# Presentation: 486714

## The role of local level reporting in environmental decision-making

- State- EPA Innovation Symposium
- January 24, 2006
- Beth Ginsberg, Ceres
- www.facilityreporting.org

## Topics

- Ceres and the Facility Reporting Project (FRP)
- Overview of FRP Sustainability Reporting Guidance
- Facility Reporting Pilot Test
- Partnerships with Government Agencies

## What is Ceres?

- U.S. ***coalition**** *of influential environmental NGOs, labor, and investors (85 organizations)
- A ***network*** of more than 70 corporations that have endorsed the Ceres Principles
- The oldest (1989) and most trusted environmental ***code of conduct*** in U.S.
- The ***convenor****, *with UNEP, of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)
**www.ceres.org**

**Notes:**
1989 - CERES Principles articulate business, environment, reporting link
	  1990s: rapid expansion of best practices in business &  environment, including reporting
1997 – 2002  CERES/ UNEP launch Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) as international disclosure standard; 
      700+ companies now reporting
2002 - CERES: sustainability + governance + climate risk = Sustainable Governance program
       Nov. 2003: UN Summit launches Investor Network on Climate Risk
 2003 – Facility Reporting Project:  	aligned with GRI reporting and varied environmental and workplace reporting requirements

## Selected Ceres Companies

- American Airlines
- Aveda
- Bank of America
- Baxter International
- Ben & Jerry’s Homemade
- Coca-Cola
- Consolidated Edison
- Ford Motor Company

- General Motors
- Interface
- ITT Industries
- Nike
- Northeast Utilities
- Saunders Hotel Group
- Sunoco
- YSI, Inc.

## Ceres Coalition(selected members)

- Ceres Coalition(selected members)

- ISIS Asset Management
- New York City Employee Retirement System
- Sierra Club
- Social Investment Forum
- SustainAbility
- Trillium Asset Management
- Walden Asset Management
- World Wildlife Fund U.S.

- AFL-CIO
- Citizens Funds
- Connecticut State Treasurer’s Office
- Domini Social Investments
- Environmental Defense
- Friends of the Earth
- Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility

## Ceres provides companies

**Stakeholder feedback on environmental & sustainability reporting**
**Dialogues with key stakeholders on leading-edge sustainability issues**
**Recognition for leadership (Reporting Awards, Other communications)**
**Annual Conference –Education/ networking**

## Why standardize reporting?

- Companies receive diverse information requests

- Stakeholders receive incomplete information

- A generally-accepted reporting framework developed through a multi-stakeholder process

*Source: GRI*

**Notes:**
WHY REPORT
Communicate with employees about performance and strategy
Respond to investor inquiries 
Attract employees and investors
Stakeholder consultation tool
Manage risk and protect reputation
Distinguish from competition

## Global Reporting Initiative

- a multi-stakeholder process and independent institution
**Sustainability Reporting Guidelines** for voluntary reporting on the **economic, environmental, and social** dimensions of activities, products
- 700+ companies reporting worldwide
- GRI “G3” guidelines just released- refined indicators, reporting process and more tools, electronic report format

## What is the FRP?

**A multi-stakeholder initiative to develop a *****generally-accepted, consistent, comparable and credible *****sustainability***** *****reporting framework*****. ***
**FRP supports:**
**1.  Public reporting and public trust**
**2.  Performance-focused regulatory & voluntary approaches, including:**
**Performance Track programs**
**Performance covenants**
**Environmental management systems**
**3.  Facility awareness of external effects**
**4.  Compatibility with Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)**

**Notes:**
The framework is based on the Global Reporting Initiative.

## How FRP Came About- Growing Sense of Need in Many Places

- How FRP Came About- *Growing Sense of Need in Many Places*

- Discussions at **Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) meetings **about need for facility-level metrics** **
**Multi State Working Group **indicated need for credible and comparable facility-level performance metrics linked to EMS
**Performance Track programs** (federal and state) seeing need
**Tellus** and **Ceres **pursue funding

## Why Report at the Facility Level?

**Current public information on facility performance is fragmented, out of context **
**Need integration of data and “story” **
**Workers, communities, regulators, citizens seek accountability**
**Opportunity for more comprehensive reporting and community engagement**
**Opportunity for learning, performance and **
**	****productivity gains**
**Interest in corporate benchmarking and best practices**

**Notes:**
NEED FOR FACILITY-LEVEL REPORTING
 Local accountability and engagement
 Use results of EMS with key stakeholders 
 “External Value of EMS” 
	(EV EMS- see Multi-State Working Group guidance at www.mswg.org)

## FRP Guidance designed to be:

**Voluntary**
**Initially US-focused **
**Compatible with GRI**
**Useful to public, private sector & govt. **
**Legitimized by multi-stakeholder formulation and feedback**
**Informed by best current knowledge and practice**
**A dynamic product that improves and evolves with experience**

**Notes:**
Developed with input from 14 member expert panel drawn from environmental, civil society and labor organizations, business, and academics

REVISED GUIDANCE:
Simplified language and organization 

Re-focused “how-to” approach for first-time reporters and those already reporting at the organization level

Refined, clarified and explained reporting indicators.

## 6 key parts of the FRP Reporting Guidance

- 6 key parts of the *FRP Reporting Guidance*

- Reporting principles
- How to prepare a report
- Facility overview
- Economic indicators
- Environmental indicators
- Social indicators

- Contents of the Facility Report

**Notes:**
FLIP THRU VERY QUICKLY

The Unique Character of the Facility The Facility vs. the Corporate Entity
Product design resides at corporate; process design resides with the facility
Decision making at the facility level more directly impacts the local environment, jobs and quality of life. 
Measures of success at the facility level typically focus on production and efficiency vs. financial performance and stock price

## Facility Overview

**Facility Profile**
**Report Scope**
**Facility Organizational Context**
***Include stakeholders and how engaged***

**Notes:**
FLIP THRU VERY QUICKLY

Facility Profile
Name of facility & parent organization
Major products and/or services 
Location, ownership, term of use
Markets served, scale of operations 
Stakeholders
Contact information
Report Scope 
Time period, scope 
Significant changes in size, structure, ownership, or products/services over previous 5 years
Policies and internal practices, including external verification, and stakeholder consultation 
Facility/Organizational Context
Facility Management Structure 
Policies and Management Systems
Policies and/or systems for managing upstream and downstream impacts
On-site or nearby suppliers, and their environmental and social performance

## Environmental Indicators

**Materials**
**Energy**
**Water**
**Biodiversity/Land Use**
**Emissions, effluents, and waste**
**Transport**
**Community Impacts of odor, noise, dust, traffic, lighting, vibration**

**Notes:**
FLIP THRU VERY QUICKLY

Materials
Type and quantity
Recycled content
Energy
Amount produced and/or used
Renewable content?
Water
Withdrawals from ground and surface waters
Sources
Biodiversity/Land Use
Amount of land owned, leased and proximity to habitat
Acreage paved or impermeable
Emissions, effluents, and waste
Greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide and others)
Ozone depleting substance
Environmental permits
Air emissions by type
Waste and disposal/treatment
Water discharges
Reportable spills
Transport
Hazardous waste
Community Impacts of odor, noise, dust, traffic, lighting, vibration

## Economic Indicators

**Describe and quantify:**
**Customers**
**Suppliers**
**Employees**
**Payroll & Benefits**
**Providers of capital**
**Public sector**
**Subsidies, Taxes, Community donations**
**Infrastructure investments**

**Notes:**
FLIP THRU VERY QUICKLY

Discussion of indicators will involve:

Briefly explaining why the indicator is part of framework 
Answering questions 
Soliciting additional ideas for tweaking or adding indicators 

## Social Indicators

**Labor practices and decent work**
**Human rights****	**
**Society **
**Product responsibility*** *

**Notes:**
FLIP THRU VERY QUICKLY

Labor practices and decent work	
Health and safety          -
Diversity and opportunity 
Training and education 
Labor/management relations
Human rights	
Management approach      
Non-discrimination
Freedom of association & collective bargaining
Child labor                  
Forced and compulsory labor
Disciplinary practices
Indigenous rights
Society 
Community
Bribery and corruption
Political contributions
Product responsibility 
Customer health and safety
Products and services
Advertising
Respect for privacy 

## FRP Pilot Test Activities

**Suggested sustainability *****indicators *****for reporting environmental, social and economic performance;**
***FRP Guidance *****to assist in the reporting process;**
**Complementary *****tools***** to aid stakeholder engagement and identification of performance indicators**

**Notes:**
HISTORY of FRP
2003: Multi Stakeholder Steering Committee
June 2004: 1st public draft of  Reporting Guidance
Summer 2004: 60+comments received, focus groups held 
Winter 2005: Pilot Test version of FRP Guidance complete.  
Spring 2005: Pilot Test launched and tools available
Spring 2005 through 2006: Pilot test activities ongoing- states, Ptrack, facilities

## Current Participants:

**Ford Motor Company**
**Timberland**
**Rockwell Collins**
**YSI, Inc.**
**New Hampshire Ball Bearings**
**Northside Foods**
**Harwood Products**
**Louisville & Jefferson MSD**

***Now ******recruiting****** additional facilities!***

## FRP Pilot Test Timeline

**Spring 2005:** Launch at Ceres conference in Boston
**Summer 2005:** Pilot startup and group conference calls
**Summer/ Fall 2005:** Trainings at individual facilities, more company recruitment. ***1st facility report published***
**Fall/ Winter 2006:** Facilities collect data, engage stakeholders, draft reports; New state and government agency partnerships bring additional facilities on board
**Spring/ Summer 2006: **Reports begin to be published

## Pilot Test Participation Benefits

** ****Preparatory workshop, peer conference calls and support, website**
** ****On-site technical and reporting assistance**
** ****Assistance with stakeholder strategy, community and employee engagement**
** ****Access to best practices in facility accountability **
** ****Publicity for commitment and effort**

**Notes:**
Opportunity to influence how NEPT will be shaped going forward.
Opportunity to enhance environmental performance commitments
Comprehensive environmental reporting and initiatives
Complement corporate-level reporting 

## Government partnerships

- FRP can support **performance-focused regulatory and voluntary programs**
- Can help government agencies looking to **move corporate partners forward on sustainability**
**Current support from:**
- EPA National Center for Environmental Innovation (NCEI)
- Washington Department of Ecology
- Georgia P2AD program

***Looking for additional government partners!***

**Notes:**
Regulatory programs including performance track programs, performance covenants, and EMS adoption
Again, FRP will also increase facilities’ capacity to improve their environmental management systems, stakeholder engagement, community relationships, and sustainability performance activities.

## EPA Supports FRP Pilot Test

**EPA funds to support 7 Performance Track facilities piloting the environmental component of the *****FRP Guidance***
**Facilities will receive no-cost technical assistance to create comprehensive  facility-level environmental reports**
**EPA will use lessons to explore relationship between environmental data collection, reporting, and performance improvement**

## Washington Ecology utilizes FRP metrics

**Fall 2005: Launch of partnership with State of Washington Department of Ecology**
- Ecology putting together benchmark analysis of pulp and paper mills’ environmental impacts
- Exploring opportunities to incorporate facility-level reporting and stakeholder engagement in future public engagement efforts.

## Georgia p2ad partnership

**Launch of partnership with State of Georgia P2AD program at MSWG meeting in September 2005**
- P2AD will run regionally-focused pilot test working group
- Possible integration of facility-level reporting and accompanying metrics into performance-based program based on external feedback

## Questions & discussion

***About pilot test opportunities?***
***About state and other government partnerships?***
**Contact Beth Ginsberg at Ceres to join:**
**617-247-0700 x21 or ginsberg@ceres.org**
**For more information about the Facility Reporting Project visit: ****www facilityreporting.org.**
**Thank you!**