We at TEM would like to congratulate Mr Meehan on his recent appointment as CEO of GRI. Mr Meehan is a veteran sustainability CEO and entrepreneur.

At TEM our mission is for a sustainable global economies, so it is easy to see how we would be natural GRI partners.  We have engaged with all aspects of GRI to support its growth and development, and we are positioned well to continue to do so from what Mr Meehan has had to say as his tenure at GRI begins.

We see the quality of reporting as an issue, but with GRI Certified Training Partner support and Guidance it need not be.  TEM were the first of the GRI training partners to deliver the latest G4 programme.  As we continue to decouple TEMs growth from the use of scarce limited resources, we have written a must have book on how to sustainability/integrated report available from Do Short; authors Kye Gbangbola and Nicole Lawler.

Mr. Meehan has almost twenty years’ experience in the sustainability field, including sustainable supply chain and carbon/energy reporting technologies. Specializing in bringing innovative corporate sustainability issues and solutions to the public, he has advised a range of stakeholders including investors, startups and governments. A visionary leader and CEO, Mr. Meehan has led companies in several countries, including Carbonetworks (2004-2010) and iVeridis Corporation (2010-2013). Focused on the intersection of innovation and sustainability, he has also advised multinationals worldwide on sustainability issues.
Michael Meehan comments: “I look forward to leading GRI’s executive team and the organization broadly to further strengthen GRI’s role in establishing sustainability reporting as a valuable global standard practice. I believe this is a pivotal time in sustainability reporting where innovation and collaboration are critical components of every organization’s sustainability strategy. GRI will continue playing its role in mainstreaming sustainability disclosures, and ultimately making a significant contribution to global sustainable development.
At TEM we will continue to encourage better Assurance and bringing awareness and knowledge of reporting to the public so the whole of society are enabled to engage in what the GRI logo of compliance says about an organisation.

The outgoing GRI CEO; Ernst Ligteringen, made GRI and sustainability reporting globally mainstream for which we all owe him and the GRI secretariat a huge vote of thanks. It is now Michael Meehan's time with his own set of transformative ideas to build upon Ernst's achievments.  At TEM we are only too happy to offer him our full support.

About GRI

Since GRI was established more than fifteen years ago, there has been rapid growth in corporate sustainability reporting Sustainability reporting is now mainstream amongst the world’s largest companies, and GRI is the de facto global standard. 95% of the largest companies in the world (G250) are now preparing sustainability reports, with 82% of those referring to GRI . Around the world, more companies and their investors and stakeholders are seeking to integrate sustainability considerations in their operations. Governments and other regulators, including stock exchanges, are increasingly developing policies and regulation in this area, and are seeking appropriate frameworks to reference.

Zinc and cyanide could join three drugs on the watch list of substances that member states will have to monitor in water from September 2015.

ENDS has seen an early draft of the list that has been circulated among EU member states and other interested parties, along with proposed criteria for either adding or removing further hazardous substances.

The list is being developed by the European Commission under the Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) Directive for substances that may pose a risk to the water environment, but where monitoring data is currently lacking.

The idea of a watch list was formed last year after member states decided there was not enough data to set legal EQS limits for three drugs: diclofenac and the contraceptive drug hormones E2 and EE2.

As a result, the revised EQS directive gives the Commission until 14 September 2014 to finalise the first watch list of up to 10 substances. It will be updated every two years thereafter and can grow to 14 substances.

Substances that may pose a significant risk to or via the aquatic environment can be considered for listing, according to the proposed criteria. This means there should be “reliable evidence of hazard and of a possible exposure risk”.

There should be insufficient monitoring data to conclude whether this possible risk warrants listing as a priority substance with associated EQS.

Substances banned or due to be banned under other pieces of EU legislation should not be listed unless emissions from sources such as imported products might be expected, or where the substances are persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB).

The Commission anticipates that more than seven substances might be proposed for inclusion alongside the three drugs, and suggests prioritisation criteria such as the hazardousness of the substance and its relevance to drinking water.

The extent and nature of its use should also be considered along with the ease of monitoring it in the water environment.

Proposed criteria for de-selection from the watch list include where monitoring data “do not suggest that a significant risk is likely to be identified, and space is urgently needed” on the list for another substance.

The paper says monitoring under the watch list should account for natural background levels of a substance. Monitoring site selection should take account of polluting inputs, with exceedances only reflecting risks to the wider water environment.
An annex to the proposals lists free cyanide and bioavailable zinc as substances that could be added to the watch list. Both were highly ranked during the last review of priority substances but monitoring data was lacking, the paper notes.

A draft first watch list will be agreed in May and a final draft in July. This will be finalised during August and September according to internal commission procedures.
[email protected]

Original post http://www.endseurope.com/35234/zinc-and-cyanide-could-join-eu-water-watch-list 
Zinc and cyanide could join EU water watch list
By Simon Evans
ENDS Europe, 20 March 2014
Water, river (Credit: Mark Devine CC BY-SA 2.0)

Sustainability is a word I use and hear every day and it could be said the catch phrase of this generation… it means learning how to use current resources in a way that does not harm the future. Yet the wisdom of sustainability is rarely applied to love, which, I believe is the source of life energy from which all else springs. Love is an action verb and a developmental skill set which evolves with time and practice.

Williams said the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - the world leader on research into climate change - had produced a report last year linking some types of "extreme weather" with man-made climate change. 

"So if you are talking about extreme weather globally there has been some observed increase in some types of extreme weather and there is some evidence, depending on which types of extreme weather you are talking about, of a link between man-made climate change and some types of extreme weather," he said. 

Williams said that this research was supported by attribution studies which looked at specific weather-related events, such as Hurricane Sandy, which devastated the Caribbean and North America, or a drought in East Africa. 

Focus on material issues
ma·te·ri·al adj.  Being both relevant and consequential; crucial: 
  
The new Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) G4 guidelines focus on materiality as a critical element of true, transparent sustainability reporting. “What” is material…and “why”…and “how” will this affect your company’s sustainability reporting, strategy, and results? Sounds simple!

Businesses face growing threats from extreme weather and climate change: damage to facilities, loss of water or power supplies, higher costs, and disruption of supply and distribution chains. Recent trends in climate risk disclosure seem to support the view that climate risks don’t belong in sustainability reports: the Center for Energy and Environmental Solutions (C2ES) recently released a comprehensive report on  Weathering the Storm: Building Business Resilience to Climate Change.  They compared S&P 100 companies’ responses to Carbon Disclosure Project questionnaires to their sustainability reports, and found that 85 out of 100 responded to a CDP questionnaire  saying that they had been adversely affected by climate change. However, 35 of these also mentioned those impacts in their sustainability reports.  Did 50 out of the 100 S&P companies decide that climate risk was not material? 

There is much written about materiality, burdensome reporting and the need to reduce reporting complexities. I recently had the privilege of reading the draft of a Colleagues book on sustainability reporting where there is the following quote:  "Materiality is like packing a backpack for a hike: you can only bring the supplies that are absolutely critical, otherwise the weight will slow you down and eventually bring you to your knees.”  
This emphasises why we prioritise and focus on the most material topics as a company journeys to sustainability.  

Then there are the many definitions of materiality as it relates to sustainability, including the GRI definition published in the G4 guidelines: “Material Aspects are those that reflect the organization’s significant economic, environmental and social impacts; or that substantively influence the assessments and decisions of stakeholders.”

G4, extends organisational accountability beyond its direct material impacts to its indirect material impacts.  These internal and external factors should be considered when evaluating the importance of information for reflecting significant economic, environmental and social impacts, or stakeholder decision making. A range of established methodologies may be used to assess the significance of impacts. In general, ‘significant impacts’ refer to those that are a subject of established concern for expert communities, or that have been identified using established tools such as impact assessment methodologies or life cycle assessments. Impacts that are considered important enough to require active management or engagement by the organisation are likely to be considered to be significant. 

How is your company dealing with climate change? Have you identified risks and opportunities? Tell us more in the Comments section.

The release of the International Integrated Reporting (<IR>) Framework on Monday 9 December 2013, marks an important milestone in the market-led evolution of corporate reporting. 

                                                                                                                                                                        Read more

On 2 December GRI is to launch a new service to check whether the most critical disclosures in reports based on the G4 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines are located as stated, and can be easily found by readers.The new service reflects G4’s increased emphasis on the need for organizations to focus – both in the reporting process and the final report - on those topics that are material to their business and their key stakeholders. This ‘materiality’ focus will make reports more relevant, more credible and more user-friendly, enabling organizations to better inform markets and society on sustainability matters.

The service focuses exclusively on 11 disclosures related to materiality, boundary and stakeholder engagement.  Reporting organizations that choose to take advantage of the service will receive formal acknowledgement from GRI that at the time of publication, the disclosures G4-17 to G4-27 from the GRI G4 Guidelines have been correctly located in both the Content Index as well as in the final report.  This acknowledgement will be made via an official GRI-branded message which reporting organizations can include prominently in their report to communicate to their stakeholders that the report has been checked.

GRI will start accepting applications for the new service from 2 December 2013. The first 20 reporting organizations to apply for the service will receive it free of charge. Thereafter the check will cost 1,750,- Euro excl. taxes. The service is offered free for GRI Organizational Stakeholders (OS).

Nelmara Arbex, GRI’s Chief Advisor on Innovation in Reporting, said:  “This service is designed to assure readers and reporters alike that the most critical part of the GRI Content Index is correctly and clearly presented.  The 11 disclosures relating to materiality, boundary and stakeholder engagement are the essence of G4.”

Further details of the service will be included in the December edition of the GRI newsletter. 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    from → GRI
  

"Report supports governments interested in the corporate sustainability reporting agenda by providing answers to key questions.

The Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) today launched the first of two reports on corporate sustainability reporting. The report, “Frequently Asked Questions on corporate sustainability reporting”, has been prepared to support the development of worldwide sustainability reporting, and is of interest to the public, sustainability practitioners, NGOs, regulators, policymakers and others.

Corporate sustainability reporting by the private sector is crucial in driving sustainable development, and businesses play a fundamental part in it. The report builds on the progress made to date in this area and outlines the key background information, including who is involved in developing sustainability reporting and why it is important for the global sustainability agenda. The report also provides an overview of current sustainability reporting policies, initiatives and practices. Further opportunities to develop corporate sustainability reporting are additionally discussed. A number of practical examples of activity, best practice, tools and links are also provided.

This report was commissioned by UNEP / Group of Friends of Paragraph 47 (GoF47) and prepared by CDSB. GoF47 was formed by the governments of Brazil, Denmark, France and South Africa, and supported by UNEP and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI).  It was founded in 2012 following the acknowledgement of the importance of corporate sustainability reporting in Paragraph 47 of the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), also known as Rio+20. GoF47 founding member governments are pioneers in the promotion of sustainability reporting practice."                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 from → CDSB
Downloads

•  UNEP (2013) Frequently Asked Questions on Corporate Sustainability Reporting 

Kye Gbangbola looks at the latest guidance from the GRI on sustainability reporting and its focus on materiality for the environmentalist.