Conservation and the corporate clout

If anyone doubts the clout of corporate power, consider this: of the world’s top 100 economies, over half are not countries - but companies. Reason enough for environmentalists to engage vigorously with business, argues Robert Napier, WWF’s newly appointed chief executive.

Business and industry has a profound effect on the environment. All too often, business practices contribute to climate change, pollution, deforestation and the destruction of natural resources. That’s why WWF’s policy to engage with this audience is more important than ever.

With my own business background (most recently as CEO of Redland plc), I’m convinced that this growing engagement is good news for all concerned. It means that we can harness business and industry’s influence, collaborate as partners in the search for solutions to environmental problems - and, where appropriate, secure funds for WWF’s conservation work. As I see it, we all benefit.

But underpinning all our decisions in this arena is the principle of inherent sustainability. This involves an assessment of the long-term impacts of a potential partner’s actions and activities on the environment, and the capacity it has for transforming itself into a sustainable business.

I have always believed in the "licence to operate": if a company is to move forward, it can only do so with the support of its employees, its customers and society in general. All the time, these stakeholders are becoming more and more demanding - not least, it seems to me, where the environment is concerned.

Today, business and industry is faced with three challenges: globalisation, information technology and consumer power. Each has a handle on sustainability, which has rapidly moved from being a fashionable buzzword to something that is firmly on the boardroom agenda. Any company ignores this at its peril, because unless it understands and acts on the need to move towards a sustainable modus operandi, it will lose its licence to operate.

That’s where I believe WWF can help. We take a robust, pragmatic approach to our business relations, and while there are clear exceptions - the offensive armaments or tobacco industries, for example - we will work with most organisations, so long as they show they are on a path to environmental performance improvement, or are fundamentally committed to change. Indeed, poor past performance may well be a very good reason for getting involved with a company - so long as there is a clear commitment to improve - since it shows just how much work there is to be done.

WWF’s global reach and our desire to engage in reasoned debate make us uniquely placed to work with the corporate sector. We’ve already had successes in this arena. To take just one example, the WWF 95+ Group is a partnership between ourselves and nearly 100 companies in the UK committed to purchasing increasing proportions of their timber products from forests that are independently certified as well managed. From that has developed an international network of timber buyers’ groups that already operates in Europe, North America and Australia, and is shortly to expand to Brazil, Italy, Japan and Hong Kong.

By anyone’s standards, this is no mean achievement. I intend to increase our engagement with companies considerably in the year ahead. Over the years, business and industry has been a significant sponsor of WWF’s conservation and education work, and I recognise that these partnerships must relate as much to the social and economic context in which industry operates as to its actual environmental performance.

The pressures on both the corporate sector and the environment are considerable, as I well know - but pressure is there to be overcome, and I look forward to building healthy and stimulating corporate relationships in the coming years. Please join me.

17 October 2001

Robert Napier