“Pomona College’s Sustainability Action Fellowship Reconsidered”

Article by: Nik Tyack, Pomona'11, an Environmental Analysis, Biology, and Chemistry Major.

Last year, 29 students took part in Pomona College’s Sustainability Action Fellowship, a program organized by Bowen Close, Pomona’s Sustainability Coordinator as a way for students to be “integrally involved” in the creation of the College’s Sustainability Action Plan.

The Sustainability Fellowship was organized into six groups, composed of 4-6 students each: energy, water, waste, education and outreach, purchasing and environmental justice.

The responsibility of each group was to develop the rough draft of a chapter of Pomona’s first-ever Sustainability Action Plan by researching what other schools had done, senior theses, the audit conducted during the summer of 2008, and other sources.

While the President’s Climate Commitment, signed by President Oxtoby on April 20^th, 2007, required Pomona College to both conduct an emissions audit of the campus and prepare a climate action plan (turned in on September 15, 2008 and September 15, 2009, respectively) over the past year or so, both Pomona’s audit and Sustainability Action Plan are more all-encompassing.

“I knew I would need a lot of support and input in the creation of our sustainability plan --- our goals, directions and priorities,” responded Pomona’s sustainability coordinator Bowen Close, who helped conduct the summer audit and was almost entirely responsible for setting up and running the Sustainability Fellowship.

“I also knew that students would be really excited about getting involved, and learning more about how the College works and how we could move forward,” Close continued. “The Fellowship is a great way for students who are interested in sustainability as a career field to get some practical experience in the area.”

All Sustainability Fellows who took part had to help draft their particular chapter of the Sustainability Action Plan, while those students who opted to take part in the Fellowship for credit were also required to submit two “Extended Strategies” detailing a particular sustainability measure in their category (energy, waste, etc.) that they thought Pomona College should take.

Since the completion of the 2008-2009 Sustainability Fellowship, Pomona College’s Board of Trustees has approved a new Environmental Policy that officially created the Sustainability Integration Office, of which Close is head, and finalized Pomona’s Climate Action Plan. Close is currently working on fine-tuning the Sustainability Action Plan with PACS, or Pomona’s President’s Advisory Committee on Sustainability, a group of environmentally-inclined faculty and students, and her four paid assistants, Joanna Ladd PO ’10, Wendy Lovinger PO ’12, Samantha Meyer PO ’10 and Nate Wilairat PO ’11. The plan will come up for review in May of 2010.

Students who took part were generally positive about the experience. Energy Fellow Sam Gordon PO ‘11 said, “It’s important to have a group like the Sustainability Fellowship in and of itself. It illustrates that sustainability is a priority of both Pomona and Pomona students,” but also pointed out that, “it was hard to understand the mechanisms behind the changes that would be made--- it wasn’t exactly clear where it was going, and we didn’t know enough about the school though Bowen did a great job explaining it to us.”

“Bowen has a really tough job,” Gordon continued. “She’s been treading new paths and doing a really impressive job.”

Purchasing Fellow Zach Mattler PO ’11 also praised Bowen, responding, “I loved Bowen, she treats you like a peer and was very positive. She got (and is getting) a lot of people excited about sustainability at Pomona.”

Waste Fellow Nate Wilairat PO ’11 said, “The Fellowship was a great way to have a hand in determining where the college goes in terms of sustainability. It definitely made me realize the not insignificant hurdles the administration has to deal with, and showed me that you have to respect the opinions of the many different groups involved, like the housekeepers or dining staff. You can’t just force them to pick up all the composting; you have to take into account the extra work that goes into that.”

And Eleanor Hughes PO ’11 responded, “I really enjoyed being on the Environmental Justice committee. Environmental justice is one of the most important aspects of achieving sustainability, and is one of the most important things our generation will have to strive for. Social justice and environmental sustainability aren’t compartmentalized--- they need to be looked at in a holistic way. Basically, environmental justice wants what everyone else wants but in a fair way, so not at someone else’s expense or on the backs of workers here. Sustainability should be a community effort.”

“Most schools that have launched groups like the Sustainability Fellowship don’t have committees that deal with environmental justice, so Pomona was one of the first.”

Sustainability Coordinator Bowen Close expressed her satisfaction with the Fellowship process upon query, saying, “The student teams did wonderful work--- the form of the plan is quite different than the form of the papers that were turned in, but the research and conclusions of the Fellowship groups from last year were invaluable in beginning to set up the format for the plan and for understanding the potential for various things the College could be doing to move forward.”

Close cited her excitement about putting together the plan, which will establish goals for the College in various categories and help the Sustainability Integration Office determine priorities and targets for moving forward, and mentioned that there will be a variety of opportunities for students, staff and faculty to give input on the draft of the plan and its components.

While the Sustainability Fellowship is on hold for this year, Close said she hopes to bring it back next year, but that “we’ll need to figure out what role it takes. For instance, perhaps it will become a yearly course focusing on a variety of campus sustainability projects, or perhaps it will become a partnership between my office and PEAR or another student group.”

Regardless of what form the Fellowship takes in the future, Close finished by saying, “I’m really committed to students being involved in the process of sustainability on campus. Not only is it meaningful for students to be a part of things, it’s also a great educational experience and provides students with some great projects to put on a resume when they graduate and are looking for jobs in sustainability-related fields. As we finish the plan and move towards implementing it, I’m hoping the Fellowship can be revived to provide students with valuable experiences in working on projects and programs to help us reach our [sustainability] goals.”

Environmental Disclosure in SEC Filings

This is a well written, succinct memorandum by Davis Polk and Wardwell (Environmental Practice Group) found online. Many thanks for your time and effort put into this.

-Elgeritte Adidjaja, REC Research Fellow

Link to document: http://www.davispolk.com/1485409/clientmemos/01.21.09.env.disclosure.sec.filings.pdf

Roberts Environmental Center gives top marks to Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis, with Abbott Laboratories, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck close behind

Claremont, Calif., December 14, 2009— The Roberts Environmental Center publishes analyses of the world’s largest companies’ sustainability reporting. Using the Pacific Sustainability Index (PSI), pharmaceutical companies were scored; and results, commentary, and rankings were published in the report. Scoring is based on the transparency, intent, and performance for both environmental and social issues.

The research is based on the reporting on each company’s web pages. Bristol-Myers Squibb (U.S.) and Sanofi-Aventis (France) led the sector as the two highest scoring companies. The lowest scoring companies, Forest Laboratories and NBTY, were two of the smallest companies in the sector, and both based in the United States. There was a slight trend between PSI scores and annual revenue; however Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer, the two largest corporations in the sector, both showed room for improvement.

Prior to the report’s release, companies were given the chance to respond to their scores and release additional information if available. Often this correspondence reveals information not previously captured in the scoring system.

“Although Biogen Idec scored low in the rankings, from speaking with staff responsible for sustainability matters, the company appears to be committed to many environmental programs; however, the top executives are not yet receptive to reporting them publicly” said Elgeritte Adidjaja, Research Fellow at Roberts Environmental Center.

The sector report includes the final scores and rankings for the 26 largest pharmaceutical companies. Commentary by the center’s analysts provides additional insight regarding overall performance of each company in the sector.

To view the complete report, visit: http://www.roberts.cmc.edu/PSI/SectorReports.asp.

About Roberts Environmental Center

The Roberts Environmental Center is an environmental research institute at Claremont McKenna College located in Claremont, Calif. Its mission is to provide students with a comprehensive and realistic understanding of today’s environmental issues and the ways in which these issues are being and can be resolved, beyond the confines of traditional academic disciplines and curriculum. The Center strives to identify, publicize, and encourage policies and practices that achieve economic and social goals in the most environmentally benign and protective manner.

Scoring Summary

Highest Overall Scores

Bristol-Myer Squibb

Sanofi-Aventis

Abbott Laboratories

Highest Environmental Reporting Scores

Bristol-Myer Squibb

Johnson & Johnson

Sanofi-Aventis

Abbott Laboratories

Highest Social Reporting Scores

Merck

Sanofi-Aventis

Bristol-Myers Squibb

Abbott Laboratories

AstraZeneca

Lowest Overall Scores

Forest Laboratories

NBTY

King Pharmaceuticals

Time to Act: L.A., Democracy and Climate Change

Article by: Nik Tyack, Pomona'11, an Environmental Analysis, Biology, and Chemistry Major.

Last Thursday, November 12^th at 7 p.m., an event entitled “Time to Act: L.A., Democracy and Climate Change” released some of the local and international results of World Wide Views, a global forum on climate change that was attended by citizens around the world.

Thirty-eight countries around the world took part, and approximately 4,000 citizens in 38 countries around the world were enabled to “define and communicate their positions on issues central to the UN Climate Change negotiations (COP15) in Copenhagen December 7-18, 2009,” according to the World Wide Views website.

The event was organized by Politics Professor Rick Worthington and Grace Vermeer PO ’10, and was sponsored by Pomona College’s Program in Public Policy Analysis, the Public Events Committee, the President’s Office, the Draper Center and Harvey Mudd College for Environmental Studies. Its basic format involved a welcome and introduction by Grace Vermeer, the maitre’d of the evening, followed by a brief recap of World Wide Views by Professor Worthington, a lecture given by keynote speaker Jim Sadd, a professor of environmental science at Occidental College, and finally, a panel session at the end designed to catalyze discussion between audience members and panelists of the event’s significance and strategies to move forward.

Professor Worthington began by presenting some pictures and explaining that overall, 80 % of World Wide Views were “very concerned” about climate change, 94 % thought it was “urgent” that a climate deal be made, and 38 % thought that countries that broke the rules set forth in such a climate deal be “severely punished.”

87 % thought that everyone but the poor should have to deal with the costs of doing so.

Worthington then continued by trying to explain why World Wide Views had recommended action so strongly, and whether or not it was a leading indicator. He mentioned that this could have been because of the info materials (provided by the relatively neutral IPCC) or self-selection (which probably had some affect), but suggested that the real reason was the process of being informed and then deliberating about the issue.

“I think that World Wide Views is a good indicator of where public opinion will go --- has more people learn about climate change and think about the consequences it will have, they most likely will become concerned.”

Following Worthington’s presentation of World Wide Views’ results, the featured speaker Professor Sadd gave a talk entitled “The Climate Gap” that suggested that climate change will have disproportionate effects on the poor and “people of color.” Not only are they more affected by pollution, which gets worse when temperatures increased, a handful of studies have shown that heat waves in California kill mainly elderly, low-income, socially-isolated individuals who have no air conditioning or no functional air conditioning. Furthermore, almost twice as many blacks die due to heat waves than whites.

Sadd also mentioned that policy responses could also make the inequality of the negative effects of air pollution by allowing certain heavily-polluting facilities in poorer areas to maintain a constant or increase their level of pollution even as overall pollution decreases. “Cap-and-trade could aggravate already existent health hazards,” he pointed out.

Two individuals from the Five County area who had taken part in Pomona’s World Wide Views event then gave an account of what they had learnt and why the event had been significant for them.

Blanca Quintanilla said, “I learned that we can empower community leaders and get involved ourselves. If we don’t voice our opinions, our air and water will all get worse. We will be poisoned by our own nature, and the consequences will be devastating.”

“All countries need to take responsibility for the betterment of the climate.”

Jose Diaz, a second participant whose Spanish had to be translated for the audience, then spoke, saying, “The governments are responsible --- they need to do something positive. We have to make change. We have to get united. We think we can continue to advance.”

He finished by exhorting developed countries to “adopt mechanisms and technologies that do not poison our planet.”

Up next was Pomona Environmental Analysis professor (and fearless director of the E.A. program) Char Miller, who gave a brief synopsis of the problem facing humanity, as he sees it.

“The problem we are facing as a species is, ‘How do we not kill ourselves?’,” he said. “We must respond in a united fashion.”

Miller mentioned that the topic is compelling to him as a historian. “How did previous generations unite and what thoughts did they have to think to change the way they acted to create a better world for their children?”

He cited the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, a period typically known as the “Progressive Era” as an example of a time where significant progress on environmental issues was made.

“With the perils of the Industrial Revolution in mind, they reinvented the way we related to Nature, and gave us the idea of wilderness as a construct.”

“Today, we’re drawing off of their energy and seeking to find a way to stop poisoning our world and ourselves. Scientifically and politically --- how can we unite and put into place the recommendations of World Wide Views, and others?”

He finished with the parable of planting trees. “When is the best time to plant a tree?” he asked. “The first best is ten years ago. And the second best is now.”

His talk was then followed by a question-and-answer session, in which students, facilitators, and members of local environmental organizations like the Energy Retrofit Group and Sustainable Claremont all took an active role. Devon Hartman of the Energy Retrofit Group emphasized the importance of using science and generating political will, suggesting that there are enough bright and engaged minds in Claremont to make a difference, while Professor Worthington stated that World Wide Views in his opinion illustrated that people can have a voice and their opinions can be heard.

In a final note, WW Views participant Jose Diaz said, “It’s big--- all of us have to work together. You have to understand. The government doesn’t care about the people--- we have to get united to make change.”

“We are a majority, those of us who are suffering. We have to unite. There are very few getting very rich.”

“We have to make a change.”

Report Grades Sustainability Reporting of the Largest Chemical Companies

The Roberts Environmental Center (REC) has released an analysis of the environmental and social sustainability reporting by 30 of the top companies in the Chemical Sector of the Fortune 500. REC ranked Bayer, BASF, and Sherwin-Williams high on the grading scale.

The original scoring took place between December 2008 and January 2009. The companies were provided the opportunity to review the initial scores and make recommend changes to the points given or to add information for a potentially higher score. Many companies responded with new information, which substantially increased their grades.

“Bayer, BASF, and Dow Chemical have been the champions of sustainability reporting in the chemical sector for years,” said REC Research Fellow Elgeritte Adidjaja. “This year, however, Sherwin Williams caught up in the review period by disclosing much of the information needed in their sustainability reporting and publishing it on-line, raising their score from the bottom half of the sector to near the top.”

Several companies, including BASF and Praxair, submitted newly-published Sustainability Reports to be re-scored. Through this process of revision, the REC empowers each company to improve its own before final publication of the sector analysis.

As expected, companies with higher revenues and profit margins tended to score higher in the report. Larger companies are more heavily scrutinized in the public eye and have additional resources to put into monitoring and reporting sustainability performance. However, while this may be a trend, it is not a rule, as several large companies have low scores and some of the top performers are relatively small.

View the complete report.

Scoring Summary

Highest Overall Scores
Bayer
BASF
Sherwin Williams

Highest Environmental Reporting Scores
Bayer
BASF

Highest Social Reporting Scores
Bayer
Sherwin Williams
Dow Chemical
BASF

Lowest Overall Scores
Mosaic
Hexion Specialty Chemicals
Solutia

NEW REPORT GRADES SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING OF THE TOP CHINESE COMPANIES

Roberts Environmental Center gives top marks to China Ocean Shipping with Lenovo, Baosteel, and Sinopec close behind

Claremont, Calif., November 9, 2009—The Roberts Environmental Center of Claremont McKenna College (CMC) today released a detailed analysis of the social responsibility reporting efforts of China’s top corporations. The report contains a compilation of Pacific Sustainability Index scores evaluating the environmental and social reporting of the 29 Chinese companies on the 2009 Fortune Global 500 list.

The report scores companies based on the reporting, intent, and performance of environmental and social sustainability efforts. The research, based entirely on material released on the firms’ Web sites, found that China Ocean Shipping and Lenovo, two of the smallest companies in the group, and Baosteel, only a little larger, had the best scores. The largest firm in China, Sinopec, came in forth with the two other largest firms, China National Petroleum and State Grid coming in fifth and sixth. Only about ten companies had scores comparable to their European and American counterparts, with two-thirds of the group hardly reporting at all. All the lowest scoring firms were in the general size range of the three leaders, so clearly size is not the determining factor in doing the best job of describing details of companies’ socially beneficial actions and environmental management.

The Roberts Environmental Center invited the Beijing-based sustainability consulting firm, SynTao, to add its insights into the current state of Chinese sustainability reporting, and the report contains SynTao’s informative synthesis.

“Chinese corporations are really just getting started in sustainability reporting.” said Emil Morhardt, Roberts Professor of Environmental Biology at CMC and director of the Roberts Environmental Center, “But we expect them to be leaders within a few years.”

To create the report’s ranking, Morhardt and his team evaluated each company’s Web site using the Pacific Sustainability Index including sector-specific questions. The index uses a general systematic questionnaire to analyze the quality of sustainability reporting. The selection of questions was based on the most frequently-mentioned topics in almost 1,800 corporate sustainability documents analyzed from 2002 through 2008 by the Roberts Environmental Center. The company’s grades in this report were assigned on a grading curve, giving an A+ to the highest scoring companies and those with scores near it.

“In the current business climate, a demonstration of corporate social responsibility is more important than ever,” continued Morhardt. “What we are analyzing is the quality of that demonstration—how transparent the companies are with respect to their environmental and social issues, and how good a job they are doing resolving any problems they currently have and avoiding future ones.”

The detailed analyses also reveal what social and environmental themes these companies perceive to be most important. The research screened Web site content to determine the most frequently reported topics. Companies with environmental achievements tended to tout their accountability and energy efficiency efforts while socially responsible businesses highlighted their superior policies and care for human rights.

To view the complete report, visit: http://www.roberts.cmc.edu/PSI/SectorReports.asp.

About Roberts Environmental Center

The Roberts Environmental Center is an environmental research institute at Claremont McKenna College located in Claremont, Calif. Its mission is to provide students with a comprehensive and realistic understanding of today’s environmental issues and the ways in which these issues are being and can be resolved, beyond the confines of traditional academic disciplines and curriculum. The Center strives to identify, publicize, and encourage policies and practices that achieve economic and social goals in the most environmentally benign and protective manner.

Scoring Summary

Highest Overall Scores

China Ocean Shipping

Lenovo Group

Baosteel Group

Sinopec

Highest Environmental Reporting Scores

China Ocean Shipping

Sinopec

Baosteel Group

COFCO

Highest Social Reporting Scores

China Ocean Shipping

Lenovo Group

Baosteel Group

Sinopec

Lowest Overall Scores (all 0)

Bank of China

China Communications Construction

China Life Insurance

China Minmetals

China Metallurgical Group

China State Construction

The Motley Coffeehouse will charge an extra $1 for to-go cups starting October 21.

Article by: Nik Tyack, Pomona'11, an Environmental Analysis, Biology, and Chemistry Major.

The biodegradable to-go cups currently in use can be recycled at Pomona’s organic farm, but only 5 percent currently end up being disposed of in this fashion, according to the Motley. The café said significant energy and resources go into producing the cups and bringing them to campus. Furthermore, when they are thrown out, as most are, they end up in landfills, which “do not facilitate decomposition.”

The Motley’s FAQ on their new policy states that the compostable cup is “simply a band-aid that promotes out-of-sight out-of-mind mentality.”

Alana Macwhorter SC '10, the Motley’s Sustainability Manger, said the move would promote "environmental stewardship" and decrease the amount of waste generated from the café's cups.

“Last year, we had 5,000 pounds of unnecessary waste from to-go cups during the school year," she said. "We had to do something if we wanted to maintain our reputation as an environmentally and socially conscious institution.”

“Individual students may not think their actions make a difference,” she continued. “But if an avid Motley-visitor used one to-go cup every day, they’d generate 175 pounds waste over their four-year college career.”

Now, students can either make a little bit more time in their day to drink coffee in a ceramic mug at the Motley, buy one of the Motley’s $12 containers, or cough up the money for a disposable cup.

Alana further mentioned that the Scripps’ café’s semester goal is to revitalize the space and spirit of the Motley.

“We want to challenge the norm and make people conscious,” she said. “We have an opportunity to make a big, positive change on campus. Obviously there will be mixed reactions, but we want to make people think and hopefully act. Sometimes it takes a little bit of an economic incentive to get people to do that.”

Pomona Professor of Economics Bo Cutter agreed, responding, “A small price can help you remember, and can act as a reminder of the true environmental costs of to-go cups.”

“The Motley’s new policy is a good example of a business internalizing externalities in their prices. It’s a very economic solution, and is much better than just getting rid of to-go cups altogether, in my opinion,” Bo continued. “It’s a much better business strategy, as well; imposing limits is unfriendly to your customers, while preserving choice is important so that people who really need the to-go cups can still get them.”

Alana concurred, saying the policy was created in the context of the “experiential economy” of the 5C’s.

Why should people keep coming to the café even with the raised prices? In the words of the Motley’s FAQ, because the café is “constantly questioning [itself] as a business and the impact [it] has on the 5C community… [The Motley] is coming from a place of genuine concern for the future of our planet and wants to utilize [its] influence to form life-long sustainable habits and awareness.”

“It’s not just about the coffee anymore.”

The Motley is a non-profit organization, so all extra proceeds resulting from the new charge will go to a Scripps coffeehouse program that funds programs including the “I Love Female Orgasm” series.

While the Motley isn’t lining its pockets with the profits garnered from its new policy, some students aren’t happy with the way the coffee-house is trying to institute sustainability.

As Alex Efron (PO ‘11) responded, “Full-cost pricing is okay, but the money should go directly to what [the Motley] is trying to reduce --- in this case waste. So, for example, they could use it to fund a recycling education program, or waste-reduction efforts around campus. It just seems selfish to me to inconvenience students with a ‘sin tax’ on disposable cups without putting the money they make where their mouth is.”

“It’s one thing to send a message to students about sustainability,” he continued. “But too many of these new, so-called ‘sustainable policies’ are just ‘hippie-critical.’”

Others, Sam Dubin (SC ‘10) responded, “I understand why they’re doing it, and I think it’s a really cool idea, but I still think they should make it more affordable to take out. Their corn mugs are on sale at a pretty steep price - $12 – and they say they’ll subsidize them, but I think it’s a lot of paperwork… Overall, though, I think the change will help set up a better system --- people will get used to it,” said Sam Dubin (SC ’10).