re feeling a sense of alienation, so 

to speak. Alienation is a disturbance in 

our relationship to the world. And it’s 

something we can feel collectively right 

now. We’re building up mistrust: The 

doorknob, the banister, all that could 

be contaminated. You can’t hug people 

anymore, we’re distrustful of them. Our 

relationship to the world is disturbed 

as a result. 

And how can we deal with that? 

There are two options. One is to regain 

control over everything, to flee into all 

the social media channels – to post 

something here, and post something 

there. That’s what we normally do: 

control, regulate, optimize. The second 

mode is to listen to ourselves and the 

world again. 

I believe we should individually and 

collectively try to shift into this second 

mode. In this new situation, we are all 

by ourselves in our homes or apartments, 

maybe with a cat – along with our lives. 

It could be an opportunity to create new 

patterns of togetherness. 

for the first time in a while. I call that 

“resonance,” a mode of hearing and responding. 

My hope is that it could perhaps 

also be a moment of collective pause 

and that we might now think about the 

way we navigate and perceive the world. 

People are supposed to stay at home and avoid 

social contact as much as possible. Why are so 

many people not following those instructions? 

I think the problem is that we don’t 

really notice the virus at all. Very, very 

few of us are around truly ill people. 

There’s no existential crisis that you 

can physically feel. And that makes 

it hard to grasp personal contact as 

something bad. 

People are programmed to seek contact. 

Social relationships are one of the four 

axes of resonance. That’s gone right now, 

“ 

My hope is that 

it could perhaps 

also be a moment 

of collective 

pause and that 

we might now 

think about the 

way we navigate 

and perceive 

the world. 

One example is the concerts on balconies 

that are taking place in Italy. We’re finding 

a new way of being in the world. So 

the social crisis situation may also harbor 

an opportunity. 

How can a society shift into this second mode? 

At first, I thought, “This kind of forced 

deceleration is great.” But apparently 

we’re not finding our way out of the ratrace 

mode that quickly after all. Maybe 

we will with time. Right now, we’re 

focused on the world around us. 

Suddenly, we’re spending a lot of time 

looking out the window, seeing the first 

flowers, or really noticing the neighbors 


RESILIENCE 

since we’re no longer able to embrace 

or meet each other. However, this crisis 

also presents us with an opportunity to 

discover the other resonance axes. 

One of them is the relationship to objects 

or things, such as a piano or a paintbrush. 

Then there’s the axis of existential 

spheres, such as art, nature, religion. And 

the last axis is the self axis: feeling and 

perceiving one’s self. The deceleration 

is also having an impact on nature. The 

canals in Venice are clear again, and the 

first dolphins have been spotted off the 

coast of Sardinia. 

Could these changes also have a positive effect 

for the future? 

I’m skeptical here. Dolphins off the coast 

of Sardinia will lead to people going to 

Sardinia to see the dolphins. That’s the 

mode of wanting to make things reachable 

and available. You can’t switch it off 

just like that. We can directly see the way 

climate change is changing the world. 

Yet, so far it has had zero effect on the 

way we live and act. I’m also skeptical 

because we have this compulsion to 

want to go higher and faster and further. 

The institutional logic of society is that 

it can only maintain the things it has 

– state pensions, healthcare, incomes, 

jobs – through constant expansion and 

growth. So we can’t just up and say, 

“That’s enough.” 

Why do you believe that? 

I think it would lead to a crisis. That’s 

why the great unknown right now is 

not just how we want to live as human 

beings, but also how we are going to 

manage to do so institutionally. The 

economic side of things is going to play 

a decisive role here. For the time being, I 

expect there to be a huge economic crisis. 

After that, we’re probably going to want 

to stimulate growth again. People are 

going to have to consume, spend money, 

produce – back to acceleration. But 

maybe there’s hope yet of a change in 

the way we think. We ought to see the 

crisis not only as forced deceleration, 

but perhaps also as a collective pause. 

Would you have thought that this kind of 

global deceleration was possible? 

I myself, as a sociologist, am surprised 

that all of the things I talk about are 

suddenly apparent for all to see. The 

deceleration is upon us in a way no one 

would ever have dared to imagine. I find 

this monstrous unavailability particularly 

interesting. Suddenly there’s this 

virus we don’t have under control. That 

leads to a disruption in our relationship 

to the world, to alienation. It’s hard to 

say what the end result will be and what 

it’s going to do to us. My hope at first 

was that this forced deceleration would 

be a great experience. But when I talk 

to other people, I notice that it certainly 

doesn’t feel like that. 

Hartmut Rosa 

One of Germany’s foremost 

sociologists 

Friedrich Schiller University, 

Jena, director of the Max-Weber- 

Kolleg, University of Erfurt. 


25



The 

EU RECOVERY 

and RESILIENCE 

PLAN 

Two deals – one goal: European Green Deal and the 

Next Generation EU deal both are committed to securing jobs, 

promoting ecological projects, and fostering the long-term 

transformation of the economy toward more sustainable 

growth. We discussed this with Paulo Gentiloni, European 

Commissioner for Economy, and asked him, in particular, of 

the impact on Agenda 2030. 

Covid-19 is a global crisis of historic proportions. 

To be honest: We were not prepared 

for this, and we face enormous uncertainties 

predicting the future. Now the EU has presented 

a comprehensive economic program as 

a countermeasure. What gives you confidence 

that this will resolve future problems? 

We are indeed facing a crisis of historic 

proportions. And as a result, our response 

can only be historic, too. The European 

Commission has shown that we are able 

to act fast and that we are committed 

to rising to the challenge. In May, we 

proposed an ambitious recovery plan, 

built around a new instrument called 

Next Generation EU, together with a 

revamped, long-term EU budget. Just 

two months later, EU heads of state and 

government agreed on a multiannual 

budget for 2021–2027 worth €1,074.3 

billion, and that Next Generation EU 

would amount to €750 billion (consisting 

of €390 billion in grants and €360 

billion in loans). The total package adds 

up to €1.8 trillion, the largest-ever EU 

multiannual budget (amounting to 5 

percent of the EU27’s GDP). Such a >> 


27

NEXT GENERATION EU – COVID-19 RECOVERY PACKAGE 

Grants 

€390 

BILLION 

€360 

BILLION 

Loans 

TOTAL: 

€750 BILLION 

€750 

BILLION 

• Capital raised on financial markets 

• Repayment period until 2058 

Investing in a green, digital, and resilient EU 

Recovery and Resilience Facility: 

€672.5 billion 

loans: 

€360 billion 

grants: 


• Legal commitments: by December 31, 2023 

• Payments: by December 31, 2026 

Horizon Europe: 

€5 billion 

Just Transition Fund: 

€10 billion 

ReactEU: 


Rural 

development: 


RescEU: 


InvestEU: 


powerful financial and policy response 

is needed to stimulate investment and 

prevent structural divergences between 

the Member States from growing further. 

We need to prevent this great recession 

from turning into a great fragmentation. 

Yet, the road to recovery is paved with 

uncertainty. Our latest economic forecast 

shows even greater economic stress this 

year than we anticipated a few months 

ago, with an incomplete recovery next 

year subject to many risks. But I am 

confident that we are taking steps in the 

right direction. The challenge before us 

is enormous, but what is important is 

that the awareness and willingness to 

act are there, as are the necessary tools 

to turn this crisis into an opportunity 

to embrace the twin green and digital 

transitions. 

Recently, the EU Parliament adopted the EU 

taxonomy of “Sustainable Finance.” NGOs have 

extensively criticized the draft deals concerning 

environmental sustainability, but social issues 

have also not been given sufficient consideration. 

What is your response? 

Recovery and Resilience Facility: grants 

Total grants: €312.5 billion 

€218.75 

BILLION 

GRANT ALLOCATION 

KEY: 

• unemployment 2015-2019 

• inverse GDP per capita 

• population share 

2021-2022 

2023 

€93.75 

BILLION 

GRANT ALLOCATION 

KEY: 

• drop in real GDP over 2020 

• overall drop in real GDP 

2020-2021 

• inverse GDP per capita 

• population share 

The role of this piece of legislation is to 

stimulate green investment projects by 

putting forward a classification of what 

is “green” – and, as such, instrumental 

in implementing the Green Deal and 

reaching our goal of climate neutrality 

by 2050. As shown in our recent Eurostat 

monitoring report on progress toward the 

SDGs in the EU, it is with the environment 

and climate objectives that the EU 

faces the biggest challenges. 

That doesn’t mean we don’t pay due attention 

to social issues – to the contrary. 

In the context of the InvestEU program, 



sustainability is defined by three dimensions: 

climate, environment, and social. 

The Commission is currently working 

on a methodology for sustainabilityproofing 

against these three dimensions 

of projects that are supported under 

InvestEU. Moreover, the Commission is 

fully committed to implementing the 

European Pillar of Social Rights during 

our mandate, which runs until 2024. 

The Pillar is our compass for action 

with respect to social issues. We have 

already adopted a number of proposals 

to strengthen the EU’s social dimension: 

from gender equality to youth employment 

and re- and upskilling. All of these 

will play an important role in cushioning 

the negative social consequences of this 

crisis, including among the young. We 

must do everything to prevent another 

lost generation. 

Many of the sustainability successes achieved 

over the last years could fall victim to the crisis. 

This is problematic because now is the time to 

act. We need a (new) global strategy to “Leave 

no one behind.” What do you recommend doing 

to support UN Secretary-General António 

Guterres’ “decade of action”? 

We are confronted with the need to both 

restart the economy and save jobs and 

livelihoods, and accelerate our progress 

toward sustainability in all its dimensions. 

It is perfectly possible – indeed 

indispensable – to not merely rebuild, 

but to build back better. I stand firmly 

behind the idea of a green and inclusive 

recovery, whereby we seize this opportunity 

to invest in skills, projects, and 

reforms for a more sustainable future. 

The Green Deal and the European Pillar 

of Social Rights are our guides in 

doing so. We will channel funds into 

activities that will help us accelerate the 

twin green and digital transitions, while 

leaving no one behind. Our proposals are 

commensurate with this ambition. Our 

recently adopted strategy for integrating 

and decarbonizing energy systems and 

our hydrogen strategy, which aims to 

further develop and upscale this clean 

energy source, are cases in point. We 

can only accelerate our progress toward 

the SDGs if we act decisively and immediately, 

drawing on the lessons learned 

from the crisis. 

Do we have to redefine the scope, significance, 

and priorities of the SDGs? 

I believe the framework of the 2030 

Agenda for Sustainable Development 

with its 17 SDGs is as relevant today as 

when it was adopted in 2015. It covers all 

of the elements that constitute our life on 

this planet and shows how all spheres of 

human activity – environmental, social, 

and economic – are interrelated. The 

current crisis has further highlighted 

that fact. What we need now – in view 

of the 2030 milestone as well as our 

pledge to reach climate neutrality by 

2050 – is to turn our attention firmly 

to implementation. We have a wealth of 

information on what the concrete challenges 

are and a wealth of knowledge on 

how to solve them. What we need is the 

political willingness to act on all levels of 

governance. Since the beginning of my 

mandate as Commissioner, I have been 

taking concrete steps to achieve the SDGs: 

This year, we have integrated them into 

the European Semester and will take 

this exercise further in the coming years. 

All of the deliverables of this Commission 

contribute to achieving the SDGs. 

Every Commissioner is responsible for 

implementing the SDGs in their policy 

area, while we are all jointly responsible 

for implementing the 2030 Agenda in 

its entirety. I can assure you that we are 

taking this very seriously. 

The pandemic is a taste of what is to come if 

we do not rethink a world where nature is not 

exploited. In this regard, how can national policies 

and enforcement efforts be strengthened to 

address habitat and biodiversity loss? 

Partnerships for goals are an important 

element of SDG implementation, which 

is why, under my watch, we have been 

actively engaging with civil society representatives 

and other external stakeholders 

to exchange views and learn from 

their on-the-ground experiences. The 

implementation necessarily happens 

at the national, regional, and local levels, 

while our role is to coordinate >> 


29

“I believe that – 

together with 

the people 

demanding a 

better future 

for their children 

and exercising 

their democratic 

rights across the 

world – we can 

truly make a 

difference.” 

these efforts and provide frameworks 

conducive to achieving the SDGs. The 

European Semester is an important tool 

at our disposal. While we already integrated 

the European Pillar of Social 

Rights into the Semester a few years ago, 

we are now taking steps to better reflect 

environmental and climate concerns. 

This year’s country reports therefore – 

for the first time – featured a chapter 

on environmental sustainability, and 

this is just the beginning. That way, we 

hope to steer national measures in the 

right direction, together with our Green 

Deal-related outputs, such as the recently 

adopted Biodiversity Strategy. 

That brings us to a fundamental conflict: There 

are global interests such as the protection of 

biodiversity, climate change, human rights, 

etc. These are the basics of a Global Governance. 

On the other side, there are national 

interests – and in some countries, nationalist 

governments. They insist on their right to 

national sovereignty. But we cannot have both, 

for example protect and exploit the Amazon 

at the same time. How will the EU handle 

the divide between Global Governance and 

National Sovereignty? 

It is true that the interactions between 

fairness, the Green Deal, productivity, 

stability, and resilience sometime imply 

trade-offs, and policymakers need to be 

aware of these. But the SDGs as a whole 

are a comprehensive economic, social, 

and environmental model based on synergies. 

I have a lot of faith that the tide for 

populist governments, also due to their 

disastrous handling of the pandemic, is 

turning. What we are observing instead 

is the mobilization of young people and 

civil society around issues such as climate 

change, good governance, and an economy 

of well-being. The EU is, of course, 

fully committed to spreading its values 

and high standards globally, including 

via its commitment to multilateralism 

as the best guarantor of human and environmental 

rights everywhere. We are 

taking every opportunity to project our 

leadership in sustainable development 

globally. I believe that – together with 

the people demanding a better future 

for their children and exercising their 

democratic rights across the world – we 

can truly make a difference. 

Multilateral institutions are not very visible 

in the public discussions. It is the hour of the 

nation-state. Is this the beginning of a new 

political culture and global architecture? 

The European Union has multilateralism 

in its DNA and will always support 

multilateral institutions, which are the 

basis of our international order. At the 

moment, we are, for example, committed 

to finding a global solution for 

digital taxation in the framework of the 

international process led by the OECD, 

because we believe that a common solution 

applied internationally constitutes 

the best way of achieving fair taxation in 

the 21st century. However, we will come 

forward with a new EU-level proposal 

if no global deal can be reached by the 

end of this year. 

A good example of well-functioning 

multilateralism at the service of the 

weakest in our global community is 

the Debt Service Suspension Initiative, 

which offered 77 countries the chance 

to suspend debt payments to their G20/ 

Paris Club bilateral official creditors 

until the end of 2020. This will allow for 

an immediate provision of liquidity for 



health, economic, and social spending 

to respond to the crisis. It is an important 

step forward because it creates an 

institutional framework to get China and 

other non-traditional creditors on board, 

while also making significant progress 

toward transparency of debt flows and 

conditions on the use of freed-up funds. 

In short, the EU will continue defending 

multilateralism while working to adapt 

it to the new realities of our highly connected 

and digitalized world economy. 

This is the best way to defend and promote 

the fundamental rights our union 

is based on globally. 

Covid-19 has revealed critical weaknesses and 

blind spots, which international organizations 

– including the United Nations, governments, 

the private sector, and NGOs – must collectively 

address. The word “resilience” is used very often 

these days. What is the future architecture for 

political resilience? 

I am a firm believer in the virtue of 

democratic accountability. In my role as 

Commissioner, I am in constant contact 

with the European Parliament, which 

directly represents EU citizens. Likewise, 

parliaments everywhere have to 

remain vigilant and scrutinize their 

governments, which will be especially 

important in the recovery period as we 

rebuild our economies and societies. 

With so many flaws in our economic 

system exposed and so much at stake, 

I also find this a perfect opportunity to 

draw up a new social contract. We have 

to build a society where we rethink our 

relationship with the environment, the 

way our economies operate – including 

ensuring that corporations pay their 

fair share of taxes – how we take care 

of our elderly citizens, and how we 

help young people to have the best 

start in life. 

Thank you very much for the interview! 

Paolo Gentiloni is a former 

professional journalist and 

graduated with a degree in Political 

Science from the University 

of Rome. He was Minister of 

Foreign Affairs in Italy before he 

became 57th Prime Minister of 

Italy from 2016-2018. He has 

been serving as European 

Commissioner for Economy in 

the von der Leyen Commission 

since December 1, 2019. 


31

10 Theses on the 

for the State and Society 

The coronavirus pandemic has plunged the whole world into a 

state of health-related, economic, and social stress. This stress 

has made it clear what is working – and what is not. 

1. 

The state and its international 

communities play 

the leading role in absorbing 

external shocks 

such as pandemics. 

Dr. Markus Engels 

Secretary-General 

Global Solutions Initiative 

In his book Political Theology, the legal 

scholar Carl Schmitt concluded some 100 

years ago that the “sovereign is he who 

decides on the exception.” Based on this 

definition, states and governments have 

proven that they are entitled to make decisions 

during the coronavirus crisis, and 

that they are very capable of doing so, 

by taking drastic measures to protect the 

populace and putting together aid packages 

worth billions. Every day, state-run 

institutions have provided information 

on the latest developments and issued 

recommendations on what should be 

done to control the virus. 

The pandemic has rocked the plausibility 

of predictions foretelling the end of the 

state. That is something most people are 

bound to be thankful for. After all, the 

state – at least in its democratic form 

– is a legitimate and neutral arbiter 

that makes decisions based on verifiable 

criteria, without pursuing its own 

business interests. 



2. situation to lead to a 

Pandemics are proof 

positive that we, as a 

global community, are 

all affected. But for the 

renaissance of multilateralism, it is going 

to require a common view that global 

challenges can only be solved globally. 

We need a new global narrative of kinship 

and solidarity. 

Joining together in a new spirit of unity 

may seem easy if we follow the Hollywood 

logic that we have seen a thousand times 

before: A global peril befalls humanity, 

bringing it together in its hour of need. 

This plot has been cinematized countless 

times, usually in connection with an 

extraterrestrial menace that leads to a 

new feeling of brotherhood on the planet. 

Although the coronavirus pandemic is 

undoubtedly a global threat, it has not led 

to a resuscitation of multilateralism. Even 

in the European Union, which has been 

trying for decades to develop a common 

post-national identity (albeit tentatively), 

the first reflex was a national one. Once 

the Covid-19 crisis has passed, we must 

realize that pandemics, climate change, 

extinction, and artificial intelligence are 

challenges that can only be solved once 

and for all through multilateral efforts. 

3. 

Democratic and federal 

states are well positioned 

to fight pandemics. 

Even though the processes 

may look complicated and arduous, 

the democratic and federal state has done 

a good job of mastering the crisis so far. 

In Germany, the Bundestag is actively 

involved in crisis management, and the 

national government regularly consults 

with individual, regional leadership. 

Although individuals may try to make 

a name for themselves in the fight for 

the best approach, and although it may 

not always be easy to understand why a 

restriction applies in one place but not 

in another, Germany’s leaders and parliamentarians 

have acted appropriately and 

prudently. They have kept the populace 

informed and involved, and have avoided 

looking for scapegoats. Moreover, local 

and county officials have also been providing 

information through the local 

press on a regular basis, often turning to 

social media. If ever there were a need 

to prove how important a functioning 

government with a legitimate claim to 

power from the very top of the chain to 

the very bottom is, then the coronavirus 

crisis has done so, albeit unwittingly. 

4. 

Technocracy undermines 

the ground rules 

of how a democracy 

works. 

Some have argued that 

virologists and doctors are the better 

decision-makers. Media appearances by 

experts may also have helped to calm the 

debate. At the same time, it would be a 

fatal mistake to draw the wrong conclusions. 

As a matter of fact, only elected 

representatives – and not experts – may 

make decisions. 

Weighing different interests, treading 

carefully when it comes to decisions that 

could infringe upon basic rights, and 

setting priorities based on a plethora of 

relevant information are of the essence. 

All of that needs to be comprehensible, 

well communicated, and subject to checks 

and balances. Taken together, this sum 

total of needs and wants is what you 

would call “politics.” 

5. 

Populist heads of state 

and government are 

part of the problem, 

not the solution. 

It goes without saying 

that populist elected officials can 

be good crisis managers, just as levelheaded 

democrats can fail in a crisis. 

During the coronavirus crisis, populists 

have displayed a pattern of behavior 

that prevents successful management: 

focusing on alternative facts, passing the 

buck, and making off-the-cuff decisions. 

All these behavioral patterns prevent 

the world’s brightest minds from working 

together and keep the international 

community from concerting its efforts. 

That makes populists part of the problem. 

Nowhere is that more apparent than in 

the United States, where the president, 

who is completely out of his league, is 

floundering his way through the crisis 

and is responsible for tremendous suffering. 

Whether or not this leads a majority 

of voters to turn away from such narcissists 

and responsibility dodgers, however, 

remains to be seen. So far, some heads of 

government have been quite successful 

in capturing the hearts and minds of at 

least half of their constituents with lies 

and finger-pointing. As long as the other 

half of the populace is divided into camps 

or uninterested in politics, people will 

continue to die due to populist public 

policy – all because those opposed are 

unable to attain a majority. >> 


33

6. pandemic make new 

The dramatic restrictions 

of basic rights 

in connection with 

efforts to fight the 

criteria-based approaches to limiting 

basic rights a necessity. 

In times of crisis and disaster, basic 

rights must sometimes be restricted, 

and there are procedures in place for 

doing so. The current measures are a 

massive infringement on the right of 

assembly, religious freedom, and occupational 

freedom, to name just a few. 

That is permissible, provided that these 

restrictions are imposed for a limited 

time and have been legitimated through 

a democratic process – and provided 

that opposing viewpoints and protest 

are given a forum. 

May Minority Report serve as a 

warning 

However, measures that are difficult 

to justify, if at all, have come up for 

debate as a result of the coronavirus 

crisis. It may well be that an app on 

every mobile phone that transmits a 

personal movement profile has the 

potential to be used to great benefit in 

pandemics. That same app may very 

well also have the potential to reduce 

crime in general. A thermometer worn 

on the wrist might help us find our way 

out of the Covid-19 crisis. It also might 

help save the lives of people who have 

a heart attack or stroke. Nevertheless, 

such measures are largely incompatible 

with our understanding of basic rights. 

It is not even necessary to have watched 

Steven Spielberg’s dystopian film Minority 

Report to grasp the risk of misuse or 

the fundamental harm to all freedoms 

posed by such measures. Apart from 

temporary restrictions in the event of 

a crisis, which are legitimized by democratic 

processes, basic rights continue to 

apply in tough times. They also protect 

individuals from the will of the majority. 

Opposition has to be possible, even if 

the opinions expressed may be wrong. 

But because the Covid-19 pandemic 

shows that governments have to be able 

to act swiftly and flexibly, and because 

our societies are now experiencing for 

themselves how quickly supposedly 

inviolable rights can be restricted, we 

need a debate about what kind of protections 

of basic rights we want to retain 

following this crisis. The Federal Constitutional 

Court’s decision on restricting 

people’s rights to practice their religion 

freely during the coronavirus crisis is a 

good starting point and provides initial 

orientation. 

7. People have noticed the 

Public services should 

not be subjected to a 

doctrine of efficiency. 

lack of funding for basic 

public services in the past and their 

excessive privatization. Decrepit schools 

and a shortage of police officers are just 

one indication thereof. Germany has 

largely been spared a hard neoliberal 

hand, which is why the healthcare system 

is still well-funded and organized, 

and why we have so far seen fewer 

deaths than other countries during the 

coronavirus crisis. 

Globally, however, economic progress is 

not always the same as social progress. 

That is why the coronavirus crisis also 

illustrates how important a social security 

net and investments in public 

services are. The reluctance or inability 

of workers to call in sick to work despite 

showing symptoms of illness because 

they will not be paid in the event of 

absence, or because they do not have 

health insurance, accelerates the spread 

of disease exponentially. 

Furthermore, the digital revolution is 

only going to lead to more prosperity 

and better lives if we invest enough 

money in education and training. 

The banking crisis did not trigger 

a shift 

It is essential to quickly turn the onetime 

bonus payments for medical 

workers into structural reforms for 

adequate pay and working conditions 

in the healthcare sector, and to help 

generally adapt the healthcare system 

to deal with an aging population. Still, 

measures to strengthen the healthcare 

and education systems are not going 

to be enough. 

Once the coronavirus crisis is behind 

us, we are going to need a new understanding 

of what is truly important to 

us – and of what aspects of our lives are 

so important to us as common, public 

goods that we are unwilling to surrender 

control over them through privatization. 

The banking and financial crisis of 2008 

and 2009 did not lead to a fundamental 

shift toward more sustainability and 

different ways of doing business. The 

coronavirus crisis has once again exposed 

systemic shortcomings and false 

priorities. We ought to learn from crises 

and develop a new understanding of 

public services and public goods. 



8. 

The empowerment of 

local communities and 

value chains strengthens 

the resilience of 

societies. 

Any calls to toss globalization on the ash 

heap of history are mistaken, as are any 

appeals to the populace to spend their 

future vacations at the local swimming 

hole. Indeed, there have long been many 

things awry in global trade and mass 

tourism fueled by budget airline tickets. 

But a supposed return to the “good old 

days” is not going to happen. They never 

existed in the first place. 

Important trade and value chains work 

globally, and globally is the only way to 

produce a wide range of essential goods. 

Excluding entire regions from technological 

advancement by way of deglobalization 

would be a tremendous injustice 

– one that would go well beyond the 

injustice done daily by an imbalanced 

international trade system. 

Local businesses help the world 

master the crisis 

At the same time, it is important to 

strengthen local and regional communities, 

because they play a crucial role 

in times of crisis. Those who have been 

shopping at local supermarkets for years, 

those who are familiar faces at local 

bookstores and repair shops around the 

corner, and those who maintain good 

relationships with their neighbors are 

better armed to survive the crisis. 

Personalized and local initiatives – 

people buying groceries for elderly or 

at-risk neighbors, at-home offerings 

from regional sports clubs and cultural 

institutions, and delivery and take-away 

services from local restaurants, to name 

just a few – have played a vital role in 

helping us master the crisis to such a 

large extent so far. That is why every 

one of us should think about whether 

shopping at stores in our neighborhoods 

or supporting local culture ought to be 

given more weight in future spending 

decisions. 

9. Most families will agree 

The efforts to promote 

digitalization raise new 

social questions. 

that school closures, 

digital instruction, and parents subbing 

in as teachers are trying for all involved. 

Although digital learning offers countless 

benefits for students and professionals 

to expand their horizons, digitalization 

is creating a new social divide. That is 

because households with little education 

or money are technically ill-equipped to 

take advantage of these global education 

opportunities. As a result, children whose 

parents are digitally well-equipped will 

not only emerge from the crisis with 

their education futures intact, but they 

may also have been able to use their time 

at home to gain an even greater edge. 

Social inequality is on the rise 

This structural inequality may have 

nothing to do with Covid-19, but the 

pandemic has widened the economic gap 

that has been growing for many years 

now. If strengthening digital learning 

is one of the lessons of the coronavirus 

crisis, then efforts should be undertaken 

to even out the social impact by providing 

children from poorer families with basic 

digital tools as a public service. 

10. 

Overcoming 

global 

poverty and 

strengthening 

climate 

protection and environmental conservation 

efforts will be essential to avoid a 

new era of pandemics. 

The coronavirus pandemic makes clear 

that poorer states are significantly more 

affected by the spread of a virus. Often, 

they lack a healthcare system and an effective 

social safety net. With distancing 

and hygiene guidelines virtually impossible 

to implement correctly, a humanitarian 

disaster is unavoidable. Help is of the 

essence. The G20’s debt relief efforts for 

lower-income nations is not going to be 

enough, even though it is undoubtedly 

the right thing to do. 

The ecological aspect takes on a whole 

new dimension in this context. Protecting 

biodiversity, fighting pandemics, and 

climate change are not issues that can 

be flexibly prioritized from one day to 

the next. On the contrary, they are causally 

intertwined. Those who demand a 

respite from environmental protections 

and climate action in light of the coronavirus 

crisis are irresponsibly working 

in cahoots with lobbyists and have failed 

to understand what is actually going on. 

Helping the poorest of the poor is an act 

of self-preservation. A pandemic outbreak 

will have an impact on the entire world, 

no matter where it begins. A second 

wave of Covid-19 – with a high number 

of deaths and infected individuals, and 

with a renewed round of restrictions on 

public life – would have the potential to 

bring even wealthy states to their knees. 

The article was originally published in 

Tagesspiegel Online on April 16, 2020. 


35

By Dr. Dominic Lenzi 

Global Governance vs. 

National Sovereignty: 

To Whom Does the 

Amazon 

Belong? 

The Amazon fires show why we need global 

governance in the Anthropocene. 



Several months ago, as fires engulfed 

large parts of the Amazon, 

world leaders, led by French 

President Emmanuel Macron, 

declared an international emergency and 

pledged support to help Brazil. President 

Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil responded with 

accusations of colonialism and foreign 

interference, asserting that the Amazon 

is Brazilian territory and no business of 

outsiders. One should, of course, take 

political rhetoric with a large grain of 

salt, especially in our current “post-truth” 

era. For instance, roughly 60 percent 

of the Amazon is within Brazilian territory, 

while Peru controls 13 percent 

and Colombia around 10 percent, with 

the rest being shared by Venezuela, Ecuador, 

Bolivia, Guyana, Suriname, and 

French Guiana. But even if the Amazon 

does not entirely belong to Brazil, these 

claims reflect genuine conflicts between 

state sovereignty and global governance, 

which continue to hamper responses to 

environmental crises. Addressing these 

conflicts is especially urgent in the Anthropocene 

– the new geological epoch 

in which human activity has produced 

interconnected ecological problems on 

a planetary scale. 

Previous international efforts to halt 

rainforest destruction have often floundered 

due to sovereignty concerns – 

whether real or merely perceived. One 

high-profile example is the Indonesian 

Palm Oil Pledge (IPOP), adopted with 

great expectations at the UN Climate 

Change Summit in New York in 2014. 

This initiative failed due to lobbying 

from large palm oil producers and the 

perception that the IPOP infringed upon 

Indonesia’s sovereignty. 

The jury is still out on whether the failure 

of the IPOP was bad news for forest 

conservation, or merely the demise of 

a failed policy mechanism. But what is 

clear is that sovereignty concerns played 

a significant role in this failure. 

These concerns about sovereignty continue 

to hamper efforts to improve 

global environmental governance. For 

example, the carbon stored in the >> 


37

Amazon, as in other rainforests, has also 

long been envisaged to become part of a 

global emissions trading scheme under 

the UNFCCC’s REDD+ program of the 

UN Framework Convention on Climate 

Change (UNFCCC). However, sovereignty 

again looms large, given the implication 

that foreign agents – potentially 

including foreign governments – might 

end up owning carbon assets within the 

jurisdiction of states. At the most recent 

Conference of the Parties in Madrid (COP 

25), President Bolsonaro claimed that 

carbon stored by Brazil’s forests should 

count in Brazil’s national emissions 

quota, since they belong to Brazil, while 

also being traded on an international 

carbon market. Although critics have 

pointed out that this would amount to 

double-counting, the attempt to enclose 

elements of a global environmental good 

within the boundaries of the nationstate 

reflects a paradox in the standard 

logic of the nation-state: Annex territory 

and be free to exploit its resources. The 

problem, of course, is that for any global 

environmental resource, “annexation” is 

impossible without an effective global 

regime – which is precisely what resource 

sovereigntists do not want. 

Previous attempts to classify something 

as a “global common good” continue to 

provoke controversy. From a biophysical 

perspective, there is no doubt that 

rainforests are essential components of 

the global carbon cycle. There is so much 

carbon stored in rainforests that their 

destruction would doom all efforts to halt 

climate change, tipping the planet into 

a new and dangerous equilibrium, such 

as a nightmare “Hothouse Earth” scenario. 

However, countries with areas of 

rainforest within their borders complain 

that recognizing rainforests as common 

goods in any jurisdictional sense would 

be both unfair and an arbitrary loss of 

territorial authority. There is some truth 

to these complaints. For instance, any 

attempt to classify rainforests as the 

“Common Heritage of Mankind” would 

require ceding territorial jurisdiction. 

This principle was developed following 

Maltese Ambassador Arvid Pardo’s proposal 

to the United Nations to equitably 



share the mineral resources of the deep 

sea bed. The Common Heritage of Mankind 

was subsequently enshrined in the 

United Nations Convention on the Law 

of the Sea, and the Agreement Governing 

the Activities of States on the Moon 

and Other Celestial Bodies (the “Moon 

Treaty”). But because the Common Heritage 

requires ceding territorial control 

over whatever it governs, the principle 

remains controversial, and its extension 

has often been blocked by states wary 

of any infringement of their resource 

rights. Moreover, the current formulation 

of the Common Heritage merely 

concerns resource exploitation, and it 

implies nothing for environmental sustainability 

beyond standard protections 

against transboundary harm. 

The loss of sovereignty implied by the 

Common Heritage principle encouraged 

the development of the Common 

Concern of Mankind, a principle that 

registers a need for cooperation to govern 

transboundary goods but is non-binding 

and implies nothing about territorial 

sovereignty. Thus, the UN Convention on 

Biological Diversity (1992), the UNFCCC 

(1992), and the Paris Agreement (2015) 

affirm biodiversity and climate change 

to be of common concern, but this does 

not require anything from states. Thus, 

even if some good can be described as a 

“global commons” in descriptive terms, 

in legal terms it has proved difficult to 

articulate this notion without triggering 

sovereignty concerns or without becoming 

merely advisory. 

The fundamental problem seems to be 

the governance structure inherited from 

the post–World War II global order, 

which was established to ensure state 

security against foreign aggression. Of 

course, the architects of this global order 

were ignorant about most, if not all of 

the global environmental challenges we 

now face. But as the existence of these 

challenges reveals, the common benefits 

of environmental goods are not properly 

acknowledged by the international order. 

Instead, free-riding upon many global 

common goods continues, reflecting 

the previous order of autonomous states. 

States do not enjoy 

complete autonomy to 

use resources 

as they wish, and 

all states are 

accountable if 

their decisions 

impose harm or risks 

upon others. 

Moreover, political rhetoric appealing to 

isolationism and national sovereignty 

risks dangerous ecological brinkmanship. 

It has proved far too easy for critics of 

multilateralism to wrap themselves in 

a border-bounded nationalism, where 

the interests of the state always trump 

those of distant outsiders. 

But while this global order does not 

facilitate effective global environmental 

governance, it is untrue that there is little 

more than anarchy at the global level. 

The assertions of Bolsonaro and others 

overstate their case: States do not enjoy 

complete autonomy to use resources as 

they wish, and all states are accountable 

if their decisions impose harm or risks 

upon others. Although the international 

legal principle of “Permanent sovereignty 

over natural resources” does indeed establish 

sovereign states’ unrestricted 

rights to make use of resources within 

their territorial boundaries, since the 

Rio Declaration of 1992, states are also 

obliged to consider transboundary harms 

that might arise from activities within 

their territories or in common spaces. 

Moreover, states also have duties to cooperate 

to address any transboundary 

emergencies or risks that emerge. These 

obligations and expectations are secured 

through a mix of “hard” treaty law and 

“soft” customary law, which, along with 

informal regimes, constitute existing 

global environmental governance. While 

enjoying sovereign resource rights, states 

are already obliged to consider the interests 

of other states, to avoid creating or 

exacerbating environmental risks, and 

to assist other states should an environmental 

problem emerge. 

One might ask: If this is so, why has it 

proved so difficult to address our global 

environmental problems? The short answer 

is that although these regimes have 

laid the groundwork for future global 

environmental governance, their spirit 

has yet to become the letter of international 

law. Thus, climate change and 

biodiversity loss have yet to be brought 

under effective global governance, despite 

(or according to its critics, because 

of) the signing of the Paris Agreement. 

Furthermore, many requirements under 

international environmental law 

remain advisory, and agreements are 

voluntarily entered into. States that do 

not wish to play along with such governance 

regimes can check out or obstruct 

by refusing to comply with the spirit of 

the law. A cautionary example may be 

the International Convention for the 

Regulation of Whaling. Signed in 1946 

by 15 nations, it has now been ratified by 

89 states. Yet, this convention only arose 

after whaling ceased to be commercially 

viable, and not when the existence of a 

problem was first discovered. Moreover, 

traditional whaling states such as Norway 

have withdrawn from and reentered 

the convention several times, and they 

have never accepted the moratorium 

on whaling signed into action in 1986 

under paragraph 10e. Japan, by contrast, 

officially pulled out in 2019 after maintaining 

a whaling fleet since 1986 under 

the clearly false pretence of conducting 

scientific research. Although Japan never 

produced any credible evidence that 

they were conducting scientific research, 

or that this research required killing 

whales, it took nearly four decades for 

the pressure from other signatories to 

encourage Japan to withdraw. By withdrawing, 

Japan intends to continue commercial 

whaling, now without any false 

pretence of conducting research. The 

Trump administration’s withdrawal of 


39

the United States from the Paris Agreement 

on climate change is another case 

of non-compliance, following decades of 

obstructing climate governance under 

the binding Kyoto Agreement. 

One way to strengthen existing environmental 

governance is for cases to 

be brought that hold some states or 

agents responsible for climate-related 

harms. To date, there has been a conspicuous 

absence of such cases concerning 

activities affecting climate change or 

biodiversity, such as building fossil fuel 

infrastructure or clearing ecosystems. 

For climate change, one key stumbling 

block seems to be the law’s difficulty in 

considering causally uncertain effects 

based upon probability estimates. Different 

climate models produce widely 

varying estimates of the effects of actions 

upon the global climate, and they cannot 

always be aggregated into compatible 

findings. Moreover, the standard model 

in law is for actions with clear causes to 

be attributed to actors who can be held 

responsible. Yet, uncertainty is unavoidable 

in estimating the sensitivity of the 

planet’s climate system to atmospheric 

greenhouse gas concentrations, or in attributing 

the harmful effects of climate 

change to particular agents, given the 

problem of multiple causations. 

Among other things, addressing this 

challenge requires clarity on admissible 

scientific evidence. Recent research on 

attribution has proposed a modification 

of the standard criteria for determining 

risk attribution to capture the incentives 

of actors who might select climate 

models favorable to themselves, and to 

establish clear rules for determining 

admissible research as evidence that a 

climate risk has been exacerbated. Research 

on “carbon-majors,” that is, the 

corporations that have emitted the most 

CO 2 

up until now, could also provide 

the basis for such claims. Short of international 

cases, there may be more 

immediate success in citizen-led cases 

against national governments, such 

as the successful case brought against 

the Dutch government. However, the 

Dutch constitution explicitly invites 

One way to 

strengthen existing 

environmental 

governance is for 

cases to be brought 

that hold some states 

or agents responsible 

for climate-related 

harms. 

such litigation through a constitutional 

requirement that the government secure 

a healthy environment – a provision 

that many constitutions lack. Nonetheless, 

as the climate crisis worsens, it is far 

from impossible for such cases to emerge. 

Obviously, such a development would 

be vigorously opposed by states worried 

about becoming newly liable. Although 

the spirit of existing laws against transboundary 

harm and actions affecting 

commons seems to apply to these issues 

equally strongly (if not more so), such an 

extension requires cases being brought 

in order to establish new precedents and 

interpretations. 

At a deeper level, it has been claimed 

for some time that more far-reaching 

changes to the international order of 

states are required. Although calls for the 

establishment of a “world state” are rare, 

a more promising proposal may be to 

extend the Common Heritage and Common 

Concern principles to recognize the 

entire planet as the “intangible common 

heritage of mankind.” This proposal is 

based upon an analogy of nested jurisdiction 

and overlapping ownership on the 

model of the condominium: States would 

enjoy ownership of their territories, just 

as individuals own their apartments, yet 

aspects such as windows or gardens can 

be owned collectively. In this way, it is 

claimed that effective global governance 

requires recognizing the Earth system 

as a legal entity in its own right, but 

in a way that does not require nullifying 

existing state sovereignty. Of course, 

such proposals raise profound moral and 

political questions. Yet, from a moral 

perspective, it is hard to find convincing 

moral reasons for states’ complete sovereignty 

over natural resources, whether 

one looks at securing the well-being of 

citizens, warding off threats, or even a 

historical relationship between people 

and places. The distribution of goods of 

global environmental significance imposes 

costs and benefits upon the providers 

of a resource and the beneficiaries. Yet, 

the distribution of rainforests, as with 

the distribution of coral reefs and deserts, 

depends on very specific biological 

and geological conditions, whereas the 

world map was determined by human 

occupations, migrations, and conquests, 

with little regard for ecological borders. 

As a result, from the perspective of any 

state, the presence of a rainforest within 

its borders is simply random chance. But 

states without rainforests have often cut 

down their forests and were never asked 

to consider the global consequences. For 

example, the United Kingdom today has 

little more than 2 percent of its original 

forests intact. Yet, nations with rainforests 

are being asked to preserve far more 

than 2 percent, and to do this because 

of global consequences. These double 

standards are at the heart of debates 

about sovereignty and the global commons. 

Perhaps until the Global North 

ramps up mitigation, rainforest countries 

are under no obligation to listen to their 

hypocritical demands. However, if all 

countries think this way, we ensure a 

world of runaway climate change and 

mass extinction, likely far beyond the 

ability of even the richest countries 

to adapt. Although Ecuador’s bid for 

funding to offset the lost revenue from 

oil extraction in its Amazonian Yasuní 

National Park failed amid accusations 

of environmental blackmail, it is far 

from clear that the principle at stake 

tells against Ecuador. Fairness was an 

additional reason for the failure of the 

IPOP: Indonesian policymakers consid- 


ered it unfair for Indonesia to submit 

to stringent deforestation conditions, 

when other states were free to do as 

they pleased. So if Ecuador is to forego 

the same kind of fossil fuel extraction 

that countries in the Global North have 

long availed themselves of (and continue 

to do so, despite current warnings of a 

climate emergency), fair compensation 

and development aid for non-carbon 

projects would seem to be the only just 

outcome. 

It is morally intolerable that a single 

nation could endanger all of humanity 

by using natural resources in ways that 

are still legally within their power. At 

least in theory, Brazil could decide to cut 

down all of the trees on its territory. The 

architects of such a plan would likely not 

survive long, but the mere possibility 

that one rogue country could decide to 

act in ways that endanger all is an affront 

to the post-war order that the permanent 

sovereignty principle was supposed to 

protect. However, research suggests that 

much less than this would be enough 

for a global catastrophe: If the Amazon 

lost between 20 and 25 percent of its 

trees, the entire ecosystem would pass 

an irreversible “tipping point,” leading 

to its collapse. Humanity simply cannot 

afford another decade of complacency on 

international rule-making. Addressing 

global environmental challenges requires 

finding a way around sovereignty concerns, 

whether real or imagined, while 

ensuring the protection of the global 

environmental commons. 

Dr. Dominic Lenzi 

Philosopher 

Working Group on Scientific 

Assessments, Ethics and Policy 

(SEP) 


41

Guidance and Arguments 

for a More Sustainable World 

During Covid-19 Recovery 



The world as we know is 

rapidly changing before 

our eyes. The coronavirus 

pandemic is a profound 

stress test for humanity. 

Many of the sustainability 

successes already achieved 

could fall victim to the 

crisis. The most vulnerable 

to the crisis are the elderly, 

workers in precarious 

employment conditions, 

and all the people living 

in countries with weak 

health, economic, and 

political systems. What will 

be the new normal? What 

will happen after corona? 

These are frequently asked 

questions, but they do not 

go far enough. We had 

better ask ourselves: What 

are the principles that will 

organize the future? Four 

excellent experts give us an 

outlook. 

Emily Auckland is UKSSD Network Director. UK Stakeholders 

for Sustainable Development (UKSSD) is an open platform that 

supports public, private, and voluntary organizations working 

toward sustainable development in the UK. UKSSD’s mission is 

to inspire and support all stakeholders to transform the UK into 

a sustainable society by generating new partnerships and 

innovative solutions for sustainable development by convening 

and coordinating stakeholders from all sectors; and providing 

thought leadership on the benefits for the UK resulting from 

action for sustainable development and the implementation of 

the Sustainable Development Goals. 

Pietro Bertazzi is Global Director – Policy Engagement at 

CDP. The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) is a not-for-profit 

charity running the global disclosure system for investors, 

companies, cities, states, and regions to manage their 

environmental impacts. Each year, CDP takes the information 

supplied in its annual reporting process and scores companies 

and cities based on their journey through disclosure and 

toward environmental leadership. Through their independent 

scoring methodology, they measure corporate and city 

progress and incentivize action on climate change, forests, 

and water security. 

Prof. Dr. Maja Göpel is cofounder of Scientist for future and 

Secretary-General of the German Advisory Council on Global 

Change (WBGU), which works on the science-policy-society 

interface. As Secretary-General Maja Göpel divides her time 

between management, public speaking, pioneer engagement, 

and networking as well as continued research on system 

transformations for sustainable development. Her personal 

focus is on new prosperity models, with an emphasis on the 

role of paradigm shifts as strategic leverage points, 

summarized in her book The Great Mindshift (Springer 2016). 

Julian Hill-Landolt is Director, Vision 2050 Refresh, 

Sustainable Lifestyles at the World Business Council for 

Sustainable Development (WBCSD), which is a global, 

CEO-led organization of over 200 leading businesses working 

together to accelerate the transition to a sustainable world. 

Their mission is to help make member companies become 

more successful and sustainable by focusing on the maximum 

positive impact for shareholders, the environment, and 

societies. Since 1995, WBCSD has been uniquely positioned to 

work with member companies along and across value chains 

to deliver impactful business solutions to the most 

challenging sustainability issues. >> 


43

Prof. Dr. Maja Göpel 

Dr. Elmer Lenzen: Pietro, the IMF speaks of 

the biggest crisis since The Great Depression 

of the 1920s. Is the present pandemic a black 

swan event no one was prepared for? 

Pietro Bertazzi: Indeed, I’m afraid this 

can be interpreted as a black swan event. 

Especially in Europe and in the Western 

world, it caught us by surprise. We were 

definitely not ready for such a situation. 

I was just chatting with a student from 

Hong Kong, and she was surprised that 

we did not have masks and sanitizers 

more readily available in every town. 

But now we have been experiencing 

a total shift of priorities from all governments 

around the world. The first 

one has been about saving lives, and 

the second one is about the economic 

recovery. I believe this is important: We 

cannot achieve sustainable development 

or tackle the climate agenda without 

stability. 

Economic recovery is a good catchword. The 

Covid-19 crisis shows how fragile societies are. 

The interesting aspect for me is to see that it’s 

Everybody feels that the 

future is much more open 

than it used to be. 

probably not the stability and inertia that 

prevent societal changes, but maybe it’s the 

instability. Maya, can we switch to a more 

sustainable economic path without the risk 

of running a total loss? 

Maja Göpel: From a transformation point 

of view, the moment when there is less 

stability is the moment when there is a 

potential for much deeper and stronger 

change. Everybody feels that the future 

is much more open than it used to be. 

How that moment of instability is used 

depends on who is putting forward what 

kind of ideas, who has influence, and 

who gets more to say and to decide. 

I keep on using the World Economic Forum’s 

global risk report to remind people 

that there was a clear understanding 

about environmental issues, especially 

climate change, being the rising risks on 

the horizon. We know that decarbonization 

means structural change in basically 

all sectors, and this means we are going 

to unbundle some of the structures that 

are very stable now to build them anew. 

Some elements are dying in order for 

” 

others to be able to grow, and that is 

nothing that is against the economy. It’s 

a very liberal idea of creative destruction 

as Schumpeter called it. 

The other aspect we should talk about 

is solidarity: In the beginning, solidarity 

was mainly for the people who were 

most vulnerable if they got Covid-19. And 

then there was a second round where we 

have solidarity with the people that are 

hit hardest by the anti-Corona measures, 

who don’t have a buffer, whose incomes 

are declining from one day to the other, 

who are really worried because they 

don’t have savings that they can depend 

on. And this is where my country, Germany, 

is really fortunate, because we 

do have a welfare state and economicl 

performance was so solid that the state 

can borrow a lot of cash for very little 

money. 

So there have been a lot of programs 

that are trying to increase solidarity 

with those most at risk, both from the 

pandemic and from the kind of lockdown 

measures. But now we have to really 

look at what is the level of solidarity 

mid-term, because people are starting 

to get very anxious about who gains the 

most, now that we are battling about 

the biggest stimulus packages. A lot of 

people fear that those most connected 

to industry – being the incumbents of 

the old system – will get most of the 

money. So we will go back to the old nor- 



mal, and the whole transformation that 

was already on the way is pushed back. 

Let’s talk a little bit later about solidarity and 

the transformation of industries. But first I 

would like to pick up on what you said about 

risks. Julian, in a recently published World 

Business Council for Sustainable Development 

publication, one can read that all this was very 

predictable. It was clear that such a pandemic 

could show up, and it was clear that we have 

chronic underinvestment in the health system, 

we have short-term profit maximization by 

many companies, and all these things were 

undermining the resilience of society at all 

levels. What happened to the highly praised, 

sustainable concept of stakeholder capitalism? 

Julian Hill-Landolt: We take a different 

view of this (and our view is in line with 

Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s, who came up 

with the black swan concept): the difference 

is between predictability and 

preparedness. The Covid-19 crisis is behaving 

like a black swan because we 

were completely unprepared for it, but 

it wasn’t a black swan because it was 

entirely predictable. There is an international 

body called the Global Preparedness 

Monitoring Board, co-convened by 

the World Bank and the World Health 

Organization, to discuss health disruptions 

like Covid-19. At the top of their 

list last year was our preparedness for 

a respiratory viral pandemic. A lot of 

the resilience conversation in business 

right now focuses on a shift from “just 

in time” thinking to “just in case.” 

In terms of the stakeholder capitalism 

question that you asked, again I think it’s 

important to think about preparedness. 

The World Economic Forum had made a 

relatively strong point at its meeting back 

in January with Klaus Schwab releasing 

his manifesto about the role of stakeholder 

capitalism. Pace and momentum 

have been gathering behind the need for 

a shift toward a more stakeholder-led 

model. The pandemic has brought into 

sharp relief the failings of our current 

systems – from underfunded healthsystems, 

to economic systems that highly 

are vulnerable to shocks, to increasing 

risks of future public health crises stemming 

from climate change or zoonotic 

diseases. A move toward a stakeholder 

model of capitalism can help to address 

some of these failures and WBCSD is 

working with its members and partners 

to accelerate the shift. 

That having been said, there is an urge 

to force sustainability factors into all 

conversations and decisions immediately. 

I think we need to be respectful of the 

phase that we are currently in, which is 

about “rescue” in the immediate term, 

and the phase that we are going to get 

into, which is about recovery. And at 

the moment, I think its important that 

people get help receiving essential medical 

care and putting food on the table. 

Yes, we need to have conversations about 

where stimulus money is going to go 

but, at the end of the day, nothing will 

recover if you have mass unemployment 

and mass public anxiety about the state 

of a given society’s economy. 

Emily, your expertise centers on the UK’s progress 

on the SDGs, on cross-sector engagement, 

and localization of Agenda 2030, among 

other things. So actually before this crisis or 

pandemic started, António Guterres called the 

beginning of the year a decade of action to 

make the SDGs happen. Instead of action, we 

are experiencing a lockdown. Are we expecting 

a lost decade in terms of the SDGs, or a swing 

in the right direction? 

Emily Auckland: It slightly depends on 

my mood on the day as to how I answer 

that question. In the UK context, we 

started this year with UKSSD launching 

our action plan for the SDGs with our 

network to say: Actually, if we all work 

together, we can do this, and this is what 

we need to do. So we started with a really 

positive outlook, and then obviously 

everything has changed since then. 

But nevertheless, we have seen some 

really positive signs of the types of behaviors 

and attitudes that are going to be 

necessary for achieving and implementing 

the SDGs: The way that businesses 

have responded to the crisis, many of 

them have had to pivot their product 

lines, many of them have developed 

really progressive approaches to partnerships 

and to communities. If those 

behaviors and those attitudes continue, 

then maybe we do stand the chance of 

making progress with the SDGs. 

Similarly, in the United Kingdom, I think 

it’s very fair to say that, ever since the 

vote on the EU referendum, and leading 

up to that, there was division in 

our society. The pandemic has created 

– certainly at the community level – a 

sense of unity in our society that we 

haven’t had for a while, and in the face 

of that crisis we have come together. If 

we can continue to use that community 

unity, we have an opportunity to 

really localize the SDGs and to achieve 

them by 2030. But it depends on what 

happens now within government, what 

decision-makers take forward in terms 

of economic stimulus, what the recovery 

program looks like, what happens globally. 

It’s not a lost decade yet, but it feels 

like it’s just too soon to say either way 

what is going to happen next. 

Stimulus is a good keyword for passing this 

question to Maja. There are billions of euros, 

dollars, or British pounds waiting to stimulate 

economies and societies. This is probably 

a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity because in 

this generation, we will not have a second 

opportunity to invest so much money. Share 

with us your wish list! How should we spend 

it to get as much sustainability and as much 

Agenda 2030 as possible? 

Maja Göpel: I would actually like to 

tie it to the points that Julian has made 

because chipping away has already happened. 

Every company that was sincere 

in contributing to sustainable societies 

has known about the collaterals. Most 

of the businesses I speak to say we need 

legal signals so that we can shift, >> 


45

especially under the pressure of shareholder 

orientation and short-termism. 

If we can continue to 

use that community unity, 

we have an opportunity to 

really localize the SDGs 

and to achieve 

” 

them 

by 2030. 

Emily Auckland 

So my wish list is, in particular, a good 

combination of public and private money 

in order to foster value chains of decarbonization, 

circularity and maximum 

resource use reduction. Even if we were 

expecting a phase where sales will be 

lower because of demand not being there 

to the same degree, we could have lots 

of very, very positive economic activity 

in form of transformative jobs, and it 

could be financed with public money. 

At least that comes into my head. I am 

absolutely surprised how little that is 

discussed, because it could go straight 

into the pain points that we are looking 

at: People are totally concerned about 

their incomes, totally concerned about 

job losses, totally concerned about losing 

structures in the economy that have 

worked, but they are also concerned 

about rebooting the old models that 

we know are behind the worldwide risk 

society that we have. And in addition, it 

is really the moment for strong G7 and 

G20 action on finally redirect subsidies 

from “fossil fuels into renewable ones.” 

Let’s pass the question to Julian. Isn’t it quite 

difficult to identify in advance economic sectors 

that are not needed in the future? 

Julian Hill-Landolt: I totally agree with 

what Maja is saying, that there is this 

mass of opportunity and we know what 

we should do – we had been thinking 

about the kinds of transformations that 

needed to occur before the pandemic hit. 

But as I said, the problem at the moment 

is the difference between rescue and 

recovery: It’s very hard to suggest that 

certain things shouldn’t exist during that 

rescue period. And then in the recovery 

period is where we have to start asking 

questions about where we go. One way 

we can influence the direction that we 

head in, is through using transformation 

of legacy systems, infrastructure, industries 

as a way of generating the demand 

that will be needed to rebuild economies, 



with funding going toward things that 

line up with our sustainability ambitions. 

However, we need to be careful about 

trying to remove, in one step, aspects 

of our society that we don’t necessarily 

agree with. The standard punching bag 

for many is the airline industry, which 

isn’t really that fair – their proportion 

of global emissions is actually not that 

enormous. WBCSD does not have any 

airline members, so I’m not defending 

the airline industry, but the global airline 

industry employs about three and a half 

million people and represents two or 

three percentage points of global GDP. 

I think we need to focus on generating 

demand in service of our sustainability 

goals, rather than destroying where we 

don’t think it aligns. It would be cleverer 

to link the outcome of what we were 

working on to the kinds of things that 

are required right now, like recovery, 

stability, jobs, etc. 

Maja Göpel: Julian, you put your finger 

exactly on the wound: There is something 

like a license to operate if business 

practice is not helping us deliver on the 

needs of the people in a sustainable way, 

but increases the risks. We cannot say: 

We can’t touch them. That is a failure 

of the state, and I think it’s really helpful 

to look at what Franklin Roosevelt 

put forward in his New Deal: The state 

needs to stop a race to the bottom and 

thus support that the pioneers can up 

the level of how business is performing 

and not the laggards. 

When I listen to European Commissioner Frans 

Timmermans, the cure seems very clear: We invest 

the money in climate-sensitive technologies, 

in the Green Deal, and this will give us in Europe 

a competitive advantage. That all sounds too 

good. Pietro, does CDP share this view? 

Pietro Bertazzi: I am glad that you 

mentioned Timmermans because I was 

thinking about referring to his recent 

statements, where he talked about linking 

the recovery to the European Green 

Concretely, 

we want to 

see companies 

that have been 

beneficiaries 

of economic 

recovery 

policies to 

commit to 

low-carbon 

transition 

plans. 

Pietro Bertazzi 

” 

Deal. He was actually trying to push 

environmental safeguards and the environmental 

agenda forwards. Because 

at the same time, some business associations 

have been trying to push back on 

this environmental agenda to put the 

economic recovery in front. I fully agree 

with Maja that we should be thinking 

long-term, but unfortunately I believe at 

the moment the thinking is still shortterm. 

And that’s because we are governed 

by fear. During the pandemic, which in 

some sense is very similar to a war – you 

try to fix just what you see in front of 

you. 

We do have a wish list at CDP, and of 

course it won’t be a surprise to you that 

we want to see the economic recovery 

be linked to the climate agenda. We 

believe in just transitions, and so all 

industries should be helped and get recovery 

support if the recovery package 

is linked to long-term environmental 

and climate goals. Concretely, we want 

to see companies that have been beneficiaries 

of economic recovery policies to 

commit to low-carbon transition plans. 

The second thing that we would like to 

see is getting companies prepared for 

the environmental and climate crisis. 

How can we do that? We recommend 

disclosure aligned with the TCFD recommendations, 

which help companies 

make assessments about the risks that 

climate change poses to financial stability. 

Emily, we talked a lot about the recovery of 

the economy, but what about the recovery of 

communities? >> 


47

Emily Auckland: In the UK context, 

we do have a lot of influential voices 

delivering a message to government 

that the recovery needs to be a green 

recovery. Our position on that is that it 

also needs to be a socially just recovery, 

and that’s where the SDGs can be helpful. 

They should be used as a way to 

frame decision-making to check that it is 

coherent and that it addresses multiple 

challenges at the same time. Those of us 

who are more immersed in sustainability 

recognize that this is all interconnected, 

and that what we are seeing socially in 

our communities is a manifestation of 

global issues. So I think there is a greater 

need for a recognition of the interconnectedness, 

of the way that we live at 

the global, national, and local levels 

when it comes to recovery programs. 

We do actually have some really good 

leadership within cities in the UK when 

it comes to recovery planning. I mean 

it’s early stages, but some of what we are 

hearing and seeing is certainly a call for 

an inclusive, just, and green recovery. We 

have city governance that is decentralized, 

and they have certain powers, but 

they don’t necessarily have all the powers 

they need to do what they would like 

to do to respond to their local contexts. 

That’s why we need locally, nationally, 

and regionally relevant responses to 

these issues. And if we want to see our 

societies come together to address these 

challenges, then the SDGs help us have 

those conversations, open up those dialogues, 

and give us a sense of direction. 

You mentioned the importance of dialogues 

and participation. But reality is a bit confusing. 

We have these days many people going on 

the streets fighting for their rights. It sounds 

like a fantastic human rights story, but it is 

not because some protestors are just angry, 

some are conspiracy theorists, right-wingers, 

crackpots, etc. Are we facing a kind of very 

aggressive debate culture, where it seems to me 

that only the loudest voices are being heard? 

Emily Auckland: It’s a good point. There 

is a huge polarization of views, and I 

think perhaps those initiatives, organizations, 

partnerships, idealists who are 

calling for transformation right now 

need to find ways to collaborate. What 

I have learned through stakeholder engagement 

is that by having a collective 

sense of purpose, we are able to overcome 

a lot of the differences. Whether 

we are talking about political polarization 

or whether we are just talking about 

the dominance of certain agendas, we 

see a tendency to be very protective of 

those agendas, and I think we have to 

let go of some of that protectiveness 

and drop our barriers a bit if we are to 

find ways to work much more collaboratively 

and influence people. The SDGs 

can help us to do that when it comes 

to building narratives that are able to 

reach and influence a larger number 

of people. 

Pietro, how can we foster ambition to go the 

right way, be it with climate change issues or 

other issues? 

Pietro Bertazzi: Ambition is something 

that we really tackle at CDP, especially 

with the support of the Science Based 

Targets initiative. The UN Secretary- 

General just earlier this week issued the 

SDG Progress Report and warned that 

Covid-19 could imperil the progress of 

the Agenda 2030. Therefore, at CDP we 

encourage companies to set sciencebased 

targets to make a real impact in 

progressing the climate agenda. In an 

open letter, more than 150 global corporations 

participating in the SbT initiative 

urged world leaders to pursue a net-zero 

recovery from Covid-19. This is a very 

practical example of what Maja was 

talking about – transformation of the 

system. We can indeed work together 

to try to readdress and reorientate the 

system at large. 

We are living in a complex world, and we have 

to find a new kind of narrative to show the 

positive side of such a transformation. How 

can we pour more happiness and more positive 

thinking into Agenda 2030? 

Transformation, 

aligned with 

the SDGs, is 

how we need 

to generate the 

demand needed 

to rebuild 

economies. 

” 

Maja Göpel: Make sustainability the easy 

outcome, and make it less hard to live a 

sustainable life and lead a sustainable 

company! I would really love to see people 

stop repeating that sustainability is 

about bogging down, that sustainability 

is about prohibiting, that sustainability 

is about less, and not much fun. Most 

people, when you talk to them in private, 

know that things have to change. So I 

don’t appreciate when people’s presumably 

relentless needs are being abused in 

a discourse that describes sustainability 

as something unpleasant. We are far 

beyond that point. Sustainability is a 

desirable vision for many people, and 

this is what we should emphasize and 

use new technologies, new ways of doing 

things to make it reality: We always talk 

about the trade-offs between the social 

and the environmental. If there was 

anything that has become visible during 

Covid-19, it’s the trade-ins between 

better environmental surroundings and 

less pollution and people’s health and 

people’s well-being. This holds true for 

richer and poorer people alike. 



We are going to do that through our 

massive advertising budgets, but actually 

it’s not our fault if they buy those 

products. And governments are saying: 

Well that is capitalism, right? It’s up 

to free markets, that’s how the system 

works. 

I have worked in community development 

with vulnerable and marginalized 

groups, and I think there is very often 

an assumption that if someone is on 

the breadline that they don’t care about 

things. And actually they do, they just 

don’t have the platform to say so. 

Julian Hill-Landolt: Just one remark: I 

just feel we might be using a view of the 

public that is not as broad as it needs to 

be. I am a committed environmentalist, 

I want the world to change. But I 

don’t see a world yet in which people 

are as open to changes as we (people 

working to bring about more sustainable 

societies) want them to be. And I 

don’t see a world in which people are 

sufficiently well-off, stable, and secure 

to have the time available to care about 

these things, particularly right now. For 

a lot of people, their pandemic has been 

absolutely awful. There are millions 

who have lost their jobs, who don’t 

have outdoor spaces to use, who have 

no access to healthcare, or who live in 

countries with no safety net and therefore 

have to keep on working because 

they live from one meal to the next. So, 

it’s important for us to have empathy 

– as governments, as companies, as a 

sustainability sector – and have the 

right conversations with people. I agree 

wholeheartedly with everything that has 

been said. But unless we get the public 

Julian Hill-Landolt 

on board, we won’t see transformation 

at the rate and scope required. 

Maja Göpel: Here I would like to add 

that being forced to do things that are 

environmentally harmful is not the 

same as not caring about these effects. 

That is exactly my point when I say we 

need to pull the social and environmental 

co-benefits of sustainability proposals 

and policies to the forefront. Justice runs 

across both domains and to me is a key 

building block for acceptance. 

I would like to turn to Emily. 

Emily Auckland: I’m going to be a mediator 

and sit somewhere in between 

the two of you because I think that both 

points are right. I think that there is 

an assumption that people can’t make 

the right decisions, and there has been 

a history of business and government 

behaviors that reinforce that within 

society. So we are going to push them 

toward these products that are not good 

for them and are not good for the planet. 

I also think that business and government 

have to take really serious responsibility 

for their role in consumer 

behavior. I heard a quote recently from 

Myles Allan, who is the physicist that 

came up with the net-zero concept. He 

said that we cannot entrust the future 

of the planet to the individual decisions 

of eight billion people, and I think that 

is ultimately it. We can’t say it’s down 

to individual choice to change these big, 

complex, systemic issues. It is down to 

those that have the power and that are 

able to pull the right levers for change. 

Pietro, what are your remarks or your narrative 

for Agenda 2030? 

Pietro Bertazzi: Well, actually, I think 

we should highlight what is possible, 

because there are some niches where 

things are actually happening and going 

in the right direction, and we should 

put a spotlight on those. In Canada, the 

government did link their economic 

recovery package to the climate agenda. 

Companies that want to be beneficiaries 

of the recovery funds must disclose 

their climate risks in line with the TCFD 

recommendations. That’s great. Why 

can’t we propose this to other jurisdictions? 

The interview was conducted by Dr. Elmer 

Lenzen, publisher of the Global Goals Yearbook 

and chair of the macondo foundation. 


49

By Meaghan Muldoon 

Covid-19 

Makes 

ESG Factors 

More 

Financially 

Relevant 

The tremendous toll of the 

Covid-19 crisis – on health, 

economic well-being, and 

everyday activity – has 

precipitated a widespread 

reassessment of the way we 

live our lives. While the market 

viewed 2019 as a watershed 

year for the mainstreaming 

of sustainable investing, we 

expect that the response to 

the Covid-19 crisis in the first 

half of 2020 will prove to be 

an even more meaningful 

test case for – and evolution 

of – the global sustainable 

investing landscape. 



Prior to the pandemic, 

there were two core hypotheses underpinning 

the growth of sustainable 

investing. First: that broad sustainable 

exposures could not only perform in 

line with traditional benchmarks (moving 

away from the “financial trade-off” 

stigma), but could in fact build greater 

portfolio resilience by better weathering 

market downturns. Second: that investors 

were on the front-end of a long-term, 

structural shift in 

preferences in favor of sustainability, 

which would lead to a major 

reallocation of capital and ultimately a 

revaluing of assets and risks consistent 

with these preferences over the course 

of many years. 

Market performance and market behavior 

during the first quarter of 2020 have 

reinforced both hypotheses. The Covid-19 

crisis is the first real test for sustainable 

strategies during a period of historic 

financial 

market stress since sustainable 

investing has gone mainstream, 

and although one quarter is short and 

certainly not determinative, what we 

observed was meaningful. 

First, from a performance perspective, 

sustainable strategies demonstrated 

more resilience than their traditional 

counterparts. From an index perspective, 

Morningstar reported that 51 of their 57 

sustainable indices outperformed their 

broad market counterparts in the first 

quarter, while MSCI reported that 15 


51

ESG 

Second, rather than fleeing sustainable 

funds in favor of traditional strategies, 

the market saw investors accelerating 

into sustainable strategies during the 

period of massive market volatility, making 

the move into sustainability a part 

of their portfolio rebalances. In the first 

quarter of 2020, global sustainable openended 

funds (mutual funds and ETFs) 

brought in $40.5 billion in new assets, a 

41 percent increase year-over-year. Meanwhile, 

US sustainable funds attracted a 

record $7.3 billion for the quarter. That 

investors used an extraordinary market 

drawdown as an impetus to grow sustainable 

exposure in their portfolios is 

evidence of the persistence in investor 

preferences toward sustainability. 

With this experience in mind, how do 

governments, businesses, investors, and 

stakeholders start to understand the 

sources of resilience during these past 

few months, and how will the experience 

of Covid-19 change sustainable investing 

as we return to a new normal? What 

have we learned? 

of their 17 sustainable indices outperformed 

over the same period – consistent 

across geography and methodology. 

In active mutual funds, our research has 

found that open-ended funds that score 

in the top 10 percent of Morningstar’s 

sustainability ratings have significantly 

outperformed low-scoring peers (bottom 

10 percent). Specifically, a majority of 

high ESG-scoring funds landed in the 

top half of performance in their Morningstar 

category, while low ESG scorers 

were more likely to be near the bottom. 

Not only has Covid-19 validated the 

growing role for sustainable investing 

strategies in financial markets, but it has 

provided important new information to 

existing notions of materiality. Our investment 

conviction is grounded in the 

expectation that companies with strong 

profiles on material sustainability issues 

have the potential to outperform those 

with poor profiles. The breadth and scale 

of the Covid-19 crisis has prompted investors 

to reevaluate how environmental, 

social, and governance (ESG) information 

can be used to help identify investment 

opportunities and risks. 



Case in point: In a mid-April internal survey 

of our own investment professionals, 

more than two-thirds of respondents said 

they believed Covid-19 would make ESGrelated 

factors more financially relevant 

to a firm’s bottom line going forward, 

even in the short term. Equally interesting, 

respondents signaled a shift from an 

“Esg” focus pre-crisis to an “ESG” focus 

moving forward – with the materiality 

of S and G considerations seen in heightened 

relief during the crisis and response. 

The reason for this is clear: The Covid-19 

crisis is above all things a health crisis. 

Companies – acting under the scrutiny 

of public authorities, unions, and 

broader society – have had to quickly 

plan and adapt to ensure the health and 

safety of their employees, demonstrate 

commitments to safeguard jobs, and 

mitigate the worst consequences of activity 

loss for customers and supply chains. 

Our research has found that across 15 

leading sustainability themes (five each 

across environmental, social, and governance 

pillars), the strongest relationship 

to short-term performance during the 

Q1 market displacement was found in 

customer relations (“S”), firm culture 

(“S”), and board effectiveness (“G”) – 

all indicators pointing to adroitness in 

pivoting quickly to address immediate 

stakeholder needs. 

Just as resilience and adaptiveness have 

been valued in the near term, maintaining 

a strong “social license to operate” 

will matter more going forward – particularly 

among companies that have 

received public support, or those that 

have suffered less and may be better 

positioned to contribute. Embedded in 

this stakeholder focus is the transformation 

of the core principles of corporate 

governance: Companies are facing pressure 

from governments around the world 

to cut dividend payments beyond the 

lifetime of the crisis, to reassess executive 

remuneration, and to overhaul risk 

management policies to better prepare 

for systemic risks. In the longer run, the 

manner in which firms serve their stakeholders 

during the Covid-19 outbreak 

may prove to be a key differentiator for 

companies looking to accelerate out of 

the crisis on the back of strong employee 

satisfaction, corporate culture, and brand 

reputation, especially in regulated sectors 

and those that will benefit from 

public financial support. 

In short, the rising salience of stakeholdercentric 

issues in the Covid-19 crisis has 

reinforced a shift in the balance between 

shareholder and stakeholder capitalism, 

with health, social, and employment 

concerns moving workers and the community 

into the investor’s focus. 

Despite the very human nature of the 

Covid-19 crisis, its lasting impact on how 

investors price sustainability considerations 

will not just be an “S” and “G” story. 

The experience of a global health pandemic 

has also made the slow-moving, 

catastrophic consequences of climate 

change, deforestation, and other onceabstract 

threats to natural capital suddenly 

much easier to imagine. As we 

move into the new normal, a legacy of 

the Covid-19 crisis will be a validation of 

the structural shift toward sustainable 

strategies, and an evolution of material 

sustainability insights focused across E, 

S, and G. 

A final way the Covid-19 crisis may shape 

the future of sustainable investing is an 

increased focus on mapping ESG factors 

onto the United Nations Sustainable 

Development Goals, as governments internalize 

new social and environmental 

challenges and as stakeholder capitalism 

gains traction. The SDG framework is 

well-adapted for alleviating the worst 

social and economic impacts of the 

Covid-19 crisis, as well as the natural 

capital issues that lead to the conditions 

which make future pandemics more 

likely. Better understanding the alignment 

between the SDGs and financial 

materiality – where doing good also 

means doing well – could open a path 

for impact objectives to also benefit from 

a broader market reallocation to sustainable 

strategies. 

Meaghan Muldoon 

Managing Director 

Global Head of ESG Integration 

at BlackRock 


53

The Corona Effect 

Four Future Scenarios 

How will the pandemic 

change the way we live 

and do business? The 

Zukunftsinstitut describes 

four possible scenarios of 

how the corona crisis can 

transform the world. 

1. Total isolation: 

Everyone against everyone 

→ Welcome to the Super Safe Society! Society 

is once again clearly defining itself 

as a nation – because security can only 

be guaranteed if the boundaries of the 

security zone are clearly defined. Security 

comes first. Every man for himself. The 

state uses all available means to protect 

its citizens – even if that means stirring 

up deep-rooted fears or artificially 

scarifying food. People therefore use all 

possible open spaces to grow their own 

fruit and vegetables. The black market 

and bartering are also flourishing. 

→ De-urbanization: The countryside is 

gaining power. Those who can, move out 

of the city, to feed themselves – and earn 

good money by supplying impoverished 

city dwellers with food. The trend toward 

single life, ever smaller apartments and 

co-living, reliance on public transport, 

and global commodity flows has made 

the urban population dependent. The 

urban hipsters have become a precarious 

class. 

→ Germophobia, the longing for sterility, 

has steadily increased mistrust of 

products whose origins cannot clearly be 

traced. Fruit and vegetables are clinically 

disinfected before consumption, and 

research into safe packaging is being 

conducted at full speed. Imports have 

been restricted because the fear of germs 

being introduced via products from 

abroad is too high. There are fewer exotic 

fruits – but many of them can now be 

grown in countries where it was not 

previously possible, thanks to climate 

change. Agriculture and the manufacturing 

industry have experienced an 

enormous upswing, nearshoring has 

been put into practice. 

→ What began with recommendations 

to cancel large events with more than 

1,000 people has developed into a ban 

on meetings with more than 10 people, 

for the benefit of the people. Public 

cultural life has therefore come to an 

almost complete standstill. Concerts or 

sporting events still take place, but the 

audience sits at home and watches the 

event from their couch at home – free 

of charge, sponsored by the state. Once 

popular third places such as cafés are 

being avoided, restaurants have become 

ghost kitchens, supplying customers with 

meals to the highest hygienic standards. 

For city dwellers in particular, social 

contacts have shifted to virtual space. 



2. System crash: 

Permanent crisis mode 

→ Frictions in the multipolar world order 

are the order of the day: Mutual 

recriminations, aggressive threatening, 

and nervous action alternate with efforts 

toward openness and cooperation – because 

there is nevertheless an awareness 

that we are dependent on each other. 

Neo-nationalism is on the rise, there is 

a constant state of tension. 

→ Looking to national sale markets, 

nearshoring is becoming a political-ideological 

premise. At the same time, however, 

dependence on international trade 

relations and commodity flows remains. 

Both tendencies abruptly and permanently 

stand side by side and rub against 

each other. Glocalization, too, is only 

an expression of the discrepancies 

between local and international 

markets, which cannot exist 

without each other. Global 

cities are the most nervous 

places in the world: 

This is where the tensions 

between the regional, 

national, and 

international flows 

of finance, services, 

and goods are constantly 

felt. 

→ High times for 

Big Data! The 

more uncertain 

the times, the 

more analysis is 

required. The collection 

and processing 

of large 

amounts of data 

are experiencing a 

continuous boom. The development of 

artificial intelligence is being intensified, 

especially for the simulation of crisis 

scenarios and the control of crises. Consequently, 

cybercrime on behalf of the 

state is also on the rise – with the aim 

of weakening international competitors. 

Internally, the state is using technology 

for monitoring: predictive analytics, the 

data-based prediction of human behavior, 

is becoming increasingly important in a 

permanently insecure society. 

→ Privacy is declining. Individual freedom 

of data is increasingly 

restricted, and laws 

concerning 

privacy and data protection have largely 

been abolished, both in international exchanges 

with other states and in dealing 

with one’s own population. Health data 

is becoming a matter for the state – and 

the population is joining in, as confidence 

in the state’s health provision and care 

has been waning for a long time. More 

and more people are relying on personal 

health responsibility, digital health, continuous 

self-tracking, and the monitoring 

of their vital signs by smart devices that 

feed personal health data into government 

databases at any time. >> 


55

3. Neo-tribes: 

The retreat into the private sphere 

→ People no longer trust state actors and 

supranational alliances – nor do they 

trust them with the power to act. The 

turning away from the global world 

community leads to a particularized 

we-culture and the increased formation 

of neo-tribes. Community is sought on 

a small scale, because in the wake of 

the corona crisis the trend toward postindividualization 

has become attractive 

to a broader mass. 

→ The fear of infection has spurred a 

retreat into the private sphere and the 

rediscovery of domesticity. There are 

practically no major events anymore, but 

there is a lot of streaming, because you 

can participate in mega-events via virtual 

reality without having to leave your 

secure and comfortable home. Neighborhood 

help is a top priority, and there are 

fixed structures for helping each other in 

a crisis. Supplies are shared or exchanged, 

special attention is paid to the old and 

weak. People are also increasingly moving 

to the countryside or smaller towns 

– the Progressive Province has reached 

its peak. 

→ Instead of using public transport, people 

are more and more switching to bicycles 

or e-scooters. Long-distance travel 

has lost much of its appeal – in contrast 

to surrounding regions or neighboring 

countries. Massive de-touristification 

has the effect that entire landscapes 

and former tourism hotspots are able 

to recover from overtourism. Travel is 

no longer taken for granted, but is – 

again – seen as something special, also 

because it requires a lot of precautions 

and planning in post-corona times. Tourism 

is turning even more into resonant 

tourism. 

→ The failure of global retail chains and 

mistrust of certain countries of origin 

are leading to a fundamental re-regionalization. 

More than ever, people are 

buying locally, the sharing economy is 

gaining momentum in regional networks, 

traditional handicraft techniques are experiencing 

a renaissance. Urban farming 

and cooperatives are replacing capitalist 

consumption patterns, and a circular 

economy with autonomous ecosystems 

is emerging in regional communities. 

Concepts such as Cradle to Cradle or 

post-growth are naturally embedded in 

people’s everyday lives – as practices 

that are as desired as they are necessary. 

The regional economy functions 

completely autonomously. 

→ The corona crisis has proven to be a 

surprising driver of new work trends 

toward more flexicurity: The fact that 

flexibility in the workplace was made 

possible on a broad scale out of necessity 

has permanently changed working 

cultures. Home office is now an essential 

part of every corporate culture, international 

companies arrange meetings in VR 

conferences, contracts are concluded via 

blockchain. Digital health applications 

calculate the potential risk of personal 

business meetings in advance – which 

are usually not recommended anyway. 

4. Adaption: 

The resilient society 

The corona virus has triggered a selfpurification 

of the markets: a collective 

reflection on the origin of our goods, 

which has stimulated new patterns of 

consumption. The breakdown of global 

chains of production and action has led to 

a rediscovery of domestic alternatives. Stationary 

trade, regional products, and supply 

chains have experienced an upswing. 

Not only has a sensible balance between 

online and offline been achieved, but 

above all a wise approach to globalized 

retail chains, a balance between local and 

global trade and a flourishing of direct 

trade platforms. Since then, weekly markets, 

regional producers, and local online 

shops have been booming. The monopoly 

position of online retailers such as Amazon 

and Alibaba has dissolved in favor 

of several smaller players that are less 

dependent on global production chains 

and more readily available locally. Society 

is moving away from mass consumption 

and a throwaway mentality toward a 

healthier economic system. 

→ Corona has made the vision of a new 

holistic understanding of health come 

true: Health is no longer seen as something 

that concerns only the individual 

body and behavior. Rather, health is now 

viewed more holistically: Environment, 

city, politics, global community – all 

these factors are important for human 

health. World health and individual 

health are being looked at as a whole. 

This new mindset is turning the entire 

healthcare system upside down: Governments, 

city planners, and businesses are 

working together to create healthy environments 

for all people. In this context, 

the use of digital health apps has become 

a matter of course to share health data 

anonymously in real time. Thanks to 

predictive health, accurate predictions 

can be made, for example about the 

likelihood of an epidemic. It is clear 

to everyone that individual health can 

no longer be viewed in isolation from 

environment and society. 

→ Global risks require supranational players 

who can act in a globally networked 

manner. The corona crisis, for example, 

has given political power to act a new 

weighting. While nation-states have 

lost relevance, cities and supranational 



Impact Map for Scenarios 

and Megatrends 

Scenario 1 

Total isolation 

1 

Strong megatrends 

Driving megatrends 

Ambivalent megatrends 

Silver Society 

3 

Scenario 3 

Neo-Tribes 

Individualization 

New Work 

Security 

Health 

2 

Scenario 2 

System crash 

Connectivity 

Globalization 

Scenario 4 

Adaption 

4 

Neo-ecology 

Culture of Knowledge 

Mobility 

Gender Shift 

Urbanization 

Source: Zukunftsinstitut, FAS Research 

bodies are becoming increasingly important 

– a reorganisation in the sense of 

glocalisation: The local level (cities, municipalities, 

mayors etc.) is directly linked 

to global organizations. In this way, local 

problems can be solved quickly and creatively, 

and global risks can be identified 

more quickly and tackled cooperatively. 

Overall, since the pandemic, humanity 

has perceived itself more strongly as a 

global community that must solve challenges 

together. For neither an epidemic 

nor the climate crisis stops at national 

borders. A global identity has emerged, 

supported by a fundamental change in 

values: solidarity and we-culture not 

only with our neighbors, but also at 

international and global levels. 

→ The corona crisis has led to concrete 

lessons in supranational handling of 

big data, predictive analytics, and early 

warning systems. Artificial intelligence 

is now being used more constructively: 

not only to contain epidemics at an 

early stage, but also to minimize all 

possible global risks that do not respect 

national borders. Everyone is equipped 

with health tracking devices, because 

the global exchange of up-to-date health 

data allows risks to be detected early on. 

The continuous learning from each other 

in a multitude of functioning networks 

creates global resilience. This new spirit 

also shapes the media landscape: Constructive 

journalism focuses on solutions 

instead of spreading alarmism and fake 

news. This also helps to maintain a resilient 

and adaptive society that knows 

how to deal productively with crises. 

Copyright and more information: 

Zukunftsinstitut GmbH 

Kaiserstr. 53 

60329 Frankfurt am Main 


57

Loss of Species Biodiversity 

Every 20 

minutes the world adds 

3,500 

human lives and loses 

6 out of 7 

marine turtles 

are threatened by extinction 

one or more species Every 60 

m i n u t e s 

240 acres 

of natural habitat are destroyed 

70% 

of the world’s known species 

risk extinction if the global 

temperature rises by 

more than 3.5°C 

20% 

of the world’s species 

could be gone in 

30 years 

75% 

of genetic diversity in 

agriculture crops 

has been lost 

Data: www.globalissues.org 



1 out of 4 

amphibians birds, conifers, 

and mammals are threatened 

by extinction 

75% 

of the world’s fisheries 

are fully or over exploited 

27,000 

species 

lost a year 

80% 

of the decline in biological 

diversity is caused by 

habitat destruction 


59

We Are Creating 

Conditions for 

Diseases such 

as Covid-19 

to Emerge 

As habitat and biodiversity loss 

increase globally, the novel 

coronavirus outbreak may be just the 

beginning of mass pandemics. 

By John Vidal 

60 

Global Goals Yearbook 2020


Mayibout 2 is not a healthy place. The 150 or so people 

who live in the village, which sits on the south bank 

of the Ivindo River, deep in the great Minkebe Forest 

in northern Gabon, are used to occasional bouts of diseases 

such as malaria, dengue, yellow fever, and sleeping sickness. 

Mostly they shrug them off. 

But in January 1996, Ebola, a deadly virus then barely known 

to humans, unexpectedly spilled out of the forest in a wave 

of small epidemics. The disease killed 21 of 37 villagers who 

were reported to have been infected, including a number who 

had carried, skinned, chopped, or eaten a chimpanzee from 

the nearby forest. 

I traveled to Mayibout 2 in 2004 to investigate why deadly 

diseases new to humans were emerging from biodiversity “hot 

spots” such as tropical rainforests and bushmeat markets in 

African and Asian cities. 

It took a day by canoe and then many hours down degraded 

forest logging roads passing Baka villages and a small gold 

mine to reach the village. There, I found traumatized people 

still fearful that the deadly virus, which kills up to 90 percent 

of the people it infects, would return. 

Villagers told me how children had gone into the forest with 

dogs that had killed a chimp. They said that everyone who 

cooked or ate it got a terrible fever within a few hours. Some 

died immediately, while others were taken down the river 

to hospital. A few, such as Nesto Bematsick, recovered. “We 

used to love the forest, now we fear it,” he told me. Many of 

Bematsick’s family members died. 

Only a decade or two ago, it was widely thought that tropical 

forests and intact natural environments teeming with exotic 

wildlife threatened humans by harboring the viruses and 

pathogens that lead to new diseases in humans, such as Ebola, 

HIV, and dengue. 

But a number of researchers today think that it is actually 

humanity’s destruction of biodiversity that creates the conditions 

for new viruses and diseases such as Covid-19 – the viral 

disease that emerged in China in December 2019 – to arise, 

leading to profound health and economic impacts in rich and 

poor countries alike. In fact, a new discipline – planetary 

health – is emerging that focuses on the increasingly visible 

connections among the well-being of humans, other living 

things, and entire ecosystems. 

Is it possible, then, that it was human activity, such as roadbuilding, 

mining, hunting, and logging, that triggered the 

Ebola epidemics in Mayibout 2 and elsewhere in the 1990s, 

and that is unleashing new terrors today? >> 


61

“We invade tropical forests and other 

wild landscapes, which harbor so many 

species of animals and plants — and 

within those creatures, so many unknown 

viruses,” David Quammen, author 

of Spillover: Animal Infections and the Next 

Pandemic, recently wrote in the New York 

Times. “We cut the trees; we kill the 

animals or cage them and send them to 

markets. We disrupt ecosystems, and we 

shake viruses loose from their natural 

hosts. When that happens, they need a 

new host. Often, we are it.” 

Increasing threat 

Research suggests that outbreaks of 

animal-borne and other infectious 

diseases such as Ebola, SARS, bird flu, 

and now Covid-19, caused by a novel 

coronavirus, are on the rise. Pathogens 

are crossing from animals to humans, 

and many are now able to spread quickly 

to new places. The US Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention estimates 

that three-quarters of “new or emerging” 

diseases which infect humans originate 

in non-human animals. 

Some, such as rabies and plague, crossed 

from animals centuries ago. Others, such 

as Marburg, which is thought to be transmitted 

by bats, are still rare. A few, such 

as Covid-19, which emerged last year 

in Wuhan, China, and MERS, which is 

linked to camels in the Middle East, are 

new to humans and spreading globally. 

Other diseases that have crossed into humans 

include Lassa fever, which was first 

identified in 1969 in Nigeria; Nipah from 

Malaysia; and SARS from China, which 

killed more than 700 people and traveled 

to 30 countries in 2002–2003. Some, 

such as Zika and West Nile virus, which 

emerged in Africa, have mutated and 

become established on other continents. 

Kate Jones, Chair of ecology and biodiversity 

at University College London, 

calls emerging animal-borne infectious 

diseases an “increasing and very significant 

threat to global health, security, and 

economies.” 

Amplification effect 

In 2008, Jones and a team of researchers 

identified 335 diseases that emerged between 

1960 and 2004, at least 60 percent 

of which came from non-human animals. 

Increasingly, says Jones, these zoonotic 

diseases are linked to environmental 

change and human behavior. The disruption 

of pristine forests driven by logging, 

mining, road building through remote 

places, rapid urbanization, and population 

growth is bringing people into closer 

contact with animal species they may 

never have been near before, she says. 

The resulting transmission of disease 

from wildlife to humans, she says, is 

now “a hidden cost of human economic 

development. There are just so many 

more of us, in every environment. We 

are going into largely undisturbed places 

and being exposed more and more. We 

are creating habitats where viruses are 

transmitted more easily, and then we 

are surprised that we have new ones.” 

Jones studies how land-use change contributes 

to the risk. “We are researching 

how species in degraded habitats are 

likely to carry more viruses which can 

infect humans,” she says. “Simpler systems 

get an amplification effect. Destroy 

landscapes, and the species you are left 

with are the ones humans get the diseases 

from.” 

“There are countless pathogens out there 

continuing to evolve which at some 

point could pose a threat to humans,” 

says Eric Fevre, chair of veterinary infectious 

diseases at the University of 

Liverpool’s Institute of Infection and 

Global Health. “The risk [of pathogens 

jumping from animals to humans] has 

always been there.” 



“We cut the trees; 

we kill the animals 

or cage them and 

send them to 

markets. We disrupt 

ecosystems, and we 

shake viruses loose 

from their natural 

hosts. When that 

happens, they need 

a new host. Often, 

we are it.” 

The difference between now and a few 

decades ago, Fevre says, is that diseases 

are likely to spring up in both urban and 

natural environments. “We have created 

densely packed populations where 

alongside us are bats and rodents and 

birds, pets and other living things. That 

creates intense interaction and opportunities 

for things to move from species to 

species,” he says. 

Tip of the iceberg 

“Pathogens do not respect species boundaries,” 

says disease ecologist Thomas 

Gillespie, an associate professor in Emory 

University’s Department of Environmental 

Sciences, who studies how shrinking 

natural habitats and changing behavior 

add to the risks of diseases spilling over 

from animals to humans. 

“I am not at all surprised about the 

coronavirus outbreak,” he says. “The 

majority of pathogens are still to be 

discovered. We are at the very tip of 

the iceberg.” 

Humans, says Gillespie, are creating the 

conditions for the spread of diseases by 

reducing the natural barriers between 

virus host animals — in which the virus 

is naturally circulating — and themselves. 

“We fully expect the arrival of 

pandemic influenza; we can expect largescale 

human mortalities; we can expect 

other pathogens with other impacts. A 

disease like Ebola is not easily spread. 

But something with a mortality rate of 

Ebola spread by something like measles 

would be catastrophic,” Gillespie says. 

Wildlife everywhere is being put under 

more stress, he says. “Major landscape 

changes are causing animals to lose 

habitats, which means species become 

crowded together and also come into 

greater contact with humans. Species 

that survive change are now moving 

and mixing with different animals and 

with humans.” 

Gillespie sees this in the United States, 

where suburbs fragmenting forests raise 

the risk of humans contracting Lyme 

disease. “Altering the ecosystem affects 

the complex cycle of the Lyme pathogen. 

People living close by are more likely 

to get bitten by a tick carrying Lyme 

bacteria,” he says. 

Yet, human health research seldom 

considers the surrounding natural 

ecosystems, says Richard Ostfeld, distinguished 

senior scientist at the Cary 

Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, 

New York. He and others are 

developing the emerging discipline of 

planetary health, which looks at the 

links between human and ecosystem 

health. 

“There’s misapprehension among scientists 

and the public that natural 

ecosystems are the source of threats to 

ourselves. It’s a mistake. Nature poses 

threats, it is true, but it’s human activities 

that do the real damage. The health 

risks in a natural environment can be 

made much worse when we interfere 

with it,” he says. 

Ostfeld points to rats and bats, which 

are strongly linked with the direct and 

indirect spread of zoonotic diseases. “Rodents 

and some bats thrive when we 

disrupt natural habitats. They are the 

most likely to promote transmissions 

[of pathogens]. The more we disturb the 

forests and habitats the more danger we 

are in,” he says. 

Felicia Keesing, professor of biology at 

Bard College, New York, studies how 

environmental changes influence the 

probability that humans will be exposed 

to infectious diseases. “When we erode 

biodiversity, we see a proliferation of 

the species most likely to transmit new 

diseases to us, but there’s also good evidence 

that those same species are the 

best hosts for existing diseases,” she wrote 

in an email. 

>> 


63

“Wet markets 

make a perfect 

storm for 

cross-species 

transmission of 

pathogens.” 

The market connection 

Disease ecologists argue that viruses and 

other pathogens are also likely to move 

from animals to humans in the many 

informal markets that have sprung up 

to provide fresh meat to fast-growing 

urban populations around the world. 

Here, animals are slaughtered, cut up, 

and sold on the spot. 

The “wet market” (one that sells fresh 

produce and meat) in Wuhan, thought 

by the Chinese government to be the 

starting point of the current Covid-19 

pandemic, was known to sell numerous 

wild animals, including live wolf pups, 

salamanders, crocodiles, scorpions, rats, 

squirrels, foxes, civets, and turtles. 

Equally, urban markets in west and 

central Africa see monkeys, bats, rats, 

and dozens of bird, mammal, insect, 

and rodent species slaughtered and sold 

close to open refuse dumps and with 

no drainage. 

“Wet markets make a perfect storm for 

cross-species transmission of pathogens,” 

says Gillespie. “Whenever you have 

novel interactions with a range of species 

in one place, whether that is in a 

natural environment like a forest or a 

wet market, you can have a spillover 

event.” 

The Wuhan market, along with others 

that sell live animals, has been shut by 

the Chinese authorities, and the government 

in February outlawed trading and 

eating wild animals, except for fish and 

seafood. But bans on live animals being 

sold in urban areas or informal markets 

are not the answer, say some scientists. 

“The wet market in Lagos is notorious. It’s 

like a nuclear bomb waiting to happen. 

But it’s not fair to demonize places which 

do not have fridges. These traditional 

markets provide much of the food for 

Africa and Asia,” says Jones. 

“These markets are essential sources of 

food for hundreds of millions of poor 

people, and getting rid of them is impossible,” 

says Delia Grace, a senior 

epidemiologist and veterinarian with 

the International Livestock Research 

Institute, which is based in Nairobi, 

Kenya. She argues that bans force traders 

underground, where they may pay 

less attention to hygiene. 

Fevre and Cecilia Tacoli, principal researcher 

in the human settlements research 

group at the International Institute 

for Environment and Development, 

argue in a blog post that “rather than 

pointing the finger at wet markets,” we 

should look at the burgeoning trade in 

wild animals. 

“It is wild animals rather than farmed 

animals that are the natural hosts of 

many viruses,” they write. “Wet markets 

are considered part of the informal 

food trade that is often blamed for 

contributing to spreading disease. But 

[…] evidence shows the link between 

informal markets and disease is not 

always so clear cut.” 

Changing behavior 

So what, if anything, can we do about 

all of this? 

Jones says that change must come from 

both rich and poor societies. Demand 

for wood, minerals, and resources from 

the Global North leads to the degraded 

landscapes and ecological disruption 

that drives disease, she says. “We must 

think about global biosecurity, find the 

weak points, and bolster the provision 

of health care in developing countries. 

Otherwise we can expect more of the 

same,” she says. 

“The risks are greater now. They were 

always present and have been there for 

generations. It is our interactions with 

that risk which must be changed,” says 



Brian Bird, a research virologist at the 

University of California, Davis School 

of Veterinary Medicine One Health Institute, 

where he leads Ebola-related 

surveillance activities in Sierra Leone 

and elsewhere. 

“We are in an era now of chronic emergency,” 

Bird says. “Diseases are more 

likely to travel further and faster than 

before, which means we must be faster 

in our responses. It needs investments, 

change in human behavior, and it means 

we must listen to people at community 

levels.” 

Getting the message about pathogens 

and disease to hunters, loggers, market 

traders, and consumers is key, Bird says. 

“These spillovers start with one or two 

people. The solutions start with education 

and awareness. We must make 

people aware things are different now. 

I have learned from working in Sierra 

Leone with Ebola-affected people that 

local communities have the hunger and 

desire to have information,” he says. 

“They want to know what to do. They 

want to learn.” 

Fevre and Tacoli advocate rethinking 

urban infrastructure, particularly within 

low-income and informal settlements. 

“Short-term efforts are focused on containing 

the spread of infection,” they 

write. “The longer term — given that 

new infectious diseases will likely continue 

to spread rapidly into and within 

cities — calls for an overhaul of current 

approaches to urban planning and development.” 

The bottom line, Bird says, is to be prepared. 

“We can’t predict where the next 

pandemic will come from, so we need 

mitigation plans to take into account 

the worst possible scenarios,” he says. 

“The only certain thing is that the next 

one will certainly come.” 

This article was originally published by Ensia. 


65

CAUGHT ON 



There comes a point in most actors’ lives when the journey, 

the profession, the lifestyle that has served them so well, 

and for so long, ultimately becomes less interesting. 

The catalyst for this could be one of many things – age, family, 

burnout, perhaps even a shift to another part of an industry 

that is perennially asking more and more of its leading lights. 

Why actor Edward Norton’s shift toward 

a vision for our planet has been a 

career in the making. 

By James Evans 

For Edward Norton, the stimuli responsible for making a change 

were beginning to stack up after a particularly fervent period 

of moviemaking in the first decade of the new millennium. 

Through Red Dragon, Kingdom of Heaven, The Illusionist, and The 

Painted Veil, the Boston-born actor’s output was unsustainably 

high, and notwithstanding perhaps one or two film projects 

that did not hit the mark, the deep-thinking Yale graduate 

always seemed to engage and enchant cinemagoers with 

informed, intelligent drama. 

And yet, as a passionate, driven, dynamic, and respected 

environmentalist, activist, social entrepreneur, and orator of 

positive global initiatives, Norton, justifiably, began to see the 

value in cinema diminish. 

“When you have a perspective that runs across two very polarized 

parts of culture, they will only, over time, become more 

separated,” he begins. “Trying to justify, validify the importance 

of a fight scene in a movie junket at a posh LA hotel, when 

on the next page of your diary you have an environmental 

project that will preserve, change, and perhaps even save lives 

… that becomes a very different thing to try to balance up. 

“The reality, of course, is you don’t attempt to balance it up. 

The reality is you accept one is more important than the other, 

and you let that guide you.” 

Norton’s investment in social and ecological change is not a 

charitable signup, nor a PR stunt; nor is it provoked by guilt 

stemming from years of living the high life. The reality is 

that the trappings of wealth and the adulation of fame have 

never been of particular interest to Norton, whose yearning 

for privacy goes far beyond that of most other actors in the 

profession. >> 


67

alance. From the World Surf League to 

International Day for Biodiversity and 

the Friends in Europe exhibition, each 

has garnered direct support from the 

star, typifying the actor’s desire to stay 

grounded to a variety of different causes. 

More than that, his dedication toward 

world health has been a lifelong devotion, 

and he is certainly happy to use his 

fame to publicize the issues surrounding 

renewable energy, biodiversity, illegal 

poaching, and even affordable housing, 

knowing that while his actions may not 

provoke direct policy change, they can 

certainly prompt action in others. “I 

don’t want to be that guy who brings 

about an end point purely on the basis 

of him being famous. I feel that cheapens 

the whole ethos – it misses the point. 

Genuine change is a mechanism based 

on listening to and trusting the voice 

of the smallest, most timid person in 

the room. If the point they are making 

is correct, then that is enough. Who 

you are and how many movies you’ve 

been in should never come into it. What 

we’re talking about are not geopolitical 

questions or issues born out of celebrity 

trends – they are binding, common 

challenges for everyone on this planet.” 

Of course, Norton is smart enough to 

know the strength of influence, and the 

effect a prominent, recognizable personality 

can have in galvanizing movement 

and action, but he counters: “The modern 

environmentalist can build a platform 

purely based on their viewpoint – they 

don’t need to have done something 

spectacular or headline-grabbing in a 

previous life. In that respect, we are in 

a dynamic era of activism.” 

For someone so revered in environmental 

circles, it is perhaps surprising to find 

that Norton is only a light user of social 

media, until you factor in his craving of 

privacy. “I just don’t find my private life 

relevant or even that interesting,” he 

says. “There are so many better things 

to talk about.” 

Sure enough, as well as the headlinegrabbing 

initiatives, in 2019 the actor 

also supported various small organizations 

in their efforts to strike the right 

Norton – who has a six-year-old son, 

Atlas, with his wife, Canadian film producer 

Shauna Robertson – is President 

of the American branch of the Maasai 

Wilderness Conservation Trust, which 

supports sustainable tourism and wildlife 

preservation in Kenya. He is also CEO of 

Baswood Inc., a green wastewater treatment 

alternative he and his partners are 

currently selling and building around 

the United States. In addition, he is a UN 

Goodwill Ambassador for Biodiversity. 

“As is often the case in life, things accumulate 

around you and it’s easy to keep 

adding new challenges without necessarily 

relinquishing older ones,” he admits. 

“That was certainly the way I was brought 

up, with a variety of positive influences 

around me and the encouragement to 

bring about change. I was very fortunate 

to be raised in a family of doers … of 

activists and entrepreneurs. They have 

all had a very, very heavy commitment 

to social impact, long before someone 

had even thought of a name for it. 

He continues, “My grandfather was very 

well-known – he was a commercial real 

estate developer called Jim Rouse. The 

Rouse Company was really one of the first 

developers of enclosed retail shopping 

malls – and according to some people, 

my grandfather coined the term ‘shopping 

malls.’ Even in the 1960s, when he 


uilt Columbia Maryland, which was 

the first planned community, he had 

an incredible sense of how developers 

and urban planning needed to have 

progressive values. 

“It’s interesting, in modern life, the phrase 

‘shopping mall’ is taken to represent bad 

things, but you have to consider the fact 

this was social change on a colossal scale, 

and it’s hypocritical to demean that 

just because it was consumerism. The 

fabric of the movement was the same, 

and it’s those sorts of qualities we need 

to embrace.” 

Norton’s father was a former US Attorney 

for Maryland, who went over to become 

the litigator and Head of Public Policy for 

The Wilderness Society. He founded the 

Grand Canyon Trust, among others, and 

remains one of the Senior Advisers for 

the Environment at TPG, an American 

investment company. “However they 

have gone about it, the reality is I have 

spent a lot of my life around people who 

care about society and the environment 

… right the way through to my mother, 

who was a teacher. They were using their 

smarts to think about how to work on 

social problems, but they were also very 

entrepreneurial. I think that’s a good 

mix – I’m okay with that.” 

As far as current projects go, Norton 

remains dedicated to promoting sustainable 

tourism with the Maasai in Kenya. 

“Across everything I do, I probably find 

Kenya the most engaging, and I’ve been 

going there for many years. My sister 

once worked for an American travel 

company that organized climbs up Mt. 


“ 


I don’t want 

to be that guy 

who brings 

about an end 

point purely 

on the basis 

of him being 

famous. 

I feel that 

cheapens the 

whole ethos – 

it misses 

the point. 

” 

Kilimanjaro, and on one such expedition 

I decided to accompany her. That’s when 

I met Luca Belpietro, who is the founder 

of the Maasai Wilderness Conservation 

Trust and was also running Campi Ya 

Kanzi, a tourist resort in Kenya. 

“People believe conservation is the concept 

of leaving something alone, but it’s 

not always that way. In this case, Luca 

was trying to create a much different, 

more enhanced kind of tourist experience. 

Now I have both friends and family 

who live there and I go every year for 

fun as well as for environment-related 

meetings. I look forward to every visit 

there and it’s my favorite place in Africa.” 

The fact that Edward Norton has rebelled 

against the plastic glamour of the entertainment 

industry is, in many ways, 

very satisfying. Of course, he is not alone, 

and alongside him, Leonardo DiCaprio, 

Robert Redford, Gisele Bundchen, and 

others are treading a new path that 

challenges our perception not just of 

the individual, or the industry, but the 

world around us. 

“In film, in environmentalism … whatever 

it is, I never want to feel that I am 

going through the motions or repeating 

myself. I’ve had periods where I’ve asked 

myself, ‘What am I doing?’ and that’s 

very troubling. 

“What I’m certain of now is there will 

always be more to do, and for someone 

entrenched in the idea of changing the 

world for the better, that’s not such a 

bad emotion.” 

69

Paradigm Shifts, 

Reactance, and 

Fighting Our 

Demons 

Humanity knows more than ever about climate change – 

but we are lazy when it comes to action. Constant 

admonitions and calls to act in a climate-conscious manner 

often leads to the opposite. In this essay, the well-known 

sociologist and social psychologist Harald Welzer explores 

the question why we fear climate change, but often do 

nothing about it. 

“My Madcap Trip around the World” was 

the title of a full-page article in Germany’s 

daily tabloid newspaper Bild on 

Sept. 12, 2017. In it, reporter Michael 

Quandt wrote about his journey to “four 

continents and eight cities” in just five 

days, flying 40,200 kilometers in the 

process. Because he relied solely on lowcost 

airlines, the entire trip cost a mere 

€1,827. His accounts were sprinkled with 

tales of excursions, from dromedary 

riding in Dubai to savoring a shaved 

ice at Waikiki Beach – all of it backed 

up by the obligatory Instagram photos, 

of course. 

>> 

Prof. Dr. Harald Welzer 

Sociologist, Executive Director, 

Futurzwei Foundation 

Professor for Transformation 

Design at the University of 

Flensburg 



71

Another full-page article in the technology 

and motoring section of Germany’s 

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) informed 

readers on May 14, 2019, about 

“explorer ships,” the new “pinnacle of 

yacht-building excellence.” This particular 

class of yacht is designed for active, 

adventurous, and very wealthy individuals 

who love exploring uncharted territory, 

such as the Arctic. The ships have 

a lot to offer: “The SeaXplorer 75 will 

provide suites for up to 12 passengers. 

The first specimen, measuring exactly 

76.9 meters long and 14 meters wide, is 

under construction. The buyers – keen 

skiers, surfers, and divers – will find an 

arsenal of sporting and leisure equipment 

on board: surf equipment, diving 

chamber, dive support boat, ski room 

with avalanche safety equipment, two 

snowmobiles, four personal watercraft, 

a submersible, a rescue boat, a luxury 

tender, and two inflatable outboard boats. 

A roughly 11-meter lift raises the two 

Airbus ACH 125 helicopters, with a maximum 

takeoff weight of 4,000 kilograms, 

from the double below-deck hangar to 

the certified helideck.” 

Both stories report on different iterations 

of the enlargement of global reach 

today, depending on income bracket. The 

sociologist Hartmut Rosa uses the term 

“global reach” to describe a marker of the 

modern age: As prosperity grows, and 

with each new technology, the ability 

of an individual to avail oneself of the 

world increases. A hundred years ago, 

it was not unusual for a person to have 

never left their village, or at least to have 

never been farther than the next largest 

city – a situation that today would be 

strange and require some explanation. 

Well into the second half of the 20th 

century, long-distance or foreign travel 

was mainly an experience had by soldiers 

on military campaigns. Except for 

a few very wealthy individuals, everyone 

else stayed home their entire lives. 

Mass tourism did not start in Germany 

until after World War II, initially with 

Italy as the dream vacation destination, 

followed later by Spain, Tunisia, 

and Turkey, depending on the price 

class. During the Nazi era, the trips offered 

by the leisure organization “Kraft 

durch Freude,” or Strength Through Joy, 

provided a preview of the mass tourism 

yet to come. Things really took off 

during the postwar “Wirtschaftswunder,” 

or economic miracle, and have yet to 

quiet down. The example presented 

by the Bild reporter impressively illustrates 

that even round-the-world trips 

are no longer the exclusive domain of 

the upper classes. That, in turn, is bad 

news for the super-wealthy. After all, 

increasing global reach is a part of their 

status-confirming consumption patterns. 

If everyone can do it, then the edge 

that sets them apart starts to dwindle. 

An upgrade is the logical consequence, 

and explorer ships deliver just that. But 

mass consumption is also playing catchup. 

Thanks to Hurtigruten, people can 

venture into purportedly untouched 

regions by cruise ship, following in Roald 

Amundsen’s footsteps. 



What determines our actions? 

Why am I telling you this? First, the 

ecological problems of the present day, 

and climate change too, are ultimately 

due to the fact that expansive luxury 

consumption unleashes its destructive 

power especially when it becomes mass 

consumption. It goes practically without 

saying that the owners of the SeaXplorer 

75 are doing more than their fair share 

to destroy the environment. But the damage 

caused by the hundreds of thousands 

of tourists on a shoestring budget who 

are following in the footsteps of the 

wealthy is several times worse. Second, 

the stories in Bild and the FAZ are being 

told because they profess expanded 

global reach as good news – as something 

we should strive to reproduce. 

That is the more important aspect in 

the following thoughts and reflections. 

It is precisely in this way that “imperial 

modes of living” – as the political scientists 

Ulrich Brand and Markus Wissen 

have termed such global consumption 

– are propagated as being worth striving 

for. In media, advertising, business, and 

The underlying issue 

immediately becomes 

clearer if we replace 

the word “growth” 

with the term “increased 

consumption.” 

It is precisely this 

pattern of permanent 

growth in global 

consumption that is 

bringing the 20th 

century model of 

civilization into such 

difficulty in the 21st 

century. 

politics alike, increased global consumption 

is still seen as desirable and is both 

subsidized and promoted accordingly. 

To this day, the majority of people view 

cruising the seas, monstrously oversized 

SUVs, enormous flat-screen TVs, and spacious 

country-house kitchens in which 

no meals are ever cooked neither as 

a nightmare nor as an anachronism. 

In fact, the opposite is true: For most 

people, it evokes a spontaneous sense 

of “I want that too.” 

And that is ultimately the point. According 

to standard theories of economics 

and politics, growth is not simply an 

economic necessity, it is essential to 

maintain a stable society. The underlying 

issue immediately becomes clearer 

if we replace the word “growth” with 

the term “increased consumption.” It 

is precisely this pattern of permanent 

growth in global consumption that is 

bringing the 20th century model of 

civilization into such difficulty in the 

21st century. 

If we look into how we encourage citizens 

in hyperconsumerist societies such 

as Germany to act with a sustainable 

and environmentally friendly mindset, 

we must account for the fact that one’s 

own efforts will stand in stark contrast 

– or even be completely negated – by 

stories such as those described above. 

After all, stories of global reach, such 

as the one about the explorer ships, are 

everywhere – simply glance at the travel 

section in any magazine or newspaper 

and the constant background noise that 

is online advertising. Faced with such 

excess, it appears quite audacious to 

present frugality as some sort of alluring 

counterpoint. 

Striving for improvement by establishing 

a conscience is misguided, too. Consciousness 

is only loosely linked to our 

actions, as we can easily see if we correlate 

concerns about the environment 

and the climate with the rapid increase 

in our consumption of this very environment. 

The spread of environmental 

consciousness has been accompanied by 

continuous GDP growth. In other words, 

more materials have been extracted and 

processed at a greater energy cost, more 

goods have been handled and transported 

around the world, and more emissions 

and waste have been generated. These 

flagrant contradictions have been made 

socially acceptable by explaining that 

greater prosperity is a prerequisite for 

reducing environmental impact and by 

allowing products to become “greener.” 

In the end, an enormous hybrid SUV appears 

just as eco-friendly as a cruise ship 

powered by natural gas. All this ignores 

the fact that the only way to make such 

products sustainable is to not have them 

at all. But that is how capitalism works: 

It is capable of gently swallowing up 

any aspect of society that was originally 

critical of it. Even environmental consciousness 

can be commodified. 

Any remaining concerns that may arise 

when we as individuals do things that 

we know to be wrong are astoundingly 

easy to cope with. People can go >> 


73

through their lives embracing the most 

blatant of contradictions without so 

much as batting an eyelid. The human 

ideal based on a desire to live without 

contradiction has seeped its way into our 

collective mindset from the theories of 

moral philosophy and theology, but in 

truth it is a complete falsity. Our behavior 

varies wildly in different situations, as 

the requirements that are set of us in our 

jobs, in sports, within our families, and 

among our friends vary, and because the 

roles we are expected to fill are constantly 

changing. The functional differentiation 

found in societies based on the division 

of labor has produced a human character 

that is highly adaptable and capable of 

taking on changing – and often even 

contradictory – roles with aplomb. The 

sociologist Erving Goffman devoted his 

life’s work to demonstrating this and 

deciphering the social choreography 

that governs the relationships, roles, and 

performances of its participants. Ignoring 

borderline pathological actions, it makes 

no sense to place human activity in a 

context that does not take into account 

the situation in which it occurs. In turn, 

modern societies are incapable of dealing 

with normal pathology. Someone who 

always has the same response to different 

requirements in different situations will 

soon end up in a secure psychiatric unit. 

Human adaptability is not pathological 

variation. Instead, it is precisely what 

all social and educational institutions 

produce in modern societies because 

they need adaptability in order to function. 

Moral convictions do not guide 

our behavior, but rather show us what 

justifications we can use to bring our 

incorrect actions into line with a correct 

consciousness. 

added texture by the cultural and social 

framework of our existence, and its rules 

are so effective at determining our reality 

because they are almost never the 

product of conscious consideration. It is 

impossible to criticize or cast into doubt 

something of which you are not aware. 

The social rules of our everyday lives 

by no means form the sole unconscious 

backdrop to our values and expectations. 

Modern societies, in particular, are 

structured from top to bottom through 

all manner of rules, regulations, and 

infrastructure. The “assumptive world” 

(Alfred Schütz) in which we live confers 

cultural obligations upon us and 

generates bonds of which we are also 

not aware. Every culture provides its 

members with standards of behavior, 

expectations, and emotions, all of which 

are only effective because we tend not 

to ever call them into question. That is 

why efforts to change such standards are 

so ineffective if the approach is purely 

cognitive – in other words, if they focus 

on areas where people can draw on 

conscious experience. Because habits and 

idiosyncrasies go beyond any threshold 

of consciousness, it is often futile to 

appeal to a sense of understanding and 

reason. According to Kant, the world 

only functions in the tiny segment of 

reality that covers wakeful consciousness. 

Understanding rarely influences 

our behavior because behavior is rarely 

based on understanding. 

Reactance 

Significant socio-psychological events 

such as these generate a peculiar tension 

between bad news, such as the latest 

climate data, and the reality in which 

we live. Every date, every diagram, every 

passionate plea from climate scientists 

such as Mojib Latif and Hans Joachim 

Schellnhuber is interpreted as a threat 

to our way of life. The more seriously 

they are taken, the less indifferent their 

impact. Paradoxically, negative headlines 

from the scientific world have an effect 

that is the complete opposite of the one 

intended: Instead of encouraging us to 

change our lifestyles and cultural models, 

fear and an aversion to loss cause us to 

cling to them even more and attempt 

to extract every last drop. How else can 

we explain why cars have become larger 

and more resource-intensive, instead 

of smaller and more efficient, since 

the problem of climate change reared 

Understanding rarely 

influences our 

behavior because 

behavior is rarely 

based on 

understanding. 

Routines and habits – in other words, 

“mental infrastructure” – are further 

factors that guide our day-to-day actions. 

Very little of what we do is the result of 

our conscious decisions. In fact, our actions 

are predetermined by the material 

and cultural standards that make up 

the world in which we live. The world 

in which we grow up in is the world 

we perceive unquestioningly. It is given 



its head? The same applies to tourism, 

which has become more expansive and 

escapist than ever before, with everything 

from electric mountain biking to 

cruises through the Arctic. In psychological 

terms, when presented with data 

showing us that we must change our 

hyperconsumerist lifestyle, we react in 

the complete opposite way to how we 

are supposed to. 

This is something that only the members 

of society who are true believers 

in the science did not expect. After all, 

it is only the members of the scientific 

community who believe, owing to their 

detachment from the broader perspective, 

that knowledge guides our actions. 

Indeed, a brief glance at their own lives 

– as frequent flyers and, as higher earners, 

seasoned practitioners of resourceintensive 

lifestyles – is all it takes to 

disprove the theory. 

It is high time we stopped issuing pleas 

and warnings, not only because those 

who have been exposed to them repeatedly 

over the past few decades have long 

since taken them into account in their 

habits and personalities, without even 

the slightest change being implemented 

in the economic and social system in 

which they live, but also because the 

desire for global consumption actually 

increases with the intensity of pleas and 

warnings instead of decreasing. 

Conditions for the paradigm shift 

As long as this system – let us call it the 

expansive cultural model – continues 

to prevail as it does now, there cannot 

and will not be any paradigm shift 

toward sustainable, environmentally 

friendly economies and lifestyles. This 

is not about will and perception. It is 

about patterns of behavior, about making 

use of and shaping our world, and 

about guiding our understanding of it. 

In Marx’s terms, our social being determines 

our consciousness. A paradigm 

shift toward a reductive cultural model 

is essential if we are to accept and deal 

with the challenges stemming from the 

looming danger of climate change and 

It is high time we 

stopped issuing 

pleas and warnings, 

because the desire 

for global 

consumption 

actually increases 

with the intensity of 

pleas and warnings 

instead of 

decreasing. 

all the other urgent ecological crises 

on the road ahead. This cannot take 

place through the idealistic forming of 

consciousness; it must be the product 

of changing behaviors. It may sound 

tautologous, but research shows that 

this is exactly what is needed. When a 

new service is offered that is better than 

the original service, people will opt for 

the new service without the aspect of 

sustainability playing any kind of role 

in their decision. A prime example of 

this thinking is Swiss Railways, whose 

services are widely used by Swiss citizens, 

resulting in the lowest passenger car 

use in Europe in relative terms, simply 

because the trains offer the best mobility 

service when it comes to comfort, 

service quality, and reliability. The fact 

that trains are the most environmentally 

friendly form of transport is an added 

benefit for its users, which they can 

either appreciate or ignore completely. 

The sustainability transformation is a 

combination of practices of this nature 

that have proven successful in the past 

or are currently enjoying success. It is a 

heterotopic process, as we build on many 

elements that are enshrined in society 

and must not be changed or abandoned, 

such as the division of powers, suffrage, 

and the rule of law. The transformation 

is not one single process either. It is a 

modular project consisting of a multitude 

of smaller transformations that, 

in an ideal scenario, interact to form 

concrete utopias. The 20th century and 

techno-utopian ideals, such as the safe 

use of nuclear energy, have provided 

many a lesson that master plans to satisfy 

human desires usually have lethal 

consequences. Project Civilization is not 

over and remains ongoing. But neither 

does it have a finite goal or an ultimate 

solution. Society must be adaptable to 

changing conditions and requirements 

and deal with mistakes and collateral 

damage – and so be correctable. 

Unlike the old modern ideal, this cannot 

be a project just for the experts, with 

technical and scientific elites drawing 

up plans that are then imposed upon 

society by politicians. It must be developed 

and scrutinized in all areas of life. 

Never have there been more groups, 

initiatives, cooperatives, and collectives 

that embrace different economic values 

and lifestyles in the western world than 

right now. These unifying structures 

do not take the form of popular theories, 

manifestos, or iconography. They 

are instead expressed in local, practical 

behaviors. There are transition towns 

all over the world acting as petri dishes 

for alternative, local economic models, 

and urban gardening is also becoming 

ubiquitous. Both of these movements 

are methods of requisitioning public 

space for social and ecological purposes. 

Other examples include repair cafés, 

citizen cooperatives, zero-packaging 

shops, community-supported agriculture, 

economies for the common good, 

residential projects, and eco-villages, all 

of which are experiments in a concrete 

utopia. Their value is derived in the fact 

that they can be experienced and trialed, 

and not because they only exist on paper. 

The clarity offered by such experiments 

of alternative economics and lifestyles 

is one of their greatest virtues. As Erik 

Olin Wright said, it is about building 

“emancipatory alternatives in the spaces 

and cracks within capitalist economies” 

and fighting for their proliferation. 

Source: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 2019, 

No. 47-48, p. 16-20, CC-BY-NC-ND-3.0 


75

GOOD PRACTICE SECTION 1: LIST OF ATTENDEES (FROM A - J) 

Companies are listed in alphabetic order 


Audi 

BASF 

Bayer 


Bosch Group 


CEMEX 

Clariant 

EDF Group 

Elomatic 

E.ON 


Inditex 


Solely responsible for the editorial contributions under the 

heading “Good Practice” are the companies themselves. 

Named articles do not reflect the opinions of the publisher. 

Knorr-Bremse 

K+S 

KYOCERA 


MAN 

Merck 


Netafim 

Nomura Group 




SAP 

Symrise 

Vonovia 

Wilo Group 

78 

80 

82 


Audi 

BASF 

76 


GOOD PRACTICE 

84 

Bayer 

86 


88 

Bosch Group 

90 


92 

CEMEX 

94 

Clariant 

96 

EDF Group 

98 

Elomatic 

100 

E.ON 

102 


104 

Inditex 

106 


Global Goals Yearbook 2020 77

AAIB’S COVID-19 

INTEGRATED RESPONSE 

For more than 55 years, as one of Egypt’s largest banks, Arab African International Bank (AAIB) 

has not only grown financially but also developed a deeper commitment to support community 

needs. With the emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Bank has been working hard to uphold 

its commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We recognized the critical need 

to act with urgency to support our people and communities hit hardest by the impacts of the 

pandemic, where the Bank undertook several procedures and precautions to contain the spread 

of the virus and manage its economic impacts. 

By Dalia Noureldin, AAIB 

Covid-19 has created an increasing 

number of challenges to individuals, 

communities, and businesses. As the 

health crisis has been affecting lives and 

rocking economies all over the world, 

AAIB quickly adapted and implemented 

an integrated strategy that considers 

the needs of its employees, clients and 

society to make the best of this situation. 

Supporting the Vulnerable and the 

Valuable 

With the rise of the pandemic, we wanted 

to ensure that we are not only supporting 

our customers but our communities 

as well. Accordingly, AAIB undertook a 

comprehensive approach to face the repercussions 

of the outbreak and address 

the needs of all impacted community 

groups – from patients to medical professionals 

and vulnerable groups struggling 

to stay afloat – where the value of 

the Bank’s contribution amounted to 51 

million Egyptian pounds (EGP). 

Initially, AAIB collaborated with Ahl 

Masr Foundation to cover the needs 

of the health sector, prioritizing governorates 

with limited resources and 

capacities to help them withstand the 

pandemic. Both entities collaborated in 

three mega projects. 

The first project was to fully purchase 

and install four intensive care units 

featuring state-of-the-art equipment, including 

ventilators to support all patients 

and ensure they receive the medical care 

they need. The second project involved 

providing medical staff in nine hospitals 

with 6,480 units of medical gear (known 

as personal protection equipment, or 

PPE) to cherish their heroic role on the 

frontlines while standing up against 

the pandemic .The third initiative was 

to inaugurate a new, fully equipped 

quarantine hospital with the capacity 

of 150 beds to complement the initiatives 

and precautions undertaken by 

the Government to manage this crisis. 

Moving forward, as we observe the socioeconomic 

landscape, we found out that 

the government undertook several precautionary 

measures, among which were 

partial lockdowns and curfews to manage 

the spread of the virus. These measures, 

despite their importance, resulted in 

severe social and economic impacts on 

several groups, especially on daily-wage 

workers. Accordingly, in addition to our 

commitment to manage the health impact 

of this crisis, we continue to make 

a meaningful contribution to the society, 

where AAIB proudly participated in the 

Federation of Egyptian Banks’ initiative 

to support these vulnerable groups who 

have been affected by the pandemic. 

Uninterrupted Business with High 

Hygiene Standards 

It has been decades since the global 

economy and the financial industry 

have witnessed a crisis close to what we 

and our customers are currently facing. 

78 


Having our customers are at the heart 

of everything we do, we are working 

tirelessly to ensure they are kept safe, 

supported, and satisfied as they face 

new and uncertain financial situations 

and to balance their needs with public 

health measures. 

All employees and clients entering the 

branches are required to wear facemasks 

and have their temperatures screened. 

Adding to this, Plexiglass shields were 

placed on all customer services desks in 

all branches to maintain social distancing 

and protect our colleagues and customers. 

We also installed sanitization towers 

at the entrances of our branches so that 

clients entering can sanitize both their 

hands and shoes. 

In addition, our Business Continuity 

Manual has been put into action to 

ensure that we provide seamless and 

uninterrupted services with no delays 

during the pandemic and thereafter. 

Additionally, acknowledging that it is not 

just a health crisis but a socioeconomic 

one as well, AAIB followed the comprehensive 

range of support initiatives 

introduced by the Central Bank of Egypt 

during the Covid-19 outbreak. AAIB 

postponed secured and unsecured loan 

installments and credit card minimum 

payments for six months automatically 

with no commission or late payment 

fees. In addition, to make transactions 

easier for clients, all ATM cash withdrawals 

and balance inquiry fees have 

been exempted and debit card limits for 

cash withdrawals and purchases have 

been raised. Adding to this, all Point of 

Sale fees have been waived among all 

merchant clients. 

The Bank also conducted awareness campaigns 

on its social media platforms to 

provide its clients with safety tips to 

follow not only in banking transactions, 

but also in their daily activities among 

which were using masks and disinfectants 

and promoting contactless payments. 

Supporting employees in and 

beyond the workplace 

Our employees are doing incredible work 

to serve our customers during this challenging 

time and we are committed to be 

there for them in this new and uncertain 

situation. We are working tirelessly to 

be there for our customers as they face 

new and uncertain financial situations 

and be there for our employees working 

to serve them as safely as possible while 

facing the same challenges. To this end, 

AAIB has put strict measures in place to 

prevent and slow the spread of COVID-19 

within the workplace. We conducted 

awareness campaigns among our people, 

put into practice high hygiene and sanitization 

measures, imposed social distancing 

and ensured that our employees get 

the full health care whenever needed. 

We have stepped up social distancing 

measures in our offices and limited the 

work capacity of employees in the office 

to a maximum of 50 percent. We also 

introduced work-from-home practices to 

limit our employees’ exposure without 

compromising their ability to remain 

connected and productive while working 

securely. For employees working on site, 

they are exposed to daily temperature 

screening prior to entering the building 

and are obliged to wear facemasks. 

For employees feeling unwell, there 

are clear instructions to not show up 

and quarantine. In addition, all employees 

suspected of being infected are not 

allowed to enter the premises until 

taking a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) 

test. If the results are positive, the whole department 

/ branch is closed and sanitized 

and all employees there must take the 

PCR test. Also, if an employee is well but 

has an infected family member, they 

have to stay home. 

In addition, to ensure employees receive 

the appropriate care if needed, the Bank 

has enabled access to several hospitals 

and was responsible for covering employees’ 

tests and treatments fully. Also, 

a Covid-19 exceptional leave has been 

provided to all pregnant women and staff 

with critical or chronic health conditions. 

To guarantee that all these measures are 

known by employees, awareness campaigns 

are circulated continuously via 

email and SMS. Additionally, awareness 

signs have been placed in trafficked areas 

with all the measures to be considered 

in different situations. 

Leadership involvement: 

A caring culture 

The Bank has also established a dedicated 

Crisis Management Committee, which is 

composed of members from the highest 

managerial levels, to assess and quickly 

respond to current and future changes. 

Additionally, a new Head of Security, 

Health and Safety Matters was hired to 

ensure that the highest safety, stability 

and security standards are implemented. 

There is no doubt we are living in an 

unprecedented time in which Covid-19 

has taken over the global agenda. With 

the situation changing every hour, we 

are following the global situation very 

closely and are committed not only to 

responding effectively, as well as controlling 

the virus and its socioeconomic 

consequences, but also to accelerate our 

learning curve to enhance the business 

resilience in the future. 

While we can’t predict the speed or shape 

of this recovery and with much uncertainty 

ahead, one thing we are sure of is that 

through our collaboration, solidarity and 

support for one another, we will emerge 

from this pandemic even stronger. 


AUDI: DEVELOPMENT OF 

A QUALITY SEAL FOR 

SUSTAINABLE BATTERIES 

The transportation sector is one of the greatest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. 

Audi has therefore set itself the goal of reducing its carbon footprint by approximately 

30 percent by 2025 (compared with the reference year 2015 and over the entire product life 

cycle.). This entails significantly reducing CO 2 

emissions, which is why Audi is particularly 

committed to electric mobility. Since the aim is to reduce the environmental impact of each new 

model over that of its predecessor throughout the entire life cycle, the company is creating a life 

cycle analysis for vehicles and working to ensure a sustainable battery value chain as a member 

of the Global Battery Alliance (GBA). 

By Dr. Stefanie Augustine, Josef Schön, and Christoph Praun, Audi 

Do you drive to work or visit grandparents 

who live 200 kilometers away? 

Mobility is a basic human need, and 

the demand will continue to rise: The 

International Transport Forum anticipates 

that passenger transport on the 

whole will triple by 2050. Thus, we need 

sustainable solutions to counteract the 

impact this will have on the climate. 

Electric mobility is one way to make both 

private and public transportation more 

ecological. But how environmentally 

friendly are electric cars, really? 

Life cycle assessment: Electric cars vs. 

combustion-engine vehicles 

A life cycle assessment (LCA) can tell us 

how environmentally friendly an electric 

car is compared with a similar vehicle 

with a combustion engine, as well as 

where there is opportunity for improvement. 

This analysis maps the environmental 

impact of a vehicle throughout 

the entire product life cycle – from raw 

materials extraction and production, 

through the utilization phase, all the 

way to recycling. Among the important 

key figures included here is the amount 

of greenhouse gas emissions incurred, 

which is measured in the form of CO 2 

equivalents. Audi is currently preparing 

this type of LCA for the purely electrically 

powered Audi e-tron 55 quattro, 

which has been available from dealers 

since March 2019. The analysis of this 

car initially shows that CO 2 

emissions 

generated during the manufacture of an 

Audi e-tron are twice as high as during 

production of a comparable vehicle with 

an internal combustion engine (Audi Q5 

2.0 TFSI quattro S tronic): In the case of 

the Audi e-tron, emissions amount to 

around 20 metric tons of CO 2 

equivalents, 

whereas the production of the Audi Q5 

incurs just under 10 metric tons. 

However, CO 2 

emissions level out after 

about just half of the car’s total mileage. 

This is because the electric car’s utilization 

phase – even when it is being 

“refueled” with today’s EU electricity 

mix – emits significantly less CO 2 

than 

a comparable vehicle with an internal 

combustion engine in this segment. If the 

vehicle is powered purely with electricity 

from reusable sources, then almost 

no emissions are generated, since electric 

vehicles drive locally with zero CO 2 

emissions. At the end of its product life 

cycle (calculated as 200,000 km), and depending 

on the energy source, the Audi 

e-tron has then emitted about 20 to 35 

metric tons of CO 2 

into the atmosphere. 

However, this figure would be much 

higher for a comparable vehicle with 

an internal combustion engine. 

Two paths to optimization 

Two important recommended actions 

aimed at making electric cars more environmentally 

friendly can be derived 

from this LCA comparison. On the one 

hand, using “green” electricity to charge 

an electric vehicle during the utilization 

phase is recommended to keep CO 2 

emissions 

as low as possible. On the other 

80 


hand, the manufacturing process must 

be optimized, because battery production 

in particular is very energy-intensive. In 

fact, it is regarded as the main cause of 

CO 2 

emissions during the production of 

an electric car. Audi is therefore committed 

to significantly reducing this 

particular piece of “CO 2 

baggage” and, 

for instance, requests that its cell suppliers 

use green electricity. In addition, 

the company is also looking at measures 

in the value chain that have an impact 

long before they reach the car. 

Responsible battery value chain 

That is why Audi is an active member 

of the GBA, a multistakeholder platform 

that currently consists of more than 70 

members from the public and private 

sectors. It was launched in 2017 under 

the umbrella of the World Economic 

Forum. The goal of the GBA is to establish 

a sustainable and more environmentally 

friendly value chain for batteries. 

According to initial findings, this would 

save approximately 30 percent of greenhouse 

gas emissions within the transportation 

and energy sector by 2030. At the 

start of 2020, the GBA published 10 guiding 

principles for a sustainable battery 

value chain. Collaborating in this initiative 

is extremely important to Audi, as 

demonstrated by the following statement 

from Hildegard Wortmann, Member of 

the Board of Management, Sales and 

Marketing, Audi: 

“For Audi, batteries are key on 

our way to carbon-neutral 

mobility. To ensure that this 

technology is thoroughly 

sustainable, we welcome and support 

the GBA initiative and our 

common principles. We believe in 

the power of join the GBA 

as well. Audi is striving for a 

reliable “sustainability 

performance seal,” carried out 

by robust stakeholder engagement, 

which stands as a global 

reference for clean and 

ethical produced batteries.” 

Greenhouse gas potential [t CO2 eq.] 

50 

45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

Legend 

Production Utilization Recycling 

0 km 

Audi e-tron 55 quattro* 

efficiency 265 kW 

(MY2019)Electricity 

from renewable sources 

Audi Q5 2.0 TFSI* 

quattro S tronic 

185kW (MJ 2017) 

In addition to its general commitment to 

the GBA, Audi is also actively involved 

in the GBA’s initiative aimed at creating 

what is being referred to as a Battery 

Passport. The passport represents a 

digital image of a physical battery and is 

intended to serve as a quality seal for a 

sustainable battery value chain. Thus, it 

contains key information about relevant 

environmental criteria. When implementing 

the passport, consideration is 

given not just to CO 2 

emissions, but to all 

the sustainability aspects that are relevant 

within the value chain, including the 

responsible procurement of raw materials 

such as cobalt. The focus is especially on 

social and societal risks, such as respect 

for human rights and the prevention of 

child labor or occupational risks. In the 

end, the Battery Passport is intended to 

ensure that the entire battery value chain 

100,000 Km 

200,000 Km 

Audi e-tron 55 

quattro*efficiency 

265kW (MY2019) EU 

electricity mix 

Audi Q7 3.0 TDI* 

quattro tiptronic 

200 kW (MY2016) 

(NEDC) 

* Audi e-tron: Combined power consumption in kWh/100 km: 24.3–21.0 (NEDC); 26.6–22.4 (WLTP), 

combined CO2 emissions in g/km: 0. Audi Q5 2.0 TFSI (model year 2017 // NEDC) and Audi Q7 3.0 

TDI (model year 2016 // NEDC): Vehicles are no longer offered for sale. Fuel/electric power 

consumption and CO₂ emission figures for current models can be found on page 110 

is sustainable, verifiable, transparent, and 

plausible. However, there is a great deal 

to do on the path to achieving this quality 

seal: The measures were implemented 

recently and the GBA aims to publish 

the first version of the Battery Passport 

by the start of 2021. 

Commitment to the SDGs 

By participating in the GBA, Audi is not 

only contributing to upholding the Paris 

Agreement, but it is also doing its part to 

achieve the UN Sustainable Development 

Goals. This particularly applies to Goal 

8 (Decent work and economic growth), 

Goal 12 (Responsible consumption and 

production), and Goal 13 (Climate action). 

Audi has also expressly committed itself 

to the Sustainable Development Goals as 

part of its sustainability strategy. 


SHAPING THE CIRCULAR 

FUTURE OF E-MOBILITY 

Electric mobility – powered by renewable energy and in combination with circular economy 

concepts – plays a decisive role in the transition to a climate-friendly society. Cathode active 

materials (CAM) are key to making e-mobility a practical reality for everyone. By 2025, BASF’s 

innovations in battery materials aim to double the driving range of midsize cars, from 300 to 

600 km, on a single charge and reduce the charging time to 15 minutes. At the same time, 

BASF is contributing to a circular value chain by providing efficient recycling technologies to 

regain valuable metals used in batteries for electric vehicles (EVs). 

By Daniel Schönfelder and Tim Ingle, BASF 

In 2018, BASF announced the construction 

of a battery materials precursor plant 

in Harjavalta, Finland. The plant is being 

constructed adjacent to the nickel and 

cobalt refinery owned by Norilsk Nickel 

(Nornickel), with whom BASF has a longterm 

supply agreement for nickel and 

cobalt feedstocks. It will utilize locally 

generated renewable energy sources, including 

hydro-, wind-, and biomass-based 

power. The precursors of the cathode active 

materials (PCAM) from the Harjavalta 

plant will be used in BASF’s new battery 

materials production site in Schwarzheide, 

Germany. The new plant is part 

of a multi-step investment plan to support 

the European EV value chain. This 

state-of-the-art plant will produce CAM 

82 


with an initial capacity that enables the 

supply of around 400,000 full EVs per year 

with BASF battery materials stemming 

exclusively from European sources. The 

Schwarzheide plant’s modular design and 

infrastructure will allow for the rapid 

scale-up of manufacturing capacities, enabling 

BASF to meet increasing customer 

demand for the European EV market. The 

start-up dates for the two plants in Finland 

and Germany are planned for 2022. These 

European plants will complement existing 

facilities in Asia and North America, 

making BASF the first CAM producer with 

a local presence that serves customers in 

three key regions. 

BASF’s sustainability strategy and targeted 

investments are aligned with the objectives 

of the European Green Deal. We 

will contribute to a competitive circular 

value chain for e-mobility and, in particular, 

batteries. The New Circular Action 

Plan – with sound implementation of 

the “strategy for a sustainable and smart 

mobility,” including battery regulation – 

is key for a regulatory environment that 

fosters European economic growth and 

balances the environmental footprint. 

As a producer of CAM for electric vehicles, 

BASF is already looking into the use of 

recycled raw materials in its production, 

thereby closing the loop in the battery 

value chain. We provide proprietary 

recycling technology to significantly 

increase extraction efficiency, which 

complements our CAM portfolio for 

lithium-ion batteries. Our innovations in 

recycling processes enable high-efficiency 

lithium extraction. Due to the relatively 

high scrap rates in the manufacturing 

processes along the battery value chain 

for EVs, sizable quantities of recyclable 

materials are available even today. We expect 

a scale-up of the global EV market in 

the coming years when large amounts of 

batteries reach the end of their lifecycles, 

making recycling an important market 

requirement. In this context, one major 

advantage of battery materials recycling 

is that it complements the sourcing of 

virgin metals from mining. A closed loop 

for battery materials keeps them in the 

use phase for a longer period and reduces 

the waste of precious resources at the 

end of the battery’s life. What is most 

important in terms of climate protection: 

Recycled batteries have a lower carbon 

footprint compared to those made of 

primary raw materials. 

Together with its partners, BASF has taken 

concrete steps toward developing innovative 

and sustainable battery recycling. One 

step is the development of new lithiumion 

battery recycling capabilities. This 

will make it possible to respond to the 

strong growth in this global market over 

the coming years and to secure the supply 

of raw materials required for this energy 

transition. In early 2020, BASF signed a 

cooperation agreement with the partners 

Fortum and Nornickel to plan a battery 

recycling cluster in Harjavalta, Finland. 

This would enable a successful closed loop 

cycle to reuse the critical metals present in 

used batteries. BASF is focused on bringing 

solutions concerning high-efficiency 

lithium extraction for battery recycling 

within this cooperation. It intends to use 

recycled materials from the processes developed 

by the companies in its planned 

battery materials precursor plant in 

Harjavalta. Using metals from recycled 

batteries to produce battery materials 

offers significant reductions in CO 2 

during 

the production of EVs. Additional 

CO 2 

reductions can be achieved by using 

electricity from renewable sources in 

Finland for the recycling process. The 

establishment of a circular value chain 

further contributes to BASF’s ambitious 

sustainability target to achieve CO 2 

-neutral 

growth until 2030. 

In addition, BASF is partnering with 

Eramet and SUEZ in the “Recycling Li-ion 

batteries for electric Vehicles” (ReLieVe) 

project, which will receive substantial 

funding of €4.7 million from EIT Raw 

Materials (European Institute of Innovation 

and Technology), a consortium 

initiated and funded by the European 

Union, and the three members. The 

objective is to develop an innovative, 

closed-loop process to recycle lithiumion 

batteries from EVs and to enable the 

production of new lithium-ion batteries 

in Europe. As of January 2020, and over 

a two-year period, the ReLieVe project 

will carry out a series of activities for 

the large-scale development of this innovative 

process and the structuring of 

an integrated industrial sector: from the 

collection and dismantling of end-of-life 

batteries going into recycling, all the way 

to the manufacturing of new electrode 

materials. BASF will contribute to the 

project with expertise in cathode material 

production. The virtuous recycling 

process meets the essential challenges 

of sustainable performance through its 

savings on raw materials. 

BASF and its partners are preparing for 

the battery materials recycling market 

scale-up by increasing recycling yields 

and building an integrated value circle. 

BASF is also actively involved in the 

World Economic Forum’s Global Battery 

Alliance (GBA), which it cofounded in 

2017. The GBA has around 70 members, 

all of whom are committed to creating a 

socially responsible, ecological, economically 

sustainable, and innovative value 

chain for batteries. The GBA is committed 

to fostering a circular approach to batteries, 

including their design and the use of 

recycled materials to drive greenhouse 

gas reductions. This commitment would 

be based on a wide range of considerations, 

including performance safety, longevity, 

material efficiency, safe and easy 

disassembly, a design based on lifecycle 

analysis, and on state-of-the-art technologies. 

It also embraces the use of recycled 

materials to drive market support for 

economically viable circular material 

flows, when available and appropriate. 


PROSPERITY AND PROGRESS 

IN HARMONY WITH THE 

EARTH’S LIMITS 

For half a century, humanity has consumed more resources and generated more emissions than 

nature can cope with. This has led to climate change, water scarcities, and a loss of biodiversity. 

What’s more, the world’s population continues to grow and life expectancies are increasing. 

Although mankind has made tremendous progress in recent decades and livelihoods have 

improved on a global level, poverty, inequality, illness, and hunger remain the most urgent 

challenges of our time. Nonetheless, there is overwhelming scientific evidence that humanity 

cannot continue at the current level of resource consumption. The world must find a new 

balance between production and protection. 

By Matthias Berninger, Bayer 

Bayer’s leading businesses of health and 

nutrition represent a unique combination 

of two life science fields that are 

system-relevant for addressing these 

challenges. We have made bold commitments 

for inclusive growth and sustainable 

development in line with the 

UN Sustainable Development Goals and 

have anchored them in our strategy and 

operations. This undertaking meshes 

perfectly with our vision “Health for all, 

Hunger for none.” 

The global population continues to rise. 

By 2050, it will grow by another two billion, 

reaching an estimated 9.7 billion 

people. Society must ensure that more 

people have access to nutritious food 

and healthcare, while at the same time 

conserving natural resources, protecting 

biodiversity, and reducing greenhouse 

gas emissions. 

This is precisely why we decided to anchor 

sustainability more firmly in our 

Group strategy. As a key player in the 

fields of healthcare and nutrition, we 

have a particular impact on “Zero hunger” 

(Goal 2) and “Good health and well-being” 

(Goal 3) and will also play our part in 

the fight against poverty (Goal 1). In 

addition, we are intensifying our focus 

on empowering women (Goal 5), redoubling 

our efforts to reduce greenhouse 

gases and tackle the impacts of climate 

change (Goal 13), and protecting life on 

land (Goal 15). 

Sustainable intensification of 

agriculture 

According to the UN, by 2050 food production 

needs to increase by 50 percent 

relative to 2012 in order to cope with the 

predicted population growth. With current 

production standards, this cannot 

be achieved; there is simply not enough 

arable land available. 

We need a social consensus that focuses 

on a science-based agricultural revolution 

rather than on a romanticized 

approach. We do not regard small and 

large producers as rival forces, and the 

same applies to ecological and conventional 

agriculture, and traditional and 

genetically optimized seeds. We firmly 

believe that a combination of all these 

approaches is needed. 

We are therefore innovating to sustainably 

increase crop yields on already 

existing acreages. For instance, our 

researchers are working on improving 

the climate resilience of crops, for example 

corn with shorter stalks that do not 

break in the event of a storm, thus pro- 

84 


tecting the harvest. In another pioneering 

project, we are collaborating with 

partners to develop plants that produce 

the nitrogen they need themselves and 

no longer have to be fertilized artificially. 

Empowering smallholders 

Farmers harvesting rice in India: 

Bayer wants to provide increased 

support for smallholder farmers, who 

are the mainstay of food production 

in many developing and emerging 

countries. 

In low- and middle-income countries 

(LMICs), smallholder farmers are essential 

for local food supplies, but they often 

suffer from hunger, malnutrition, and 

poverty themselves. By 2030, we aim to 

support 100 million smallholder farmers 

by improving access to agronomic 

knowledge, products, and services. In 

doing so, we will increase their yields 

and incomes as well as contribute to 

fighting poverty in rural areas. 

Women are central to boosting 

socio-economic development 

Experts consider the lack of women’s 

empowerment as one of the main factors 

hindering successful socio-economic 

development in LMICs. Today, more than 

200 million women in developing countries 

have an unmet need for modern 

contraception, an essential component 

of family planning. This is not only central 

to women’s health, but also gives 

them greater autonomy over their lives, 

which can have a positive ripple effect on 

families and communities. As the leading 

women’s healthcare company, our 

goal is to provide 100 million women in 

LMICs with access to family planning by 

2030 by contributing to multistakeholder 

programs and ensuring the supply of 

affordable, modern contraceptives. In 

this way, we want to improve women’s 

health, rights, and economic status – a 

large step toward gender equality. 

Access to everyday healthcare 

More than half of the world’s population 

today has no access to adequate 

self-care products and services, and this 

figure could potentially rise to five billion 

people by 2030. Besides helping current 

patients avoid illness, expanding access 

to everyday healthcare also improves the 

health of younger generations, reduces 

costs, and offers the chance of a better 

future. As a leading Consumer Health 

company, we will expand access to everyday 

healthcare for 100 million people in 

underserved communities around the 

world by 2030. Our proven consumer 

brands will drive this ambition. 

Carbon-neutral operations and 

reduction of GHG emissions along 

our value chains 

Bayer has set out to become carbon 

neutral by 2030 and reduce emissions, 

including in our value chain. With that 

in mind, we have joined Science Based 

Targets, an initiative that promotes increased 

energy efficiency and a switch 

to green energy. 

Agriculture currently accounts for about 

a quarter of the world’s GHG emissions. 

As such, the biggest contribution to 

reducing greenhouse gases can be made 

by our customers. We will help farmers 

cut GHG emissions from their fields 

by 30 percent per kilogram of yield by 

2030 through the use of eco-friendly 

products and technologies. This pledge 

is unprecedented in the industry, as is 

our endeavor to also reduce the environmental 

impact resulting from the 

use of our crop-protection products by 

30 percent. 

A special challenge lies in finding effective 

ways to offset unavoidable emissions. 

With our digital innovations, which enable 

us to determine exactly what is happening 

on and in the field, right down to 

the smallest furrow, we want to lay the 

groundwork for a new line of business for 

farmers across the globe. We furthermore 

intend to establish a private market for 

sequestering CO 2 

in the ground. Combining 

cultivation methods that retain a lot of 

CO 2 

in plants and soil will enable farmers 

in food production to benefit from an 

additional source of income. 

Economic success and sustainability 

go hand in hand 

We consider attaining these sustainability 

targets to be just as important 

as meeting financial goals. That is why 

they are anchored in the remuneration 

models for the Board of Management and 

other managerial staff, as well as in our 

company’s decision-making processes. In 

accordance with our purpose of “Science 

for a better life,” we want to help people 

thrive on a healthy planet. In our eyes, 

economic success and sustainability go 

hand in hand. 


NEXT-GENERATION 

NONWOVENS GO 

SUSTAINABLE 

Nonwoven textiles do not loom large in the consumer’s mind, but they are big in the industrial 

world. Their applications include industries such as healthcare, automotive, geo-engineering, 

construction, agriculture, filtration, dredging, disposable, as well as durable carpeting and more. 

As such, the average person is likely to encounter them in their day-to-day life more than they 

may think. Unfortunately, their manufacture is traditionally resource-intensive, but Beaulieu 

Fibres International’s UltraBond fibre can change this. 

By Maria Teresa Tomaselli and Valérie Bouckaert, Beaulieu International Group 

UltraBond is a bonding staple fibre that 

eliminates the need for latex or other 

chemical binders in nonwovens. The traditional 

downside of nonwoven fabrics 

that need latex is that they cannot be recycled 

without substantial downgrading 

and loss of performance, so nonwovens 

that bypass the need for latex in their 

manufacture now have a clear path to 

the circular economy. 

In industries such as event carpeting, this 

is a major advantage, considering that 

annually, 120 million square meters of 

event carpet ends up in incinerators or 

landfills. In addition, UltraBond-based, 

thermally bonded fabrics allow for cost 

savings due to their greater rest value 

after use, and they require lower energy 

and water consumption levels during the 

manufacturing process than chemically 

bonded fabrics. But how does UltraBond 

work? 

No latex needed 

Nonwoven carpets and needlepunched 

fabrics are typically produced by interconnecting 

man-made staple fibres into 

a felt. To achieve a strong enough bond 

of the fibres to withstand installation 

86 


and usage, an extra component such 

as latex is added. The felt is submerged 

into a dispersion tank, after which the 

remaining water is evaporated using 

an energy-intensive thermal process. 

UltraBond does not work this way and 

only needs thermal treatment. 

The UltraBond fibre is specifically 

designed to have a lower melting temperature 

than normal polypropylene 

than normal polypropylene (PP) fibres: 

140°C for UltraBond versus 160°C for 

regular PP fibres. PP fibre can be blended 

into an existing nonwoven composition, 

and the bicomponent PP fibre guarantees 

additional strength and stiffness without 

requiring additional blends with other 

raw materials. 

Saving 20 million liters of water a year 

A traditional fibre application such as 

exhibition carpet uses 0.2 liters of water 

per square meter to make bonding 

agents such as latex work. By taking 

latex out of the equation, UltraBond also 

bypasses the need for water. Looking at 

the event carpet market in Europe alone, 

this could potentially save 20 million 

liters of water per year. 

UltraBond’s manufacturing process 

saves a whopping 93 percent of energy 

expenditure because no water needs to 

be evaporated. This obviously reduces 

energy costs and lowers the carbon footprint 

(by 35 percent). 

Flagship product on board 

UltraBond is already being used in products. 

One of them is the Rewind recyclable 

event carpet, which was launched by 

Beaulieu International Group at the end 

of 2019. Crucial to Rewind’s success was 

that the UltraBond-based carpet would 

match – or even exceed – traditional 

event carpet performance in terms of 

sturdiness, anti-piling, and color evenness. 

It passed its first test with flying 

colors: It was used at the COP 25 Climate 

Change Conference in Madrid from 

December 2 to 13. 

THE ALCHEMY OF 

ULTRABOND 

Blending of PP fibres + UltraBond 

oven 

PP Fibre 

UltraBond 

Bicomponent fibre UltraBond 

Low melt 

sheath 

oven 

High 

strength core 

Maria Teresa Tomaselli, General Manager 

“ 

Beaulieu Fibres International, comments: 

Filtering the future 

We see textile flooring as just 

the beginning. We look forward 

to exploring the potential of this 

unique thermal bonding fibre in 

other nonwoven or textile 

applications, such as laminated 

nonwovens or as an alternative 

to dry powders. 

UltraBond-based fabrics have the potential 

to branch out in other markets. On 

top of the environmental benefits, the 

thermally consolidated UltraBond fibres 

in nonwovens are on a level with latexbonded 

nonwovens in terms of stiffness, 

without affecting porosity. UltraBond 

fibres can become attractive alternatives 

in technology sectors such as water and 

air filtration industries, life sciences, 

and geotextiles. All of them are looking 

for sustainable alternatives to current 

solutions. 

In the flooring world, further applications 

for contract flooring are also possible, 

for example in showrooms, office 

spaces, museums, and other areas that 

experience high-frequency foot traffic. 

The average person will not notice the 

difference with traditional PP fabrics, 

but the environment will. 

ULTRABOND’S 

SUSTAINABILITY 

ADVANTAGES IN A 

NUTSHELL 

• Reduced energy consumption: 

Curing latex is energy-intensive, but 

because of the absence of latex, 

less heat is needed. 

• No water consumption: As a consequence 

of not needing water (traditionally 

one of the key agents in 

the latex bonding process), Ultra- 

Bond-based PP event carpets can 

save as much as 20 million liters of 

water a year. 

• Lower CO 2 

emissions: Using Ultra- 

Bond in the manufacturing process 

of nonwoven needlepunch fabrics 

lowers CO 2 

emissions by an average 

of 35 percent, potentially cutting 

back up to 10,000 tons of carbon 

emissions for the European event 

carpet market alone. 

• Contribution to the circular economy: 

Latex-bonded PP cannot be 

recycled, but UltraBond-based products 

can. Not only does this reintroduce 

pellets into the economy after 

recycling, it also removes waste 

from landfills and lowers carbon 

emissions from incinerators. 

WHO IS BEAULIEU 

INTERNATIONAL 

GROUP? 

Beaulieu International Group was 

founded in 1959 in Belgium and is a 

global producer of flooring solutions, 

engineered fibres, yarns, and technical 

textiles as well as polymers. It 

employs nearly 5,000 people worldwide. 


enjoyed a 2019 turnover of €2 billion. 

Beaulieu Fibres International, the 

brand that created the UltraBond 

fibre, has production facilities in 

Belgium and Italy. 


ADVANCING WITH FORESIGHT: 

CLIMATE ACTION BEYOND 

COMPANY BOUNDARIES 

Bosch is dedicated to playing a pioneering role in climate action. In 2018, the board of 

management adopted an ambitious CO 2 

strategy: Bosch aims to be climate neutral worldwide as 

of 2020 in order to make a concrete contribution to the 2015 Paris Agreement of the United 

Nations, which seeks to limit global warming to 1.5°C. On top of its objective to make its more 

than 400 locations climate neutral as of 2020, Bosch is going a step further: The company has 

additionally set itself an ambitious target for lowering indirect emissions in order to reduce its 

carbon footprint – even beyond company boundaries. 

By Torsten Kallweit and Annette Wagner, Bosch Group 

Bosch knows that many changes, new 

approaches, and innovations are needed 

quickly to effectively support climate action. 

As the efforts to achieve energy efficiency 

also contribute toward becoming 

more cost-efficient, the company also sees 

major opportunities. The climate goal of 

being carbon neutral by 2020 refers to the 

energy generated by the company itself 

and the energy volume purchased for its 

more than 400 locations worldwide – this 

covers engineering, manufacturing, and 

administrative facilities (Scopes 1 and 2 

of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol). Here 

Bosch can directly influence the reduction 

of greenhouse gases and make a major 

impact in a short time. The company is 

also setting itself an emission reduction 

target for the upstream and downstream 

stages of the value chain (Scope 3) of 15 

percent by 2030, focusing on the categories 

of purchased goods, logistics, and the 

use of products sold. In addition to this 

specific goal, Bosch wants to make an active 

contribution to ensuring that its value 

chain will also be climate neutral by 2050. 

Climate neutrality as of 2020 

Despite the challenges from Covid-19, 

Bosch is maintaining its long-term strategic 

course and continuing with its 

systematic pursuit of becoming carbon 

BOSCH CLIMATE GOALS 

Purchased goods and logistics 

Scope 3 

Own generation 

and purchased energy 

Scopes 1 and 2 

Use of products sold 

Scope 3 

Energy efficiency 

New clean power 

Green electricity 

Carbon offsets 

neutral. When it comes to achieving 

this target, Bosch is making progress: 

Already by the end of 2019, all German 

sites had become carbon neutral. To this 

date, Bosch has achieved 70 percent of 

its target on a global scale. By the end 

Climate neutrality as of 2020 

Science Based Targets 

initiative (SBTi) 

– 15% 

by 2030 

88 


of 2020, 100 percent carbon neutrality 

will have been achieved, and Bosch’s 

worldwide development, manufacturing, 

and administration activities will no 

longer leave a carbon footprint. 

To make this a reality, the company is 

investing in energy efficiency, increasing 

the proportion of renewables in its 

energy supply, buying more green power, 

and offsetting unavoidable carbon emissions. 

Bosch is also making progress in 

improving the quality of its measures to 

maintain carbon neutrality until 2030. 

For instance, the share of carbon offsets 

in 2020 will be significantly lower than 

planned – just 25 percent. 

holistic supply chain network design 

is intended to strengthen the regional 

procurement and production of goods 

and avoid air transport. In addition, by 

increasingly combining freight, Bosch 

wants to reduce transport and optimize 

routes and capacity utilization. Product 

design geared to energy efficiency 

is already contributing to the reduction 

of emissions with regard to how 

products sold are used. In 2020, Bosch 

wants to identify additional potential 

for further reducing the CO 2 

emissions 

of its products. On top of that, Bosch 

has already decided on a measure for 

the category of associates’ transport: 

Starting in 2020, Bosch will make air 

travel of all associates carbon neutral 

by using carbon offsets. The costs will 

be included directly in the airfare. 

Torsten Kallweit and Annette Wagner lead the 

Bosch Group’s corporate EHS and sustainability 

departments. Torsten Kallweit is also CTO of 

the newly established Bosch Climate Solutions. 

For more information, please visit: 

sustainability.bosch.com 

Climate action along the value chain 

To ensure its own efforts have a multiplier 

effect on the economy, Bosch 

also set a target for reducing its Scope 3 

emissions – which means tackling emissions 

in the upstream and downstream 

activities along the value chain. 

Upstream emissions in the Bosch value 

chain concern categories such as purchased 

goods and services, logistics, associates’ 

commutes, and business trips. 

Downstream emissions are mainly 

caused by the use and disposal of products. 

To calculate the carbon footprint, 

Bosch has analyzed all Scope 3 categories 

of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol and 

focused on those that account for the 

largest share of CO 2 

emissions. These 

are purchased goods, logistics, and the 

use of products sold. In order to live up 

to self-imposed standards, Bosch wants 

to reduce CO 2 

emissions by at least 

15 percent by 2030, or more than 50 

million metric tons per year. To this end, 

Bosch has agreed on a target with the 

Science Based Targets initiative, making 

Bosch the first automotive supplier to 

commit to a measurable target. 

To achieve this, Bosch will identify 

the supplier groups creating the largest 

volumes of CO 2 

emissions in order 

to work with them on mitigation 

measures. In the field of logistics, a 

Bosch intends to increase own power generation 

from renewable sources of energy such as 

photovoltaics and wind to 0.4 TWh in 2030. 

CLIMATE SOLUTIONS FOR THE ECONOMY 

To make its experience available to other companies and to help them progress 

toward carbon neutrality, Bosch pools the knowledge of nearly 1,000 Bosch 

experts worldwide and offers access to the results of more than 1,000 energyefficiency 

projects of its own in a new advisory company called Bosch Climate 

Solutions. The newly established operating unit develops tailored solutions for 

customers and shows how to strike the right balance between economic and 

ecological considerations. “We want to make our experience available to other 

companies, to help them progress to carbon neutrality,” says Dr. Volkmar Denner, 

Chairman of the Board of Management of Robert Bosch GmbH. In doing so, Bosch 

enables companies to develop their own climate protection plan: from the 

analysis of the carbon footprint to the concept and throughout the implementation 

of a dedicated reduction plan. 


FROM WHISTLEBLOWING TO 

COMPLIANCE SOLUTIONS 

The field of compliance has undergone major developments over the last 20 years. Although 

in the beginning the importance of business ethics was not recognized, or even rejected, and 

compliance was only seen as a set of regulations, the understanding of a value-oriented 

corporate culture gradually grew. This was accompanied by the development of compliance 

software to support people who want to report misconduct without fear of retaliation, and thus 

to help build better ethics in businesses. 

By Kai Leisering, Business Keeper 

Twenty years ago, when it all started 

under the supervision of the UN, states 

and businesses shared a vision of making 

the world a better place. They agreed on 

goals that would enable – and promote 

– progress in people’s social and ecological 

conditions, and therefore would 

improve the quality of life for everyone. 

An integral part of the defined measures 

has been fighting corruption – an evil 

that challenges equal chances for all 

people regarding wealth, employment, 

and a healthy environment. Those who 

developed the early initiatives realized 

that defining common rules for ethical 

behavior and business ethics can be a 

strong foundation on which to build. 

Over time, this has led to global policies 

and legislation that have incorporated 

basic principles to fight corrupt practices. 

But what are these rules, which are just 

written down on paper, able to change? 

Missing awareness for corrupt 

actions 

Kenan Tur was an early pioneer. Being 

involved in the discussions about how 

to support global initiatives on fighting 

corruption, he became aware that these 

rules needed to include the possibility 

for people to speak up without having 

to fear retaliation and negative consequences, 

especially when pointing out 

misconduct. Motivated by his belief that 

even a single person can make a difference, 

he decided to develop the world’s 

first web-based whistleblowing software, 

and thus gave birth to Business Keeper. 

Business Keeper was founded with the 

goal of protecting the identities of people 

who have information about possibly 

corrupt actions within their organizations 

and want to report them without 

being publicly labeled as an informer. 

At the beginning, Tur’s idea was rejected, 

and he experienced resistance from 

nearly all the big players. This included 

the suggestion that no malpractice was 

occurring, and there was denial that a 

corruption problem even existed. But 

conviction and passion kept him going. 

Perhaps as a result of the numerous corruption 

scandals that have become public, 

an important positive development has 

been the common understanding of some 

of the leading companies worldwide, 

namely that committing to the fight 

against corruption requires organizational 

measures. These measures include, 

for example, appointing people at the top 

of the organization’s hierarchy to assume 

responsibility, to define guidelines and, 

in the end, to implement a Compliance 

Management System. This led to whistleblowing 

systems becoming standard and 

an accepted best practice instrument in 

the fight against corruption. Decades 

later, in 2020, this is considered normal, 

and some might have even forgotten that 

this was not always so. 

Business ethics require new 

compliance tools 

Over time, compliance has grown into 

something bigger. Whereas compliance 

focused only on fighting corruption in 

the early days, it has now become the 

central governance function in organizations 

and includes many other areas, 

ranging from competition law to data 

privacy, and from IT security to employees’ 

90 


www.business-keeper.com 

health and safety. At the same time, 

compliance continues to include new 

developments such as sexual harassment, 

#metoo, manipulation of technical 

processes, and many other topics. 

There has also been a change in scope: 

Whereas at the beginning, the focus was 

mainly to look at the internal organization 

and ensure the proper behavior of 

employees, compliance now extends to 

anyone related to an organization, be it 

persons within global supply chains or 

anyone acting on behalf of – and in the 

name of – the organization. Nowadays, 

all of these are part of the governance 

structure and should be covered through 

defined measures. 

This development has led to growing 

levels of compliance within organizations 

while raising awareness that 

the relationship between costs spent 

for compliance and achieving goals 

needs to be balanced. For compliance 

departments, this has required efficient 

processes and applications that allow 

processes to be implemented which 

cover large numbers of people in and 

around the organization. At the same 

time, the processes allow for managing 

people with a small number of compliance 

officers. 

Business Keeper has remained aware 

of these changing requirements and 

new challenges, and therefore it has 

continued to enhance the suite of software 

solutions to help organizations. 

This includes evolved case management 

and reporting solutions, software that 

allows for automating and supporting 

third-party due diligence processes, as 

well as an application that allows for the 

easy handling of benefits and gifts, and 

any other relevant approval processes in 

organizations on a local or global scale. 

After 20 years, compliance has become 

an extremely important element for 

companies of all sizes and in all industries. 

No one any longer questions 

that business ethics are important and 

relevant. Looking back over the last 20 

years, good progress has been made 

compared to when it all began – but 

there is still a long way to go. 

BUSINESS 

KEEPER 

As the first provider of electronic 

whistleblowing systems 

and the European market 

leader in compliance software, 

Business Keeper has developed 

integrity and compliance 

applications to help fight whitecollar 

crime such as corruption, 

money laundering, and other 

crimes against society for 

more than 20 years. 

The company collaborates with 

leading experts and participates 

in numerous networks 

to help customers integrate 

various aspects of whistleblower 

protection in an optimal 

manner, and to support them 

in matters of ethics and compliance. 


WE CONTINUE TO GO 

FURTHER AND CONTRIBUTE 

TO OUR 5 PRIORITY SDGs 

At CEMEX, we live our purpose of building a better future, which is embedded in our strategy, 

operations, and our culture. CEMEX has a rich history of contributing to the well-being of those it 

serves through innovative building solutions, efficiency advancements, and efforts to promote 

a sustainable future. 

By Martha Herrera, CEMEX 

Our approach to the UN Sustainable 

Development Goals 

The SDGs represent business opportunities 

for CEMEX and contribute to the 

2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development 

of the United Nations (UN). Our 

sustainability goals are aligned to the 

five priority SDGs for our company. They 

are designed to enhance CEMEX’s economic, 

environmental, social, and governance 

pillars and contribute toward 

the achievement of a better and more 

sustainable future for all. 

As a leading building materials company, 

we recognize and embrace our responsibility 

in the development of sustainable 

cities and the generation of shared 

values among communities. As part of 

this purpose, we collaborate very closely 

with field experts, authorities, customers, 

suppliers, NGOs, and other stakeholders 

so that our products and solutions not 

only address all of our customers’ construction 

needs efficiently and effectively, 

but also accomplish those needs in the 

most sustainable way. 

Social entrepreneurs from our 

Social Innovation Award 

Global Goals Local Business 

regional event end of 2019 

92 


Building upon our commitment to the 

SDGs, in collaboration with a multidisciplinary 

group within CEMEX, we connected 

stakeholders’ objectives, risks, and 

financial and non-financial indicators to 

set our five priority SDGs, upon which 

we can contribute even further toward 

achieving the UN’s established goals of 

Agenda 2030. Our five goals are focused 

on the promotion of decent employment 

and economic growth (Goal 8); innovation 

and infrastructure development 

(Goal 9); climate change mitigation (Goal 

13); environmental and ecosystem conservation 

(Goal 15); and the advancement 

of sustainable cities and communities 

(Goal 11). We devised internal output 

indicators in order to keep track of our 

contributions toward selected targets. In 

2019, we selected our main actions and 

programs, and we are currently working 

to unify them in order to further increase 

our SDG contributions. 

Collaborating and sharing best 

practices with UN initiatives 

CEMEX is a member of the United 

Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. 

In 2019, we led the ARISE Mexico 

Forum: Resilience for All. During the 

forum, we promoted resiliency through 

disaster risk management within companies 

to generate value for society. 

We further protect integrity and wellbeing 

by integrating disaster prevention 

through appropriate training, policies, 

and infrastructure involving our 

employees, communities, national 

and local governments, academia, civil 

society organizations, and multilateral 

organizations. 

We continue to lead the UN Global 

Compact (UNGC) in Mexico, inspiring 

and motivating business leaders to join 

this initiative and promote inclusive 

prosperity and sustainable development. 

In 2019, through our role in the Global 

Compact Network in Mexico, we led 

the signing of a collaboration agreement 

between the government of Mexico, 

the private sector – represented by the 

Business Coordinating Council – and 

the local Global Compact Network in 

Mexico and led Making Global Goals 

Local Business – Mexico, where more 

than 800 participants shared best practices 

to collaborate and play a more active 

role in the achievement of the SDGs. 

We will continue pursuing our purpose 

of building a better future, ensuring a 

sustainable growth to further advance 

the SDGs and mitigate impacts and risks, 

by operating in a more agile way, seeking 

disruptive innovation and collaboration 

with organizations that also are guided 

by their purpose and are committed with 

the UN SDGs. 

Agreement signed by government, private 

sector, and the UNGC on Agenda 2030 


Enabling a Circular 

Plastics Economy 

One of the biggest environmental threats of our time is plastic waste. Governments across 

the globe must take immediate action to reduce plastic waste and increase recycling levels. 

Industry partners along the value chain as well as consumers will need to change their 

behaviors and established paths, primarily concerning packaging. Clariant’s answer to these 

challenges is EcoCircle, a circular plastics economy initiative. 

By Dr. Bettina Siggelkow, Clariant 

There is no doubt that we enjoy the 

benefits of plastic every day – not only in 

packaging, for example for food preservation. 

However, we are constantly facing 

the consequences of improperly 

handled plastic waste, which is polluting 

our environment and damaging flora 

and fauna across the globe. It is therefore 

necessary to act now to dramatically 

reduce plastic waste and to start 

seeing it as a raw material source for 

new products. At Clariant, the circular 

economy is a central element of our 

sustainability strategy. We are convinced 

that only through the close collaboration 

of industry partners across the value 

chain can a circular plastics economy 

be realized. Sustainable results for a 

circular economy require that products 

are considered cost-efficient, not only 

for direct application, but also when it 

comes to their purpose along the circular 

value chain. This opens up a new dimension, 

offering potential for product and 

business model innovations. 

EcoCircle – A Circular Plastics 

Economy Initiative 

A key aspect of collaborating to achieve a 

circular plastics economy is the outreach 

of industry partners to all players along 

the value chain. This includes brand 

owners, polymer producers, designers, 

retailers, sorters, recyclers, and converters 

– partners that, so far, have only had 

limited direct interaction. These types of 

cooperation are more complex, not only 

due to the amount of project partners, 

but also due to the different positions 

within the value chains and there being 

significant differences in legal frameworks, 

specifications, and culture. This 

often makes communication across the 

new circular value chain challenging. 

For a successful transformation toward a 

circular value chain, it will be key to overcome 

the gap and create a framework 

to allow for joint project management. 

Clariant has developed competencies to 

effectively orchestrate the approach and 

foster projects along the value chain to 

drive successful product development 

for a new circular value chain. 

To help facilitate innovation and cocreation, 

Clariant is setting up Centers of 

Excellence. The integration of the knowl- 

That is why Clariant created the Eco- 

Circle initiative to address these challenges 

and support the development of 

a circular plastics economy. It combines 

four key elements: collaboration across 

the value chain, co-creation, technology, 

and distinction. 

94 


edge on the main recycling pathways 

(mechanical/chemical recycling) will 

not only speed up product development, 

but also allow for predicting behavior 

within a circular value chain. Integrating 

these considerations right from the start 

during product development will, in the 

future, be a key aspect for the industry 

in successfully transforming the value 

chain toward a circular economy. The 

first center will be located in Pogliano, 

Italy, and will focus on product design 

and mechanical recycling for polyolefins 

in supporting circular product design. 

Plastic waste to be considered the 

new raw material 

Plastic packaging is by far the single 

largest challenge to be solved. On the 

one hand, it requires the largest amount 

of plastic; on the other hand, it has the 

shortest lifecycles in use. It accounts for 

about 57 percent of the 250 million tons 

of plastic waste produced globally every 

year, of which only 10–20 percent is recycled, 

and almost all of it is downcycled 

to lower-value applications. To increase 

the recycling rate, it is crucial to preserve 

the quality of the plastic resin to enable, 

for example, turning a plastic bottle into 

a new plastic bottle using recycled plastic. 

Many companies and organizations have 

already announced concrete targets in 

this direction, such as achieving 100 

percent recyclability of their packaging 

and using between 25–50 percent of 

recycled plastic in their packaging by 

2025. Achieving these targets will require 

a change in collaboration approaches 

among partners across the different value 

chains in order to create new products 

and establish new value chains that 

include consumer involvement. 

The role of consumers returning 

plastic for recycling 

On the path to a circular plastics economy, 

consumers play an important role. 

An extensive education of the global 

population is required in order to send 

the message that plastic waste is not 

garbage, but an important raw material 

source for future production. Independent 

of the way in which plastic waste is 

collected in different countries, the effective 

and improved execution of recycling 

efforts will be key. Consumers need to be 

encouraged to collect plastic waste. This 

can be done by creating an easy-to-use 

system to collect and dispose of plastic 

waste, enabling further economically 

viable and feasible processing. With 

no collection system in place, plastic 

waste ends up in landfills, consumer 

acceptance levels will remain low, and 

the leakage of plastic waste into the environment 

will take place. The success of 

establishing a circular plastic value chain 

is therefore based on congruent actions 

taken by industry, governments, and 

consumers. A joint education program 

run by the industry and local authorities 

will help to create the fundamental 

shift in perceptions and understanding 

within today’s society. This is one of the 

fundamentals of the Alliance to End 

Plastic Waste, which Clariant joined, 

together with more than 30 companies. 

These companies have pledged to invest 

more than $1.5 billion in projects 

to reduce plastic waste in the environment 

by focusing on rivers and oceans, 

expanding the recycling infrastructure, 

and ensuring the required mobilization 

of politicians and society. 

Harmonized quality system for 

recyclates 

One of the fundamental drawbacks of 

using recyclates in packaging today is 

the availability of high-quality recyclates, 

which are compatible with the processing 

and quality requirements of brand 

owners, converters, and consumers. Recyclates 

show reduced quality because of 

reduced polymer properties, color, and 

odor. Counteracting the quality issues 

concerning post-consumer recyclates 

(PCR) starts with the packaging design, 

for example avoiding different polymer 

types in one packaging. Including the 

impact on the recycling process in the 

packaging design is a new approach 

that can only be managed with a good 

understanding of the circular value chain. 

Value chain cooperations – one of the 

key elements of Clariant’s EcoCircle initiative 

– will play an important role in 

this transition. Additionally, Clariant 

is developing solutions for some of the 

functional and critical performance issues 

with PCR materials through additive 

solutions as well as using adsorbent and 

detergent technologies to help with the 

purification in the recycling process, resulting 

in higher-quality PCR. In addition 

to product innovation, a harmonized 

approach to defining recyclate quality 

– similar to how it was done in the 

paper industry some decades ago – will 

facilitate the purchasing and usage of 

recyclates. This will enhance the suitability 

of reclaimed plastics for consumer 

or industrial goods that are in popular 

demand. 


CARBON NEUTRALITY, 

NATURAL RESOURCE 

PROTECTION, WELL-BEING, 

AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 

On May 7, 2020, during its Annual General Assembly, EDF passed its raison d'être or purpose 

through its by-laws. This purpose sums up the Group’s determination to take up the dual 

challenge of economic recovery especially in light of Covid-19 and France and Europe’s goal of 

achieving carbon neutrality. 

By EDF Group 

The CEO of EDF, Jean-Bernard Lévy, was 

invited to address the UN Global Compact 

on EDF’s actions during the Covid-19 

health crisis. He expressed two firm 

personal beliefs about what “the world 

after Covid-19” might look like: a world 

which shows more solidarity that – in 

France at least – will put public services 

back at the center of the model of society; 

and a world that will see a greater outcry 

from society to fight climate change with 

determination. 

The fight against climate change is 

quite rightly central to EDF’s recently 

announced purpose. This position is 

reinforced by EDF’s decision to join 

the 10 percent of companies that have 

written their purpose into their articles 

of association. 

“We believe that reducing 

our impact on 

biodiversity and fighting 

climate change go hand 

in hand. That’s the idea 

behind our purpose, to 

build a net zero energy 

future with electricity 

and innovative solutions 

and services, to help 

save the planet and drive 

well-being and economic 

development.” 

Jean-Bernard Lévy, CEO and Chairman, 

EDF Group 

This stance is backed up by concrete 

measures. EDF Group has upped its 2030 

(on the basis of its 2017 direct emissions) 

target for direct CO 2 

emission reductions 

from 40 percent to 50 percent, and it has 

committed to achieving carbon neutrality 

by 2050. It has also committed to 

reducing emissions relating to the energy 

use of its customers and suppliers by 

obtaining independent certification from 

the Science Based Targets initiative. On 

average, over the past decade, EDF has 

invested between €12 billion and €15 

billion a year in renewable and nuclear 

power generation, energy services, smart 

grids, and mobility (investments excluding 

Group acquisitions and disposals). In 

2019, 97 percent of these investments 

went towards helping decarbonize the 

electricity system, and 95 percent of 

96 


ACCELERATION IN DEVELOPMENT OF RENEWABLES 

Target of 50 GW net installed capacity in 2050 in GW 

50 

50.0 

+1,2 GW / yr 

20 

18.0 

15 

+2.1 GW / yr 

10 

+0.7 GW / yr 9.6 

6.8 

5 

0 

2015 

2019 

2023 

2050 

EDF Group also formally set out its 

voluntary action plan on the “Entreprises 

Engagées pour la Nature – act4nature 

France” platform, created by the French 

government via the OFB, the country’s 

biodiversity agency. It is also engaged in 

the act4nature international initiative, 

which brings together French companies 

that have global operations. EDF Group’s 

commitments include: 

• Monitor – and ultimately limit – soil 

sealing when converting its former 

fossil-fired power plants in France; 

• In the nuclear sector in France and 

the United Kingdom, action plans to 

conserve and enhance biodiversity in 

outstanding environments in partnership 

with local actors; 

• Work with the IUCN to develop wind 

and solar power guidelines by 2021 

that favor biodiversity; 

• Reduce water and soil pollution by 

pursuing its program to halt the use 

of phytosanitary products at all of its 

industrial sites; 

• Continue to counter the proliferation 

of invasive alien species, with priority 

given to stepping up actions in Corsica 

and French overseas territories; 

• Work together with researchers to build 

its future R&D actions on the effects of 

water temperature on aquatic organisms; 

its R&D operating budget in France 

(€485 million) was dedicated to electricity 

system decarbonization and transition. 

Climate goals that go hand in hand 

with biodiversity conservation 

On June 15, 2020, EDF Group signed 

up to the call for collective action to reverse 

nature loss launched by the World 

Economic Forum, the International 

Chamber of Commerce, the World 

Business Council for Sustainable 

Development, the UN Global Compact, 

the International Union for Conservation 

of Nature (IUCN), and the Business 

for Nature coalition, under which CEOs 

from all over the world call for curbing 

biodiversity erosion and reversing the 

loss of the planet’s essential systems. 

• Review its biomass policy in 2020 to 

include new commitments in favor of 

biodiversity; 

• Extend the scope of its green-bond eligible 

investments for biodiversity (to a calendar 

depending on market conditions); 

• Raise awareness of biodiversity issues 

among the general public and EDF 

employees. 

EDF will report annually on the progress it 

has made on its CSR goal for biodiversity 

through its various publications. 


THE NYK SUPER ECO SHIP 

2050 IS THE VISION OF AN 

EMISSIONS-FREE SHIP 

By Elias Penttinen, Elomatic 

In 2018, the Japanese shipping company 

NYK launched its challenge for attaining 

CO 2 

-neutral shipping by 2050. NYK 

referred to the International Maritime 

Organization (IMO) goals, which state 

that greenhouse gases from shipping 

must be reduced by at least 50 percent 

from 2008 levels. In 2012, although 

shipping is the most energy-efficient 

way of transporting goods, the share of 

its global CO 2 

emissions was 2.2 percent. 

Prior to the announcement by the IMO, 

NYK and its technology development 

arm, the Monohakobi Technology Institute, 

had already approached Elomatic 

for a development roadmap toward a 

more environmentally friendly operation. 

The showcase vessel for the study was a 

Pure Car and Truck Carrier (PCTC), which 

is known as the NYK Super Eco Ship 2050. 

Compared to current designs, energy 

savings of 70 percent were achieved. An 

emissions-free operation was reached 

using primary fuel produced with 

renewable energy. 

The challenge of an emissions-free 

operation 

In principle, an emissions-free operation 

requires a fuel with neutral or no 

CO 2 

emissions. The challenge is that 

such fuels are rare, expensive, and in 

most cases difficult to store. They also 

are energy inefficient when the entire 

footprint – from the primary energy 

source to the bunker fuel on board the 

ship – is considered. Therefore, the 

use of alternative fuels in shipping 

requires highly efficient ships and a 

highly efficient operation of the fleet 

and its logistical chain. 

Minimal resistance is the key to 

improvements 

For a typical merchant ship, the biggest 

power demand is for overcoming the 

resistance of the ship. Resistance originates 

from the need to move the ship 

through water and air, with the former 

being the dominating component. 

The hull’s (the main body of a ship) 

volume and shape are critical for reducing 

resistance. The hull has to provide 

buoyancy to carry the weight of the ship 

and its cargo. To minimize the volume 

of the hull, it is important to minimize 

the weight while maintaining the cargocarrying 

capacity. The weight without 

cargo of the NYK Super Eco Ship 2050 

was reduced by 30 percent using topology 

optimization, the potential of 3-D 

printing in manufacturing, and material 

developments. 

The other purpose of the hull is to provide 

sufficient stability for the vessel, 

which is especially critical for a PCTC. 

In our vision, ships will have active 

devices that provide sufficient stability 

in a similar manner as fighter jets. In 

the NYK Super Eco Ship 2050, this has 

been done with gyro stabilisers. 

The vessel is equipped with pontoons 

that can be deployed if required. This 

allows it to remain stable during emergencies 

and other abnormal situations. 

These developments will allow the hull 

shape to be optimized with a greater 

focus on resistance. Overall, the reduction 

in vessel resistance is 35 percent. 

Machinery and propulsion 

Efficiency is the most important aspect 

in prime movers, power distribution, 

and propulsion equipment. 

Hydrogen fuel cells were selected as the 

prime movers of the vessel. Due to the 

fuel cells and hydrogen fuel, a lot of 

auxiliary equipment can be removed, 

and therefore the maintenance requirement 

is reduced. The electricity from the 

fuel cells is fed into a highly efficient, 

low-voltage DC grid. 

Conventional propellers have been 

replaced by flapping foils that mimic the 

98 


several ways. It can reduce the required 

power consumption on board when used 

for air conditioning and cold equipment 

in the kitchen. It can also improve the 

efficiency of power distribution through 

superconducting and reduce the surface 

temperature of solar panels. 

Outside view of the ship featuring solar panels and pontoons 

Other sources of waste originating from 

the ship’s operation are stored on board 

the vessel and unloaded at port. This 

improves the environmental footprint 

of the vessel and reduces the amount 

of equipment required onboard, such 

as incinerators. 

Operation 

An inside view from a cargo deck featuring innovative use of materials 

movement of fishtails to deliver greater 

efficiency than screw-type propellers. The 

flapping foils are driven with efficient, 

permanent, magnetic electric motors. 

Another important aspect is the creation 

of renewable energy on board the 

vessel. By 2050, solar power will be 

the most cost-efficient new source of 

energy at land-based as well as maritime 

installations. Therefore, the ship area is 

optimally utilized for solar panels that 

can rotate to follow the sun for the best 

possible efficiency. Fifteen percent of the 

vessel’s energy demand will be covered 

by solar panels. 

Zero waste 

One way to increase efficiency is to 

eliminate all sources of waste. Excess 

heat from machinery is already being 

utilized today to produce electricity, but 

the NYK Super Eco Ship 2050 will go one 

step further. As the need for heating the 

ship’s spaces decreases, there is no need 

to heat the bunker fuel, the exhaust fume 

temperature can be low, and therefore 

most of the excess heat can be used to 

create electricity. 

Waste cold that originates from liquid 

hydrogen bunker fuel can be utilized in 

Operational efficiency has a major impact 

on emissions from shipping. Already today, 

weather routing, just-in-time arrival, 

as well as advanced power and energy 

management are used to some extent 

and will be standard procedure by 2050. 

The optimization will be done across 

entire logistical chains. For example, port 

arrivals will be optimized between all 

vessels heading to port, and shore-based 

logistical chains will be aligned with the 

arrival of vessels. Also, cargo for feeder 

vessels will be moved directly from one 

vessel to another, reducing the duration 

of the port stay for vessels. 

Time between bunkering will be another 

important change in vessel operations. 

As most alternative fuels require more 

storage space compared to current fuels, 

bunkering will need to be more frequent. 

The vessel will require a capacity of 

21 days compared to several months for 

current vessels in order to keep costs and 

space demands reasonable. 

Conclusions 

The NYK Super Eco Vessel 2050 is a 

source of inspiration and an idea for 

further discussions. The vessel clearly 

demonstrates the importance of energy 

efficiency for the adoption of alternative 

fuels. To achieve the 2050 target, a development 

roadmap should be produced 

and followed – an example set by NYK. 


E.ON IS MAKING THE 

INTERNET MORE 

SUSTAINABLE 

Digitization is integral to business and everyday life. The volume of data processed by data 

centers is growing continually, which increases electricity consumption as well as carbon 

emissions. But E.ON is showing how data centers can become more efficient and sustainable. 

Its innovative solutions help customers make their data centers greener. 

By Ilke Rangette, E.ON Business Solutions 

Digitization – from cloud services and cat 

content to streaming and cryptocurrencies 

– accounts for a big part of (business) 

life. But it has drawbacks: As data centers 

process more and more data, they require 

immense amounts of electricity. This leads 

to higher costs as well as higher carbon 

emissions, which contribute to global 

warming. The Berlin-based Borderstep 

Institute for Innovation and Sustainability 

calculates that data centers in Germany 

used almost 13 billion kilowatt-hours 

of electricity in 2017, about as much as 

a major city such as Berlin. No end is in 

sight. The Shift Project, a think tank in 

Paris, expects global energy consumption 

for digitization and related technologies 

to increase by 9 percent annually. 

Unlike a home or office computer, servers 

cannot simply be switched off. To ensure 

uninterrupted data flow, data centers 

operate 24/7. Nearly all the electricity 

they consume is converted into heat. This 

100 


heat must be cooled, which itself is an 

energy-intensive process. But it is possible 

to make cooling more sustainable as well. 

Innovative systems from E.ON 

E.ON offers practicable, customized solutions 

that enable companies of all sizes 

to make their data centers more efficient. 

E.ON’s individually tailored microgrid 

systems optimize energy consumption 

and supply. Its energy-generation solutions 

are embedded, redundant, and 

scalable. This ensures that customers 

have a reliable and flexible power supply 

that can be adapted to their individual 

needs. Examples include sustainable 

storage and energy technologies such 

as solar and combined heat and power 

(CHP). The latter utilizes a data center’s 

waste heat, which can reduce energy 

costs by up to 20 percent. 

Fuel cells are another promising option. 

“E.ON is one of the few companies in the 

world that has experience building and 

operating utility-scale fuel cells, which 

are an important element in our portfolio 

of B2B solutions,” Anthony Ainsworth, 

CEO of E.ON Business Solutions says. 

“The industry is showing great interest 

in fuel cells, which not only make the 

power supply climate-friendlier but also 

almost entirely eliminate the emission of 

nitric oxide and particulate matter. We’re 

convinced that this clean technology can 

be used on a large scale.” 

Alongside efficient heating, ventilation, 

and air conditioning (HVAC), waste-heat 

utilization plays a key role in making 

data centers more sustainable. “E.ON 

has developed a state-of-the-art district 

heating technology called ectogrid tm , 

which is ideal for data-center infrastructure,” 

explains Andrea Miserocchi, 

Head of Segment Sales for Data Centers, 

Telecoms & Media at E.ON Business 

Solutions. Data centers can export their 

waste heat to the local district heating 

network, providing good neighbor energy 

with no additional environmental 

impact. 

The Binero project: A green data 

center in Sweden 

A green data center is already in operation 

in Vallentuna, a town located about 20 

kilometers north of Stockholm, Sweden. 

It was developed jointly by E.ON and 

Binero Group AB, a Swedish supplier of 

digital infrastructure services. The objective 

was not just to make the internet 

greener but to deliver benefits to Binero 

and the community as well. Development 

therefore focused on energy-efficient 

technologies and cooling systems as 

well as energy recovery. E.ON provided 

the solutions. 

The new data center has a redundant 

design with two separate systems for 

both power and cooling. Each of the 

dual systems is individually capable 

of supporting full IT operations. This 

reduces the likelihood of outages and 

simplifies maintenance. The data center 

is connected to the regional electricity 

network and has its own on-site switching 

equipment to convert from high 

to low voltage, which facilitates large 

power draws. The electricity is 100 percent 

sustainable and comes from wind 

and other renewable sources. The data 

center is also equipped with a modular 

uninterruptible power supply (UPS). 

In addition, Binero Group recycles its 

data center’s waste heat, which is piped 

into E.ON’s district heating network. 

This enables Binero both to conserve 

energy and support the local community. 

When the facility is fully connected, its 

waste heat will meet the heating needs of 

about one-third of Vallentuna’s roughly 

30,000 residents. 

Sustainable solutions for cities and 

communities 

E.ON uses these technologies to design 

highly efficient solutions that reduce 

customers’ energy costs, increase the 

availability of their energy supply, and 

improve their sustainability performance. 

Cities and communities benefit 

as well. “We combine our infrastructure 

with other E.ON services – such as district 

heating, charging points for electric 

vehicles, solar panels, energy storage 

devices, and demand-side response – 

to develop sustainable solutions for 

city districts in large European cities,” 

Miserocchi adds. 

These activities also enable E.ON to 

make an important contribution to 

the achievement of the UN Sustainable 

Development Goals (SDGs), primarily 

Goal 7 (Affordable and clean energy), Goal 

11 (Sustainable cities and communities), 

and Goal 13 (Climate action). In addition, 

E.ON’s solutions for data centers help 

achieve Goal 9 (Industry, innovation, and 

infrastructure) and Goal 12 (Responsible 

consumption and production). 


THE SDGs AS A WAY TO BUILD 

RESILIENCE 

The last few months introduced a completely new world to us when the pandemic started. The 

novel coronavirus has wreaked havoc on society while putting the lives and livelihoods of millions 

into disarray. The toll that the coronavirus has taken on people is very painful. The actions taken 

to stop the vigorous spread of the pandemic has left a massive impact on the global economy and 

the prospects for sustainable development. 

By Md. Moniruzzaman Khan, Green Delta Insurance Company 

Bangladesh was not spared from this 

easily transmitted deadly virus. With 

the very first Covid-19 case, detected 

on March 8, 2020, Bangladesh started 

its journey as a country with steadily 

increasing cases. Since then, businesses 

and operations have come to a complete 

halt to reduce the number of deaths, and 

the economy started to drop drastically, 

jeopardizing economic forecasts and 

targets for 2020 and 2021. 

There is no doubt that the world economy 

has entered a stage where it will take 

years to recover – not only for developed 

economies but especially developing and 

least-developed countries. Countries such 

as Bangladesh have to be very proactive 

to rebuild themselves to overcome their 

internal crises. With the sudden closures 

of workplaces, people at all levels have 

been challenged to adapt to the rapid 

changes in industries. 

While following the footsteps of the 

global leaders and their examples, Green 

Delta also started to work toward building 

a better future and utilizing the crisis 

for opportunities. These timely initiatives 

were undertaken to make the best of the 

sudden lockdowns and use the resources 

that Green Delta had created to build 

a resilient workforce. This ensured its 

contribution to the economy as well as 

minimize the impact of the pandemic 

at the company level. 

The following offers a glimpse of how 

Green Delta initiatives provide a framework 

for achieving resilience and will 

also help achieve the SDGs in a postpandemic 

era: 

Building a Resilient Workforce: 

Decent Work and Economic Growth 

(Goal 8) 

Most of the initiatives taken by Green 

Delta during the lockdown were centered 

on building a workforce that could serve 

even if the situation got worse. Starting 

with creating massive awareness regarding 

safety measures and good practices 

among the employees and community 

as well as clients and valued customers, 

Green Delta has enforced social distancing 

at its workplaces and informed 

personnel about taking care of their 

surroundings during the crisis. 

While ensuring a healthy work environment, 

Green Delta has offered unique 

approaches to ensure the health and 

safety of employees. 

Soon after workplaces were closed, employees 

were trained to carry out their 

duties for the company while working 

from home. There were a number of 

online training sessions, motivational 

sessions, and awareness-creation sessions 

to keep the spirits of the employees up 

and to increase employee engagement 

through various online platforms. 

Thus, Green Delta believes that building 

a resilient workforce can help to reduce 

the negative impacts on profits. It is 

also helping to strengthen the current 

workforce to cope with the prolonged 

aftermath following the crisis. 

Ensuring Good Health and Well- 

Being: Good Health and Well-Being 

(Goal 3) 

As the pandemic spread across the country, 

creating a health hazard throughout 

the entire population, the impact was 

much stronger on mental health, as 

everything started to shut down and 

human life became immobile under 

strict lockdowns. 

Green Delta looked after the mental and 

physical well-being of its employees as 

well as the community at large so that 

102 


they could cope with immobilization 

and the sudden changes in lifestyle due 

to the outbreak. Purchasing personal 

protective equipment for project managers, 

ensuring safety measures for client 

handling, as well as conducting online 

mental wellness and yoga sessions are 

a few of the measures that were initiated 

and regularly monitored during 

the initial closure of operations. 

Addressing the Community at Large: 

Reduced Inequalities 

(Goal 10) and Sustainable Cities and 

Community (Goal 11) 

Green Delta not only ensured good 

practices and mental health among its 

employees and communities, it also 

extended initiatives to support the communities 

that are in the most vulnerable 

positions due to the pandemic and the 

weakened economy. Green Delta has created 

a CSR fund to support 1,500 farmers 

through a project called “Amra Korbo Joy” 

and distributed gifts in the form of cash. 

The Green Delta family contributed one 

day of their salaries to stand with the 

farmers through this project. 

workforce, but it will also facilitate digitalizing 

the operations and service offerings. 

This helped us to open our first fully 

functional digital platform. This eases 

the process of payments by partnering 

with multi-financial service companies 

and will help Green Delta adapt to future 

crises in a post-pandemic world. 

Heading toward the unknowns of postpandemic 

uncertainties in the future, 

Green Delta has aimed to build a resilient 

workforce and partnerships to 

cope with the negative impacts of this 

pandemic while harnessing the power 

of togetherness and using insurance as 

a risk-mitigating tool to cushion against 

the financial losses faced by companies 

and households. Green Delta believes 

that together we can make it through 

these difficult times and learn from our 

experiences to create a better world. 

Green Delta believes that being in the 

position to help the most vulnerable 

provides an opportunity to make a contribution 

while keeping the system running. 

Partnerships for a Resilient Future: 

Partnerships for the Goals (Goal 17) 

As the people, institutes, and businesses 

look for ways to recover from the losses 

that the pandemic has already created, 

Green Delta kept their goals straight and 

decided within a short period of time 

to become operational while following 

the new norms of the workplace. This 

crisis pushed the company toward rapid 

adaptation and opened new doors to 

partnerships to create a better future 

while overcoming internal and external 

turmoil. During this crisis, Green Delta 

has partnered with digital service providers 

to ease the process of delivering 

efficient services. This not only helped 

during the initial lockdown period of the 

Together we can make 

bigdifference 

Farmers are the backbone of the nation. 

We have initiated a fund to help 

the farmers who are affected by 

the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Let's Come Forward 

log on to 

amrakorbojoy.net 


OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH 

THE ORGANIC COTTON 

ACCELERATOR 

Sustainability is a key aspect that is considered in all steps of our business model and product 

life cycles. This affects all stages of our global supply chain – design, raw material supply, 

manufacturing, quality control, logistics, and point of sale through physical stores and 

e-commerce. 

By Javier Losada, Inditex 

We are aware of the necessary global 

contribution to a sustainable society. For 

this reason, we collaborate with different 

stakeholders and maintain alliances 

with diverse international organizations 

to succeed in implementing our social 

and environmental sustainability strategies. 

This allows us to maximize our 

positive impact throughout the value 

chain. Furthermore, we believe that the 

future of sustainability must increasingly 

move toward an open approach whereby 

collaboration is the pillar on which the 

industry evolves – an approach that 

Inditex has been developing for years. 

In this sense, Inditex is a founding partner 

of the Organic Cotton Accelerator 

(OCA; www.organiccottonaccelerator. 

org.), which stands as “the only multistakeholder 

organization fully dedicated 

to organic cotton. As a global platform, 

we’re committed to bringing integrity, 

supply security, and measurable social 

and environmental impact to organic 

cotton.” 

Cotton plays a key role in Inditex’s sustainability 

strategy; it is the second-most 

used raw material in the world, the first 

with a natural base (26 million tons in 

2018/2019; Preferred Fibers & Materials 

Market Report 2019, Textile Exchange), 

and it is widely used in our products 

at Inditex. 

Organic cotton is highlighted as one of 

the best sustainable alternatives to conventional 

cotton; however, it represents 

only 0.7 percent of all cotton production 

in the world (Organic Cotton Market Report 

2019, Textile Exchange). There is still 

so much to be done to encourage and 

enable organic cotton farming to help 

meet the demand for this fiber. 

OCA’s Farmer Engagement and Development 

(FED) program allows for sourcing 

and capacity-building at the farm level. 

Brands, retailers, and implementing 

partners (IP) work together to change 

the organic cotton market and deliver 

prosperity, integrity, and best practices 

at the farm level. 

The FED program is currently focused on 

India, where 47 percent of the world’s 

organic cotton is produced. The program 

links brands to nominated farm groups, 

creating a secure market and premium 

payments for the farmers and facilitating 

third-party-validated impact data 

while making future investments in 

farmer training. IPs will be responsible 

for providing non-GMO (genetically 

modified organism) seeds to nominated 

farm groups, training them in organic 

practices and offering general management 

and support throughout the growing 

season. 

At Inditex, we participate in several FED 

projects in collaboration with more than 

5,900 small farmers. Their training in 

organic practices helps preserve local 

biodiversity, soil enrichment, the use 

of natural pesticides and fertilizers, and 

prevents the use of GMO seeds. 

The FED program puts organic farmers 

first, helping to make organic farming 

a viable choice for cotton growers in 

India – where most of the project farmers 

are small landholders – with a high 

dependence on cotton farming for their 

family incomes. 

Organic practices usually bring lower 

levels of crop productivity as well as 

increased pest risks, so incomes are lower 

than with conventional farming. While 

remaining aware of the challenges, the 

FED program’s primary goal is improving 

business for organic cotton farmers 

as well as promoting organic cotton in 

India. The FED program advocates the 

104 


At Inditex, we focus on our clients and 

look toward the excellence of our products, 

which protect human rights and 

create social value, while ensuring that 

all of our items meet the strictest health, 

safety, and environmental sustainability 

standards. OCA’s FED program aligns 

with our goals and enables us to take 

steps forward in our sustainability journey. 

We are committed to the protection of 

biodiversity through the responsible 

and sustainable management of natural 

resources as we reflect on our Biodiversity 

Strategy, which is based on the principles 

of the United Nations Convention on 

Biological Diversity. 

payment of a premium over the market 

price, which, in combination with lower 

production costs, ensures that farmers 

receive a competitive and higher net 

annual income from organic cotton 

when compared to conventional 

cotton farming under similar conditions. 

Production costs can be reduced because 

farmers are trained to produce their 

own natural fertilizers and pesticides. 

This creates the possibility for farmers 

to generate extra income if they can 

sell their surplus production locally to 

other farmers. In due course, this could 

potentially reduce their credit dependency 

and help them achieve financial 

solvency as well as reduce their exposure 

on the open market. 

In summary, the FED program offers 

several benefits for organic cotton smallholder 

farmers and the environment. 

In terms of livelihoods, organic cotton 

improves farmers’ incomes, which are 

based on a premium and involve cost 

reductions; decreases credit dependency; 

and encourages capacity-building on the 

ground, thereby generating new local 

opportunities for farmers as producers 

of natural pesticides and fertilizers. 

Organic farming also produces benefits 

for the environment, enhancing the use 

of local seed diversity, which enables 

improved soil health and biodiversity. 

When organic farming principles are 

followed, the land has improved soil 

health, retaining more nutrients, which 

enables increased moisture retention. 

Organic farming can also help fight climate 

change due to using less energy 

and reducing greenhouse gas emissions 

associated with growth. 

Farmers in the FED program recognize 

that following organic farming principles 

improves the quality of the soil they 

cultivate and increases their incomes, 

meaning less dependency on financial 

institutions. 

By 2025, all cotton to be used in our 

products will come from sustainable 

sources (i.e., it will be organic, BCI cotton, 

or recycled). 

“ 

Sustainability is a 

never-ending task 

in which everyone 

here at Inditex 

is involved and in 

which we are 

successfully 

engaging all of our 

suppliers; we aspire 

to playing a 

transformational 

role in the industry. 

Pablo Isla, Executive Chairman 

of Inditex, Annual General Meeting 

of Shareholders, July 2019 


DIBICHAIN: TRANSPARENT 

MATERIAL CYCLES WITH 

BLOCKCHAIN 

As a resource-saving economic model, the circular economy offers a sustainable alternative to 

previous economic strategies. But it also presents companies with major challenges. Digital 

technologies are very promising in this context. In the project DIBICHAIN, the software company 

iPoint, in cooperation with industrial partners, is researching how blockchain technology can be 

applied to the circular economy. 

By Dr. Katie Boehme, iPoint-systems 

In times of climate change and increasing 

scarcity of resources, sustainable 

management is becoming more and 

more important. This also means that 

companies, in particular, have to rethink 

their business approaches. The circular 

economy is considered to be particularly 

resource-saving, and therefore futureoriented. 

The central idea of a circular 

economy is the establishment of closed 

material cycles: Instead of disposing of 

materials or components of products 

at the end of their useful lives, they are 

returned to biological or technical cycles. 

Recycling, dismantling, and reusing are 

the main focus; ideally, there is no waste. 

This saves valuable resources. 

However, the necessary processes of a 

circular economy are highly complex and 

very challenging for companies. In order 

to implement them in a truly sustainable 

and efficient manner, it is necessary 

to factor in the complete life cycle of a 

product or substance. All physical material 

flows must be analyzed, evaluated, 

and finally interpreted across the entire 

product cycle. The collection of data 

along the supply chain is also complex 

and effortful. An example: A smartphone 

contains hundreds of individual parts. 

These, in turn, consist of more than 

60 different natural resources and materials. 

If you want to make the supply 

chain completely transparent, you have 

to trace every single one of them back 

to their point of origin. This is not only 

complicated and time-consuming, but 

also involves high costs. Another point: 

All data collected in the context of the 

circular economy and along the supply 

chain must be up-to-date, transparent, 

and tamper-proof. 

Blockchain as key technology 

For the software company iPoint-systems, 

digital technologies have great potential 

in this context. Blockchain is particularly 

promising, explains iPoint CEO Joerg 

Walden: “We are convinced that blockchain 

technology can be of great benefit 

for these challenges and for the development 

of circular economy systems. 

Because with blockchain, information 

can be made available to all users of the 

106 


system in a controlled manner, virtually 

in real time. The intellectual property of 

each individual is still protected, and the 

user retains data sovereignty. Only by 

consensus can the rules regarding the 

visibility of the data be changed. In this 

way, virtually everything and everyone 

is connected with each other, which 

enables completely different innovation 

cycles and business models.” 

Blockchain not only simplifies the information 

flow within the company 

and with stakeholders. The data is also 

tamper-proof. Once verified, it cannot 

be changed or manipulated without the 

system noticing and the participants 

agreeing. The transaction can be cryptographically 

secured. In the blockchain, 

data is stored decentrally. This eliminates 

dependence on a single server, and several 

systems monitor the data flow. 

Project DIBICHAIN 

So far, however, not enough research 

has been conducted on how blockchain 

technology can be applied to the circular 

economy. In order to change this, 

iPoint is participating in the DIBICHAIN 

research project with the industrial partners 

Altran Deutschland, Blockchain 

Research Lab, CHAINSTEP, and Airbus. 

The main objective is to investigate the 

potential of blockchain for the digital 

representation of product cycles – 

especially with regard to decentralization, 

reliability, and counterfeit protection, 

but also carbon footprint, sustainable 

production, and recycling. As part of the 

German Federal Government’s blockchain 

strategy, which was adopted in 

September 2019, DIBICHAIN is funded 

within the framework of the measure 

“Resource-efficient recycling management 

– innovative product cycles” (ReziProK) 

of the German Federal Ministry of Education 

and Research (BMBF). The research 

project started in July 2019 and has a 

duration of 36 months. 

The first step of the DIBICHAIN project 

is the development of a software 

demonstrator based on blockchain technology 

using the example of a bionic 

component produced by Airbus. The 

project team will use it to evaluate the 

suitability of blockchain for the circular 

economy. “The evaluation of the developed 

demonstrator is intended on the 

one hand to develop a knowledge base 

for the application of a blockchain for 

the circular economy, and on the other 

hand to reveal starting points for further 

projects in order to tap the full potential 

of blockchain and other distributed 

ledger technologies in the context of 

the circular economy,” says Sebastian 

Galindo, Project Manager at iPoint. 

Many years of expertise from iPoint 

iPoint is supporting the project with important 

expertise: “With our constantly 

growing ecosystem of 55,000 companies, 

iPoint is contributing cutting-edge 

technology know-how to the research 

project as well as many years of experience 

with players, due diligence processes, 

and problem solutions in the 

downstream area,” says Walden. For the 

software company, DIBICHAIN is not the 

first research project centered around 

blockchain technology. In early 2018, 

iPoint launched “SustainBlock,” 

a blockchain project in 

the area of conflict 

materials that makes the supply 

chain digitally traceable, and thus 

more transparent. The SustainHub 

community platform also provides 

customers with a software solution for 

efficient and simple communication 

and data acquisition in the supply chain. 

The system can also be used to manage 

other compliance requirements in the 

environmental, social, and materials 

areas, such as the REACH Regulation 

(Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation 

and Restriction of Chemicals) and the 

Restriction of Hazardous Substances 

(RoHS) Directive. 

Not only customers and project partners 

benefit from iPoint’s many years of 

experience. With its software solutions 

and research projects, iPoint also makes 

an important contribution to the UN’s 

Sustainable Development Goals. iPoint’s 

business model and business portfolio 

pay particular attention to both Goal 8 

(Decent work and economic growth) and 

Goal 12 (Responsible consumption and 

production), whereby the DIBICHAIN 

project additionally addresses SDGs 13 

(Climate action) and 16 (Peace, justice, 

and strong institutions). 


GOOD PRACTICE SECTION 2: LIST OF ATTENDEES (FROM K - Z) 

Companies are listed in alphabetic order 


Audi 

BASF 

Bayer 


Bosch Group 


CEMEX 

Clariant 

EDF Group 

Elomatic 

E.ON 


Inditex 


Solely responsible for the editorial contributions under the 

heading “Good Practice” are the companies themselves. 

Named articles do not reflect the opinions of the publisher. 

Knorr-Bremse 

K+S 

KYOCERA 


MAN 

Merck 


Netafim 

Nomura Group 




SAP 

Symrise 

Vonovia 

Wilo Group 

110 

112 

116 

Knorr-Bremse 

K+S 

KYOCERA 

108 


GOOD PRACTICE 

118 


122 

MAN 

124 

Merck 

126 


128 

Netafim 

130 

Nomura Group 

132 


134 


138 


140 

SAP 

142 

Symrise 

144 

Vonovia 

146 

Wilo Group 


DRIVING RESPONSIBILITY 

AND SHAPING TOMORROW’S 

TRANSPORTATION 

Knorr-Bremse is committed to contributing to a more sustainable society. As the global market 

leader for braking and other systems for rail and commercial vehicles, we drive forward innovations 

for sustainable system solutions in the mobility sector. In doing so, we play a key role in 

enhancing safety, efficiency, and reliability on rail tracks and roads around the world – each and 

every day. In order to make a positive contribution to the economic, social, and environmental 

challenges of our time, we are putting a special focus on 5 of the 17 UN Sustainable Development 

Goals that can be influenced by our business. One example is our recently renewed climate 

strategy, which contributes to Goal 13 (Climate action). 

By Stefan Bräuherr, Knorr-Bremse 

For more than 115 years, Knorr-Bremse 

has been the industry visionary, driving 

innovation in mobility and transportation 

technologies with an edge in connected 

system solutions. As global market leader, 

we see ourselves as a role model and try to 

live up to that expectation – in the way 

that we do business, as well as with our 

products. This is where the UN Sustainable 

Development Goals come into play. 

In 2018, a two-phase process comprising 

“top-down” voting by the top 160 managers 

worldwide and a “bottom-up” ballot of 

the global workforce culminated in the 

selection of five SDGs. Knorr-Bremse sees 

Goals 5, 8, 9, 12, and 13 as the areas where 

we can make the biggest difference. For 

instance, our approach to tackling Goal 

13 (Climate action) is holistic: By implementing 

our renewed climate strategy 

(Scopes 1+2), we are trying to reduce the 

environmental footprint of the transportation 

industry, and we are continuing and 

supporting our own efforts. In the past, 

we contributed to emissions reductions 

through our energy-efficiency program 

and by shifting progressively to generating 

KNORR-BREMSE CLIMATE STRATEGY 2030 

– 

CLIMAT E NEUTR ALIT Y 

F R O M 2 0 2 1 

GOAL: TO HALVE OUR 

CO 2 

EMISSIONS BY 2030 

Average reduction of Scopes 1 

and 2 emissions by 4.2 percent per 

annum in relation to the reference year 2018. 

Three levers to achieve a reduction: 

Energy efficiency 

Improvement of 

energy efficiency 

and switch to 

low-carbon fuels 

50.4 % CO 2 

B Y 2030 

– 4.2 % 

PER Y EAR 100 

% 

Renewables own 

generation 

Gradual increase of 

share of own-generated 

renewable energy 

GOAL: CLIMATE 

NEUTRALITY 

By further increasing the 

proportion of renewable 

energy we use above the 

4.2 percent target 

and, as necessary, 

offsetting any 

remaining 

emissions 

Renewables purchase 

Expansion of renewable 

energy purchasing, 

making use of power 

purchase agreements, 

green energy products 

and certificates 

The new Climate Strategy 2030, which supersedes the 

climate protection objectives set in 2015, represents a true milestone for Knorr-Bremse. 

110 


and procuring renewable energies at all of 

our locations. In Germany and Hungary, 

we are already at 100 percent. The SDGs 

provide valuable guidance for the strategic 

roadmap that will take us there. 

Commitment to carbon neutrality 

from 2021 onward 

Reducing the environmental impact of 

our production processes by using energy 

more efficiently is a key aspect of 

our approach. The new Climate Strategy 

2030, which supersedes the climate protection 

objectives set in 2015, represents 

a true milestone for Knorr-Bremse. In 

our climate strategy formulated in 2015, 

Knorr-Bremse committed itself to achieving 

climate-neutral, organic growth by 

2020 at its 43 most energy-intensive sites. 

With our new climate strategy, we have 

set the ambitious target of cutting our 

locations’ CO 2 

emissions by 50 percent 

by 2030 at the latest. In our view, we can 

achieve the most by focusing strongly on 

CO 2 

reduction – to contribute to more 

climate-friendly mobility. 

To achieve the goal of halving our CO 2 

emissions by 2030, we are working on 

the energy efficiency of our production, 

using more self-generated renewable 

energy, and expanding the purchasing 

of renewable energy as a whole. This 

goal is based on the Scopes 1 and 2 

requirements of the Science Based Targets 

initiative to follow a 1.5°C reduction 

pathway. We also want to go one step 

further: Knorr-Bremse has pledged to 

make all of its sites carbon neutral from 

2021 onward by maximizing the share 

of renewable energy and offsetting the 

remaining emissions. In fact, with this 

climate strategy, Knorr-Bremse wants to 

contribute to achieving the goals of the 

Paris Agreement. 

Contributing to the SDGs – 

an imperative for every global player 

Stefan Bräuherr, 

Head of Corporate 

Responsibility at 

Knorr-Bremse, 

signed the Climate 

Pact² in October 

2019. 

Knorr-Bremse can and will play an active 

part in making our environment more 

sustainable. Our products and systems 

are destined to become the mobility solutions 

of the future. Their competitive 

edge today is in part due to our customers’ 

demands for more sophisticated solutions, 

focused on safety and customer benefit 

as well as on sustainability. Employees’ 

and society’s expectations regarding sustainable 

industries are steadily increasing 

– and we always aim to surpass 

them. In fact, Knorr-Bremse already offers 

solutions to the challenges ahead of 

us, which puts the company in a strong 

competitive position and makes it attractive 

to investors and employees. We 

are making a large contribution to more 

environmentally friendly products and 

have structures and processes in place 

that are designed to optimize the way 

we use energy and materials, thus reducing 

potential negative effects for the 

environment and society. The action we 

are taking in this area is guided by Goal 9 

for sustainable industry, innovation, and 

infrastructure, and Goal 12 for sustainable 

consumption. We want to further 

develop sustainability and make it a decisive 

factor in our technological leadership 

and market position. Our products and 

systems for rail transportation form an 

intrinsic part of climate-friendly mobility 

solutions due to weight-reduction and 

energy-efficiency measures. This applies 

equally to commercial vehicle solutions, 

where we were early to realign all our 

product development activities toward 

efficiency and low-energy consumption. 

Always a step ahead – hybrid 

transformation for rail vehicles 

Rail transportation plays a key role in 

the mobility of the future. However, in 

some places it is hard to electrify stretches 

of track for rail vehicles. Kiepe Electric, 

a subsidiary of Knorr-Bremse, has been 

working on affordable and immediately 

available alternative drive systems for 

diesel multiple units. Kiepe has developed 

a modular concept for mild and full 

hybrids with a range of modules with 

which to supplement existing diesel propulsion 

systems – including batteries. 

Full-hybrid trains with diesel engines and 

transformers for operating in overhead 

mode can be upgraded using traction 

batteries with a capacity of 300 kWh or 

more. And diesel trains with hybrid capability 

can be upgraded to mild-hybrid 

units. In this respect, Kiepe provides integral 

modular systems expertise that can 

achieve energy savings of up to 25 percent. 

Conscious use of resources – 

remanufacturing helps to conserve 

raw materials 

The industrial reconditioning of old and 

used products is an important part of 

Knorr-Bremse’s business. What is known 

as “overhaul” in the rail division is called 

“remanufacturing” in the truck division. 

At Knorr-Bremse’s truck site in Liberec, 

Czech Republic, the benefits of this procedure 

can be seen in huge numbers on 

the board at the factory gate: 1.9 million 

kg of CO 2 

, 7.9 million kWh of energy, and 

more than half a million kilos of material 

were saved through remanufacturing last 

year. The raw materials used in the electronic 

components of commercial vehicle 

brakes – rare earths, gold, and silver – 

get a new lease of life. Remanufacturing 

is a huge factor in making our company 

more sustainable. Simultaneously, it provides 

our development engineers with 

valuable information about real-world 

wear and tear and the damage sustained 

by various parts. It is therefore just one 

more example of how Knorr-Bremse aims 

to make tomorrow’s mobility safe and 

sustainable at the same time. 


THE K+S BRINE CHALLENGE: 

APPROACH TO CREATE 

SUSTAINABLE SOLUTIONS 

Minimizing the impact on nature of activities associated with the extraction and processing of 

raw materials is a group-wide goal at K+S. We act by reducing the piling of solid waste from 

potash mining and the related formation of brine solution. Our long history of developing 

solutions to deal with the formation of brine solution from potash tailings piles has made us an 

expert in this field. By combining our expertise with an innovative crowdsourcing initiative, K+S 

collaborated with the public and searched for new approaches. We called this initiative the K+S 

Brine Challenge. 

By Dr. Arne Schmeisky and Janina Beduhn, K+S 

By using modern technology and crowd 

intelligence, new approaches and better 

solutions for overcoming different problems 

can be found. In the case of the “K+S 

Brine Challenge,” it was all about finding 

ways to address inevitable tailings from 

mining potash. In line with Sustainable 

Development Goal 17 (“Strengthen the 

means of implementation and revitalize 

the global partnership for sustainable 

development”), people from all over the 

world took part in a contest to find solutions 

to protect bodies of water. The approach 

led to a more innovative way of 

working together and used the “wisdom of 

many” to improve K+S’s tailings covering 

systems. K+S offered global partnerships 

to improve the impact on bodies of water 

and ensure a transfer of knowledge 

between multiple stakeholders. 

Reducing the impact on water caused 

by potash mining 

Mining is known to have a high impact 

on water by either consuming a lot of 

water or by using bodies of water to 

discharge wastewater. Potash mining is 

no exception concerning water consumption, 

since all potash mining companies 

have to cope with solid and liquid tailings 

that accumulate during mining and 

production processes. The best available 

technique to dispose of large amounts 

of solid tailings in the potash mining 

sector is to dump it onto tailings piles, 

which consist mainly of sodium chloride. 

Since these tailings are out in the open, 

rainfall, combined with the salt tailings, 

results in a brine solution that needs 

to be disposed of. This brine solution, 

together with other liquid wastes from 

production processes, is usually disposed 

of in one of two different ways, through 

deep-well injections or discharged into 

surface waters such as rivers and oceans. 

Depending on the size of the river and 

the amount of wastewater that needs to 

be disposed of, this technique might affect 

the total concentration of salt within 

the river. To keep the effect on aquatic 

life as well as the ecosystem of the river 

to a minimum, K+S is developing new 

techniques to minimize the buildup 

of wastewater during the production 

processes as well as at the sites of the 

tailings piles. 

To make a measurable contribution toward 

achieving the Sustainable Development 

Goals (SDGs), K+S wants to keep the 

amount of its solid residue from potash 

mining to a minimum and further limit 

the formation of salt water by covering 

the tailings. We promote the efficient 

use of natural resources and the avoidance 

of waste (Targets 12.2 and 12.5), as 

well as the sustainable use of land and 

inland freshwater ecosystems (Target 

15.1). We have also set ourselves the 

following targets: 

• From 2030 onward, it will be possible 

for up to 3 million metric tons of residues 

to be used for purposes other than 

112 


ainfall 

collected brine 

solution 

collected brine 

solution 

tailings pile 

tailings pile 

collecting ditch 

collecting ditch 

being deposited onto tailings piles. In 

this regard, there are plans for finding 

alternative uses for tailings pile material 

and preventing residues. 

• By 2030, an additional 155 hectares of 

tailings piles will be covered to further 

reduce or prevent tailings pile runoff. 

Covering of tailings piles as a viable 

solution 

The central aspect of reducing the formation 

of brine is to use different methods 

to cover the piles and prevent rainfall 

from coming into contact with the salt 

tailings. Over the past few decades, K+S 

has developed several techniques to 

cover the tailings piles and prevent most 

of the rainfall from dissolving the salt 

tailings. The idea is that water is stored 

within a covering layer and evaporates 

over time. Different methods for covering 

with and without vegetation have 

been tested and implemented, depending 

on the properties of the respective 

site, such as size, height, geological conditions, 

location of the piles, and so on. 

Using covering techniques to minimize 

the environmental impact is state of 

the art in the management of waste 

dumps and landfills; however, it is not 

common in the field of potash mining. 

These techniques cannot simply 

be transferred to tailings piles due to 

the size and the properties of these salt 

deposits. Years of experience as well 

as many research and development 

projects have made K+S the leading 

expert in the field of covering potash 

tailings piles. The expertise has been 

gathered through collaboration with 

many experts working in the fields 

of statics, construction, geology, and 

biology, among others. 

To get new inspiration, to raise awareness, 

and to include a broader spectrum 

of experts, K+S chose to pursue an innovative 

crowdsourcing approach. >> 


REDUCING WATER IMPACTS ALONG THE K+S VALUE CHAIN 

In the context of its strategic sustainability program, the K+S Group also takes the SDGs into account. In principle, the 

SDGs are on an equal footing. However, because of our focus as a producer of raw mineral materials, we exert a 

stronger influence on some SDGs than on others. Impacts occur within the K+S value chain and on a product level. 

Reducing water impacts from extraction and production: The extraction and production of our potash and raw salt 

materials are associated with high levels of water usage. Therefore, K+S has set itself ambitious environmental goals 

and closely monitors its progress to achieving these goals. We promote the efficient use of natural resources and the 

avoidance of waste (Targets 12.2 and 12.5) as well as the sustainable use of land and inland freshwater ecosystems 

(Target 15.1). 

Fostering employee engagement on water management: In addition to the strategic activities of the company, we 

value the commitment of all employees and encourage them to act responsibly. At our European sites, we strongly 

support the “TuDu’s” campaign and its English equivalent, the “Good Life Goals,” which is named with regard to the 

SDGs. We call on all employees to submit ideas that promote the sustainability of K+S via our online ideas management. 

Naturally, this includes ideas on sustainable water management. 

Collaborating for water protection: In line with 

Goal 17, we enter into global partnerships 

at the project level to improve our 

impact on water protection. 

A prominent example is our 

recent crowdsourcing 

challenge to reduce saline 

wastewater from 

tailings: the “K+S Brine 

Challenge.” 

Saving water 

through the use 

of products: 

With our range 

of mineral 

fertilizers and 

the development 

of 

systemic 

solutions, K+S 

makes a 

significant 

contribution to 

fertile soils and 

the nutrition of a 

growing world 

population: Goal 2 (No 

hunger). Additionally, 

our fertigation products 

enable a precise application 

of the water-soluble fertilizers 

through an irrigation system. 

Business Ethics 

Health & 

Safety 

Compliance & 

Anti-Corruption 

Sustainable 

Supply Chains 

Energy & 

Climate 

People 

Diversity & 

Inclusion 

Waste 

Human 

Rights 

Water 

Environment 

114 


Crowdsourcing discovers the 

“wisdom of many” 

Crowdsourcing is an innovative way to 

create solutions to problems by asking 

participants from all over the world for 

their input in an idea competition. This 

is done with an internet platform where 

people can register as problem-solvers. 

The problems are described by the respective 

companies and the requirements and 

limitations for valid solutions are stated 

in a so-called challenge. The problemsolver 

can hand in their ideas, which are 

then evaluated by the platform provider 

and the company looking for a solution. 

The best ideas are awarded a prize. 

The advantage of using an established 

crowdsourcing platform is that the community 

of registered problem-solvers of 

the platform is addressed, and anyone in 

the world with internet access can join 

the challenge as well. Registered users log 

in as experts for a certain field, allowing 

the crowdsourcing provider to forward 

their challenges to the relevant users. 

However, addressing non-experts via 

social media is also an option and opens 

the challenge up to an even broader 

audience. 

The K+S Brine Challenge as an enabler 

for sustainable innovation 

Usually, crowdsourcing covers a broad 

variety of technical problems. The idea 

is to find solutions for defined problems. 

Today, crowdsourcing is used more and 

more to address environmental and sustainability 

issues in addition to technical 

questions. To approach the issue of 

minimizing brine formation from the 

BRINE CHALLENGE IN A NUTSHELL 

9 

months 

18 

K+S departments 

2 

external jurors 

tailings piles, K+S combined a technical 

with an environmental question in the 

Brine Challenge crowdsourcing project. 

The challenge went as follows: 

1. Raising the question: The K+S Brine 

Challenge crowdsourcing project focused 

on “How can K+S reduce the 

brine formation at the tailings piles?” 

2. Defining the challenge: The challenge 

had to be defined with a short and 

clear description of the background 

that covered technical facts such as 

the height, composition, and location 

of the tailings piles. Apart from 

the technical facts, the problem itself 

– rainfall leading to the solution of 

salt, creating brine that needs to be 

disposed of – had to be an essential 

part of the challenge description. 

3. Informing on the state of science: 

Since several technical solutions for 

covering tailings piles already existed 

and the aim of the Brine Challenge 

was to create new solutions, these 

current methods were added to the 

background information of the challenge. 

Solutions for the problem that 

had been tested before, but had failed, 

were described in the background 

information to prevent solution providers 

from turning in similar ideas. 

The contents for the challenge were 

developed together with different 

teams of K+S and the crowdsourcing 

provider. 

4. Setting up an online platform: The 

challenge was set up on a microsite 

on the crowdsourcing platform and 

made accessible to the public over a 

44 

ideas 

12 

countries 

2 

winners 

period of three months. The participants 

had access to the background 

information and were able to create 

a draft for their solution. A midterm 

Q&A session with K+S experts gave the 

participants the chance to ask specific 

questions for additional background 

information. 

5. Evaluating the ideas: After the challenge 

was closed, the submitted solutions 

first went through a compliance 

check by the crowdsourcing provider. 

The ideas were then evaluated by K+S 

experts and finally by a jury of K+S 

experts and two university professors. 

44 ideas and two promising 

solutions 

A total of 44 ideas were submitted for 

the Brine Challenge, offering a wide variety 

of solutions. Covering tailings piles 

is a topic that requires a lot of insight 

into topics such as geology, construction, 

materials, processes, and biology, 

so finding a solution is quite difficult. 

Because of the complexity, none of the 

submitted ideas proposed a totally new 

and viable covering system, mainly due 

to technical limitations. 

However, two ideas were identified as 

having the potential to improve the 

already existing covering systems. So 

the Brine Challenge was able to verify 

that the current systems in place are 

state of the art. The two winning ideas 

will continue to be tested to see if the 

incorporation into any of the existing 

covering systems is technically and economically 

feasible. 

This project showed that by combining 

company knowledge with crowd intelligence, 

new ideas that might improve 

existing processes are generated. By using 

a crowdsourcing approach for environmental 

issues, companies are able to 

raise awareness of different challenges, 

thereby creating support for existing 

solutions to problems and, in the best 

case, being able to create new technologies 

for a better future. 


KYOCERA’S APPROACH TO 

SUSTAINABILITY AND 

CLIMATE PROTECTION 

Sustainability and climate protection are the central challenges of our time. KYOCERA is 

working on making document management processes more digital, ecological, and economical. 

By Annette Neth, KYOCERA 

Since the company was founded in 1959, 

the sustainable use of resources has 

been firmly anchored in the company 

and product philosophy. The foundation 

stone for this was laid by Group founder 

Dr. Kazuo Inamori, who sees respectful 

treatment of nature and love for people 

as the basis for entrepreneurial action: 

Respect the divine and love people. 

According to Dr. Inamori, a company 

must not only act in a social but also in 

an environmentally friendly manner. 

Technology and responsibility for people 

and the environment are inseparable. 

Accordingly, the entire KYOCERA Group 

is committed to the goals of sustainable 

corporate development and climate 

protection. 

KYOCERA has been named a “Supplier 

Engagement Leader” by CDP, an international 

non-profit organization. The 

reason for the award is the company’s 

initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 

throughout its supply chain. The 

Kyocera Group has set itself the goal of 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions – including 

internal emissions and emissions 

116 


from its supply chain – by 30 percent 

by March 31, 2030, compared to levels 

from fiscal year 2013. 

In Germany and Austria, the company’s 

climate protection strategy also includes 

the climate-neutralization of products 

through “Product Carbon Footprints.” 

Kyocera Germany has been the only 

manufacturer to offer all customers only 

climate-neutral original toner since 2013. 

The hardware has also long since been 

made CO 2 

-neutral by compensating for 

all CO 2 

emissions that arise from the 

extraction of raw materials, production, 

transport, and recycling. In total, 

Kyocera has saved well over 260,000 

metric tons of CO 2 

. 

Kyocera offsets this amount by investing 

in three international climate protection 

projects. All projects have been awarded 

the Gold Standard. This guarantees 

that not only is a contribution made to 

climate protection, but that the living 

conditions of people in the regions are 

also improved in the long term. 

In addition to the cooker project in Kenya, 

the Kyocera Print Green program also 

promotes the installation of biogas plants 

in Nepal, which allow for cooking with 

biogas instead of firewood, and the construction 

and sale of climate-friendly 

solar cookers in Madagascar to counteract 

deforestation on the ground. 

With ECOSYS technology, Kyocera printers 

use toner as their only consumable 

– unlike the competition. This is 

achieved by using particularly durable 

components that remain in the system 

throughout the product’s life. The result: 

up to 75 percent less waste compared to 

other manufacturers. 

Our participation in the Alliance for Development and Climate 

makes us proud and is an important incentive to continue our 

commitment to sustainability. 

With our philosophy, we are working to promote our social 

commitment, build relationships of mutual trust, and strive for 

sustainable growth. At the same time, KYOCERA strives to contribute 

to the healthy development of society. 

We have been successful with our PRINT GREEN program since 2013. 

We are pleased that we have been supporting great climate protection 

projects since then and, of course, that our climate-neutral products 

are so well received by customers and partners. 

Daniela Matysiak, Environmental and CSR Manager 

“at KYOCERA Document Solutions Germany 

As part of its commitment to climate 

protection, Kyocera has made the Corporate 

Carbon Footprint 2020 climate 

neutral for the German sales company. 

To this end, the CO 2 

footprint of Kyocera 

Document Solutions Deutschland GmbH 

was first calculated using the official 

guidelines of the “Greenhouse Gas Protocol,” 

according to which both direct 

and indirect emissions are considered. 

In addition to the strategic expansion of 

its own commitment to climate protection, 

Kyocera is working with other companies, 

NGOs, and ministries on various 

initiatives to anchor the topic of climate 

protection more firmly in German business 

and to promote it, for example 

in “Business does climate protection” 

and in the Alliance for Development 

and Climate, which was initiated by the 

German Federal Ministry for Economic 

Cooperation and Development and focuses 

on avoidance, reduction, and compensation. 

In the “Business does climate 

protection” dialogue forum, Kyocera is 

working with other German companies 

to develop solutions and guidelines as 

well as offer support to further promote 

climate awareness and sustainability in 

German companies. 

Kyocera is also involved in environmental 

and species protection. To this end, 

the document management provider 

is cooperating with the Beefuture bee 

initiative and is giving three colonies at 

its Meerbusch site a new home. This is 

because about half of the bee species that 

live in Germany are threatened. More 

than 80 percent of the native flowering 

plants depend on the pollination of bees. 

The consequences for the ecosystem 

would be devastating. Sustainability 

has always played a major role in the 

Kyocera Group. 

For more than 30 years, the company has 

been a partner of Deutsche Umwelthilfe 

and has received several awards for its 

commitment. The settlement of the bee 

colonies makes a valuable contribution 

to the protection of species. Kyocera 

is thus sending out a clear signal and 

making its contribution to the preservation 

of biological diversity. Over the 

year, Kyocera bees produce around 45 

kilograms of honey, which is given to 

the employees as a gift. 


HOW RESILIENT ARE YOUR 

SUPPLY CHAINS? 

The ESG Stress Test helps regions to understand the full spectrum of environmental-, social-, 

and governance-related risks and to manage and disclose them effectively. 

By Dr. Elmer Lenzen, macondo foundation 

What? 

The ESG Stress Test is a public–private 

partnership (PPP) initiative to promote 

both technological innovation and 

sustainable development. We support 

regional governments and their local 

industries in testing their highly complex 

supply chains against ESG criteria, 

thereby making them more resilient. In 

addition to digital data collection and 

evaluation (including AI technologies), 

capacity-building and trainings improve 

the quality of cooperation between social 

and business partners. The direct usability 

of the results is an essential goal: 

The ESG Stress Test is a practical answer 

to the needs of the Paris Climate Accord 

and the UN Sustainable Development 

Goals (SDGs). 

The technological architecture is 

based on the award-winning software 

CSRmanager – a comprehensive webbased 

solution for sustainability, climate, 

and risk management. Automated data 

collection, consolidation, reporting, and 

management capabilities make disclosure 

and controlling efficient, accurate, 

and intuitive. 

Why? 

Extreme weather events, intolerable 

working conditions, risks of human 

rights violations, the use of hazardous 

substances, etc. – sustainability is no 

longer a niche issue but an important 

reality in everyday business (see the WEF 

Global Risks Report 2019). It names central 

risks, but also opportunities in the 

value- creation process. No wonder that 

legislators, investors, consumers, and 

procurers of larger companies are paying 

more attention to compliance with 

environmental, human, and labor rights 

118 


as well as questions of good corporate 

governance. Experts use the expression 

of so-called ESG (environmental, social 

and governance) criteria. 

In a globalized world with highly complex 

levels of production, compliance 

with these ESG criteria is becoming increasingly 

challenging and, at the same 

time, more critical for each company: 

The more that production steps and processes 

are relocated to the supply chains, 

the more that risks are outsourced. Digitalization 

and political uncertainties 

aggravate this development. 

for such reports is increasing both in 

terms of quality and scope: In a recent 

statement, European Commission Executive 

Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis 

provided details on the implementation 

of the Green Deal Investment Plan – 

including strengthening sustainability 

reporting by companies. He set out 

that the EU’s Non-Financial Reporting 

Directive is to be reviewed, and the EU 

will establish “clear reporting standards” 

to “scale up sustainable finance at the 

level that the world needs”. >> 

Entities – including businesses, governments, 

and nonprofits – therefore face a 

rapidly evolving landscape of ESG-related 

risks that can impact their profitability, 

success, and even survival. Given the 

unique impacts and dependencies of 

ESG-related risks, sustainability expert 

macondo publishing has launched a 

public–private partnership initiative 

to develop digital platforms that help 

organizations better understand the full 

spectrum of these risks and to manage 

and disclose them effectively. 

Drivers 

To measure corporate sustainability and 

make it transparent, companies prepare 

appropriate reports. The legal obligation 


Reporting at regional level is becoming 

more difficult: The OECD is helping 

to guide local and regional leaders in 

developing policy approaches and action 

plans to localise the SDGs. What 

is lacking is a concrete instrument to 

address these drivers on the part of 

policymakers (e.g. the EU) and regional 

actors (e.g. the OECD). Our project approach 

comes into play at exactly this 

point. 

How? 

1. You are a city, a regional government, 

a business association or a large 

company with international supply 

chains. 

2. You want to test crucial parts of your 

business/your economic area for their 

resilience in the light of different 

crisis scenarios. 

3. You work together with us on the 

implementation of the ESG stress 

test. Results and findings must made 

available to the general public and 

academic purposes. 

1. 

Risk-management 

2. 

framework 1 

Data mining and 

referent standards 2 

Governance and 

culture for 

ESG-related risks 

Strategy and 

objective-setting for 


Information, communication, 

and 

reporting for ESGrelated 

risks 

Performance for 


Review and 

revision for ESGrelated 

risks 

Connecting the business context and strategy to risk identification 

means understanding of internal and external challenges 

like climate change and other megatrends, SWOT analysis 

and impact and dependency mapping among others. 

Risk identification by working with KPIs and international 

reporting standards – this is the starting point for threats or 

opportunities to achieving strategy and business objectives. 

1 

COSO/WBCSD: Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) framework, 

Oct. 2018 

2 

Global Reporting Initiative Standards S2016, ISO 14001:2015-11, ISO 

50001:2011, EMAS III, ISO/DIS 45001.2:2017, UNGC Organisational Capacity 

Assessment Instrument (OCAI), HR Reporting and Assurance Framework 

Initiative (RAFI), SA8000:2014, EN ISO 9001:2015, ISO 26000 CR, EFFAS/ 

DVFA ESG-KPI Scope1, Greenhouse Gas Protocol: SCOPE 1 & 2 

120 


4. You are responsible for 

a) ESG training with local partners, 

b) translation into local languages where 

necessary, 

c) obtaining a sufficient number 

of firms to generate meaningful data. 

5. The participating companies 

a) get full access to the benchmark 

data generated in the project 

b) receive a detailed written analysis 

of their test results 

c) pay a small one-time fee 

INQUIRY 


Dr. Elmer Lenzen, Chair 

mail@macondo-foundation.org 

Dahlweg 87 

D - 48153 Münster, Germany 

3. 

Projection of 

4. 

scenarios 3 Scenarios 4 

Community 

involvement 

Discrimination 

Human Rights 

Employee Rights 

Human health and safety 

3 

Climate Action 

2 

1 

0 

Wages, benefits, 

pensions 

Affordable and 

clean Energy 

Sustainable Cities 

and 

Communities 

Peace, Justice, and 

strong Institutions

Planet under Pressure

Create successful ePaper yourself