Today, the veil of secrecy is being lifted on a project in which my colleagues and I have been engaged for several years: The creation of a global sustainability standard for business.
The standard is being developed in partnership with UL Environment, a business unit of the venerable Underwriters Laboratories, the 115-year-old standards and certification organization best known for its ubiquitous "UL" logo associated with safety assurance on millions of products. UL Environment was established 18 months ago to do for the environment what UL has done for safety: create credible standards where they are needed. The initial focus of UL Environment has been on product standards.
For the past year or so, my team at GreenBiz.com has been engaged with UL Environment to develop and commercialize a company-level standard for sustainability — that is, environmental, social, and corporate governance issues — to be used as a procurement tool for companies, government agencies, and others.
Today, at the Global Reporting Initiative annual conference in Amsterdam, Marcello Manca, vice president and general manager at UL Environment, participated on a panel during which he talked about this project publicly for the first time. The final standard won't be launched until later this year.
A little history is in order. The idea for a business-level sustainability standard dates back to 2003, when a group of individuals representing nonprofits, government agencies and companies in the San Francisco Bay Area came together to create a business council to share best practices in engaging with companies on sustainability issues. One project that emerged was the need for a standard -- what did it mean to be a "sustainable business?" We weren't the first or only ones asking that question, of course, but we began an effort to figure it out.
We received seed funding from StopWaste.Org, an Alameda County, Calif., public agency, to begin developing a standard. A core group of five of us (including two sustainability veterans: Gil Friend, president of Natural Logic, and David Johnston, president of What's Working, along with Rory Bakke and Justin Lehrer of StopWaste.Org) labored for several years, ultimately building a framework and a partial standard before lack of funding forced us to set the project aside. (I wrote about that earlier attempt to write a standard in a 2005 blog post.)
In 2008, Greener World Media, the company I co-founded that produces GreenBiz.com, among many other things, decided to develop a new standard. Along the way, we met Manca and his colleagues at UL at our 2008 Greener By Design conference, and learned they were planning an environmental spin-off, UL Environment. The pieces fell into place. Bakke, who headed business programs at StopWaste.Org and served as our team leader from 2003 through 2007, joined Greener World Media as director of sustainability and heads the standard-development process. Inspired by the seminal work done by the original team, we developed a new standard.
The 2003 vision remains largely intact, including our original notion of looking beyond mere "green" to the broader arena of sustainability. The new standard covers environment, workforce, social and community engagement, customers and suppliers, and "governance for sustainability."
We've long described this in shorthand as "LEED for Companies" -- that is, a point-based rating system along with good-better-best levels of certification. We have been inspired by the success of the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED green building rating systems, which created definitions of "green building" where there were none. Those ratings systems were critical catalysts in spurring the green building market. Similarly, we believe this new standard and rating system will help define sustainability at the enterprise level, growing markets for certified companies.
Of course, the LEED analogy only goes so far. LEED isn't perfect, and companies aren't buildings -- they vary infinitely in terms of size, sector, geography, activities, culture, inputs, outputs and the people who engage with them every day. What companies do can have far-reaching ripples both upstream and downstream. So, designing a standard for companies has been a complex challenge, to say the least.
The first draft of the standard has now been completed and is beginning a robust process of stakeholder feedback. The plan is to have a final version ready for the marketplace later this year.
As I said, this will be a procurement and supply-chain standard -- a tool for companies and others to use in assessing companies with which they do business. Companies, government agencies, universities and other entities will each decide how to use it -- as a requirement for suppliers, for example, or as a way to compare companies vying for their business, or perhaps as a tie-breaker in requests for proposals. It is being designed as a global standard, though it will initially be introduced in North America.
We intend this standard to be a learning tool as much as a certification process -- a means for companies to benchmark themselves on sustainability measures and to identify what specific measures they can take that would be most impactful for their operations and stakeholders. We plan to develop tools companies can use to assess how they would fare under this standard, regardless of whether or not they seek certification.
You may be asking, “How is this different from the dozens of other standards out there?” The short answer is that this one is different. First, as I said, this is a company-level standard, of which there are relatively few. It is the first global standard on sustainability that is comprehensive in scope, global in application, and verifiable by trained, accredited third parties. It includes management quality and reporting, but emphasizes performance and is intended for mainstream companies -- the kind typically found in company supply chains -- not just for smaller, values-led companies already committed to being leaders. Finally, it integrates with dozens of other standards from around the world -- a rich alphabet soup that includes ASHRAE, BOMA, CDP, GRI, ISO, IUCN, SPC, UNESCO and many others.
There will be much more to say later in the year, as we formally launch the system and announce our key partners, initial pilot companies, and more. For now, we wanted to lift the veil in order to engage more effectively and collaboratively in the hard work that lies ahead.
Joel Makower is executive editor of GreenBiz.com.


Browse
Engage
Research

































































































Special Education Leader Earns A+ for LEED® Gold Certified Green
Perhaps, our audiences' will find this informative: Special Needs School Builds Texas’ Greenest K-12
Please Visit
http://www.howtogreenschools.com
YouTube video showcasing the green team's journey and results at
http://bit.ly/9QU4h9
A New Sustainability Standard for Business
Congratulations to the Team!
I look forward to watching the initiative unfold!
The ISEAL Codes of Good Practice
Now that the veil of secrecy is being lifted on this new and exciting program, this is the time to make sure the ISEAL Code of Good Practice for Setting Social and Environmental Standards is followed. The ISEAL Codes is globally accepted as a normative reference for engagement of stakeholders, including other standards systems with overlapping content.
ISEAL offers itself as resource and opportunity to UL Environment. Please let me know how we can help you have increased positive impact.
Best wishes,
David Gould
Member Support Manager
PS - ISEAL expects to ratify its new Impacts Assessment Code by end of June. Soon to follow is the development of a new Verification Code.
Stakeholder Feedback
I, too, am interested in the "stakeholder feedback" process. I run an EPA voluntary partnership for supermarket companies. Supermarkets have a huge impact on the environment, which means of course that environmental improvements are a major part of these corporations' social responsibility missions and plans. For reasons beyond my comprehension, some of the areas of greatest impact, like refrigerant emissions, are ignored by mainstream environmental rating systems. Refrigerant emissions are responsible for 1/3 of a supermarket's carbon footprint, more than the whole transportation fleet at most supermarket companies. I'd like to help make sure that your system does not make the same mistake that others have made, including some of the alphabet soup organizations you mention in the article.
Accredited
Your new Sustainability standard for business is an excellent idea. I see that the standard will be verifiable by trained, accredited third parties. How can I get involved in the verification process?
Thanks!
Leading OSH Metrics
Congratulations on your progress to date. Even though you haven't shared the provisions of the standard, the concept is good and the need for it is clear. My concern is about any OSH metrics you may have included. My organization, ORC Worldwide, focuses on OSH issues globally. We have not seen robust OSH indicators included in sustainability standards, guidelines, reports, reporting systems etc. Those we have seen are almost exclusively focused on illness and injury rates as defined by OSHA, flawed and lagging indicators. We believe leading metrics must be incorporated for a accurate measure of the robustness of occupational safety and health programs at companies across the supply chain, which should be a key component of a sustainability standard. We hope that you have done so in your standard, or are open to discussion about including some.
What about C2C?
Does this new Standard take into consideration Cradle to Cradle or the Green Products Innovation Initiative. What about collaboration with them?
An Open Letter to Joel Makower, Gil Friend, et. al
Joel, Gil, et. al,
I hope you don't mind that I wrote my comments on my blog.
Well done!!
http://businessforgood.blogspot.com/2010/06/open-letter-to-joel-makower-...
stackholder' feedbacks
It would be nice to get more information regarding publication. Is draft avaiable for comments? what is the forum expected for the development of this document? How do we participate in this activity?looking forward to hear aobut this in near future.
Best Regards
Bansi Patel
Sharp SESG
Companies starting at home?
I notice that you emphasize how companies can use this tool to evaluate their direct suppliers and others in the supply chain. That is, companies will use it to decide if OTHERS are acceptably responsible in terms of ESG. The image it evokes is large Western companies going to Asian suppliers, asking pointed questions about ESG.
But as they say... regime change begins at home. I hope your standard will first be used by companies to evaluate THEMSELVES, and only then taken outward to rate others. I have seen few Western companies that actually live up to the "standards" they proclaim for their suppliers in terms of ESG. It is so easy to ask others to change, and so difficult to transform ourselves. My hope is that we make ourselves MODELS for change, not merely "change agents."
Sincerely,
Kim
Including ISO 26000?
I see "ISO" in your alphabet soup. Hope that mean you're including ISO 26000, now on its way to approval - http://www.iso.org/iso/pressrelease.htm?refid=Ref1321. Robert Pojasek did a great job writing about it earlier this year.
Looking forward to seeing the work you're doing!
The veil of secrecy still have not been removed ...
Is the draft still a secret?
Or do you want to tell us where we can find it?
stakeholder feedback?
Congrats on making it to this step! I'm excited to learn more.
You mention a "robust process of stakeholder feedback" but I haven't been able to find a draft of the system or more detailed information that would enable members of the public to give meaningful feedback. Is this coming or are you only accepting feedback from specifically designated parties?
Anyway, I'd encourage the developers of this standard to check out the Sustainability Tracking Assessment and Rating System (STARS, stars.aashe.org), which seems very similar in many respects, except that it focuses specifically on higher education institutions rather than business. STARS launched in January after a 3-year development process and already has over 130 participating campuses.