About 64 million people visit McDonald's every day. That's a stunning number. They'll see changes in the year ahead, some driven by a renewed sustainability push at the $24-billion fast-food giant.
LED lights in new and renovated stores. "Greener" packaging. Eco-labels on fish sold in Europe.
None of this is earth-shattering or, more importantly, earth-saving, but it's the start of something big, says Bob Langert, McDonald's v.p. for sustainability.
"We're on a path to mainstream sustainability," Bob told me by phone the other day. "This is transformational for us. We want to be bolder, and we want to make a bigger impact." Most important, he said, the company wants to embed sustainability into its operations and, eventually, into its brand.
Business-friendly environmentalists who work with McDonald's -- groups like the World Wildlife Fund, Conservation International and Environmental Defense Fund -- will applaud any sign that the company is ready to integrate sustainability into its core business and dig deeper into its supply chain to find ways to raise beef and chicken that are better for the planet. Skeptics, and there are many, will call this greenwashing, or perhaps "farmwashing," a term I hadn't heard until yesterday when I saw this anti-McDonald's posting in Grist.
In a way, McDonald's is like Walmart -- it's never going to be beloved in the Whole Foods-shopping, arugula-eating, tony precincts of Berkeley, Brooklyn or Bethesda. But the company is much too big to ignore or wish away.
Today, McDonald's released its 2011 Sustainability Scorecard. Under the umbrella of sustainability, the company includes environmental responsibility, its supply chain, nutrition and well-being, employees and community grants and programs, albeit in a way that highlights accomplishments and isn't easily transparent. (Please let me know if you can find an accounting of the company's carbon footprint or a greenhouse gas reduction goal, because I couldn't.) But McDonald's can feel good about a couple of big initiatives in the year just past.
First, as you've probably read, McDonald's will reformulate all of the Happy Meals sold in the U.S. and Latin America to automatically include fruit and reduce the overall amount of calories and fat, mostly by serving smaller portions of fries. This is a big deal if you choose to blame the obesity crisis on the companies that sell food. I don't. (See my blog post, Mmm…mmm..who's to blame for obesity?) It's dangerous to confuse corporate responsibility with personal responsibility.
McD has the money to super
McD has the money to super size their effort in the sustainability of their food and packaging supply. A few LED lights lead the way but I really want to see MORE! I think they can make a huge impact by just adding 1% organic ingredient to their food and stop giving out those silly smelly plastic kids toys.
Just wanted to point out that
Just wanted to point out that the last posting (by Billy) was presumably intended for MarC (Gunther), not me (MarK). Phew!
Regards to all,
Mark McElroy (not Gunther)
That's pretty obnoxious,
That's pretty obnoxious, Mark.
"In a way, McDonald's is like Walmart -- it's never going to be beloved in the Whole Foods-shopping, arugula-eating, tony precincts of Berkeley, Brooklyn or Bethesda."
Can't you say something nice about McD's without being a jerk?
(Should all the McD's stores thriving in Berkeley, Brooklyn and Bethesda close their doors to fit your distorted view of reality?)
Regardless of what their
Regardless of what their corporate initiatives might be to improve their sustainability, their actual product will never be sustainable...I have three words..."Super Size Me".
If McDs was serious about
If McDs was serious about sustainability they would use their immense influence with consumers and start making plant-based meals more mainstream. I doubt most kids could tell the difference between a nugget made of chicken parts or soybeans. Until they address their primary impact (the food they sell) their efforts are mostly rounding errors...
Marc, It's disappointing that
Marc,
It's disappointing that you're perpetuating the idea that people who care about industrial ag's immense impact on the planet and human health are only found in "Whole Foods-shopping, arugula-eating, tony precincts of Berkeley, Brooklyn or Bethesda." The food system and all of us who depend on it are in serious trouble if we fall on that crutch every time the sustainability of big food is discussed.
Kyle Cahill
At least McDonald's is
At least McDonald's is stepping up to the proverbial plate to use their influence over consumers in a more positive way (sure we all have choices, but they make their money by making those choices very difficult). They are in a position to significantly alter value chain and consumer behaviors - and they should feel obligated to do just that as long as they can profit from it. But to get there sooner than later, they do need more discipine around goal-setting and transparent metrics and measurements, in addition to embracing guidance from external sources.
Regarding Bob's claim that
Regarding Bob's claim that McDonald's is "on a path to mainstream sustainability," I could agree, perhaps, that they may be on a path to mainstreaming eco-efficiency or marginal 'improvementcy', but not sustainability. If you're not measuring, managing and reporting your impacts against norms, standards or thresholds for what they would have to be in order to be sustainable (i.e., in 'sustainability context'), you're not managing for sustainability at all - eco-efficiency perhaps, but not sustainability. Why not just cut to the chase and measure, manage and report sustainability performance in an authentic fashion? What's the hold-up on this?
Mark W. McElroy, PhD
Executive Director
Center for Sustainable Organizations