Monday, April 19, 2010

Wootliff: Businesses Ahead Of Enviro Curve

By Margaret Kriz Hobson  

Jonathan Wootliff

Head of corporate accountability at Reputation Partners

Fortune 500 companies are scrambling to respond to climate change, in part to protect their corporate images, according to Jonathan Wootliff, head of corporate accountability at Reputation Partners, a communications firm based in Chicago. Wootliff, who was previously communications director for Greenpeace International, said that multinational companies are leading the charge to establish U.S. environmental standards for greenhouse gas emissions. The international push to control climate change pollution will spur new innovation in energy and environmental products, he argued, predicting that "the next Bill Gates is going to be in this arena." Following is an edited excerpt of Wootliff's recent interview with National Journal.

NJ: How are the businesses you work with reacting to the U.S. climate change debate?

Wootliff: I've been involved with this issue for the best part of 20 years. There is a compelling business case for corporations to look at and deal with the climate change issue. Because if you accept that climate change is really happening, sooner or later there's going to be legislation, or at least regulation, that is going to require you to do something about it. And if not, then you're going to be reputationally disadvantaged if you seem to be a large greenhouse gas emitter. You'll need to protect your image as a corporation.

But on the flip side of this, if this is not a climate change issue it's an energy issue. We need to increase technology to open the door to sustainable solutions and take away the dependency on gas, coal and oil. That's actually going to be good for the long-term economic sustainability of a business anyway. So whatever side of the argument we're on, it would be very strange for any corporation not to be looking at how we can somehow address this issue, which is indeed what they are doing.

There is not a Fortune 500 company that doesn't have a department that is looking at this and preparing for this, and are actually ahead of the curve legislatively. The reason why there needs to be legislation, however, is so that everyone is on the same page. That's what legislation is for.

This has to be standardized. And right now we've got different corporations doing different things, working at different levels in bringing different types of solutions to the issue. They're setting their own emissions targets. Some are assuming there will be a cap-and-trade program. Some are looking at different mitigation programs.

There's no evidence that business is shying away from the issue. And businesses are increasingly demanding a direction. We live in a global world, and multinational corporations don't want to have one set of standards in one part of the world and another set in another part of the world. With the United States not having a legal framework at all -- it's untenable. So I think that the drive for all of this is going to be coming increasingly from business.

NJ: Do corporate officials tell you they want climate change legislation?

Wootliff: I think businesses -- well, certainly the large corporations that I'm talking with -- are actually saying that we want to have some direction on this. We don't want to be pushed and swayed and cajoled and lobbied by every environmental group and have to come to our own decisions as to what direction we're going to go on this. We need to know what standards can be established so that we can actually behave accordingly.

NJ: Is there investment waiting in the wings for clear climate change rules?

Wootliff: There certainly is evidence that there's a lot of money to be made from the whole climate change issue. Carbon trading is just one of them. There are technologies and mitigation programs and the like. In fact, there's already a huge amount of money being made on this, and we can see that there is a massive opportunity.

Legislation is going to unleash untold amounts of investment in this area. There's absolutely no doubt. I often say that we're limited only by your imagination on this. Clearly the world is going to change in terms of energy in the next 20 years. The investment community is just waiting for the green light to really switch this on big-time. I'm saying that the next Bill Gates is going to be in this arena.

NJ: Will companies that have already invested in this get hurt if we postpone legislation further?

Wootliff: I'd like to believe that most companies that are ahead of the curve will actually benefit. So much of this is corporate imaging, the kind of corporate marketing that you see when you turn on the TV and you wonder why they're actually doing it [at] all because they're not selling a product. They're saying that they're green companies. They say that they are in touch with where we're going for the future. And whether they're a bank or a heavy industrial sector business, it seems like it's all the rage. Businesses are really jumping onto this bandwagon. I'd like to believe that the companies that are ahead of the curve on this are probably going to be the first to benefit when there are rules. I can see a scenario where they would lose out because of the delay in legislation. But it probably depends on the type of investment they've made.

NJ: Can the companies convince Republicans to vote for a climate bill?

Wootliff: You just triggered a point that I really want to make. For a long time, the NGOs [non-governmental organizations] have been targeting the legislators. But increasingly it's become tough to pass legislation. Not just on the federal level, but at an international level. Look at the chaos that occurred in Copenhagen. After years and years of preparation, the whole thing effectively collapsed and became a bit of a kind of face-saving rather than a planet-saving outcome.

All these groups that have been working on climate change for all these years are increasingly frustrated on the difficulties of getting anything done either domestically or internationally. They are increasingly turning to the corporate sector and applying pressure on them. They get a hold of the good guys and say, "Look at these guys. Why can't you do that? And look at how well they're doing as a result." The Environmental Defense Fund is working with industry -- they're taking the carrot approach. The likes of Greenpeace are taking the stick approach.

So I think the focus will shift much more toward the business side, because businesses are ready showing significant signs of changing anyway.