directions 2007 - cutting through the noise of climate change
TRANSCRIPT
Contents
01 Welcome to Directions 2007
02 Tackling climate change – why us?The Rt. Hon. John Gummer, Chairman of Sancroft International and Chairman of the Quality of Life Policy
06 Turning green consumption into mass consump-tion Steve Howard, CEO, The Climate Group
10 Carbon neutrality Fiona Harvey, EnvironmentCorrespondent, The Financial Times
14 IS IT ALL TALK?
16 Is it all talk? – salterbaxter’s review of companyresponses to climate change
24 BEYOND CLIMATE CHANGE
26 Fighting climate change – as well as other chal-lenges to sustainable business Julia Cleverdon, Chief Executive of Business in the Community
30 The panel judges the CR reports from the FT UK 100 companies
46 ANALYSIS
48 Analysis of the FT UK 100 and FT Euro 100 companies
56 About us
Using the monocle
Whenever you see this symbol use
the monocle from the front cover,
hold it up to your eye and reveal
a hidden message.
0 1
Climate change is unavoidable these days: every timeyou open a newspaper there is a new angle. Blogs,information sites, dinner party opinions and politicalstandpoints abound. And that’s before you count all the supermarkets’ announcements. So the topic for this year’s Directions was really a one horse race.
But the knock-on effect of the debateabout climate change going mainstream hasactually meant that there is a lot of noise andconfusion out there – it is hard to see what isa c tually going on. So we decided it wa s time to cut through the noise and try to put intocontext what effective action looks like.
This Directions re p o rt isn’t doom and gloom,a p o ca l y ptic sca re sto r i es and chest bea t i n g .I n stead it is a slice of real life action, an insighti nto what to do to tackle climate change in theway that’s right for you. John Gummer leads arallying call to ta ke action; Steve Howa rd from The Climate Group tells us about the pra c t i ca lTo g ether initiative; and Fiona Harvey from Th eFinancial Ti m es guides us through the co nte nt i o n s
of carbon offsetting. The noise around climatechange also risks stealing the limelight from the broader responsible business agenda. JuliaC l eve rdon from Bu s i n ess in the Co m m u n i ty arg u esthe ca se for not getting fo cu sed on just one iss u e.
And to give you your ‘fly on the wall’ fix on who’s doing what in corporate responsibilitygenerally, the panel are back with their thoughtson this year’s FT UK 100 CR reports. We’ve alsoreviewed some of those companies’ actions on climate change and we’ve analysed thecorporate responsibility activities of the FT UK 100 and Euro 100.
It’s a bumper crop again so dive in and, if you’dlike to, let us know what you think!
Nigel Sa l te r, sa l te r ba x te [email protected]
Lucie Harrild, sa l te r ba x te rl h a r r i l d@sa l te r ba x te r.co m
Welcome to Directions 2007 :
Cutting through thenoise of the climatechange debate.
DIRECTIONS 2007
DIRECTIONS 2007
only works for the UK, but also the rest of theworld – a one world philosophy. Then decisionsmade based on that system will have the clarityto cut through that confusion. Involving globalpolitics means the process is slow butcooperation on a global scale is necessary.
The UK needs to wa ke up and rea l i se we are well placed to lead. Global co o p e ration has itsc h a l l e n g es but has had its successes. We havep l ayed a key role within the EU – without Eu ro p et h e re would have been no Kyoto Proto col whereres p o n s i b i l i t i es we re shared amongst those m ost able. And in 1997, when I was Env i ro n m e ntSe c reta r y, we played a fundamental role in the ‘Co nve ntion on climate change’ meetings.
Business has received a lot of criticism for not doing enough to combat climate change.However, in some cases businesses are movingfaster than governments.
Tesco took a lea d e rship role announcing that t h ey are to publish the carbon fo ot p r i nt of their
Tackling climate change – why us?Al Gore’s film title ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ could noth a ve summed up the situation better. It is only humann a t u re to resist what is not seen as conve n i e n t .
R t. Hon. John GummerChairman of Sancroft International and Chairmanof the Quality of Life Policy
Climate change is the biggest physical threat to mankind and the UK needs to takea stand. In actual fact we need to play catch up with some countries, such as Germany,who are leading in tackling the climate changeagenda. In order to cut emissions by 80% in fewer than 50 years there is need for auniversal response.
Climate change is currently the biggest threat – but it is also a symptom of how our society’ssystems are set up wrongly. Increases in wealth and happiness no longer correlate above quitelow levels of income. But the key to tackling theissue is to not be overwhelmed by the scale ofwhat needs to be achieved – as in wartime, wejust need to get on with it.
It is true that there is a lot of information,opinion and noise on climate change out there– and some confusion. At Sancroft we have beenworking with a range of businesses and theCarbon Trust on the need for a user friendly anduniversal approach. We need a system that not
0 2 _03
DIRECTIONS 2007
p ro d u c ts. In the same way BP are drivingtowa rds re n ewable and alte r n a t i ve forms ofe n e rgy with plans to set up the wo r l d ’s biggestl ow- carbon power business. Co ca - Co l a ’s approa c hto ref r i g e ration and the phasing out of HFCs hasm ea nt a wholesale change to the way that se c to rn ow opera tes. Th e re is ev i d e n ce that businessesa re more than ca pable of taking a lead inco m bating climate change. Howeve r, these a re individual exa m p l es and a large number ofco m pa n i es have not yet engaged. Many do notu n d e rstand their role and have not yet decidedwhat their position should be.
“It is only human nature to resist whatis inconvenient. But consumers canmake changes, helped by the provisionof incentives.”G ove r n m e nt needs to help them understand what isex p e c ted of them. Then they must be given time tod e l i ve r. The key is to keep businesses fully invo l ve din co m bating climate change without making them
feel that it is so daunting a task that they give up.S i m i l a r l y, enco u raging co n s u m e rs to make choicesand enabling them to do the right thing is the key.At the moment people are not clear and it is notmade ea sy enough for them. In the end, they mustc h o ose but we should be giving them a helpinghand with information and enco u ra g e m e nt.
It is only human nature to resist what isi n co nve n i e nt. But co n s u m e rs can make changes,helped by the provision of incentives. Forexample Tesco have saved one billion plasticbags by incentivising customers with loyaltypoints, encouraging them to reuse. It is alsoimportant to focus on measures to improveenergy efficiency in homes, linking council taxwith energy consumption. We could offer cutsin stamp duty to homeowners who make theirhomes ‘carbon efficient’, the council tax couldbe reduced for people who recycle more. Thekey is not to impose on people but offer choices.We should cut the tax on fuel efficient carsand increase it on gas-guzzlers.
DIRECTIONS 2007
The Quality of Life Po l i cy Gro u p, set up by Dav i dCa m e ron, which I chair with Zac Goldsmith as myVi ce Chairman, outlines the need to be frank and to fa ce up to the real iss u es, however diffi cu l t. It is simply not possible to atte m pt to ta c k l ec l i m a te change unless you address hard iss u es liket ra n s p o rt. We all like cheap fl i g hts and we have allb e n efi ted from them. Nonet h e l ess we also knowthis is the fa stest growing so u rce of emissions and,w h a tever Michael O’Leary may say, we ca n n otexe m pt air travel if we are to re d u ce our ca r b o nfo ot p r i nt. Our pro p osals are designed to deal withthe problem in the lea st damaging way. Nearly aq u a rter of fl i g hts from Lo n d o n’s airports go top l a ces that could rea sonably be reached by train in a similar timef ra m e. We therefo re pro p ose thatt h ose fl i g hts should be more heavily ta xed andlong haul fl i g hts should get priority for the slots ata i r p o rts. Doing this will mean that no new runwayswill need to be built at Gatwick or Sta n sted. We alsowa nt to change the Gove r n m e nt’s ta xation syste mwhich penalises full planes to one which enco u ra g esa i r l i n es to ta ke the maximum number of pa sse n g e rs.
If we are to crea te a way of living that one planetcan sustain, then the approach also needs to be thought through as a whole. The Quality of L i fe Po l i cy Gro u p’s re p o rt emphasises the fact that co m bating climate change crea tes wea l t h .
“With these parameters in placebusiness and society will see their roleand can make choices based on clearinformation, avoiding the currentoverload of contradictory informationand confusion.”The Green Revolution would be as valuable today to Britain as the Industrial Revolution was 200 years ago.
Our green products and services will be neededthroughout the world and we will have firstmover advantage. But we have to move quickly,particularly since the United States has signaledits intention to take global warming seriously.President Bush’s Scientific Advisor publiclystated that there is no argument about thescience of climate change, the only issue is about how to counter it.
Our re p o rt sets out clearly how it can be done.F i rst our ‘One nation’ philoso p hy needs to beex tended to the one world we share. If those lessfo rtu n a te are ex p e c ted to share the res p o n s i b i l i tyto tackle climate change then it is only fair fo rthem to benefit directly from doing so. Se co n d l ythe Gove r n m e nt needs to lead the way and set the pa ra m ete rs for business and co n s u m e rs.
With these parameters in place businessand society will see their role and can makechoices based on clear information, avoiding the current overload of contradictoryinformation and confusion.
The problem is that our pa rty political st r u c tu re,with an election every four or five years,makes it difficult for the kind of continuousimprovement that is necessary. That is w hy we need a Climate Change Co m m i tte e,i n d e p e n d e nt from gove r n m e nt, tapping into the sc i e nt i fic knowledge of the Royal So c i ety.Th ey would fo cus on ta rg ets and mea s u re m e nt,advising on the best co u rse of action anda l l owing business to do what they do best –i n n ova te to so l ve the challenge. The co m m i tte ewould hold the gove r n m e nt acco u ntable andeach year underta ke an independent audit oftheir pro g ress. Not only would the co m m i tte ekeep gove r n m e nt and opposition to the task in hand, it would also stop the cu r re nt co nfusion which lack of ex p e rt i se in gove r n m e nt has crea te d .
0 4 _05
DIRECTIONS 2007
create policies and systems that can bedelivered globally.
set out the direction and clear parametersand then the market will delive r. Once publicbuildings are specified to deliver energy savings it opens the way for big contracts,prices come down and a market is created.Then businesses know how to react.And consumers can make their choices.
develop frameworks to prevent distortion but enable innovation and entrepreneurship.Builders are the experts in delivering energyefficiency, they just need to be encouragedto do so.
new ways of doing things need help at the beginning.
g i ve business and co n s u m e rs the info r m a t i o nand the ability to make sense of the issuesand be encouraged to make their choices– but without over prescriptive regulationwhich can end up disto rting the res u l ts andthe market.
So for us to tackle climate change, and make the truthless inconvenient, there are five things the g o ve r n m e n tneeds to do – and business and consumers will then havethe d i rection they need to navigate their way thro u g hthe confusion and choose their path for meeting the challenge of climate change:
DIRECTIONS 2007
It won’t have escaped anyone’s notice thatclimate change is now big news in the UK. Not a day goes by without another alarmingstory or report hitting our TV screens or thefront pages of our newspapers.
We now have unprecedented levels of awarenessand concern on the climate issue. Research conducted last year by The Climate Group showsthat an overwhelming 81% of people feel verystrongly about climate change or at the veryleast recognise that it is important.
However, as yet, this has not translated intosignificant individual action. Our research also shows that people feel powerless in theface of such a big problem. They don’t fullyunderstand the issue and hold the belief thesolutions are inconvenient and expensive.Above all, consumers don’t want to feel thatthey are acting alone. They need help (not morelecturing) to overcome these barriers. The wayforward was pointed out by a 2006 researchreport called ‘I will if you will’ which indicatedthat people were willing to change but only if they were met halfway by government andbusiness, who they perceive as more able toeffect change than themselves.
This is why, on 23 April of this year, a ground-breaking new partnership was launched in theUK aimed at enabling individual consumers tobe more climate friendly.
Turning green consumption
S u rely with the current attention and noise aro u n dclimate change there would be lots of individualaction? Actually, no. Consumers believe that solutionsa re inconvenient, isolated and expensive. Business(and government) needs to address this. That is why the ‘Together’ partnership was fo r m e d .
Steve Howa rdC EO, The Climate Gro u p
into massconsumption
0 6 _07
DIRECTIONS 2007
‘Together’ is a coalition of famous brand name companies and retailers committed tomaking it easier for their customers to takeup low-carbon solutions.
Together they aim to help every UK household to reduce their emissions by one tonne, a totalof around 24 million tonnes over the next threeyears, more than the combined householdemissions of Scotland and Wales.
B&Q, Barclaycard, British Gas, Marks & Spencer,02, National Express, MORE TH>N, BSkyB andTesco have all united behind the campaign andare providing effective ways for people toreduce their impact.
For example, Tesco is committed to selling 10 million energy efficient light bulbs this year (a five-fold increase on the previous year) and is offering them in-store and online at half price.Marks & Spencer has launched a campaign to persuade their customers to wash at 30°Cwhenever possible, including changing the labels on the majority of their clothing range.
Loft insulation is one of the biggest singleimprovements that people can make to theirhome to reduce emissions and B&Q is making it easy to plan, buy and install insulation – if everyone insulated their lofts to therecommended level it would save four milliontonnes of CO2 per year – enough to fill the new Wembley stadium 500 times.
British Gas recently launched Zero Carbon,which goes further than any other green tariffto provide genuine environmental benefits.Householders signing up to the Zero Carbontariff will: reduce their household energy carbonemissions to zero through Kyoto compliantoffset schemes which will meet the new DEFRArequirements; help fund a direct increase ininvestment in renewable energy generated inthe UK; and contribute to the new British Gasgreen fund, which will invest in developing newrenewable technologies such as wave power, andoversee a programme to help schools in the UKreduce their CO2 emissions.
The campaign website (www.together.com) willaggregate the achievements of all the partnersinto one CO2 figure that will demonstrate in realtime the power of collective action (50,000tonnes of CO2 have been reduced since launch,equivalent to every household in Ipswich savinga tonne or to 18,000 family cars off the road fora year). Users of the site will be encouraged toundertake certain key actions and show howthey can contribute to their one tonne target.
The reasons for bringing ‘Together’ to life at this moment in time are compelling – both forthe planet and for business.
The environmental case is well established, butit’s important not to become numb to the facts.Atmospheric CO2 concentration, approximately280 parts per million (ppm) before the IndustrialRevolution, has increased to around 380 ppmtoday. Each doubling of greenhouse gasconcentration raises Earth’s equilibriumtemperature by about 3°C. Greenhouse gas
0 8 _09
emissions are still rising globally and under‘ b u s i n ess as usual’ trends the Ea rt h’s te m p e ra tu reis likely to increase by between 2 and 4.5°C by2100. A rise of 2°C is widely accepted as thethreshold for unacceptable and unpredictablechange. Latest findings from the leadinginternational body on climate change, the IPCC,suggest that in order to prevent a 2°C rise theglobal growth in emissions would need to peakat around 2015 and decline fairly sharply fromthere to reach the 50% cut required by 2050.
The business case for action is also clear cut.Many companies are already reducing emissionsin their operations and supply chains becausethey are finding opportunities to reduce costsat the same time as achieving ambitioussustainability goals – for example throughimproved energy efficiency. Looking beyondoperational emissions to the consumer, theClimate Group’s research shows strong evidenceof latent demand for products, services andbrands that would allow people to reflect theirclimate change concern in their spending.
“It is against this backdrop thatcompanies are also now starting toask, in their branding and marketing,what are the equivalent opportunitiesthat will create new revenues at thesame time as achieving environmentalobjectives?”
It is against this ba c kd rop that co m pa n i es area l so now sta rting to ask, in their branding andm a r keting, what are the equiva l e nt opportu n i t i esthat will crea te new reve n u es at the same timeas achieving env i ro n m e ntal objectives?
Th e re is a growing belief, demonst ra ted by the‘ To g et h e r’ pa rtner co m pa n i es, that helping co n s u m e rs to ove rcome ba r r i e rs to individualaction can unlock a signifi ca nt market opportu n i ty.
By acting in co l l a b o ration there is less risk ofindividual co r p o ra te initiatives being seen as ‘o n e -offs’ and gre eted with cynicism about gre e nwa s h .
In fact, the campaign also benefits from helpand backing from a diverse and growing rangeof non-commercial organisations – the Cityof London, the Church of England, DEFRA andthe Energy Saving Trust, for example. Based on this message of partnership, ‘Together’ is setto expand globally and reach a mass audiencerunning into tens of millions of people already.
Instead of trying to argue that one sector is more important than another when it comesto reducing emissions, it is crucial to understandthe linkages between government, business andindividual action, to avoid a situation whereeach sector passes the buck to another, and to work in collaboration to develop solutionsthat deliver the win-win outcomes for society.
We believe that bit by bit, and acting together,we can tackle climate change.
“The Climate Group’s re s e a rch shows stro n gevidence of latent demand for products, servicesand brands that would allow people to reflect their climate change concern in their spending.”
DIRECTIONS 2007
DIRECTIONS 2007
neutralityUseful – when treated with caution.
Carbon
projects that reduce emissions elsewhere.It is a way of making up for the damage that a company’s activities cause – of erasing acompany’s carbon footprint.
“Being carbon neutral simply meanscancelling out the negative effect ofone’s greenhouse gas emissions on theclimate by investing in projects thatreduce emissions elsewhere.”For any company seeking to go carbon neutral,there is a three stage process. First, companiesmust cut their own emissions as far as possible – it could be as simple as turning off lightsand computers, or as complex as overhaulingprocesses, like installing new equipment or using less materials.
Se cond, co m pa n i es can look to buy their cre d i tsf rom ‘g re e n’ so u rces. A growing number ofco m pa n i es are investing in their own wind tu r b i n esand solar panels to cut their futu re energy bills.But for co m pa n i es where this is imposs i b l e, buyinge nv i ro n m e ntally friendly energy means taking a green ta r i ff from an electricity supplier, withe n e rgy supplied from re n ewable so u rces such as wind or hyd ro e l e c t r i c i ty.
However, this is not always possible in the UK as not enough renewable energy is produced to satisfy the soaring demand. Most companiesthat do not already have a green supply will find
Treadle pumps in India might seem an odd kind of investment for a bank.
The pumps, which are worked by foot, arealternatives to diesel-powered pumps fordrawing water from underground to irrigatecrops. By using treadle pumps instead of hiringexpensive diesel pumps, Indian farmers can save money and water. The pumps also cut the amount of fuel farmers use – and that saves carbon dioxide emissions.
That is the key reason the Co-operative Bankinvests in the pumps, and the reason severalother companies also contribute to providingthem. Th ese co m pa n i es are using the invest m e ntin pumps as pa rt of their co m m i t m e nt tob e coming ‘carbon neutra l ’ .
An ever-lengthening list of companies areseeking carbon neutral status, ranging frominternational banks, retailers and mediacompanies to small enterprises with a handful of employees. Among the household namesthat have pledged to become carbon neutral are HSBC, Marks & Spencer, BSkyB and itsparent company News Corporation. A fewvillages in the UK have also decided to gocarbon neutral, and individuals can even seek carbon neutrality for themselves.
Being carbon neutral simply means cancellingout the negative effect of one’s greenhousegas emissions on the climate by investing in
Fiona Harvey E nv i ro n m e nt Co r res p o n d e nt, The Financial Ti m es
There is a new phrase about town: ‘going carbon neutral’.More and more businesses are talking about it, but whatdoes it really entail? Carbon offsetting projects are notalways as they seem, and businesses must be diligent to avoid good intentions going wrong.
10_11
DIRECTIONS 2007
in
“Companies embarking onoffsetting need to be waryof a few potential problemsbefore they set out. Somecarbon offsetting projectsare not what they seem.”
DIRECTIONS 2007
It’s not just treadle pumps, either. Companiesthat have already gone carbon neutral haveused a huge variety of projects: solar panels inIndia, wind farms in China, energy efficient lightbulbs in Jamaica, hydroelectric power plantsin eastern Europe, more efficient cooking stovesin Africa. All of these cut the amount of carbonproduced where they are used.
As more and more companies, and individuals,seek to go carbon neutral, the amount of moneybeing raised for projects around the worldthrough the sale of carbon credits is growingquickly – from zero a few years ago to aprojected $4bn by 2010.
Companies embarking on offsetting need to be wary of a few potential problems beforethey set out. Some carbon offsetting projectsare not what they seem.
In a wide-ranging investigation of the market,the Financial Times recently found manyexamples of bad practice. For instance,offsets were being sold from projectsthat brought no, or questionable,environmental benefits.
Carbon credits were being sold tocompanies for many times their real value. The same credits were being sold twice over.
And companies that were already profiting from their carbon cutting activities were profiting twice over byselling carbon credits to others wishing to be green.
These potential problems should not necessarilydeter companies from offsetting. Businesses,after all, have many good and valid reasons for going carbon neutral: the desire to be goodcorporate citizens, and the knowledge that the Government is increasingly regulating onenvironmental issues, for instance. Companiescan even cut costs in the process by improvingtheir efficiency. And taking on environmentalgoals is a great way of engaging staff andcustomers.
But in order to avoid the reputational risk ofinvesting in a bad carbon offsetting project, anycompany taking such a step should carry outproper due diligence on the project first – justas they would for any other investment.
they cannot source one so easily now. But itshould become easier: the Government is aimingfor 20% of the UK’s electricity to come fromrenewable sources by 2020, so the amountof green electricity available is set to grow.The final stage of carbon neutrality is to‘offset’ a company’s remaining greenhousegas emissions by funding projects that reducecarbon dioxide elsewhere.
This is where the treadle pumps come in. By funding the purchase of treadle pumps forpoor farmers, companies can contribute to thereduction of emissions in the developing world.
“A tonne of carbon saved in thedeveloping world is just as valuable inmitigating climate change as a tonneof carbon saved in a rich country.Cutting carbon in poor countries canalso bring additional social benefits,such as improving people’s economicsituation and bringing them technologyto which they would not otherwise h a ve access.”
1 2 _13
DIRECTIONS 2007
“T h e re are examples where carb o nc redits have been sold from non-existent projects, or projects that do not generate the carb o nreductions they claim.”
There are several guides to carbon offsettingavailable to companies wishing to consider theoption: for instance, the Carbon Trust has one, asdoes F&C Investments. But whichever guide youchoose, the key points are always the same:
Demand that the carbon credits you buyare placed in a registry, which guardsagainst the same credits being soldseveral times over to different buyersby unscrupulous offset intermediaries.
Consider carefully whether you wantto buy credits from forestry projects.These are numerous, and tend to be thecheapest credits, but they are also them ost co nt rove rsial. Tre es, as any sc h o o l c h i l dk n ows, absorb carbon dioxide from the airas they grow, so forests should be a goodway of cutting carbon. But there areproblems: it is difficult to tell how muchcarbon a fo rest abso r bs; the tre es can ta ke70 years to grow, so it takes decades forthe carbon to be re d u ced; and it is diffi cu l tto ensure that, over such a long period,the trees do not die off or get cut down. In addition, there is some evidence thatforests in northern regions may contributeto global warming, absorbing heat thatwould be deflected by snow cover.
If you are buying offsets through ani nte r m e d i a r y, ask for detailed information onexactly where the cre d i ts are coming fro m .
Companies should take care that thecredits they buy are additional, whichmeans that they come from projectswhich would not have happened withoutthe financing provided by carbon credits.This is important because if a project,such as a wind farm, was financially viablein any case, buying carbon credits from itsimply enriches the owners and the moneycould have been better spent elsewhere.
Do not buy any credits that have not beenverified by an independent third party –there are examples where carbon creditshave been sold from non-existent projects,or projects that do not generate thecarbon reductions they claim.
DIRECTIONS 2007
1 4 _15
DIRECTIONS 2007
U se the monocle to reveal a selection of notewo rt hy res p o n ses to climate change.
IS IT ALL TALK?IN THE NEXT SECTION WE HAVE TAKEN A LOOK ATWHAT COMPANIES ARE REALLY DOING TO TACKLECLIMATE CHANGE, AND WHAT THEY ARE TELLING USABOUT IT. DESPITE ALL THE NOISE AND CONFUSIONTHERE ARE SOME PATCHES OF CLARITY, WHEREMEANINGFUL ACTIVITY IS GAINING MOMENTUM.BUT IT ISN’T ALL GOOD NEWS…
DIRECTIONS 2007
68% of the FT UK 100 talk about climate change to somedegree in their corporate communications (73% of the FT Euro 100 do too).*
The long-term target set by UK Government is a 60%reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050.
55% of senior executives in a KPMG and YouGov surveyexpect climate change to impact on their companiesstrategic development plans and the Carbon DisclosureProject has generated its highest ever response rate thisyear – 77% of the FT 350 responded.
But according to DEFRA’s latest figures, CO2 emissions in the UK for 2006 have risen by 1.25%.**
C o n fusing isn’t it?! So we want to get to the stories behind the percentages, and find out the re a l i t yof the corporate response to climate change – aside from all the noise of theclimate change debate. We believe their response to this issue should be tailore dto their operations – and that makes it hard to sum up with quick numbers thee f fectiveness of UK plc’s strategy to tackle climate change.
But don’t worry, we’re not going to throw masses of conflicting information atyou to add to the confusion. Instead we are taking a snapshot to review goodpractice. The companies voted best CR communicators by our independentpanel (see page 30) are reviewed here for their response to climate change and we hope you will find some insights that help define your own strategy.
** according to salterbaxter’s analysis this year, see page 48 for details.
** taken from www.defra.co.uk. 2006 figures are provisional and expect to be within 1% of the final figure to be published inJanuary 2008. CO2 is the main greenhouse gas accounting for 85% of the ‘basket’ of greenhouse gas emissions in 2006.Methane and nitrous oxide are the other two main greenhouse gases, and their levels are falling.
Is it all
t a l k ?
1 6 _17
How we did itWe have rev i ewed the co m pa n i es who arei d e nt i fied as leading co m m u n i ca to rs by ouri n d e p e n d e nt panel. We’ve looked at the co m pa n i es’co m m u n i cations in the public domain, not h i n ge l se. We decided to do that because onlytransparent and open communication from acompany on their position and behaviour willcut through the confusion on this issue. Wefigure that if a company is doing something well in this area they would definitely wantpeople to know about it.
We considered the effectiveness of the activitiesand communications, and applaud ‘fit forpurpose’ – sophisticated programmes for carbonintensive companies and smaller consideredprogrammes for low carbon users.
And to understand the big picture we checkedthe emissions figures to see if the activities aredelivering real results.
DIRECTIONS 2007
A = Company is doing well with their effortsto tackle climate change.
B = Company is working on a response but there is still lots to do.
C = Company has either not fully engaged in the climatechange debate, or is only just beginning to.
Key:
A
B
C
BAE SystemsEmissions status
Slight drop in CO2 emissions in the UK, but rising in the US
BAE haven’t really grappled with their position on climate change yet,beyond a recognition of the link with energy use, CO2 and greenhousegases. But what does count in their favour is a willingness to publiclydiscuss that. So it will be interesting to see what develops.
C
BHP BillitonEmissions status
6% reduction in greenhouse gas intensityover five years.
Producers and users of fossil fuel based energy – so high impact,high risk and high opportunity. BHP Billiton have raised their game thisyear and revised policy and activities: more partnerships; more R&D;increased targets on efficiency. The challenge will be to quantify theresults. An A rating for the strategy but it’s the performance that is the real test now.
A
DIRECTIONS 2007
BTEmissions status
CO2 emissions dropped but now stabilised
A clear strategy (or carbon busting plan), which is accessible andengaging. There are separate information sites with pledges andcompetitions. The tone is straightforward and the commitment toawareness raising is definitely high. This extends to employees too,a group often overlooked. So an A rating.
A
B S k y BEmissions status
Overall emissions are up (though due toacquisition), core business emissions are down
Sky are a leading company on this issue. They have programmes tomanage emissions and communications with all stakeholders includingemployees and consumers. Highlights include: a recent TV advert; a competition to upload short films about climate change on theirwebsite; events; and roadshows. It will be interesting to see how quicklythey can instil the same ethos into acquisition businesses and continueto bring emissions down.
A
GlaxoSmithKlineEmissions status
CO2 and equivalent emissions are down for energyand production but travel is going up
GSK have a comprehensive document on the website which coverstheir understanding of their role in tackling climate change, theirapproach and some interesting insights into how they might adaptin a world with a changing climate. A statement in the CR report putsclimate change into context as one issue amongst many importantones for GSK to tackle, showing a measured approach. However,it does seem that GSK is just beginning to tackle this issue followingstakeholder pressure, so perhaps more is to come.
ExperianEmissions status
CO2 emissions falling
A good example of an approach that is fit for purpose. Experian has a clear strategy, convincingly argued, and the CO2 figures are falling.They aren’t the most carbon intensive business, but they recognisetheir responsibilities and are taking action. A good progression wouldbe more engagement with the workforce and the supply chain to rollthe message out to a wider audience.
A
British AirwaysEmissions status
CO2 emissions from flights have crept up,though fuel efficiencies improved
The airline industry is often at the eye of the storm in the climatechange debate. BA does communicate about their carbon footprint,their emissions and include a piece on the debate in their industry.But they don’t talk about adaptation and they state they aren’t a bigco nt r i b u tory fa c tor to climate change without adequately acknow l e d g i n gthe airline indust r y ’s re p u tation. Fuel effi c i e n c i es have improved but thea c tual CO2 e m i ssions from fl i g hts have cre pt up. It’s a B rating but a B minus rea l l y. B
A
Is it all t a l k ?
18_19
DIRECTIONS 2007
Johnson MattheyEmissions status
CO2 is falling for the second year
J o h n son Matt h ey ’s approach co m es across as a mea s u red res p o n se toc l i m a te change in line with business needs. Initiatives are appa re ntly inp l a ce and they note that some of their pro d u c ts have the ability to ass i st in a transition to a low carbon eco n o my – but on the other hand theyh ave n’t included some pa rts of the business in the climate change st ra tegy (eg tra n s p o rtation and precious meta l s). And they could engage with a wider range of audiences with the information they have to offe r.
B
HSBC Emissions status
Overall CO2 emissions are going up
HSBC have a high profile on this issue. They were an early adopter and their strategy includes (amongst other things) carbon neutrality,a survey on public confidence, engaging Stern as an adviser, a carbonmanagement taskforce and the HSBC Climate Partnership. So theirrating is A but they must be careful: all those initiatives must remaincoordinated so as not to contribute to confusion; and performanceneeds to be addressed.
A
Legal & GeneralEmissions status
Overall carbon emissions are increasing slightly
Legal & General don’t articulate a clear policy on climate change,although they do monitor and report on greenhouse emissions.Their disclosure on climate change is low, especially as their SRIbusiness lists it first on the list of engagement topics. There areobjectives for next year so perhaps improvements are on the way.
C
Imperial TobaccoEmissions status
CO2 emissions falling
Imperial re co g n i se climate change as an area for atte ntion and have madesome pro g ress but it sounds like they are really getting sta rted in ta c k l i n git this yea r. Th ey sta te they are considering approa c h es including lowcarbon te c h n o l o g y, re n ewa b l es and offsetting. Th ey have achieved so m ee n e rgy effi c i e n c i es though. So a B rating for now but there should bes i g n i fi ca nt deve l o p m e nts in order to keep that ra t i n g .
J SainsburyEmissions status
CO2 emissions reported to be dropping but wouldbe good to see figures over time
Sa i n s b u r y ’s consumer we bs i te ta kes the reader st ra i g ht to the CR re p o rton this subject. Some co n s u m e rs might find that information a bitco nfusing as it brings to g ether energ y, pa c kaging and wa ste and does n’ ttalk about what climate change is all about. Th e re are good initiativesbut there isn’t the se n se of st ra tegy that ot h e rs get across and this isn’ ta se c tor that can shy away from the iss u e. So the co m m u n i cations feel a bit lukewa r m .
B
B
DIRECTIONS 2007
Reckitt BenckiserEmissions status
Greenhouse gases from manufacturing andgeneral energy use falling
Reckitt Benckiser have a vision to make eight billion products carbonneutral in 2006 and 2007. They already tackle lifecycle analysis for the production and use of their products. So it’s a bold target andmitigating climate change is high on their list of sustainabilitypriorities. They also pledge to tackle carbon footprint issues withsuppliers, employees and customers. However, they could come underfire for using only a forestry project to offset their emissions. If theydeliver on their plans an A rating would follow.
B
RexamEmissions status
CO2 constant over three years, but energy savingsin parts of the business – a bit unclear
Rexam are overlooking climate change, both in terms of articulatingtheir responsibilities and in grasping an opportunity. They operateenvironmental management systems including resource efficiency,eco efficiency and a mention of the use of alternative energy sources.But this only links to climate change if you know how to read betweenthe lines. And it is an opportunity for the business to deliver packagingwhich complements potential customers’ positive product values –something missing from the business to business marketing site.C
National GridEmissions status
35% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
National Grid have made climate change a focus area and publish aclear public position statement. They use the World Resources Institutegreenhouse gas protocol to break down how they monitor and manageemissions, which is helpful in explaining what they consider is withintheir sphere of control. They also offer smart metering and energyefficiency schemes in US and are conducting a Met office study in theUK. But being such a significant player in the utilities sector, theyshould engage consumers more.
Marks & SpencerEmissions status
CO2 emissions from energy use are down, but are up from transport
The doyen of the CR communications world, Marks & Spencer’s ‘Plan A’(because there’s no Plan B) programme has climate change at the top.Marks & Spencer’s commitment to tackling climate change is clear and it is being rolled out to customers – labels inform about washingclothing at lower temperatures and carbon from air freight. At theother end of the value chain they are working with suppliers, and theypartner with the Women’s Institute for more awareness raising. It isdefinitely an A rating. Continued clear communications are key to avoidbeing part of the noise of the climate change debate.A
Man GroupEmissions status
CO2 emissions down
Another early adopter of a carbon neutral strategy, but with clearenergy reductions and thought around offsetting. Though not a carbonintensive business the strategy is a good example of being thoroughand fit for purpose. Working with employees is a large part of theapproach including workshops, audits, mentors and internalcommunications.
A
A
Is it all t a l k ?
20_21
DIRECTIONS 2007
Royal & Sun AllianceEmissions status
Emissions going down
Royal & Sun Alliance are running a number of initiatives: beco m i n gcarbon neutral; eco - i n s u ra n ce pro d u c ts for cu sto m e rs; insure rs ofre n ewable energy pro j e c ts; and pa rt of the ‘To g et h e r’ initiative. H oweve r, considering they are in insura n ce and wea t h e r- re l a ted risks a re key to the business you might expect more information on theirst ra tegic approach, and for them to include information on their siteaimed at inte r m e d i a r i es. So really a B ra t i n g .
Rio TintoEmissions status
Greenhouse gas equivalent emissions and energy use rising
Embarking on a new three year plan including emissions reductions,new technologies and better communication. They have conducted arisk assessment of climate change related losses and operate internalknowledge sharing across regions. One of their videos also tackles thesubject, though perhaps over-simplifies. An A rating for the amountgoing on, but performance is a concern.
B
SAB MillerEmissions status
Overall CO2 emissions are going up
SAB Miller do recognise their impact on climate change and how theresults could affect them – threatening crop and water supply, the rawmaterials for their business. They have programmes in place and arecommunicating. What isn’t so clear is how effective programmes areacross the global operations. So you are left with the feeling you don’thave the complete picture.
B
Sage GroupEmissions status
No exact data although some energy reduction claims
Sage has no information at group level. In the chief executive’sstatement, the UK business says it’s tackling climate change backed upwith some information about energy saving initiatives. There is also anobjective to measure carbon footprint but no figures are reported. Thebusiness is a low carbon emitter but the lack of a coordinated approachacross the group means a C rating.
C
Scottish PowerEmissions status
A rise in CO2, NOx and SO2 in the last year,though the trend is downwards
C l i m a te change is number four out of 12 material iss u es and Scott i s hPowe r’s approach seems pragmatic – a signifi ca nt iss u e, a challenge, with some pos i t i ve achieve m e nts as well as diffi cu l t i es. Th ey use acombination of policies and there are signifi ca nt changes in their energ ysupply portfo l i o. But there is so m ething not i ceably abse nt in their‘summary of approa c h’ docu m e nt: a co m m i t m e nt to engage withcu sto m e rs. So still an A rating but room for improve m e nt.
A
A
DIRECTIONS 2007
UnileverEmissions status
CO2 from energy use going down
Unilever has a working group which is trying to tackle the whole range of emissions from product to consumer use. So they give a realimpression of strategically getting to grips with all levels of theirimpacts (though they are yet to communicate on how to adapt tochanges caused by the climate). Unilever is also the leader in its sectorin the Carbon Disclosure Project. With such prominent brands and ahistory in bringing corporate responsibility messages to the consumer,they could consider engaging more in this area.A
VodafoneEmissions status
Emissions are rising
Vodafone have an internal communications programme to promoteenergy efficiency. Their CEO statement suggests that they are in a lowcarbon sector. But on the other hand they do have a huge customerreach which they aren’t working with to raise awareness, and overallemissions are rising. They do seem to have been working on thenetwork efficiency as their biggest impact. So some positive activitybut more needed before it could reach an A grade.
B
ShellEmissions status
Greenhouse gas emissions from operations arefalling but targets give them room to increase
Interestingly when you first go onto the environment and society pagesof Shell’s website, there isn’t a main navigation area for climate change.But then there is significant information in the environment sectionwhich links to other areas of the site. It is a detailed programme but itcan be hard work to find what you want on the website. An A rating butas Shell have calculated that their products are responsible for 3.1% ofglobal CO2 emitted from the combustion of fossil fuels – and there areno targets to reduce this – you are left wanting more.A
SEGROEmissions status
Incomplete data but CO2 in own offices falling andrenewable energy rising
SEGRO recognise the importance of climate change, and have sometargets in place, but the coverage is low key when you take into accounttheir sector and impacts. Their risk assessment does put energy useand emissions as a material issue and there is a rare mention ofadaptation – interestingly classed as high risk but low influence. As theyhonestly admit that some targets are not met – one of which beingcommunications and awareness – and there has been work done oncarbon footprint calculation and renewable energy use, the rating is B.But there should be more.B
Is it all t a l k ?
2 2 _23
DIRECTIONS 2007
0 40 3
01
0 2
05
In our review, we saw a pattern emerging – so we’ve puttogether five things we think companies need to rememberwhen considering their plans to tackle climate change:
Our top 5 tips for your approach to climate change
01. AdaptationAdaptation – it’s become that strange phenomenon, ‘there’s anelephant in the room’. Companies and communities need to givec o n s i d e ration to how they will adapt in a changing climate. Whilemany companies now frankly admit that climate change is a re a l i t y ,only a few talk about how they will react to weather change. Thismight be identifying how operations will change, or how pro d u c t sand services can meet new needs. The lack of consideration fo radaptation is both a risk, and a lost opportunity.
02. Awareness raisingAwareness raising – some companies with mainstreamconsumers as a major stakeholder group are having somesuccess. But it’s not widespread and many of the otherstakeholder groups are being overlooked.
03. Plain languagePlain language – there are companies doing a good job of not skirtinga round the issue, but others are not clearly articulating their appro a c h ,p e rhaps because they aren’t clear themselves about what it should be. We don’t advocate doom and gloom or scaremongering about thee f fects of climate change, but companies do need to tell it like it is.
04. Numerous initiativesNumerous initiatives – some companies have a raft of activitieswhich can be achieving a lot, but the challenge is to make surethey don’t end up confusing and just make more noise aroundclimate change.
05. RelevanceRelevance – the approach to climate change needs to be right for thecompany and its sector. It brings together all our top tips: the rightinitiatives explained in plain language including plans for adaptation,whilst raising people’s awareness.
DIRECTIONS 2007
DIRECTIONS 2007
Use the monocle to pick out other key CR issuesthat climate change must not eclipse.
BEYOND CLIMATE CHANGECLIMATE CHANGE IS A FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE BUT IT CAN’T HIJACK THE WHOLE CORPORATERESPONSIBILITY AGENDA. WE HOPE WHAT YOU HAVE JUST READ HAS PROVIDED SOME USEFULINSIGHTS, BUT NOW WE ARE MOVING ON TO OTHER ISSUES AND A ROUND UP OF THIS YEAR’SREPORTING AND CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITYCOMMUNICATIONS ACTIVITIES.
24_25
U N E M P L O Y M E N T A C C I D E NTR A T E S U N E M P L O Y M E N T A C C I D E NTR A T E S U N E M P L O Y M E N T A C C I D E NTR A T E S U N E M P L O Y M E N T
SUPPLY CHAIN
CHALLENGES
CHILD
LABOUR
SUPPLY CHAIN
CHALLENGES
CHILD
LABOUR
SUPPLY CHAIN
CHALLENGES
CHILD
LABOUR
SUPPLY CHAIN
CHALLENGES
SOCIAL
EXCLUSION
SKILLS
GAP
SOCIAL
EXCLUSION
SKILLS
GAP
SOCIAL
EXCLUSION
GREENWASH LIP-GLOSSING GREENWASH LIP-GLOSSING GREENWASH LIP-GLOSSING GREENWASH LIP-GLOSSING
SECRECY BRIBERY SECRECY BRIBERY SECRECY BRIBERY SECRECY BRIBERY
LICENCE
TO OPERATE
CONSUMER
CONFIDENCE
TRUST REPUTATION GROWTH
DIRECTIONS 2007
B U S I N E S S
O N E W A Y
C O M M U N I C A T I O N
2 0 _27
– as well as other challenges to sustainable business
F i g h t i n gclimate change
The role of business in tackling climate change has been thrust onto centre stage over the past 12 months. Sir Nicholas Stern’s Review ofthe Economics of Climate Change highlightedthe need for businesses to reduce their carbondioxide emissions to avoid severe economicconsequences, and the UN’s IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change (IPCC) emphasised the short time window for action, with emissions needing to peak and decline within the next 20 years.
This has not gone unnoticed by the corporateworld. Out of the 1,000 business leaders thatattended this year’s Prince of Wales’s May DayBusiness Summit on Climate Change, nearly two thirds saw climate change as a risk for their business. What is encouraging, however,is that 90% also saw the opportunities itoffered, whether through cost savings, newmarket opportunities or as a driver to engageand retain employees’ trust.
It is those companies that truly understandthose opportunities that are making a realdifference. Take for example BSkyB, winner ofthe Man Group International Climate ChangeAward 2007. It recognised the consumer desirefor affordable green products and introduced
the world’s first set-top box with an automaticstandby facility. It has also now engagedemployees in eco-schools. BT has taken adifferent angle, working closely with its suppliersto produce products that have a lower carbonfootprint than their predecessors, so emissionssavings can be passed on to its customers.
These companies are successfully combining the reduction of their environmental footprintwith business benefits, and continuing tocreate wealth for the UK. And they should be commended and used to inspire othercompanies, some of whom are only justbeginning their climate change journey.
But to see corporate responsibility just through the lens of climate changewould be to miss the rich mix of issueson which business has been making an impact.
Taking a broader approachWhen Business in the Community was formed 25 years ago in the wake of race riots and socialunrest in the UK, the purpose of the group ofleading businesses was to work collaboratively to tackle the key social issues of the day. Since
Julia CleverdonChief Executive of Business in the Community
C O R R U P T I O N M I S T R U S T
PRIVATE EQUITY
M I S T R U S T
O N E W A Y
C O M M U N I C A T I O N
DIRECTIONS 2007
2 6 _ 2 7
With corporate attention focused on climate change, someare asking whether companies should return to the ‘green’roots of corporate responsibility. Julia Cleverdon argues thatcompanies taking this approach are missing the point.
PRIVATE EQUITY
MISTRUST
DIRECTIONS 2007
then, our network of businesses has grown, as has the range of issues that companies areexpected to address. In our jubilee year, DavidGrayson, Professor of Corporate Responsibilityat Cranfield, has pulled together a commentaryon Business in the Community’s successes andfailures in doing this along the way, available at www.bitc.org.uk.
A glance at our Corporate Responsibility Index,published in the Sunday Times as ‘Companiesthat Count’ and now in its sixth year, showshow companies are having an impact acrossthe corporate responsibility spectrum, fromresponsible selling to diversity in the workplace.
Taking this broader approach allowscompanies to consider all potential social andenvironmental issues that may impact uponthem and focus on those that are most pressingto them and on which they can make the mostdifference. Key to this is realising that everybusiness is different. For some businesses andsectors climate change is an absolute priority,but for others there are more pressing andimmediate issues that they can impact upon.
Recognising the challengesThe three main issues that business will need to consider over the coming years are: the needfor improved skills and a greater social cohesionto ensure that the UK remains competitivein global markets; the need for transparencya c ross business to regain trust in an increa s i n g l yquestioning environment; and the need tointegrate corporate responsibility into the heart of their operations.
A more enterprising and talentdriven skills baseThe futu re skills ba se of the co u ntry is critical to our co m p et i t i ve n ess as so many of the jobo p p o rtu n i t i es will increasingly need much higherl evel qualifi ca t i o n s. Upskilling the ex i st i n gwo r kfo rce, as well as developing a more re l eva ntand enterprising cu r r i culum for 14-19 year olds is vital. The roll call of co m pa n i es who havei l l u st ra ted their impact through Bu s i n ess in the Co m m u n i ty ’s exce l l e n ce awa rds include the Oracle learning pro g ra m m e, the Deloittee m p l oya b i l i ty initiative and the Esh Gro u pco n struction project for 14-16 year olds. We willall need to step up the quality, impact and sca l eof our business engagement in this area and I am delighted that Gordon Brown has asked meas Chief Exe cu t i ve of Bu s i n ess in the Co m m u n i tyto lead the rev i ew on how business- e d u ca t i o npa rt n e rs h i ps can help to achieve world classe d u cational exce l l e n ce in the next 10 yea rs.
Winning trustScrutiny of business by the public, media andshareholders has grown in sophistication.Companies are no longer taken at face value.They have to back up what they are claimingwith hard evidence. This is particularly true for the growing number of private equity funds.Business in the Community’s membership now covers one in five of the private sectorworkforce, and one in five of that samewo r kfo rce is now employed by co m pa n i es ow n e dby private equity. With the high stakes andmedia coverage involved in the takeovers ofthese businesses, many questions are beingasked on what these funds are doing to improvethe social and environmental impact of theirnewly acquired businesses.
“For some businesses and sectorsclimate change is an absolutepriority, but for others there arem o re pressing and immediate issuesthat they can impact upon.”
B U S I N E S S
2 8 _29
DIRECTIONS 2007
This is not a large company preserve. Massesof small to medium sized enterprises alsoprovide inspiration on how to do this. Whenasked ‘Why are you volunteering in your localcommunity?’ a small engineering company inthe West Midlands replied ‘it is just part of whatwe do’. Smaller businesses have decision takerscloser to community need.
The challenge now is to spread goodpractice to those companies that are just starting on their corporateresponsibility journey. Collaboration is key to this.
Whether through the supply chains of leadingcompanies or business networks such asBusiness in the Community and its May Daygroup of companies committed to tacklingclimate change, using the leaders to inspirethe laggards will be vital in helping allcompanies address not only climate change,but the wider pressing issues which affect our competitiveness and our cohesion.
The Walker Report on private equity sends afirm message to owners of those businessesthat the key to improving trust is transparency.Open reporting of impacts and publicbenchmarking of performance through toolssuch as Business in the Community’s CorporateResponsibility Index will help business to winover the public, media and investors. That iswhere the bar needs to be set, and is a keychallenge for businesses across sectors.
Making corporate responsibility part ofhow business does businessIn this climate of mist r u st, it is importa nt thatco r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i ty activities are not appliedas ‘lip-gloss’ to co re opera t i o n s. Th ey need to be at the hea rt of the business. To achieve this,co m pa n i es need clear direction and co m m i t m e ntf rom senior management and their approach to co r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i ty needs to be fullyi nte g ra ted into their eve r yd ay opera t i o n s.
Some companies stand out as clear examplesof this. Marks & Spencer’s ‘Plan A’, namedbecause the company believes there is no PlanB, sets out how it will tackle the key issuesfacing it as a business. From how it will reducewaste, to how it will ensure it maintains fairpartnerships with suppliers, the Plan recognisescorporate responsibility as central to thecompany’s success.
In last year’s Directions, the panel got under the skin of the top 100 companiesin the UK, looking at how effective their corporate responsibility reports were atcommunicating strategy and activities.
Another year has passed and a fresh group of experts are looking at this year’scrop of reports. The attention that climate change has received has really putcorporate responsibility in the spotlight. So businesses need to turn up the heat on their communications to withstand the scrutiny. And there is evidencethat some are.
So this year there are high expectations and the panel are hot on the trail of thecompanies under analysis. As in previous years the panel were given some basicguidelines but their findings on the good, the bad and the ugly are their own.
Rules
The panel is on it
1. The assessments should be based on information on company websites or in public reports available up to and including 3 August 2007.
2. The panellists are encouraged to be forthright!
3. The panellist’s decision is final (but please feel free to get in touch with us if you’d like to discuss it).
Please note the views expressed are the panellists’ own and not necessarily those of their organisations.Company list taken from the Financial Times, 30 March 2007.
The reporting highs and lows
DIRECTIONS 2007
of the top 100 UK companies
30_31
DIRECTIONS 2007
01 Nancy TurrellCSR Manager, Nestlé
Nancy joined Nestlé UK as CSR Manager inJuly 2007. Before joining Nestlé she spentfive years at Sainsbury’s as CSR Manager.Nancy read Business and Italian atUniversity College London.
02 Stuart PooreDirector of CR, Virgin Media
Stu a rt is Dire c tor of Co r p o ra te Res p o n s i b i l i tyat Vi rgin Media where he leads on the so c i a l ,e nv i ro n m e ntal and et h i cal dimensions of theco m pa ny ’s re p u tation management. Prior tojoining Vi rgin Media, Stu a rt looked after CRat QinetiQ having previously wo r ked in publica ffa i rs and env i ro n m e ntal ca m paigning atW W F- U K .
03 Cindy CahillHead of CR, Deloitte
Cindy is Partner responsible for CorporateResponsibility and Sustainability Servicesat Deloitte UK. In addition to providing CRservices to a number of Deloitte’s largestclients, Cindy is also responsible for leadingDeloitte’s internal CR programme. She is amember of the Deloitte Global CR executiveand has helped a number of member firmsto develop their CR practices.
04 Lucie HarrildHead of CR communications, salterbaxter
Lucie has a background in corporateand consumer communications, SRI and CR consultancy. She holds an MSc inEnvironmental Technology from Imperial
College and is responsible for corporateresponsibility communications work at salterbaxter.
05 Angela McClowryEnvironment Analyst, British Energy
Angela is an Env i ro n m e nt Analyst with apa rt i cular fo cus on CSR policy for indust r i a land co m m e rcial electricity supplier, BritishE n e rg y. Her ba c kg round is in env i ro n m e nta lm a n a g e m e nt and she wo r ked previously for al a rge agribusiness invest m e nt managementco m pa ny in her native Au st ra l i a .
06 Andrew VickermanGlobal Head of Communications & External Relations, Rio Tinto, London
Andrew has overall responsibility for media,corporate communications, public affairs,co r p o ra te social res p o n s i b i l i ty and co m m u n i tyrelations. He has a BA, MA and PhD fromCambridge University. Prior to joining RioTi nto he wo r ked as a deve l o p m e nt eco n o m i stand as a consultant for internationalorganisations, including the World Bank. In his current role Andrew played a leadingrole in the Global Mining Initiative, a miningindustry exercise focused on addressing thecontribution of the industry to the transitionto sustainable development.
07 Adam GarfunkelIndependent CSR CommunicationsConsultant
Adam is an independent CSR co m m u n i ca t i o n sco n s u l ta nt. He has more than 10 yea rs’ex p e r i e n ce in et h i cal business
co m m u n i ca t i o n s, working with lea d i n gi nternational brands writing CSR re p o rts andwe bs i tes, and developing social market i n gca m pa i g n s. Adam holds an MSc in the PublicU n d e rstanding of Env i ro n m e ntal Change fro mUCL. Befo re working in co m m u n i ca t i o n sco n s u l ta n c i es, Adam was a pollutionca m paigner for Friends of the Ea rth.
08 Stephanie MaierHead of Research, EIRIS
Stephanie is Head of Research at EIRIS,a leading global provider of independentresearch into the social, environmental andother ethical performance of companies.Stephanie works on developing newresearch products and approaches, recentlylaunching the new climate change criteria.She has researched and written on theengagement approach to SRI and was amember of the Indicators Working Groupdeveloping the new GRI sustainabilityreporting guidelines (G3).
09 Stefan ReichenbachHead of Environment Markets, Reuters
Stefan is Head of Environmental Markets atReuters. Under Stefan’s leadership, Reutershas emerged as a leading business mediacompany for the environmental financesector. Stefan introduced innovative onlineinitiatives that inform the global carbonmarket and bring the market’s buyersand sellers together. Stefan holds an MA in Economics from Cambridge Universityand an MSc in Environmental Change &Management from the University of Oxford.
0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9
The judging panel
0 1
DIRECTIONS 2007
The FT UK 100
s e c t o rsAerospace & Defence 32Banks 33Beverages 33Chemicals 34Construction & General Industries 34Electricity 35Fixed Line Telecoms 35Food & Drug Retailers 36Food Producers 36Gas, Water & Multi-utilities 37General Financial 37General Retailers 38Health, Pharma & Biotech andHealthcare Equipment & Services 38
Sectors Page
Household Goods 39Life Insurance 39Media 40Mining 40Mobile Comms 41Nonlife Insurance 41Oil & Gas 42Real Estate 42Software & Computer Services 43Support Services 43Tobacco 44Travel & Leisure 44
Sectors Page
Environment, health and safety (EHS) havetypically been the focus of aerospace anddefence reports, primarily due to the heavyindustrial nature of activities – manufacturingaircraft parts and military equipment.This year was no exception, with extensivereporting on EHS activities from both Rolls-Royce and Smiths Group.
Climate change was also a common theme forreports and was broached through discussionsof ‘innovation’. Companies reported ontechnological advancements in avionics systemsand engine design that promise to deliverimproved energy efficiency and fuel savings for aircraft, whilst others reported on the latestd eve l o p m e nts with pro d u c ts such as ‘g re e n’ lea dfree bullets. Some of this may be due to thedemands of buyers such as Boeing and Airbus;m ea nwhile ot h e rs have criticised it as being pure l y‘g re e nwa s h’. Re p o rts used emissions data to ba c kup environmental performance, both using their
own performance data and also by usingbenchmark data, comparing themselves to morepollution intensive sectors.
Co m p re h e n s i ve re p o rting on the key challengesfa ced by defe n ce re l a ted activities remained achallenge for re p o rts. Wh i l st BA E ’s was the onlyre p o rt that detailed iss u es ra i sed by sta ke h o l d e rsthroughout the year, it failed to discuss them in the necessary depth, brushing over issuessuch as recent Saudi-related accusations.Future challenges will include reporting moretransparently and thoroughly on their humanrights position, product stewardship, supplychain and lobbying activities. So the winner,based solely on the limited stakeholderengagement, is BAE.
Aerospace & Defence:BAE Systems
Rolls-Royce Group
Smiths Group
Panellist:
Cindy Cahill
DeloitteAnd the winner is:BAE Systems
32_33
DIRECTIONS 2007
Banks continue to invest significantly in theirCR profiles. The responsibility of helping totackle climate change is now a clear priorityfor the sector with each of the ‘big 5’ jostlingfor position and differentiation. HSBC remainclear leaders, especially in view of theirClimate Partnership with environmental NGOs.
On the customer side, the issue of responsiblelending takes top billing although one wonderswhether these companies are ducking someuncomfortable truths. Beyond pledging toshare data on vulnerable borrowers, our biglending institutions are less than convincing in their claims to be meaningfully addressingsoaring and distressing levels of personal debt.
E l sew h e re, big sums of money are beingploughed into building co m m u n i ty invest m e nt –H BOS give £8m annually to their Fo u n d a t i o n ,for example – alongside some impress i ve andm eaningful co ntributions to the educa t i o n
agenda. Alliance & Le i ceste r’s ‘Right to Rea d ’p ro g ramme and RBS’ ‘ Fa ce 2 Fa ce with Finance’d ese r ve special mention in this re g a rd .
Each of the companies reviewed appear to placea strong emphasis on employee well-being,creating a sense that these are very nice placesto work. This is backed up with a raft of hard-hitting metrics on diversity and opportunity thatundoubtedly differentiate this sector as ‘people-oriented’. Refreshingly, HSBC also give the issueof executive remuneration and accusations of‘fat-cattery’ some fairly ‘up-front’ treatment.
BanksAlliance & Leicester
Barclays
HBOS
HSBC
Lloyds TSB
Northern Rock
Royal Bank of Scotland
Standard Chartered
Panellist:
Stuart Poore
Virgin Media
Beverages:Diageo
SABMiller
Scottish & Newcastle
Panellist:
Lucie Harrild
salterbaxter
The companies in this sector are experiencedreporters. Diageo’s report sets up a clearvision of the business reinforcing that senseof confidence from the beginning. And theirmarketing activities around the responsibledrinking message show they are integratingCR into other communications – and it will beinteresting to see where they take that in thefuture. However the relative achievementsacross global operations are a little harder toget a sense of. Overall the report can be a bitdense to read and breaking information upwould be helpful.
SAB Miller’s* is also a heavyweight report,though not as bad as those 100 page tomesof years gone by. Its focus is more towardssustainability and it reports on 10 quite specifickey issues giving a clear sense of direction. SABMiller’s web information is straightforward tonavigate too, and it gives a fast insight into thebusiness and what it wants to communicate.
SAB Miller and Scottish & Newcastle both use video on their website to articulate theirapproach, a great way to hold the interest of theviewer/reader. However Scottish & Newcastle’sactual report is less engaging, though quiteproficient. Being an 85 page document, it is on the long side. The winner is SAB Miller, forgood presentation of information online and inprint, plus using features like video to get themessage across. But actually it is very closein this sector.
* n ote, due to publication dates SAB Miller’s re p o rt is a morere ce nt ve rs i o n
And the winner is:HSBC
And the winner is:SAB Miller
The two reports in this category variedconsiderably in size and content. ICI had thebenefit of being short, concise and full ofgood data, though lacking a bit of imagination.I was very impressed by their newly formedStakeholder Review Group which is made up of a high calibre panel.
J o h n son Matt h ey fa i red better on these a s p e c ts and, although longer, it was a bette rread. Detailed employ m e nt sta t i st i cs we rei nte resting, including trade union re p rese nta t i o n .Some other highlights are that a number of s i tes worldwide have ce rt i fied OHS syste m s. The re p o rt is cross refe re n ced to the GRIg u i d e l i n es, with detailed pro m i n e ntly place de nv i ro n m e nt indica to rs.
With the chemicals industry as a big user of electricity I was looking for signifi ca nt co nte nton climate change. Both co m pa n i es acknow l e d g ei ts importa n ce and are invo l ved in the policys pa ce. As ant i c i pa ted both co m pa n i es re p o rt ong re e n h o u se gas emiss i o n s. Johnson Matt h ey ’sm o re visible and desc r i pt i ve perfo r m a n ce
i n d i ca to rs won me over more than the ta b u l a te dd a ta at the back of ICI’s re p o rt. A fi ve page ca sestudy on low carbon generation at the end ofJ o h n son Matt h ey ’s Re p o rt tipped it ove r. So thewinner is Johnson Matt h ey !
Hanson have not produced a report since theEnvironment, Community and the Workplacereport in 2003, so there is no formal reportingstructure. In search of more information I wentto the website, and have to say that giventheir position in the construction industry I expected more attention to climate change – I was disappointed to find next to nothing.They are, however, committed to continualimprovement in environmental performance.There are clear objectives, but no set targetsand the only mention of performance isrelated to Health and Safety and dated 2005.
Th ey refer to co r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i ty as ‘inte g ra lto good business management’ and challengest h ey fa ce are ca te g o r i sed into wo r k p l a ce,e nv i ro n m e ntal and co m m u n i ty iss u es, also howthe web section is st r u c tu red. The Health andSa fety section is the most detailed with policysta te m e nts, monitoring of perfo r m a n ce andd etails of employee pa rt i c i pation. Th ey clea r l yh ave internal co m m u n i cation on CR iss u es ast h ey have a quarterly employee magazine whichp rov i d es information about local co m m u n i t i es,e m p l oye es’ achieve m e nts, etc. Could this be se e nas ev i d e n ce of an inte g ra ted approach to CR?
R E X A M ’s latest available hard co py ord ow n l oadable re p o rt is the 2004 Env i ro n m e nta land Social Update. Th ey have now moved to online re p o rting in the form of the‘ Res p o n s i b i l i ty’ section of their we bs i te. The we bre p o rt is well st r u c tu red and cove rs a substa nt i a la m o u nt. My favo u r i te fea tu re has to be the‘ E nv i ro n m e ntal fo ot p r i nts’ – these are diagra m sthat map out the env i ro n m e ntal impa c ts of theb u s i n esses’ pro d u c ts and pro cesses. The user isa l so able to view data ta b l es, policy docu m e ntsand various ca se stu d i es.
To identify a winner between the two has beendifficult, given that they are two very differentcompanies. But based on the accessibility ofdata and ease of navigation – REXAM has to winthis one. A fully downloadable version of theirreport is going to be available some time thisyear so I look forward to that.
DIRECTIONS 2007
Chemicals:ICI
Johnson Matthey
Panellist:
Angela McClowry
British Energy
And the winner is:Johnson Matthey
Construction& GeneralIndustries:Hanson
REXAM
Panellist:
Andrew Vickerman
Rio Tinto
And the winner is:REXAM
The FT UK 100 s e c t o rs
As a se c to r, power genera to rs have st ro n gCo r p o ra te Res p o n s i b i l i ty co m m u n i ca t i o n s. Allt h ree co m pa n i es make available ex te n s i ve dataon impa c ts, ta rg ets and perfo r m a n ce and havec l early fo r m u l a ted policies. Senior managementis invo l ved in each ca se and third pa rtyve r i fi cation or ce rt i fi cation of CSR a c t i v i t i es is co m m o n p l a ce: Scottish & Southern Energ yand International Power have some of theiro p e rations ISO 14001 ce rt i fied and Scott i s hPower has an ex ternal ass u ra n ce pro cess fo ri ts CSR information. Howeve r, all is not perfe c t.
The companies’ CSR summary reports are belowpar. International Power produces a decenttwo pager but Scottish Power and Scottish &Southern Energy’s materials are too dense.Scottish Power acknowledges having receivedthis feedback before but its ‘at a glance’ sectiondoes not do the job.
M o re importa ntly though, the co m pa n i es are n ot transparent enough about how they settheir targets, especially around climate change.For example, Scottish Power does not explain
why it u ses 1999 as its ba se year for itsg re e n h o u se gas emissions targets. And inScottish & Southern Energy’s case the chosenbase year is 2006 and the 20% reduction targetby 2016 would result in a carbon efficiencythat is above Scottish & Southern Energy’sown 2005 performance. The company doesnot explain this incongruity.
The power sector is very explicit about itsapproach to CSR, stressing how CSR activitiesare part of everyday operations. While this ispositive, the power sector has a particularlycritical role to play in addressing climate changeand CSR activities should be integrated intobusiness strategy as well as operations. Thiselement is missing, which may account for thefact that all three companies had higher totalcarbon dioxide emissions in the last yea r, des p i tereductions in carbon emissions per GWh.
Window-dressing is too glamorous a term for what Cable & Wireless has published on CSR. There is just a single page for each of the two main business units and four policydocuments. They have not published a reportsince 2004.
D es p e ra tely sea rching for more information I tried the site map, where one finds four newpa g es not available from the main nav i g a t i o n .C h o osing one of these pa g es opens up a diffe re ntn avigational st r u c tu re. Co nfusing… but may b eh e re’s the real co nte nt, I thought. No, click on the links and blank pa g es appea r. Not good.
If Cable & Wireless is more CSR pygmy thantelecoms giant, the same charge cannot belevelled at BT. A comprehensive website issensibly complemented by a shorter printedreport. I particularly like the ‘Hot topics’ sectionwhere external authors are invited to writepapers on topical and controversial CSR issues.
One small black mark is the navigation, whichcan sometimes confuse, so keen is BT to offermultiple routes to the content. Indeed, there iseven a page titled ‘Navigation’. Now navigation
is as inherent to a webpage, as page numbersare to a book. This page is the report table ofcontents, so why not call it that? But overall, BT has done a great job and these structuralweaknesses can quickly be put right.
Choosing a winner out of these two is easy.It is Manchester United at home in the FA Cupto the Codswallop Village pub team. BT winshands down.
34_35
DIRECTIONS 2007
Electricity:International Power
Scottish & SouthernEnergy
Scottish Power
Panellist:
Stefan Reichenbach
Reuters
Fixed LineTelecoms:BT Group
Cable & Wireless
Panellist:
Adam Garfunkel
Independent CSRconsultant
And the winner is:Scottish Power
And the winner is:BT Group
This se c tor has, in the pa st yea r, not only been inthe firing line of the media due to its eco n o m i c,social and env i ro n m e ntal impact – but it se e m sto have ca u g ht the eye of Priva te Eq u i ty giants.
Wh e re has the Alliance Bo ots buyout by KKR l eft them? Unfo rtu n a tely the merged group has not as yet re l ea sed a combined co r p o ra teres p o n s i b i l i ty re p o rt. Howeve r, if the 2006 re p o rtis anything to go by we can only hope theyco ntinue to ba se their ‘hea l t hy business’ on trust !
So what impact has the pa st year had on theco r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i ty co m m u n i cations of thisse c to r’s co m pa n i es? As in previous yea rs bot hSa i n s b u r y ’s and Tesco show their st rength inm easuring their perfo r m a n ce against clea r l yd efined ta rg ets and use of ca se stu d i es. And theway in which the key perfo r m a n ce indica to rs ared o cu m e nted is very clear and prov i d es a goodove r v i ew for Tesco. Morrisons is the wea ke r
co m m u n i ca to r, however credit where it’s due, thisyear they have pro d u ced their fi rst stand alone CRre p o rt.
The Sainsbury’s report is clearly laid out andmakes it easy for the reader to find what theyare looking for. Climate change is also part andparcel of one of five of their guiding principles,‘Respect for Environment’. Their recognitionthat climate change is not just about energy –makes me think that they ‘get it’! Sainsbury’salso display good use of Rich Media takingadvantage of online communications tools. Soit’s a close call between Tesco and Sainsbury’s,but the winner for me is Sainsbury’s.
U n i l ever and Cadbury Sc hwe p p es are clea rl ea d e rs in this gro u p, devoting signifi ca nt effo rtsto co m m u n i cating their approach to key CS Ri ss u es in their re p o rts and on their we bs i tes. The key to effe c t i ve co m m u n i cation is of ten tobe found in the st r u c tu re used to help nav i g a tethe information and in providing a ba l a n ce ofi nformation to meet a range of sta ke h o l d e rs’n e e d s. It is here that Unilever co m es out on to p.
An ove r v i ew of its impa c ts and re l eva ntco m m i t m e nts org a n i sed around the life cycle of its business, from understanding co n s u m e rneeds and innovation and R&D to distribution andretail, sets the scene well and prov i d es a co ntex tfor Unileve r’s CSR activities. Th roughout there p o rt we b l i n ks are used to signpost furt h e ri nformation, keeping the re p o rt a suffi c i e nt l yd i g estible length. Ca d b u r y ’s could benefit fro mapplying this approach as their re p o rt is almosttw i ce as long. The ba l a n ce of information inU n i l eve r’s re p o rt allows spa ce for climate changeto be clearly addressed. Information on theco m pa ny ’s carbon fo ot p r i nt, clear ta rg ets, ve r i fi e d
d a ta and its public position and gove r n a n cest r u c tu re gives the reader a good pictu re ofU n i l eve r’s approach. Cadbury has co n ce nt ra te dh eavily on co m m u n i cating on consumer iss u essuch as obes i ty which have att ra c ted mucha tte ntion re ce nt l y, leaving little room for climatec h a n g e, although the ba s i cs of policy and dataa re cove red. Howeve r, this may be remedied inthe next re p o rt; Cadbury opera tes on a biennialre p o rting cyc l e.
For Associated British Foods the task is morecomplicated – a diversified company comprisingbusinesses such as the British Sugar Groupalongside Primark – it does its best to presenta comprehensive overview of CSR performance.There is a good level of information which isclearly presented, however it does not comparewith the others in this group.
DIRECTIONS 2007
Food & DrugRetailers:Boots Group
J Sainsbury
Morrison WmSupermarkets
Tesco
Panellist:
Andrew Vickerman
Rio Tinto
FoodProducers:Associated British Foods
Cadbury Schweppes
Unilever
Panellist:
Stephanie Maier
EIRIS
And the winner is:J Sainsbury
And the winner is:Unilever
The FT UK 100 s e c t o rs
Historically this has been a strong sector inreporting, driven primarily from the high levelof regulation and the need for comprehensiveenvironment, health and safety data. This yearthere is a clear move towards more onlinecontent and stakeholder focused reporting.
This is a key se c tor in the climate change deba tein three ways: the se c tor can be a large pro d u ce rof emissions (o p e rational impa c t); the co m pa n i esand inf ra st r u c tu re will be directly impa c ted byc l i m a te change; and the co m pa n i es play a key ro l ein helping so c i ety deliver the solutions necessa r yto tackle the pro b l e m s. The ex te nt to which theset h ree iss u es are addressed by each co m pa nyva r i es, with the wa ter co m pa n i es having a st ro n gse c tor approach to tackling susta i n a b i l i ty iss u es(e.g. Wa ter UK Su sta i n a b i l i ty Indica to rs), but withthe individual energy co m pa n i es generally lea d i n gthe way in terms of having clear climate changep o l i c i es and st ra te g i es.
The sector is one of the leaders in gainingassurance over sustainability information, with all reports having some form ofindependent assurance.
Challenges that this sector face includereporting effectively on the volume ofinformation now required by stakeholders andbeing able to effectively demonstrate that thesustainability activities go beyond compliance.So the winner is National Grid for this sector.
This sector is split in two in terms ofdisclosure on corporate responsibility. 3i Groupand Man Group are at the top, both producingdecent reports. Invesco, Schroders and ICAPare in the bottom half, though Invesco offerssome brief statements on their website andSchroders has reported in the past (therehaven’t been any recent updates). On apositive note Schroders does have a video that discusses their climate fund and gives aninsight into the business opportunities whichcan be created by climate change.
So the competition here is between 3i Groupand Man Group. 3i produce a short butcompetent report which covers the bases.Though the corporate responsibility governancestructures are described, there is no statementfrom a senior executive which might be a causefor concern for their internal commitment. Butinteresting information is offered on workshopsconducted for investment staff about corporateresponsibility issues.
Man Group’s report is the winner in this group,and it goes much further than 3i. There is seniorexecutive support, strategic thinking and usefulinsight from members of the CR committeewhich gives a real flavour of the individualsinvolved, the business and how it approachescorporate responsibility. Programmes arethorough and there is evidence of internalengagement on key issues which is encouragingevidence of a business working towardsintegrating CR in the day to day operations.Further information is provided in supplementson key issues: environment, people andcommunity. And by publishing their corporateresponsibility manual online, they are achievinga good level of transparency.
36_37
DIRECTIONS 2007
Gas, Water & Multi-utilities:Centrica
Kelda Group
National Grid
Severn Trent
United Utilities
Panellist:
Cindy Cahill
Deloitte
GeneralFinancial:3I Group
ICAP
INVESCO(was called Amvescap)
Man Group
Schroders
Panellist:
Lucie Harrild
salterbaxter
And the winner is:National Grid
And the winner is:Man Group
DIRECTIONS 2007
As an independent co m pa ny fo l l owing thed e m e rger from GUS plc, Home Retail Gro u ppublished their fi rst co r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i tyre p o rt this yea r. The re p o rt outlines the newm a n a g e m e nt st r u c tu re’s approach to co r p o ra teres p o n s i b i l i ty suggesting that CR is inte g ral to their opera t i o n s. Although they aim to m a ke CR pa rt of the fabric of how they work I struggled to find ev i d e n ce of whether they d o. Marks & Spence r’s co r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i tyre p o rt on the other hand clearly does.
Entitled the ‘How we do business’ report it isclear that Marks & Spencer’s CR activities aresupported and led from the top. Whereas lastyear the report seemed to cover almost 20issues, causing some confusion for the reader,this year’s ‘Plan A’ lists five clear commitmentsto be tackled over the next five years. All round a clearly documented report explainingactivities, performance and targets in a succinctway. The only flaw I would have to note is thateverything is positive and very limited detail, if any, is presented on targets not met.
K i n g fi s h e r’s re p o rting format is a good exa m p l eof a co m pa ny using the web to re p o rt
ex te n s i ve l y, supported by a printed summaryre p o rt. Th roughout the re p o rt the reader isguided to the we bs i te for more information, fo rexample the Chief Exe cu t i ve’s sta te m e nt is anex t ract supported by an online video. Th ey alsofea tu re a co u ntry specific re p o rting tool that can be used by rea d e rs to track how opera t i n gco m pa n i es meet their CR policy co m m i t m e nts.DSG are still, disa p p o i nt i n g l y, re p o rting within the Annual Re p o rt and Acco u nts. Morei nformation on how they tackle co r p o ra teres p o n s i b i l i ty within the traditional market p l a ce,wo r k p l a ce, co m m u n i ty and env i ro n m e ntst r u c tu re can be found online. The last co m pa nyfor this se c tor is, I’m afraid, not much morei n n ova t i ve. Nex t’s re p o rt is very text inte n s i ve,d o es n’t engage with the reader and there is l i ttle mention of perfo r m a n ce against ta rg ets.
Although Kingfisher is progressing well, for methe winner is Marks & Spencer.
GeneralRetailers:DSG International
Home Retail Group
Kingfisher
Marks & Spencer
Next
Panellist:
Andrew Vickerman
Rio Tinto
CR in the pharmaceutical sector appears tohave a very clear purpose: to generate trustamong stakeholders. And when your product is relied upon to save lives, trust is a veryimportant commodity.
The value of comparisons in CR performancebetween big operators such as GSK and smallerhealthcare/equipment providers such as Smith & Nephew is always likely to be limitedalthough progress at both ends of the spectrumis evident.
Both GSK and AstraZeneca articulate a veryclear business case for CR that cleverly directsattention towards the social benefit deliveredthrough their products while also facing up tomore specific ethical challenges such as safetyin clinical trials and animal testing. AstraZenecashould be particularly applauded for thetransparency afforded to their ‘Priority ActionPlanning’ which sets out very clearly what thecompany sees as its core objectives.
Smith & Nephew deserve credit for embracingthe language of sustainable development evenif, as with the sector as a whole, there is little by way of ‘headline-grabbing’ activity on the
management of environmental impact. It is also a little disappointing not to see greatereffort being expended on encouraging sciencein education. Shire’s ‘educational grants’ and GSK’s science teaching programme are notableexceptions in this regard.
Overall, a ‘solid if unspectacular’ approachtowards CR characterises the sector. A far more dynamic approach to CR reporting(getting stuck into a proper dialogue with the NGO sector on some of the testier issueswould be a good start) is essential if levels of trust are to significantly increase.
Health,Pharma &Biotech andHealthcare,Equipment & Services:AstraZeneca
GlaxoSmithKline
Shire
Smith & Nephew
Panellist:
Stuart Poore
Virgin Media
And the winner is:Marks & Spencer
And the winner is:GlaxoSmithKline
The FT UK 100 s e c t o rs
38_39
DIRECTIONS 2007
HouseholdGoods:Persimmon
Reckitt Benckiser
Panellist:
Stephanie Maier
EIRIS
Comparing the proverbial apple and pear we find ourselves looking at a companyproducing household products such ascleaners and detergents and a companybuilding the houses to put them in. While thechallenges the companies face are clearlydifferent, the principles of CSR communicationare universal and in this comparison ReckittBenckiser is the winner.
Re c k i tt Be n c k i ser outlines the co m pa ny ’s defi n i t i o nof susta i n a b i l i ty and ta c k l es eco n o m i c, social ande nv i ro n m e ntal iss u es in turn. The product life cyc l ep e rs p e c t i ve ensures that not just their dire c ti m pa c ts are addressed. This approach is pa rt i cu l a r l yu seful when looking at climate change where theco m pa ny co n s i d e rs its ‘Total Carbon Fo ot p r i nt’ .H oweve r, while the impact of their suppliers andp ro d u c ts in use is ident i fied, the impact is not yet quant i fied. Th e re is clear disc l os u re on iss u esl i ke res p o n s i b i l i ty, ta rg ets and data. The basis of the re p o rting data section and ve r i fi cation arepa rt i cularly useful. Including the GRI co nte nt indexh e l ps the reader to nav i g a te the info r m a t i o n .
Persimmon is clearly aware of its stakeholdersand includes a useful description of how they
engage with each of these groups. The reportand website are easy to navigate and coverimportant issues such as inclusiveness andaffordable housing although this is not alwaysbacked up with clear targets and data. Climatechange reporting includes the average energyperformance of homes built measured using theStandard Assessment Procedure (SAP) ratings,but clear targets are missing. More quantitativedata and clear targets in all key areas wouldimprove the quality of reporting.
The quality of CR reporting in this sector washigh, and with a large number of companiesthe competition was stiff. It was encouragingto see that just about all the companies areactive in the Climate Change arena and arereporting on their CO2 emissions, though assome critics would say their direct carbonfootprint is pretty small.
Aviva sets out good environmental policies such as their goal to be carbon neutral. They alsoreport on total CO2 emissions. The communitysection was a bit disjointed but covered keyareas. Prudential mention the importance ofsustainable development which is promising.They do well to represent a big company acrossa number of countries, presenting examplesof employee engagement.
Legal & General had clear guiding principles,targets and a practical approach to CSR.Comparisons to industry benchmarks,detailed figures, a comprehensive and easyto understand report with its own flavour – not a carbon copy of other CR reports.
CR reporting for Old Mutual is listed within theAnnual Report – content is brief but with some
objectives and initiatives in community and the environment. There is however a separateCorporate Citizenship report for their SouthAfrican operations.
Sta n d a rd Life puts a st rong emphasis oncu sto m e rs, share h o l d e rs, has a section on ClimateChange and re p o rts on their CO2 e m i ss i o n s.Resolution is new to the FT 100, inco r p o rating CRin their Annual Re p o rt. Co nte nt is brief, but doesinclude a number of indica to rs, including CO2.
Friends Provident engaged Forum for the Futureto provide a commentary on the report whichwas interesting. Performance indicators andtargets are set out clearly and the environmentsection of the report has been replaced withone on Climate Change.
The winner is Legal & General: you getthe sense CR is really part of the business.Tangible targets on climate change also addedto their rating.
LifeInsurance:Aviva
Friends Provident
Legal & General
Old Mutual
Prudential
Resolution
Standard Life
Panellist:
Angela McClowry
British Energy
And the winner is:Reckitt Benckiser
And the winner is:Legal & General
DIRECTIONS 2007
Media:BSkyB
Daily Mail
ITV
Pearson
Reed Elsevier
Reuters Group
WPP Group
Yell Group
Panellist:
Nancy Turrell
Nestlé
As a group the sta n d a rd and depth of CRre p o rting was wildly diffe re nt. From a fl e et i n gm e ntion in some annual re p o rts to the we i g htyto m es of Reed Elsevier and WPP this se c to rc l early has differing views of the re l eva n ce ofCR to their bra n d s.
Looking specifi cally at env i ro n m e nt, most (n ot all)we re able to show some degree of perfo r m a n cedata. In the case of Reed Elsevier’s they wereable to show the global trend over several years.However, targets relating to forward lookingenvironmental performance were thin on theground. DMGT, ITV and Yell had none. There wasa scattering of carbon reduction targets amongthe rest until you arrived at the top end of thescale with Pea rson and WPP who have co m m i tte dto going carbon neutral. BSkyB get best in classfor having already got there. The comments ofboth DMGT and Pearson that environmentallythey were low impact may be true, compared to other companies, but in the context of a CRreport seemed to jar with the prevailing tone ofresponsibility and accountability.
The rea d a b i l i ty and imagination of the re p o rts wa sl a rgely disa p p o i nting for org a n i sations whose co rebusiness is communication. Yell’s report stoodout (possibly the bright ye l l ow!) as having tried toco m m u n i ca te clea r l y, their prese ntation of data byway of inte resting fa c ts being an example of this.
The best read by a long shot was WPP: theybrought together interesting thought pieces,exciting examples of their own and clients’CR work and used case studies in a way thatgenuinely reflected the conundrums andtensions companies experience in balancingtheir business with a position of corporateresponsibility. But for their achievements todate, the level to which CR is obviously part ofthe culture and their innovations that transcendboth their own operations and their products,BSkyB must fall to the top of the pile.
Mining is a heavyweight sector for corporateresponsibility and the standard is high. AngloAmerican, Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton,* Xstrata andLonmin all produce in depth, interestingcommunications.
A ntofa g a sta and Ve d a nta include theiri nformation in the annual re p o rt. Ka za k h myslags behind but does have a few pa g es on thewe bs i te. Ca se stu d i es in Xst ra ta ’s re p o rt makefor an inte resting read and the perfo r m a n cesummary is very clea r. Lo n m i n’s perfo r m a n cei nformation is also well prese nted. AngloA m e r i can use the fi ve ca p i tal model and it makesfor a clear pro g ression through the info r m a t i o nt h ey prese nt, though it is a dense re p o rt. In their opening sta te m e nts climate change isre co g n i sed as an importa nt (and to p i cal) iss u efor their business and Anglo are also makings i g n i fi ca nt pro g ress in their HIV pro g ra m m e.
Alongside their report Rio Tinto make great useof video on a range of subjects, and what really
comes across is that sustainability is beingembedded in the business. BHP Billiton presenttheir information very well with an easy tonavigate online report, a summary report and afull report. I particularly like the use of ‘you arehere’ in the summary report when explaininghow it fits together.
It’s sad that for many, zero fatality targets arenot being met. Having said that this sector is a beacon of good practice but winner(s) haveto be chosen. I have chosen two: BHP Billiton for the balance between readability and solidinformation, and Rio Tinto for use of video.But others are doing well too.
* n ote, due to publication dates, BHP Bi l l i to n’s 2006 re p o rt is assesse d
Mining:Anglo American
Antofagasta
BHP Billiton
Kazakhmys
Lonmin
Rio Tinto
Vedanta Resources
Xstrata
Panellist:
Lucie Harrild
salterbaxter
And the winner is:BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto
And the winner is:BSkyB
The FT UK 100 s e c t o rs
40_41
DIRECTIONS 2007
NonlifeInsurance:Admiral
Royal & Sun Alliance
Panellist:
Nancy Turrell
Nestlé
I would hes i ta te to draw conclusions for thee nt i re se c tor from only having assessed oneco m pa ny, and I will fo cus on just rev i ewing the one. Vo d a fo n e’s co r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i tyco m m u n i cations are co n c i se, fo cu sed andb e l i eva b l e. Vo d a fo n e’s we bs i te is ea sy ton av i g a te and information is ca te g o r i sed logica l l y.
In terms of effectiveness of reporting Vodafonewas among the best companies I reviewed. Bestpractices are followed, senior managementis clearly engaged, reporting is third partyverified, policy statements are clear and brief,the company’s impacts are well communicatedand targets and performance are t ra c ke dc l ose l y. While for many of the co m pa n i es I rev i ewed, the co r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i ty re p o rtsstill appear to be a public relations exercise,even where progress is being made, Vodafone’scommunications give the appearance of acompany that actually believes it has animportant role to play in the world.
Climate change may be given less space than iswarranted but Vodafone did assess its carbonfootprint, set targets and has initiated projectsthat are credible attempts to prototype and pilotscalable solutions for energy reduction acrossthe company. Overall: impressive.
MobileComms:Vodafone Group
Panellist:
Stefan Reichenbach
Reuters
And the winner is:Vodafone Group
The companies within this category arereporting on CR to notably different degrees.Admiral’s very light touch approach clearlyreflects that it is early days for themunderstanding their impacts as a business andcommunicating that with stakeholders. This istheir first year of collecting basic environmentdata and allocating responsibility for managingthe business approach to env i ro n m e ntal iss u es.Clearly they expect to be able to say morenext year.
By co nt ra st Royal & Sun Alliance have published a re p o rt that within a very clear st r u c tu re ta kes a co m p re h e n s i ve look at their UK operations and to a degree those globa l l y. The data in theire nv i ro n m e nt section demonst ra tes that theyh ave ro b u st mechanisms in place to understa n dtheir fo ot p r i nt and re p o rt against it, as does theira c h i eving carbon neutral sta tus in Dece m b e r2006. Des p i te not all ce nt res of global opera t i o n sh aving provided data, the re l a t i ve co m p l ete n essof the data is impress i ve. Non-env i ro n m e nt data
is less ex te n s i ve, for exa m p l e, health and sa fetyp e r fo r m a n ce, but nonet h e l ess they are able tos h ow trends over seve ral yea rs and have n’t shiedaway from publication where the trend isn’ ta l ways moving in the right dire c t i o n .
What the re p o rt lacks in addressing more diffi cu l ti ss u es or trying more imaginative prese ntation itm a kes up for in clarity and st r u c tu re.
And the winner is:Royal & Sun Alliance
DIRECTIONS 2007
H e re we have two titans of co r p o ra teres p o n s i b i l i ty re p o rting – BP and Shell. The challenges fa ced by oil and gas ex p l o ra t i o nand production co m pa n i es are co n s i d e rable and, while both have over a decade of re p o rt i n gex p e r i e n ce, effe c t i vely co m m u n i cating ando rganising the co n s i d e rable volume of co r p o ra teres p o n s i b i l i ty disc l os u re co nt i n u es to prese nt af u rther challenge which they both stand up towell. It’s a close call but in this gro u p, Shell pipsBP to the post.
BP and Shell rightly focus on incidents orregions where the company is facing particularchallenges and criticism, such as the Texas Cityincident (BP) and Shell’s operations in Nigeria.Transparency on these types of issues isincreasingly important for the credibility ofreporting. All companies in this group give dueweight to the issue of climate change as youwould expect, with BP devoting one of its threemain chapters on the subject and Shell placing
the energy challenge and Shell’s response upfront. In addition, BP and Shell have numerouslinks to further information and data on theirwebsites covering pretty much any area areader might be interested in. BG Group does agood job on clarity and structure of information,including helpful diagrams on material issuesfor stakeholders, linking targets to businessprinciples and a detailed breakdown ofgreenhouse gas emissions. While BP and BGGroup integrate auditor and stakeholdercomments and dialogues, Shell appears to havestrongly emphasised the inclusion of a varietyof viewpoints and perspectives including a CEOinterview and a report by the External ReviewCommittee which gives greater credibility andconfidence in the company’s reporting.
Oil & Gas:BG Group
BP
Royal Dutch Shell
Panellist:
Stephanie Maier
EIRIS
Real Estate:British Land
Hammerson
Land Securities
Liberty International
SEGRO
Panellist:
Stefan Reichenbach
Reuters
And the winner is:Royal Dutch Shell
I am still re covering from my atte m pts to find my way through the laby r i nth of PDF fi l esthat make up the real esta te se c to r’s CS Rco m m u n i ca t i o n s. You could not call this effe c t i veco m m u n i cation and re p o rting. To be fa i r, the CSR re p o rts themse l ves are usually good butthe ove rall ex p e r i e n ce of finding out about theseco m pa n i es’ CSR approa c h es is ove r w h e l m i n g .The one exce ption is SEG RO (formerly SloughE sta tes), which has a clear and we l l - p rese nte dCSR section on its we bs i te. Wh e re the rea lesta te se c tor does do a good job, is in prov i d i n gsummary information: British Land, Hammerso nand Liberty International make available fa i r l ygood summary re p o rts and Land Se cu r i t i es andS EG RO make it ea sy to access key information.
Climate change is moving up the priority listfor all of the companies in this sector andBritish Land has committed to going carbonneutral by 2008/09. Outside of climate change
the CSR targets of the different real estatecompanies are quite varied, which amplifiesthe need for clear communications around thestructure and priorities of the CSR programmes.
Again, SEGRO does a particularly good job andwins this sector hands down. Also noteworthyis Land Securities, which reports effectively and tries to take its CSR messages to the publicin such innovative ways as online CSR-relatedcomputer games.
And the winner is:SEGRO
The FT UK 100 s e c t o rs
As this is a very dive rse se c to r, with ve r yd i ffe re nt ty p es of co m pa n i es, it is diffi cult toco m pa re ove rall. Su p p o rt se r v i ces are genera l l ymuch newer to co r p o ra te res p o n s i b i l i tyre p o rting and therefo re the re p o rts are not as adva n ced as they are in other se c to rs, fo rexample utilities or consumer goods.
The reports focused on social issues and werecomparatively light on reporting the breadth of CR performance data. The companies alsoneed to work on the presentation of the CRinformation: two have very limited additional CR information on their websites; and only one has a well designed and easy to readdownloadable PDF report.
On climate change none of the reports have agreat deal of content. Each of them states thattheir environmental impact is lower than othersectors but there is no comparison with
companies within the sector, or a real pictureof any climate change policy and strategy forthe company.
Overall, reporting in this sector has improvedthis year but it can do better, particularly withregard to more detailed performance metricsand targets, along with how CR activities havebeen integrated into the business and strategy.
The winner for this sector is Experian –impressive as it’s a first time reporter and it isalso independently assured.
42_43
DIRECTIONS 2007
With only one contestant in this category I followed last year’s approach of looking tothe EURO 250 which opened it up to includeSAP. The quality and depth of the reporting for both of the companies was not great.
Sage Group does have a number of pages ontheir website discussing social responsibility.They state at this stage they do not set specifictargets for CR. Sage (UK) Limited which is partof Sage Group plc has produced their second CR report. This report does cover some mainpolicy issues and lists key objectives with aprogress update. Climate change is given apassing mention in the report and on the web.There is no reporting of carbon emissions just some examples of initiatives taken toreduce emissions.
I checked out the German SAP and only found a few pages in their annual report on CorporateGovernance and Corporate Citizenship on theirwebsite. With just a few examples of CR relatedactivities and no mention of climate change,SAP are not rated highly.
Software& ComputerServices:Sage Group
Panellist:
Angela McClowry
British Energy
SupportServices:Capita Group
Experian
Wolseley
Panellist:
Cindy Cahill
Deloitte
And the winner is:Experian
And the winner is:Sage Group
DIRECTIONS 2007
BAT’s web pages begin with a refreshinglyfrank statement – if a business is managingproducts which present a health risk then it’s all the more important for them to do so responsibly. Whatever you feel about thetobacco industry, they have a point.
This year BAT have dispensed with their hugereport and are reporting more briefly while they assess reporting structures for the future.Encouragingly they have produced updateson their commitments, including stakeholderengagement and dialogue on the key issue ofharm reduction in tobacco products. Theirwebsite is also a useful resource for informationin this transition phase, which hopefully will stayonce the new reporting structure is unveiled.Imperial continue to produce a wealth ofinformation and they have a highlights listwhich helps introduce the reader to the content.
Imperial produce an HTML version of theirreport which is a good way to navigate aroundthe annual information but their top level webpages aren’t as engaging as BAT’s. Gallaher is
now part of the JT Group, and whilst there isinformation on JT Group’s website it is difficultto see Gallaher’s performance specifically.It’s a difficult one to judge this year as thoughBAT haven’t produced a full report, they mustbe congratulated for handling a transition year with transparency and clarity. And theirclear tone of voice still outstrips Imperial’scombination of using a very corporate stylelanguage on one hand but strong words fromsenior executives at the beginning of the report.But Imperial are making improvements andpublishing expert (and critical) commentary ontheir progress makes for an interesting read.
So this year Imperial takes top slot. But it will beinteresting to see what happens next year andhopefully we’ll see more information on the truesustainability of the tobacco sector.
Tobacco:British American Tobacco
Gallaher Group
Imperial Tobacco
Panellist:
Lucie Harrild
salterbaxter
Travel &Leisure:British Airways
Carnival
Compass Group
Enterprise Inns
Intercontinental Hotels
Mitchells & Butlers
Punch Taverns
Whitbread
Panellist:
Adam Garfunkel
Independent CSRconsultant
And the winner is:Imperial Tobacco
M a ny of the co m pa n i es in this se c tor prov i d eco n s u m e rs with food and drink. With re ce ntpublic inte rest in iss u es of health, nutrition andp rove n a n ce, you would expect they would havel ots to say. Unfo rtu n a te l y, this is not the ca se.
Enterprise Inns and Punch Taverns producejust a single page on their websites. Mitchells & Butlers, another pub chain, does better with a well organised website and a report thatincludes figures for employee satisfaction andenergy consumption. But targets are missing.
Compass has gone some way to meetingconsumer concerns. Its ‘Balanced Choices’programme offers menus of healthier and moresustainably sourced foods. It also acknowledgesthat performance information is an area itneeds to address. Whitbread includes someenvironmental performance data, but again no targets.
In its 2006 annual review IntercontinentalHotels recognises that growing stakeholderpressure provides a business opportunity.Let’s look out for the promised CSR reportto be published at the end of 2007.
Carnival has achieved ISO 14001 certification forall its operating companies. Its environmentalmanagement report is an internal documentand not really fit for public consumption.
British Airways has a clear we bs i te section ca l l e d‘ Respecting our World’ that cove rs its principa li m pa c ts including climate change, but the we bs i teis missing a se n se of the lively deba te about airt ravel. Th e re are also fi ve pa g es in the annualre p o rt, an env i ro n m e ntal rev i ew and se pa ra ted ow n l oadable chapte rs of a 20 0 5/06 co r p o ra teres p o n s i b i l i ty re p o rt. Why these are PDFs and nothtml is unclea r. And why ‘Respecting our Wo r l d ’d o es not link to the re p o rt is also a myste r y.
With few perfo r m a n ce fi g u res, next to no ta rg ets,and no se n se that sta keholder views have beenco n s i d e red, the ove rall impression is of a se c to rthat is immatu re in its CSR re p o rting. BA winsa g a i n st pretty weak co m p et i t i o n .
And the winner is:British Airways
The FT UK 100 s e c t o rs
DIRECTIONS 2007
44_45
wi n nersAe rospace & Defe n c e :BAE Systems
B a n k s :HSBC
B e v e ra g e s :SAB Miller
C h e m i c a l s :Johnson Matthey
C o n s t ruction & G e n e ral Industries:REXAM
E l e c t r i c i t y :Scottish Power
Fixed Line Te l e c o m s :BT Group
Food & Drug Re t a i l e rs :J Sainsbury
Food Pro d u c e rs :Unilever
Gas, Water & M u l t i - u t i l i t i e s :National Grid
G e n e ral Fi n a n c i a l :Man Group
G e n e ral Re t a i l e rs :Marks & Spencer
Health, Pharma & Biotech and Healthcare ,Equipment & Services:GlaxoSmithKline
Household Goods:Reckitt Benckiser
Li fe Insura n c e :Legal & General
M e d i a :BSkyB
M i n i n g :BHP Billitonand Rio Tinto
Mobile Comms:Vodafone Group
N o n l i fe Insura n c e :Royal & Sun Alliance
Oil & Gas:Royal Dutch Shell
Real Estate:SEGRO
S o f t wa re & Computer Services:Sage Group
Support Services:Experian
To b a c c o :Imperial Tobacco
Travel & Le i s u re :British Airways
The
aaaaaaaaaaninininininnnnnnnnnnnn eseseseseseeeeeeeeeeee r r r r rrrrrrrrepepepepepepepepeporoooo tiiiiin4747474777477477747474777777% % % %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ofofofofofofofofoffofofofofofff cc cc c cccccccccccomomomomomomomomomomomoomoo papapapapapapapapapapapapaaa ngnggngngggggggggggggggggiiiii HHHHTTTMTTaaaaaarrrerererrrrrreerrrrr uuuuuuuuuuuuuusisisisiisiiiingngngnnnnnnnnngng HHHTTMTTTTTareeee uu uu usisissis ngg HTMliliililililillllionononononononoonononononononnlililiilililililililililiil nneneneeeenenenneenee aaaaaaaaaaaaaoooonnnnnlililillinnnenee a MLMMLLLLLLLLLMLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
99999990000000000000%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeee pppppppppppppp900000000000%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrreeeeee p gggggggg9999999999999 eeeee rrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppeeeeeeeeeee rrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeppppppppppppppppooooooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrtttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggggggg poooooooorrrrrrrrrtttttttttiiiiiiiiiinnnggggg ooooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnllllllllllooonnnlll eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelllllllllllllliiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnneeeeeeeeeeeelllllllliiiiineeeeeeeeeee
666666666666666666666660000000000000000%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% oooooooooooooooffffffffff rrrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeppppppppppppppppppppppppppppoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrtttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttsssssssssssssssssssss aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeee iiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnddddddeeeeeeeepppppppppeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnndddddddddddddeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnttttttttttttttttttlllllllllllllllllllllllllyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvveeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrriiiifffffffffffiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeddddddddddddddeeeerrrrrrrriiiiifffffffffiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiieeeeeddddddddddddddddddddpppp yyyyyyyy
DIRECTIONS 2007
666666622222%%%%% ppppprrrroooooddddduuuuuuccccccceeeeeeeeeppppprrrrrriiiiiinnnnnttttttttteeeeeddddddd rrrrrrrrreeeeeeepppppppooooorrrrrtttttttttttttssssssssssssss
676767676767767676767676776767% % % %% ofofofofof ccccccc cccomomomomomoooo papppp nininiinininn eseseseses a a a aarerererereeee iiiii iiin n n n nnnnnn6767676767%%%%% ofofofofof cccccomomomomompapapapapaniinininiesesesees aaaaarerereere iiiii676776767%%%%% ofofoffo cccccomoo paniesss aaaaarerereere iiiii6767676767%%%%% ofofoff compa iniiiies aaaarererethththththeeeee FTFTFTFTFTTTTTSESESESESE4G4G4G4GG4GGGGGOOOOOOOOOOODDDDD InInInnnnnInnndedededeeeedeeexxxxxthththththhththeeeee FTFTFTTTFTFTTSESESESESE4G4G4GGGG4G4GGGGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODDDDDDDD InInInnInnInIInnndededeededeeeeeexxxxxththhththee e ee FTFTFTFFTSEESEESE4G4444GGGGGGGGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD D D DD InnnInIInnnInnnnndeeededededeexxxxx
DIRECTIONS 2007
46_47
Use the monocle to reveal some of this year’s findings.
ANALYSIS
THE FOLLOWING CHARTS ARE THIS YEAR’S ROUND
UP OF WHO IS DOING WHAT IN CORPORATE
RESPONSIBILITY AND COMMUNICATIONS. WE’VE
LOOKED AT THE FT UK 100 AND FT EURO 100, PAYING
SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE VARIOUS TYPES OF
ONLINE AND INTEGRATED CR COMMUNICATIONS,
AND MENTIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
DIRECTIONS 2007
All research conducted by salterbaxter
AnalysisMethodology: We have made every effort to ensure that the data in Directions is accurate.
The research is based on company websites and printed reports. Every attempt was made to
verify the data with each company on the phone or via email. If we have missed data, please
get in touch and we will update our records. The categories we have chosen are not judgemental
but the following rules and definitions were applied to ensure a consistent approach.
The cut-off date
Our assessments are based on information in the public domain by 1 August 2007.
The list of FT UK 100 and
FT Euro 100 Companies
Taken from the Financial Times website and dated 30 March 2007.
CR Report – years
Shows the number of years the company haspublished either a CR Report, SustainableDevelopment or EHS Report. Reports notarchived in the company’s website may notbe counted. Mergers and acquisitions mayaffect these data by reducing the number of years recorded.
CR Report – format
Shows the format of the report ie printedsummary, printed in full, web report. Weindicate if the report is limited in scope or integrated within the annual report. We do not count the following as reports:web pages on CR which cover policies and programmes (without time-specificperformance information) and single issuereports e.g. on community, HIV, supplierdiversity. If reporting online we havespecified whether this is in the form of an express PDF, HTML format or both.
Other integrated CR communications
Identifies whether there are any examples of CR communications outside of CR report.Examples might include product advertisingand internal campaigns.
Independent verification statement
Report includes a formal verification or assurance statement by third parties. We have not counted informal comments by external commentators.
FTSE4Good Index
Company included in any of the FTSE4GoodIndex Series (Global, US, Europe, UK).
Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI)
Company included in any of the DJSI series (World, STOXX, EURO STOXX) as of May 31 2007.
United Nations Global Compact (UNGC)
Signatory to the United Nations GlobalCompact.
Business in the Community Ranking
Shows if the company is ranked in theBusiness in the Community’s (BITC) CRindex. Each identified company would havebeen placed within the performance bands:platinum, gold, silver or bronze. It is alsostated if a company is a member but notpart of the index.
Climate Leadership Index 2006
Shows inclusion in the Climate LeadershipIndex. The index is based on companyresponses to the Carbon Disclosure Projectand comprises the 50 ‘best in class’.
Performance against
environmental targets
The report covers a range of environmentalimpacts and the company’s performance data is reported against specific targets for continuous improvement.
Performance against social targets
The report covers a range of social impactsand the company’s performance data isreported against specific targets forcontinuous improvement.
Attention to climate change
Shows if the company has paid attention to climate change including statements on strategy, tackling the issue, targets and performance on either the website or within the report.
The FT UK 100 and FT Euro 100
The FT UK 100 and FT Euro 100 combined are a group of 177 companies. This meansthat 74 companies are in the FT UK 100 butfall outside the FT EURO 100. The followingcharts and the analysis overview listsinformation for the group as a whole butseparated by sectors for ease of reference.
FT UK and Euro 100
KEY Yes a See comments CR/CSR = Corporate Responsibility/Corporate Social Responsibility AR = Annual Report EHS = Environment, Health & Safety m = Member of Business in the Community
Sector name
28 117 COMPANY NAME UK 7 • -- • • • -- • -- • -- -- -- • •
FT UK 100 listing on the leftFT Euro 100 listing on the right
Country
CR repo
rt – y
ears
Printed
repo
rt
Printed
summary
repo
rt
Online C
R communica
tion
Reporti
ng onlin
e – PDF
Reporti
ng onlin
e – HTM
L
Other integ
rated
CR communica
tions
Verif
icatio
n
FTSE
4Good
DJSI
UNGCBiTC
rankin
g
Climate
lead
ership
index
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
envir
onmental
targe
ts
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
socia
l targe
ts
Attentio
n to cl
imate
chan
ge
Notes
DIRECTIONS 2007
62%60%
47%
51%
90%
68%
FT UK and Euro 100
Analysis overview48_49
Printed reports last year 49%
Web reports last year 59%
Reports independently verified last year 55%
Printed reports this year 54%
Web reports this year 91%
Reports independently verified this year 91%
Last year VS this year:
We had a quick look for trends in UK reporting, comparing UK data from last year’s analysis with UK data from this year.
67%
62% produce printed reports 60% of reports areindependently verified
90% are reporting online
51% of companies show evidence ofintegrated CR communications
67% of companies are in the FTSE4GOOD Index
68% of companies pay someattention to climate change
47% of companies reporting online are using HTML
DIRECTIONS 2007
Aerospace & Defence
28 117 BAE SYSTEMS UK 7 • -- • • -- • • -- • • • • • • •42 181 ROLLS-ROYCE GROUP UK 8 • -- • • • • • -- • -- • -- -- -- --
59 269 SMITHS GROUP UK 6 • • • • • • • -- • -- m -- • • •
Automobiles & Parts
33 DAIMLERCHRYSLER G 5 • -- • • -- • -- -- • -- • • • • •65 VOLKSWAGEN G 6 • -- • • • -- • • -- • -- -- • • •89 BMW G 6 • • • • • • -- • • • -- • • • •
Banks
3 4 HSBC UK 7 • -- • • -- • • • • • m • • • •6 14 ROYAL BANK UK 5 • -- • • • • • • • • -- -- • • --
OF SCOTLAND
7 27 BARCLAYS UK 8 • -- • • • • • • • -- • • • • •10 38 HBOS UK 4 • -- • • -- • • • • -- • • • • •13 50 LLOYDS TSB UK 11 • • • • • • • • • -- • -- • -- •21 86 STANDARD CHARTERED UK 6 • -- • • -- • -- • -- • -- -- • • •71 ALLIANCE & LEICESTER UK 6 • -- • • -- -- • • -- -- m -- -- -- --
73 NORTHERN ROCK UK 7 -- -- • • • -- • • -- -- -- -- • • •13 UBS Sw 9 • -- • • • • • • • • m • • • •16 SANTANDER CENTRAL Sp 5 -- -- • • -- -- • • • • -- -- • -- --
HISPANO
20 BNP PARIBAS Fr 7 • -- • • -- -- -- • • • -- -- • -- --
21 INTESA SANPAOLO IMI It 3 • -- • • -- -- • a -- b -- -- • • • a = will join in September 2007b = Banca Intesa S.p.A July 2006 only
31 BBVA Sp 5 • -- • • • • • -- -- -- -- -- • • •32 CREDIT SUISSE Sw 11 -- -- • • • • -- • • • m • • -- •34 ABN AMRO N 4 • -- • • • -- • • • • -- • • • •36 SOCIETE GENERALE Fr 6 • -- • • • -- -- • • -- m -- • • •41 SBERBANK OF RUSSIA Ru 0 • -- -- a -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = within AR
42 DEUTSCHE BANK G 9 • -- • • • • -- • • • -- -- • • •49 CREDIT AGRICOLE Fr 2 • -- • • • -- -- • -- • -- -- -- -- --
53 FORTIS B 4 • -- • • • -- • • • • -- • -- -- •74 KBC GROUPE B 2 • -- • • • -- • • -- • -- -- • • •84 NORDEA BANK Swe 0 -- -- • -- -- -- -- • -- • -- -- -- -- --
99 DEXIA F 6 • -- • • -- -- • • • • -- -- • • •
Beverages
15 51 DIAGEO UK 8 • -- • • -- • • • • • • • • • •26 103 SABMILLER UK 8 -- -- • • -- • • • • -- m -- • • •62 279 SCOTTISH & NEWCASTLE UK 7 • -- • • -- • • • -- -- • -- • • •
76 INBEV B 3 • -- • • • • -- -- -- • m -- • • •
FT UK 100 listing on the leftFT Euro 100 listing on the right
Country
CR repo
rt – y
ears
Printed
repo
rt
Printed
summary
repo
rt
Online C
R communica
tion
Reporti
ng onlin
e – PDF
Reporti
ng onlin
e – HTM
L
Other integ
rated
CR communica
tions
Verif
icatio
n
FTSE
4Good
DJSI
UNGCBITC
rankin
g
Climate
lead
ership
index
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
envir
onmental
targe
ts
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
socia
l targe
ts
Attentio
n to cl
imate
chan
ge
Notes
FT UK and Euro 100
Analysis
KEY Yes a See comments CR/CSR = Corporate Responsibility/Corporate Social Responsibility AR = Annual Report EHS = Environment, Health & Safety m = Member of Business in the Community
50_51
DIRECTIONS 2007
KEY B = Belgium Den = Denmark Fin= Finland Fr = France G = Germany It = Italy Ire = Ireland N = Netherlands Nor = Norway Ru = Russia Sp = Spain Swe = Sweden Sw = Switzerland UK = United Kingdom
FT UK 100 listing on the leftFT Euro 100 listing on the right
Country
CR repo
rt – y
ears
Printed
repo
rt
Printed
summary
repo
rt
Online C
R communica
tion
Reporti
ng onlin
e – PDF
Reporti
ng onlin
e – HTM
L
Other integ
rated
CR communica
tions
Verif
icatio
n
FTSE
4Good
DJSI
UNGCBITC
rankin
g
Climate
lead
ership
index
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
envir
onmental
targe
ts
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
socia
l targe
ts
Attentio
n to cl
imate
chan
ge
Notes
Chemicals
56 262 ICI UK 17 -- • • • • -- • • • • -- -- • • •91 411 JOHNSON MATTHEY UK 5 -- -- • • -- -- -- • -- -- m -- • • •
60 BASF G 19 • • • • -- -- • • • • -- -- • • •68 BAYER G 8 • -- • • • • • • • • -- • • • •
Construction & Materials
60 273 HANSON UK 4a • -- • • • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- b -- a = no reporting update since 2003 reportb = only Health and Safety targets from 2005
94 VINCI Fr 2a a -- • a -- -- -- -- • • -- -- -- -- • a = within AR
97 SAINT-GOBAIN Fr 2a a -- • a -- -- -- • -- • -- -- -- -- -- a = within AR
Electricity
31 125 SCOTTISH & UK 7 • -- • • -- -- • • -- -- • -- • • --SOUTHERN ENERGY
32 120 SCOTTISH POWER UK 11 -- • • • • • • • a a • • • • • a = parent company Iberdrola
57 263 INTERNATIONAL UK 5a a -- • • -- -- -- • -- -- • -- -- -- • a = within AR
POWER
9 EDF Fr 10 -- -- • • • • • -- -- • • -- • • •47 ENEL It 10 • -- • • -- • • • • • -- • -- -- •56 UNIFIED ENERGY Ru 2 • a b • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- • • -- a = summary in english
SYSTEM b = no web pages, only link to report
58 ENDESA Sp 6 • • • • -- • • -- • • -- -- -- -- •79 IBERDROLA Sp 8 • -- • • -- -- • -- • • -- • • -- •
Electronic & Electrical Equipment
22 SIEMENS G 8 -- -- • -- • -- -- -- • • m • -- -- --
92 ABB Sw 12a • -- • • -- -- • -- • • m -- • • • a = past 3 yrs as Annual Report Sustainability review
Fixed Line Telecommunications
18 70 BT GROUP UK 15 -- • • • • • • • • • • -- • • •83 370 CABLE & WIRELESS UK 6a a -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = no update since 2003 report
17 TELEFÓNICA Sp 5 • • • • • • • • • • -- -- • • •40 DEUTSCHE TELEKOM G 9 • -- • • -- -- -- • • • -- -- • -- •45 FRANCE TELECOM Fr 7 • • • • -- -- • • -- • -- -- • • --
63 TELECOM ITALIA It 9a b -- • • • -- • • • • -- -- • • • a = 2003 current report as part of AR. Previously produced a sustainability report
b = within AR
Food & Drug Retailers
11 44 TESCO UK 6 • -- • • • • • • • -- • • • • •39 170 SAINSBURY (J) UK 12 • -- • • • • • • • -- • -- • • •43 196 MORRISON (WM) UK 2 a a a • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = within AR
SUPERMARKET
66 CARREFOUR Fr 6 • • • • • -- • • • • -- -- -- -- •165 ALLIANCE BOOTS UK 8a • -- • • • • • • • -- m -- • • • Boots group is listed as 37 on FT UK 100 list
a = not yet released report as merged Alliance Boots.
DIRECTIONS 2007
FT UK and Euro 100
Analysis
KEY Yes a See comments CR/CSR = Corporate Responsibility/Corporate Social Responsibility AR = Annual Report EHS = Environment, Health & Safety m = Member of Business in the Community
FT UK 100 listing on the leftFT Euro 100 listing on the right
Country
CR repo
rt – y
ears
Printed
repo
rt
Printed
summary
repo
rt
Online C
R communica
tion
Reporti
ng onlin
e – PDF
Reporti
ng onlin
e – HTM
L
Other integ
rated
CR communica
tions
Verif
icatio
n
FTSE
4Good
DJSI
UNGCBITC
rankin
g
Climate
lead
ership
index
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
envir
onmental
targe
ts
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
socia
l targe
ts
Attentio
n to cl
imate
chan
ge
Notes
Food Producers
22 18 UNILEVER N/UK 11 • -- • • • • • • • • • • • • •30 123 CADBURY SCHWEPPES UK 6 • -- • • -- • • • • • • • • • •49 228 ASSOCIATED BRITISH UK 5 • • • • • • -- -- -- -- m -- -- -- --
FOODS
7 NESTLÉ Sw 7 • -- • • -- • -- -- • • m -- -- -- --
80 DANONE Fr 9 • -- • • -- • • -- -- • -- -- -- -- --
Gas, Water & Multiutilities
20 81 NATIONAL GRID UK 10 -- -- • • • -- -- • • -- • -- • • •TRANSCO
29 119 CENTRICA UK 5 -- -- • • • • • • • • • -- • • •52 220 UNITED UTILITIES UK 10 • -- • -- • -- • • • -- • -- -- -- •92 414 KELDA GROUP UK 8 • -- • • • -- • • -- -- • -- • • --
94 419 SEVERN TRENT UK 12 • -- • • -- • • • -- • • -- • • •26 E.ON G 3 • -- • • -- • • -- -- • m -- -- -- •46 SUEZ Fr 7 • • • • -- • • -- -- • -- -- -- -- •55 RWE G 9 • -- • • • • • -- • • • • • • •73 GAZ DE FRANCE Fr 7 • • • • • -- • -- -- • -- -- • • •
General Financial
34 153 MAN GROUP UK 2 • -- • • • • • • -- • m -- -- • --
65 292 3I GROUP UK 4 • -- • • -- -- -- -- • -- • -- -- -- •74 325 AMVESCAP UK 0 -- -- • -- -- -- -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- --
89 400 SCHRODERS UK 5a -- -- • • • -- -- • • -- -- -- -- -- -- a = formal reporting moved to online in 2005
90 409 ICAP UK 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
General Industrials
96 431 REXAM UK 3a -- -- • -- • -- -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- • a = 2 printed reports in 2003 & 2004. 2006 report online only
General Retailers
33 142 MARKS & SPENCER UK 5 • -- • • -- • • • • -- • -- • • •53 244 KINGFISHER UK 6 • -- • • -- • • • • -- • -- -- -- •68 301 NEXT UK 3 -- -- • • -- -- • • -- -- m -- -- -- --
84 374 HOME RETAIL GROUP UK 1 -- -- • • -- -- • -- • -- • -- • • •98 443 DSG INTERNATIONAL UK 4a a -- • a -- • -- • • -- • -- -- -- • a = within AR
82 HENNES & MAURITZ Sw 5 -- -- • -- • • -- • • • -- -- • • --
87 INDITEX Sp 4 • -- • • -- -- • • • • -- -- • -- •
Healthcare Equipment & Services
54 258 SMITH & NEPHEW UK 7 -- -- • • • -- -- • • -- m -- • • •
Household Goods
24 93 RECKITT BENCKISER UK 6 -- • • • -- • • • • • • -- • -- •81 357 PERSIMMON UK 2 • -- • • • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- • • •
52_53
DIRECTIONS 2007
FT UK 100 listing on the leftFT Euro 100 listing on the right
Country
CR repo
rt – y
ears
Printed
repo
rt
Printed
summary
repo
rt
Online C
R communica
tion
Reporti
ng onlin
e – PDF
Reporti
ng onlin
e – HTM
L
Other integ
rated
CR communica
tions
Verif
icatio
n
FTSE
4Good
DJSI
UNGCBITC
rankin
g
Climate
lead
ership
index
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
envir
onmental
targe
ts
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
socia
l targe
ts
Attentio
n to cl
imate
chan
ge
Notes
KEY B = Belgium Den = Denmark Fin= Finland Fr = France G = Germany It = Italy Ire = Ireland N = Netherlands Nor = Norway Ru = Russia Sp = Spain Swe = Sweden Sw = Switzerland UK = United Kingdom
Industrial Engineering
96 VOLVO Sw 13a a -- • • -- -- -- -- • • -- -- -- -- • a = within AR
Industrial Metals
23 ARCELOR MITTAL Fr 1a b -- • • • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- • a = as merged Arcelor and Mittal Steel companyb = within AR
98 MMC NORILSK NICKEL Ru 4 • -- • • -- -- • -- -- -- -- -- • • --
Industrial Transportation
75 A.P. MOLLER-MAERSK Den a a -- • a a -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = briefly mentioned in AR
95 DEUTSCHE POST G 4 • -- • • • • • • -- • -- -- -- -- •
Leisure Goods
77 PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N 8 • -- • • -- • • • -- • -- -- -- -- •
Life Insurance
23 91 AVIVA UK 9 -- • • a • -- • • • • m -- -- -- • a = pdf of summary
25 100 PRUDENTIAL UK 6 • -- • • -- • -- • -- -- m -- • • •35 156 LEGAL & GENERAL UK 6 • -- • • -- -- • • • -- • -- • • •41 180 OLD MUTUAL UK 6a • -- • • • • -- b -- c -- -- -- -- • a = Old Mutual South Africa only
b = UK Old Mutual plc c = Old Mutual Kenya
51 236 STANDARD LIFE UK 2 • -- • • -- • • • -- -- • -- • -- •78 350 RESOLUTION UK a -- -- a -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- • a = within AR
82 362 FRIENDS PROVIDENT UK 5 -- -- • • -- • -- • • -- • -- • • •25 ING N 12a -- • • • • • • • • • -- • • • • a = 3 yrs CR reports & single issues before that
Media
38 166 BRITISH SKY UK 6 • -- • • -- • • • • -- m -- • • •BROADCASTING
40 172 WPP GROUP UK 4 • -- • • • • -- • • -- m -- -- -- •46 118 REED ELSEVIER N/UK 5 -- -- • • • -- • • • • • -- • • •48 223 PEARSON UK 4 -- -- • • • • • • • • • -- • -- •58 268 REUTERS UK 4a a -- • • • • -- • • -- m -- • • • a = within AR
75 327 YELL GROUP UK 3 • -- • • • • -- • • -- m -- -- -- --
80 353 ITV UK 4 • -- • • • • • • • -- • -- • • •99 434 DAILY MAIL UK 2a • -- • • • • -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- • a = within AR
72 VIVENDI UNIVERSAL Fr 8 • -- • • -- • • • -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Mining
9 37 ANGLO AMERICAN UK 7 • -- • • -- -- • -- • • • • • • •14 57 RIO TINTO UK 11 • -- • • • • • -- • • • • • • •16 64 BHP BILLITON UK 7 -- • • • • • • • • • • • • • •17 69 XSTRATA UK 6 • -- • • • • • -- • • • • -- -- •64 286 KAZAKHMYS UK 0 -- -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
DIRECTIONS 2007
FT UK and Euro 100
Analysis
KEY Yes a See comments CR/CSR = Corporate Responsibility/Corporate Social Responsibility AR = Annual Report EHS = Environment, Health & Safety m = Member of Business in the Community
FT UK 100 listing on the leftFT Euro 100 listing on the right
Country
CR repo
rt – y
ears
Printed
repo
rt
Printed
summary
repo
rt
Online C
R communica
tion
Reporti
ng onlin
e – PDF
Reporti
ng onlin
e – HTM
L
Other integ
rated
CR communica
tions
Verif
icatio
n
FTSE
4Good
DJSI
UNGCBITC
rankin
g
Climate
lead
ership
index
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
envir
onmental
targe
ts
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
socia
l targe
ts
Attentio
n to cl
imate
chan
ge
Notes
Mining (continued)
67 300 LONMIN UK 6 • -- • • • -- • • • -- -- -- • • •69 302 ANTOFAGASTA UK 3a a -- • • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = within AR
85 380 VEDANTA RESOURCES UK 3a a -- • • -- -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- • a = within AR
Mobile Telecommunications
5 11 VODAFONE UK 7 • -- • • • • • -- • -- m -- • • •90 TELIASONERA Swe 3a -- -- • • • -- -- • • -- m -- -- -- • a = CSR report 2004 and 2005. 2006 in AR
Nonlife Insurance
72 315 ROYAL & SUN ALLIANCE UK 8 -- -- • • -- • • • -- • • -- • • •100 456 ADMIRAL UK 1a a -- • • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = within AR
28 ALLIANZ G 7 • -- • • -- • -- • • • -- • • • •30 AXA Fr 5 • -- • • -- • • • -- • m -- -- -- --
61 GENERALI It 2 • -- • • -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
83 ZURICH FINANCIAL Sw 2 -- -- • • -- -- -- • • • • -- -- -- --SERVICES
88 MUNICH RE G 7 • • • • • • • • -- -- -- • • -- •
Oil & Gas Producers
1 2 ROYAL DUTCH SHELL UK 10 • • • • • • • • • • m • • -- •2 3 BP UK 10 • -- • • • • • • • • m • a -- • a = extensive data on performance but not against targets
19 71 BG GROUP UK 11 • -- • • • • • • • -- -- -- • • •1 GAZPROM Ru 2a • -- • • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = environmental reports 2005 & 2006
5 TOTAL Fr 7a • -- • • -- • • • • • • • • • • a = including 2 yrs prior to name change
12 ENI It 10 • -- • • • • • -- -- • -- -- -- -- •29 ROSNEFT Ru 1 • -- a -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
39 LUKOIL Ru 3a • -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = no update since 04 report
52 STATOIL Nor 13a • -- • • • -- • • • -- -- -- -- -- • a = 8 yrs within AR, 5yrs sustainable development report
67 SURGUTNEFTEGAS Ru 0 -- -- a -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = two sentences, referring to charity work for theatresand music
78 NORSK HYDRO Nor 13a b -- • • -- • • • • -- -- -- -- -- • a = 6yrs as Environment report, 7 yrs as part of ARb = within AR
85 REPSOL-YPF Sp 8 • -- • • • -- • • • -- -- -- -- -- •
Personal Goods
43 L’OREAL Fr 4 • • • • -- • • • -- • -- -- -- -- --
62 LVMH Fr 6 • -- • • -- -- • • -- -- m -- • -- •
Pharma & Biotech
4 6 GLAXOSMITHKLINE UK 7 -- • • • -- • • • • a • • b -- • a = GSK in Bulgaria, Pakistan, Romania and Ukraine are signatories
b = for performance against targets reader is referred to the 2005 report
8 35 ASTRAZENECA UK 8 -- • • • -- • • • • -- • -- • • •
54_55
DIRECTIONS 2007
FT UK 100 listing on the leftFT Euro 100 listing on the right
Country
CR repo
rt – y
ears
Printed
repo
rt
Printed
summary
repo
rt
Online C
R communica
tion
Reporti
ng onlin
e – PDF
Reporti
ng onlin
e – HTM
L
Other integ
rated
CR communica
tions
Verif
icatio
n
FTSE
4Good
DJSI
UNGCBiTC
rankin
g
Climate
lead
ership
index
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
envir
onmental
targe
ts
Perfo
rman
ce ag
ainst
socia
l targe
ts
Attentio
n to cl
imate
chan
ge
Notes
Pharma & Biotech (continued)
61 274 SHIRE UK 3a • -- • • • -- -- • -- -- • -- -- b -- a = 2006 report was released after cut off dateb = for Health and Safety
8 ROCHE Sw 15a a -- • • -- • • • • -- -- -- -- • • a = now within AR
10 NOVARTIS Sw 13 -- • • • -- -- -- • • • -- -- -- a • a = for Health and Safety
15 SANOFI-AVENTIS Fr 3 • -- • • -- -- • • • • -- -- -- -- --
Real Estate
36 161 LAND SECURITIES UK 5 • -- • • • • • • • -- m -- • • •44 203 BRITISH LAND UK 6 -- • • • • • • • • -- m -- • • •70 304 HAMMERSON UK 4 • -- • • -- -- • • • -- m -- a a • a = produce a separate target review
76 335 LIBERTY INTERNATIONAL UK 5 • • • • -- -- • • -- -- • -- -- -- --
87 391 SEGRO UK 4 • -- • • • -- • • -- -- m -- • • •
Software & Computer Services
93 415 SAGE GROUP UK a -- -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- m -- • • -- a = no separate report produced, however Sage UK have been reporting for 4 yrs
59 SAP G 1a -- -- • -- -- -- -- • • • -- -- -- -- -- a = within 2005 AR
Support Services
45 207 WOLSELEY UK 1a a -- • • • • -- • -- -- m -- -- -- -- a = within AR
55 261 EXPERIAN GROUP UK 2a -- -- • • • -- • -- b -- m -- -- -- • a = 2yrs, since demerging from GUS plc in October 2006, prior to which 5 yrs reporting as Gus plc
b = GUS plc was a signatory, Experian will be assessed in 2007
79 351 CAPITA GROUP UK 2 -- -- • • -- • -- • -- -- -- -- • • •
Technology Hardware & Equipment
24 NOKIA Fin 7 -- • • • • • -- • • • -- -- -- -- •54 ERICSSON Sw 11 • -- • • -- • • • -- • -- -- • • •
Tobacco
12 48 BRITISH AMERICAN UK 6 • -- • • -- -- • -- • -- • -- • • •TOBACCO
27 106 IMPERIAL TOBACCO UK 6 • -- • • -- -- • -- -- -- • -- -- -- --
47 214 GALLAHER GROUP UK 6a • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- • -- -- • -- a = acquired by Japan Tobacco Inc in 2007, not produceda report since
Travel & Leisure
50 230 COMPASS GROUP UK a -- -- • -- • -- -- • • • m -- -- -- -- a = reporting as Compass Group North America
63 281 BRITISH AIRWAYS UK 17 -- -- • • -- -- • • -- • m -- • -- --
66 295 CARNIVAL UK 2 -- -- • • -- -- -- • -- -- -- -- -- -- --
77 341 INTERCONTINENTAL UK 1a • -- • • -- • -- • -- -- -- -- • • • a = focussed on Americas only so does not cover entire
HOTELS organisations. Only in AR. No update since 2005 report
86 388 WHITBREAD UK 4 -- -- • • • • • • -- -- • -- -- -- --
88 395 ENTERPRISE INNS UK 3a a -- a a -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a = within AR
95 423 PUNCH TAVERN UK 1a a -- a a -- • -- -- -- -- m -- -- -- -- a = within AR
97 437 MITCHELLS & BUTLERS UK 2 • -- • • -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
KEY B = Belgium Den = Denmark Fin= Finland Fr = France G = Germany It = Italy Ire = Ireland N = Netherlands Nor = Norway Ru = Russia Sp = Spain Swe = Sweden Sw = Switzerland UK = United Kingdom
Our clients are extremely varied and include FT UK 100
companies; some of the world’s most exclusive brands;
independent, entrepreneurial businesses; world leading
educational establishments; law firms; private equity
firms and media companies.
We are widely perceived to be one of the leading consultancies
in the field of corporate responsibility.
We have worked on over 130 CR communications programmes
since we started in 1998. Our offer covers the full range of
advisory work. From pure strategic consulting for a FT UK
100 board, to the launch of complete CR programmes from
scratch; from internal embedding of CR, to highly sophisticated
online CR reporting; from building CR into global consumer
brand strategies, through to small, targeted single issue
campaigns – our experience is unrivalled.
If you would like to discuss a project with us, please get
in touch.
Salterbaxter advise companies
on strategy, branding, corporate
communications and design.
DIRECTIONS 2007
About us
This report is yours to keep but if you do need to recycle it, please peel back the cover and dispose of magnet separately.
Printed on Think Bright and supplied by Howard Smith. It is an FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certified material and is 100% recyclable. www.hspg.comwww.fscpaper.co.uk
Printed by CTD, an ISO 14001 certified and FSC accredited company. TT-COC-2142©1996 Forest Stewardship Council A.C. www.ctdprinters.com
202 Kensington Church Street London W8 4DP
Tel +44 (0)20 7229 5720Fax +44 (0)20 7229 5721www.salterbaxter.com
If you would like to find out
more, please get in touch:
Nigel [email protected]
Lucie [email protected]
Pavan [email protected]
Tel: +44 (0)20 7229 5720
