Australian Paper

Soon after the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster, Greenpeace UK encouraged designers to submit posters rebranding BP’s flower logo. From around the world, over one thousand submitted designs ranged in tone from darkly humorous to bitter, venomous, frustrated and outraged.

While drawing attention to the Gulf catastrophe, Greenpeace also aimed to discredit BP’s green credentials and its claim that it is ‘beyond petroleum’. Its green logo, Greenpeace contends, is another example of corporate greenwashing.

Adding its own fuel to already inflamed popular opinion, Greenpeace’s campaign nevertheless confirmed one thing: bad reputations escalate fast in the information age.

But alongside all the spin and bad news, there’s a wealth of useful information available to those genuinely wanting to practice sustainability. In areas such as the sharing of ideas, the sourcing of information on sustainable design and improved accountability, there are many independent organisations set up to help businesses.

The intention of sustainable design is, of course, to avoid any detrimental impact on the environment. But there are also social and economic considerations. Together, these concerns comprise the triple-bottom-line approach: a holistic philosophy also known as ‘The Three Ps’ – plant, people and profit.

Achieving sustainable design relies upon sourcing sustainable materials. Like any system, a business supply chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

Many corporate websites declare the sustainable credentials of their companies; often it’s in their annual reports. For those wary of exaggerated claims, the easiest way to verify accuracy is to see if that company has been independently audited. Companies who have been audited will proudly wear that appellation. After all, reputations are at stake and misleading claims can come back to hurt.

But as respected website Ecospecifier warns, “all labels are not recreated equal”. So, as a consumer, it helps to research the standards by which companies judge their own products. Always look for products, companies and certifications/labels that have been independently audited. The Australian Government’s ‘Greenhouse Friendly’

logo administered by the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (and scrutinised by the ACCC) is a goldstar example of an independently audited certification/label, as is the FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) logo that certifies that fibre inputs only come from sustainable forests.

For those who commission work or buy products from Third World countries, the ‘Fair Trade’ logo ensures workers are fairly paid and maintain a decent standard of living. Fair Trade has a social consequence and an economic benefit to workers and their communities: by paying a fair price for goods and services you ensure money is available for infrastructure, like schools and healthcare, in the product’s country of origin.

‘Good Environmental Choice’ is another respected label. This Australian program indicates the environmental performance of a consumer product from a whole-of-product-life perspective. The internationally recognised program awards its label to “products that meet voluntary environmental performance standards, which have been created and assessed in conformance to international environmental labelling standards”.

ISO (International Standards Organisation) certification is designed to “make the development, manufacturing and supply of products and services more efficient, safer and cleaner. They make trade between countries easier and fairer. ISO standards also serve to safeguard consumers and users of products and services in general – as well as making their lives simpler”.

Smaller companies, however, don’t always have the money required for auditing. But it costs nothing to ask questions. For designers, it’s often a matter of asking printers or merchants for advice. If your printer can’t help, find another. There’s a lot of information out there already and organisations like AGDA, Designers Accord and AIGA provide basic information for anyone wanting to keep an independent eye on the claims made by others.

The benefits of sustainable design and sourcing are not just about future proofing the planet, they’re also about the survival of businesses.

“From my point of view,” designer Stefan Sagmeister has said, “living a full life includes doing no harm, and being aware of the world that you live in on various levels.”

The occasion for the reflection was the launch of Worldchanging: a user’s guide to the 21st century, that he had designed.

A bestselling book of 2006, Worldchanging includes a foreword by such heavy hitters as Al Gore and Bruce Sterling, while its editor, Alex Steffen, runs the influential non-profit web magazine of the same name. If Sagmeister comes across as idealistic, Steffen is very much aware of the bottom line.

“Money spent making greener profits is not a cost, it’s an investment,” says Steffen.

If you want facts and figures, ask Fuji Xerox. Since initiating its Sydney recycling facility, the company has recovered 99% of end-of-life equipment and parts, saving $13 million in new part costs, generated export revenue of $5 million, and created over 100 new jobs. For its efforts, Fuji Xerox is a finalist in the large business category of the 2010 Premier’s Sustainability Awards.

While awards might be confirmation of their corporate social responsibility, surely it’s the million-dollar profits that matter most. Doesn’t a business succeed by focusing on one thing: the bottom line?

Increasingly, businesses – like those on the Dow Jones sustainability index or the FTSE 4 Good, to which the Xerox parent company has been nominated – are realising that profit is only part of the equation. For them, contributing something back to society and being environmentally sustainable is also part of the economic business model – the triple bottom line.

Indeed, the very fact that big companies have chief financial officers or even chief sustainability officers scrutinising the triple bottom line is a transformation in corporate governance.

As the very existence of those stock market indices suggest, corporate social responsibility is not only increasingly prevalent, it’s the basis for a burgeoning shareholders revolution.

Taming the fickle and demanding shareholder is a major enterprise. It’s about having them recognise ‘patient capital’ – acknowledging that greening a company and corporate social responsibility takes time – and that stakeholders, not just shareholders, are affected by businesses. Exponential growth is appealing, but difficult to sustain.

But the sustainability revolution doesn’t need to happen only at the big end of town. As the directors of Etiko and Sustainable Living Fabrics, Nick Savaidis and Bill Jones, testify smaller companies can make a positive contribution as well.

While research by the Mobium group, Living LOHAS, suggests people are prepared to pay price premiums of around 5–10% for sustainable products, Savaidis and Jones believe it’s simply about a fair price for a fair-trade product.

Both directors agree that good products can be profitable with everyone along the supply chain paid fairly, the environment left undamaged, the wider community aided by company charities and the loop completed by educating the next generation.

Under the triple bottom line model, profit is not just the economic value created by the organisation after deducting the cost of all inputs. Value is measured by how society also profits.

As humble stakeholders, we can still create change. As Joel Makower, author of Strategies for the Green Economy, declares: “Every time you open your wallet, you cast a vote – for or against the environment!”

Or, as Stefan Sagmeister is wont to say, “Everything I do always comes back to me”.