1 / 11

Wednesday April 4, 2012

Promoting discussion and problem solving among sustainability thought leaders. Wednesday April 4, 2012 “The Evolving Metrics for Corporate Sustainability: Beyond Waste Water and Energy”. Dr. Blair Feltmate Director of Sustainability Practice, University of Waterloo. Media Sponsor .

morty
Télécharger la présentation

Wednesday April 4, 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Promoting discussion and problem solving among sustainability thought leaders Wednesday April 4, 2012 “The Evolving Metrics for Corporate Sustainability: Beyond Waste Water and Energy” Dr. Blair FeltmateDirector of Sustainability Practice, University of Waterloo Media Sponsor Venue Sponsor twitterchat #TSSSchat

  2. The Value and Process of Developing aSustainable Development Index (SDI)Toronto Sustainability Speakers SeriesApril 04, 2012 Dr. Blair Feltmate Director, Sustainability Practices, Faculty of Environment, University of Waterloo Chair, Climate Change Adaptation Project (Canada) bfeltmat@uwaterloo.ca

  3. Overview • General Observations on Corporate SD Reporting • Case Study: Purpose and Characteristics of the SDI, Canadian Electricity Association • SDI: Weighting and Scoring of Performance Metrics • SDI 2010 Thresholds & Score • SDI for 2006-2010 (2004/05 base years) • Next Steps

  4. Corporate Sustainable Development Reporting: General Observations • Canadian corporations produce about 150 Sustainable Development Reports annually, and 3,000 are produced globally • Since Place Dome Inc. produced Canada’s first Corporate Environmental Report (early 1990s), followed by Noranda Inc. and Falconbridge Ltd., the look and content of SD/Environmental Reports has not changed much • SD Reports are not generally well reviewed/embraced by the financial community (e.g., financial analysts, institutional and retail money managers, institutional money management consultants, VPs Finance, etc.) • SD Reports are often difficult for Boards of Directors and Senior Management to fully appreciate/digest To remedy this omission, SD Reports must be changed in at least two ways: • Sustainable Development Index • Identification of 3-6 key SD metrics, that financial analysts can readily translate into financial value creation, presented up-front in SD Reports

  5. Purpose and Characteristics of the Sustainable Development Index Purpose of the SDI • The SDI enables the CEA and all stakeholders to determine if the CEA membership is collectively trending “better or worse” in reference to SD – NOTE: the SDI could be applied to any association, company or government enterprise Characteristics of SDI • The SDI includes measures of environmental, social and economic performance • The SDI is predisposed to transparency regarding the relative contribution of environmental, economic and social performance metrics to the index • The SDI is “simple” to calculate • The SDI is predisposed to being amended/updated

  6. Weighting and Scoring of Performance Metrics: Consensus Reached in 2009/2010 • SDI can (and does) have an unbalanced number of metrics within each category of Environment, Society and Economy • Each SDI category of Environment, Society and Economy is given equal weighting in the SDI calculation, regardless of the number of metrics per category • Scoring for a given metric in a given year is made relative to a % change in performance relative to the average of the base years 2004/05 • 2004/05 were chosen as base years due to (a) data availability, (b) integrity of data, (c) a mean of 2 years helps to lesson the impacts of a single ‘anomalous” year, and (d) going back “too far” may be perceived as compromising the rigour of the analysis • A score is determined relative to a % change in performance based on pre-assigned criteria • pre-assigned criteria were established based on a sensitivity analysis of annual variation in criteria performance

  7. Current SDI Parameters

  8. SDI – 2010 Environment Thresholds & Score 0 25 50 0% relative <6% decrease >6% decrease to base yrs relative to base yrs relative to base yrs Score: 61.11

  9. SDI Summary for 2006-2010

  10. SDI for 2006 – 2010 (04/05 base yrs)

  11. Next Steps SDI Broad Application • associations and companies across all industry sectors could develop and present similar style SDIs • SDIs could be presented on the inside front cover of SD and related reports • SD is generally not on the “radar screen” of financial analysts, retail and institutional money managers, and institutional money management consultants – SDIs could contribute to turning this situation around • SD reports have not evolved much in the past 15 years – SDIs could offer change that would be positively received by key stakeholders (notably senior management and Boards)

More Related