Businesses dialling down on their net zero commitments have much to lose, writes IAIN CLUNIE
In 2023, a new phrase was inducted into the corporate lexicon – ‘quiet quitting’. It was generally deployed to describe an informal work to rule action by employees who felt undervalued by their employers or burnt out by their jobs.
Quiet quitting is an ongoing issue in workplaces, but it’s no longer restricted to employees. It has spread to businesses themselves as economic, social and political pressure is either encouraging them, or allowing them leeway to quiet quit on diversity and climate commitments.
The epidemic of businesses backtracking on their ESG commitments is particularly pronounced in the United States, but it is increasingly an issue in the Scottish, British and European markets as climate scepticism continues to infect public discourse.
Research shows that quiet quitters in a workforce have more sick days, lower productivity, lower creativity, and negative workplace relationships, all of which take a toll on the individual. But the impacts of businesses quiet quitting on their Net Zero commitments can be equally as high.
While some businesses may find short-term relief by aligning with climate scepticism or stepping back from climate commitments, this approach risks significant financial and legal consequences down the line. Investors and regulators are increasingly demanding transparency and action, meaning the long-term costs of quiet quitting on Net Zero are likely to far outweigh any immediate gains.
Organisations which quietly drop pledges to become carbon neutral can face higher energy and fuel costs in an already highly disrupted energy market. They also lose competitive advantages in global markets where sustainability credentials remain important to most influential buyers.
In the UK, we have spoken to every major supermarket retailer as well as leading foodservice and wholesalers to understand their expectations for food and drink suppliers. Those buyers have hard and fast commitments to reducing their Scope 3 emissions, meaning that their suppliers must adapt and meet their criteria if they want to continue to sell into £195.3 billion UK grocery market.
And it’s not only buyers of food and drink products that are concerned. Investors, from high street banks to private equity, are actively seeking to de-risk their portfolios from carbon liability. Hearteningly, they are still asking tough questions about the sustainability of the businesses they fund in our new reality of climate uncertainty.
Scotland Food & Drink has identified a £4 billion growth opportunity for producers in its recent Levers for Growth and Sustainability report. To unlock that potential, however, action is needed by both businesses and governments. The report identifies high costs to transition to more sustainable practices as a barrier that businesses face and challenges the Scottish and UK Government to provide greater funding opportunities for food and drink producers.
That reinforces the findings of a recent survey we conducted which found that 73% of food and drink businesses identified a lack of financial support as either ‘challenging’ or ‘very challenging’.
The vast majority of respondents to the survey (88.9%) also said that unlocking more funding support would help their businesses to advance towards Net Zero emissions.
If we’re serious as a nation in reaching Net Zero and tackling the climate emergency that is already upon us, there is no excuse not to act.
Collectively, we need to cauterise the epidemic of quiet quitting on environmental commitments and prevent growing climate scepticism from further infecting our public debate and economy.
Quiet quitting on environmental action is simply not an option.
Iain Clunie is programme director of Scotland Food & Drink Partnership’s Net Zero Commitment
>Latest Daily Business news
Related
#High #costs #loom #ESG #quitters #Daily #Business #Magazine