Sustainable Development and the Environmental Practitioner

Frank Friedman

On Dec. 18, 2001, the ABA Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources' International Environmental Law, Climate Change & Sustainable Development, and Second Generation Issues Committees cosponsored a program with the Environmental Law Institute entitled "Sustainable Development and the Environmental Practitioner." The program was held at the Environmental Law Institute and chaired and organized by Ira Feldman of Greentrack Strategies. Opening remarks were also made by Erik Meyers of the Environmental Law Institute (ELI). The program featured speakers from the U.S. government, private businesses and an environmental NGO.

Allan Hecht of the Council on Environmental Quality noted that sustainability encompasses a variety of processes and the critical concern is getting the right institutions in place. He defines those processes as 1) stewardship - the ability to help each other; 2) innovations; 3) science-based decision-making; 4) federalism - government involvement at appropriate levels; and 5) compliance - more flexibility to allow sustainability. On the international level, the U.S. government is promoting good governance, which means that countries such as India and Mexico need to take responsibility for their own destiny by establishing and strengthening their institutions.

Jonathan Margolis from the State Department emphasized that most countries do not view the environmental aspects of sustainability as their primary concern. Rather, their interest is in the "development" part of "sustainable development" - money is their key issue. This is particularly important for the Group of 77 (G77) countries (developing countries), which view "poverty eradication" as sustainable development. For example, "governance," a key component of U.S. strategy on sustainable development, means to the G77, how do you energize the private sector and the NGOs? The South Africans, for example, are looking for an end to dependence on governmental support and a specific program for Africa. Coordination on sustainable development policy continues to be a problem in the U.S. government, but a Policy Coordinating Committee at high levels is helping.

Carl Bruch of ELI noted that defining sustainability "often feels like a Rohrshach test" since sustainability covers virtually every social and political issue. There is a need to establish uniform bases for performance. He also noted that at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, governance will be a key issue - but defined very broadly. For example, one goal will be to cut in half by 2015 the number of persons throughout the world that are without adequate drinking water, viewed by many as the number one world health problem.

Jeff Barber of the Integrated Strategies Forum argued that society cannot sustain itself by technology alone and there is a need for political will and understanding of consequences. He challenged companies, saying that corporate social responsibility means working with employees and their families' quality of life. Company efforts on sustainability should be transparent and companies should be able to "prove" they are following their various corporate social responsibility codes.

Dawn Rittenhouse and Jack Stein, respectively, discussed the Dupont and Anheuser-Busch approaches to sustainability. Dupont was uncomfortable with the term "sustainable development" and prefers instead the term "sustainable growth." The company has a variety of indicators of performance showing significant drops in its emissions of various pollutants and reductions in the size of its environmental footprint, which have occurred while Dupont was increasing the size of the businesses. Anheuser-Busch uses the term "corporate responsibility." Jack Stein noted that a responsible corporation has the opportunity to promote superior value for shareholders, employees and the larger community and at the same time increase brand loyalty. Anheuser-Busch recognized the importance of this corporate responsibility effort and created a cross-functional task force. The important point from a corporate standpoint is, what does sustainable development mean in the context of our particular company? Sustainable development is a descriptive term for the ethic of business management responsibility.

Ed Quevedo of the WSP Group described his efforts in counseling several companies that view sustainable development as a critical element in their business strategy, including one company that would not be involved in certain products unless it could justify sustainability. Social responsibility is key to product decisions. He also observed that these companies review these issues thoroughly prior to developing products.

Frank Friedman of Frank B. Friedman & Associates explained that what is good social policy is often in the eye of the beholder, and that companies need to understand that "sustainable development" is not environmentally driven, but - particularly in less developed countries - viewed as a means for dealing with the entire panoply of social ills. He noted that both Dupont and Anheuser Bush have utilized their own terms, sustainable growth and corporate responsibility, to finesse the broader issues. He also mentioned that, unfortunately, good corporate responsibility will not necessarily mean anything in specific enforcement proceedings. Companies should be socially responsible, but they should understand all the ramification of "sustainable development" and have realistic expectations.

Frank Friedman is president of Frank B. Friedman & Associates, LLC, and also serves as a vice-chair for the Climate Change and Sustainable Development Committee.