 |
|
|
|||||
Global sustainability models are failing. Theyve been designed to showcase ethical trade and environmental responsibility, but they fundamentally misunderstand how global supply chains operateespecially the critical, unseen work at the beginning of essential value chains such as critical minerals. For decades, these models have burdened African merchants, miners, and farmersthe backbone of global industries from cocoa to lithiumwhile corporations further along the chain claim the benefits. The systems celebrate end products, like sleek electric vehicles (EVs) or iPhones, while ignoring the heavy lifting at the start of the work, where its most difficult. This imbalance in sustainability frameworks doesnt just sideline African businesses. It undermines the entire premise of accountability that we want to engender amongst commercial supply chain stakeholders. The unfair burden on the start of the supply chain The reality of global supply chains is simple: The earliest stages, where raw materials are extracted and processed, require the most effort. African farmers, miners, and merchants are at the very heart of these early stages. Theyre the ones putting in the hardest workextracting resources, growing crops, and preparing raw materials that fuel industries around the world. But despite their essential role, theyre stuck carrying the heaviest burden. Strict regulations and sustainability requirements often hit them the hardest, even though they have the fewest resources to meet these demands. Take cocoa farmers in Africa, for instance. Many are already working on tight margins, struggling to make enough to feed their families. Then along comes the European Unions Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), which demands proof that their cocoa isnt linked to deforestation. While the goal is noble, the execution has left these farmers scrambling to provide documentation theyve never needed before. For many, the cost of compliance is just too high, and failing to meet the standards means losing access to international buyers. Its not just farmers. In the mining sector, lithiumthe critical ingredient for EV batteriesis dug up under tough, often dangerous conditions. The raw material is shipped overseas for refining and manufacturing, where the final product becomes a celebrated symbol of sustainability. But little thought is given to the people who made that product possible in the first place. But instead of recognizing the environmental and social costs borne by African miners, global narratives around green batteries conveniently ignore this reality. The hard work is erased, and the end producta shiny new electric vehiclebecomes the hero of the story. Why these models dont work The deeper issue is that global sustainability models were never designed with supply chain realities in mind. They were built to make sense on paper, not in practice. Heres why they fail: They ignore the realities of extraction The first stages of the supply chainextraction and initial processingare treated as a liability, not a foundation. These stages are overregulated, under-supported, and painted as inherently dirty, while the later stages enjoy the benefits of cleaner reputations and fewer demands. They push costs downstream Compliance costs are overwhelmingly placed on the smallest and least resourced players. Farmers, artisanal miners, and small merchants are expected to shoulder the expense of meeting global benchmarks, while corporations further up the chain avoid their fair share of responsibility. They celebrate the end, not the beginning By the time raw materials are turned into recognizable productslike the chocolate bars we enjoy or the batteries that power electric vehiclestheyre celebrated as symbols of innovation and progress. But the reality behind those products is far less glamorous. The hard work, long hours, and sacrifices made at the start of the supply chain are often ignored. At best, theyre reduced to a footnote; at worst, theyre treated as inconvenient details in the story of sustainability. Rebalance the equation If sustainability is going to workfor people and the planetwe need to rethink these frameworks entirely. That means starting from the ground up, ensuring fairness across every step of the supply chain. Heres where the change needs to happen: Stop pushing the costs on producers Sustainability cant come at the expense of the people doing the hardest work. Corporations that depend on African resources need to take responsibility for compliance costs. For example, chocolate companies that rely on African cocoa should be actively investing in the farmers and cooperatives that keep their supply chains running. Its not just a moral obligationits a business necessity. Put money into local solutions The earliest stages of the supply chain need better support. This means governments, corporations, and international institutions must work together to invest in systems that help producers succeed. From building cooperatives for artisanal miners to funding training programs for sustainable farming, these investments would ease the pressure on producers while ensuring global standards can actually be met. Measure what really matters Current sustainability metrics focus too much on quick wins and shiny results. But real progress happens when we focus on achievable, incremental improvements. Instead of setting impossible benchmarks, we need to create standards that reflect the realities of resource extraction and reward meaningful change. Work together to share the load No single entity can fix this alone. Public-private partnerships are key to amplifying sustainability efforts without placing all the costs on producers. Companies that actively work with merchants to address issues like traceability and compliance have already shown that fair, sustainable practices are possibleespecially when governments step in to support these efforts. A fairer vision for sustainability Sustainability should not mean shifting the burden onto the communities that sustain the worlds supply chains. African merchants, farmers, and miners are not just resource providersthey are the backbone of industries that drive global progress. They deserve recognition, support, and a fair share of the benefits. Global sustainability models need to changeurgently. If they dont, theyll keep fueling inequality while claiming to promote progress. Its time to stop pretending that these systems are working, because theyre not. We need to build frameworks that reflect the real-world challenges of supply chains, ones that are fair, practical, and genuinely sustainablefor everyone involved. Anu Adedoyin Adasolum is CEO of Sabi.
Category:
E-Commerce
Super Bowl LIX had a clear winner on the field, but victory for brands was more hard-won. Many aimed for impact, but did they deliver? Autodesk CMO Dara Treseder offers hot takes on this years hits and misses from the big games ads. She joins host Bob Safian to break down what makes an NBDB (never been done before) moment, why so many brands adopted a safe approach, and what trends business leaders should note going forward. This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by Robert Safian, former editor-in-chief of Fast Company. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with todays top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode. Last year, we talked about whether you would buy a 30-second spot for Autodesk. When you were watching this year, did you think, Oh, maybe I should have; that would have been a good way to spend $8 million? No, when I was watching the game, I was like, I am very glad with our strategy of not buying an ad in the Super Bowl. Look, I think sometimes it makes sense for your business. And I think you really have to understand: What are we trying to accomplish? What are the objectives? And will this help us make that happen? I think that not enough brands who showed up this year did that calculation, I have to say. So, I think we did the right math by deciding to let our customers take center stage. When a game is not close, is that good from a marketer’s point of viewlike people are going to spend more time paying attention to the ad? Or is it bad because people aren’t as intensely focused on the screen? It’s not good. It’s not good because people are getting up and people are leaving. Consumers start to get distracted and go back to their lives when it’s not as competitive until the very end. You’re making a bet when you decide where you’re going to buy your ad, where in the show, right? Like in some ways it’s better to be at the end because people will remember you more, but only if the game is close. Only if the game is close. So, youve got to think about the calculus for what you’re trying to do. I always think that going early and in the middle is safe. Again, it comes down to calculated risk, a clear-eyed risk. You gather as much data as you can, you strip away uncertainty, and then you make a decision with conviction. Going late is a risk that you should only take if you are sure that even if consumers get up and walk away, that placement still makes sense for your brand. But if you’re not sure about that, going early or going in the middle is probably a good way to make sure that you gather as many eyeballs as needed. If you’re a brand like Autodesk and you haven’t bought a Super Bowl spot, how do you participate in the moment around the Super Bowl? If you have an authentic reason to participate in the conversation, hey, it’s as good a time as any to do that. So for us at Autodesk, our software is used to design and make anything, whether it is literally the Caesar Superdome stadium in NOLA that housed it all, or stages like Kendrick’s, or ads like the Michelob Ultra ad. Our software is used to design and make anything. So for us, being a part of the conversation makes sense in terms of celebrating our customers who are playing a role in the game. Now you’ve used this expression, NBDB (never been done before). There wasn’t a whole lot of that this year. We like a good NBDB. And I thought a brand that actually did that was Rocket. So Rocket had that wonderful ad that really talked about owning the dream, owning the American dream, and owning the home. They took the time to tell the story in a way that was so powerful. I was watching it live, and everybody from my father-in-law to my daughter was like, “Oh, we like this one.” And every American can remember that song. I mean, Bob, I’m sure in a bar somewhere at 1 a.m. at some point or the other, you were singing about country roads taking you home. There’s no video of that. You’re neither going to confirm nor deny, but I thought that ad was great. But what was especially awesome was to see that connected with the live experience of Country Roads playing in the stands and having the fans in the stadium. That was marketing magic, right? Because the ad, the extension was so real, so powerful, so wonderful. So that was an NBDB. I don’t think I’ve seen any ads do that before where they connect what is happening on the screen to what is happening physically in the stadium in such a powerful integrated way. I thought Rocket did that. They certainly owned that NBDB category with that first-of-its-kind integration. So not the skin cowboy hat from Tubi. I didn’t get on with that. I mean, that was when everyone was like, “I’m going to go get some chips.” Nobody wants to watch that, right? I thought that ad was pushing creative direction. That’s what I meant. Because people were staying away from relevance, sometimes they turned up the dial on ownability or memorability in a way that didn’t always work. And I think for that Tubi ad, they turned up the memorability dial a little too much, and it didn’t quite work. I want to ask you about the Nike So Win ad with top female athletes like Caitlin Clark and Jordan Chiles. In some ways, it was like a throwback to some of the ads wed seen from Nike before. So it wasnt really never been done before, but at the same time, I thought it was pretty darn effective. I think Nike was the winner of the night, and I’ll tell you why. They did an amazing job of being ownable. It was like you said: It was an ownable Nike spot. You saw that spot, and you immediately knew it was Nike because of the athletes presence, the visual aesthetic, the black-and-white aesthetic, and the message. It showed the power of purpose and performance, and I have to give Nike a lot of credit for this spot because in a year where a lot of brands were staying away from saying anything, Nike said something. They said something important. They said something that matters. And they said something that needed to be said, right? And that was the power of women in sports. And the importance of gender equity in sports. And I thought they said it really well. It wasn#8217;t preachy. It was powerful. And, so talk about being memorable and being relevant. And many of us can remember what was happening in the Olympics when Sha’Carri [Richardson] was running: She was ahead, and she looked to her left, and she looked to her right. And that moment was a part of the narrative, right? Many of us remember the journeys that these women athletes have had. And to see them standing on business, standing on power, standing on strength, it was saying, “Look, come what may, women’s sports is here to stay,” and I love that. Just watching my daughter watch that spot and her face light up, it was a powerful moment. So I think Nike did that, and they were really the only brand that made a statement, right? A lot of brands talked about unity and nostalgia, which I thought was a little bit overdone, to be honest, and not actually reflective of the state of the country, so it felt a little forced. But I thought Nike did a really good job of saying, “Hey, we’re standing on business. We’re standing on purpose.” We’re not cause-led, so we’re not jumping into a political conversation. But we’re standing on what makes sense for our business. Our values remain unchanged.
Category:
E-Commerce
Small dwelling units are booming as solutions for affordable housing, camping, and glamping. But of most interest, at present, is the opportunity this category provides as a source of transitional housing during times of climate crisis and regional disasters such as the L.A. fires. California already had increasingly positive regulation toward accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and tiny homes prior to the January 2025 Los Angeles fires. In the wake of the current disaster, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass issued an emergency executive order: Return and Rebuild. This new mandate eliminates the significant regulatory hurdles of rebuilding to organize efforts with a theme of urgency, common sense, and compassion. We applaud this effort, which includes allowing the use of park models, RVs, and other structures as needed to allow owners of the 12,000-plus homes affected to recover and rebuild as quickly as possible. This is an area where the industry for sustainable and high-quality park models will shine. Beyond California, recovery efforts from other disasters are shining a floodlight on the need and benefit of affordable and weather-resistant small homes for many thousands of additional people throughout the U.S. and beyond. I recently interviewed Dan Fitzpatrick, the president of the Tiny Home Industry Association about these needs. Dan has 49 years experience in both public and private roles. Hes had a front-row view of the need and the power of public/private partnerships to accomplish projects such as the Rio Mesa master-planned community of 15,000 on the north side of Fresno, California, as well as Tesoro Vieja, a 400-acre planned lake community in the states Central Valley. What L.A. can learn from recent hurricane disasters in the southeast Dan and I have observed the damage across Florida and North Carolina from three catastrophic hurricanes in 2024: Debby, Helene, and Milton. FEMA responded to those disasters with approval for more than $2.1 billion in aid, including $931.7 million for housing repairs and personal property replacement, along with more than $1.18 billion to support local and state governments in recovery efforts including debris removal and emergency protective measures. These situations caused the demand for tiny homes as transitional housing to skyrocket. The units are proving to be especially beneficial in allowing homeowners continual proximity to manage and monitor the rebuilds and can serve as permanent and property-enhancing studios and accessory dwellings after the rebuilds are complete. California is following suit In addition to the emergency order by Mayor Bass, the January 2025 executive order by California Governor Gavin Newsom is expediting the rapid rebuilding efforts now required in L.A. This new order suspends key permitting and review requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Coastal Act, to facilitate faster property restoration. As a response to natural disasters, we can anticipate the demand for tiny homes to surge well beyond the already aggressive predictions for growth. The prefabricated home sector is on track to grow by more than $30 billion over the coming few years, Dan told me. Tiny homes hold the potential to be the ideal answer to increase our countrys resilience to natural disasters. However, he also notes that while the importance of this category is increasingly obvious, there are critical nuances involved. Speed is our friend– but also our enemy. While Mayor Basss and Governor Newsoms order are vital steps toward removing the bureaucratic hurdles to expedite rebuilding, we must strike the right balance between rapid reconstruction and adherence to environmental safeguards. The quality and nature of tiny homes is critical to avoid the prospect of having quickly erected small home communities turn into poorly constructed and badly located shanty townsa worry large enough to lead some regions to enact regulation against them. NPR has also noted vast ranges in quality among tiny home shelters, ranging from cabins with a cot to miniature houses with kitchens and bathrooms.In my own companys case, our Los Angeles, California facility, in operation since 2022, has more than tripled its capacity in 2024 to 24/7 operation to meet the rising demand. We are 3D printing homes from recycled polymers and fiberglass to create units that are energy efficient and sustainable as well weather resilient. Clearly the need and the demand for high quality, sustainable and weather resistant tiny homes has never been higher. It is an industry that will impact all areas of the U.S. and the regions beyond in 2025 and in the years and seasons to come. Gene Eidelman is the cofounder of Azure Printed Homes.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||