Khotin Impact Strategies

If I were an academic, I would try to prove the following theory: - When #IncomeInequality rises, whether headline numbers are strong or not, more people are more unhappy. - In democracies, the unhappy people try to “vote the bastards out.” - And when there are a lot more unhappy than happy people, they can eventually do that. Not suggesting that other factors weren’t at play! Just that this is a biggie and is a function of decades-old policies, that the IRA etc simply couldn’t undo in its short yet fairly successful life. We debate economic growth vs #degrowth. But it’s not just the #economy, stupid. It’s the structure and shape of the economy. Gus Speth, as a true environmentalist, is very efficient with his words. And as a true humanist, he’s very deep with his views. Great quick read to add to the long list of “morning after” reflections. https://lnkd.in/e9JTw6tY Adding FT piece with 10 charts with FACTS (not people's feelings or perceptions) about our economy and its the structure, that tell a key story of our elections... https://lnkd.in/ePWM-72k

McDonald's in one of the world’s most iconic brands – it’s in our lives, whether we go there to work, eat, drink and/or just need a clean, stocked bathroom on the road. It’s why I’ve written about it a few times already, in the context of its role in the #beef supply chain as a 1% buyer of total beef globally and in the context of it being on the ESG leader boards, as a “top #sociallyresponsible dividend stock.”?(links below) So, I was super excited when I saw that McD’s is introducing a #chicken #BigMac on October 10th ... and not (just) because it's great timing for my birthday. https://lnkd.in/exS4jgrC It’s because beef requires?7x?more #land and generates?7x?more #GHG #emissions (mainly #methane) than chicken per gram of #protein (per World Resources Institute). For every Big Mac that somebody chooses the chicken option, McD’s will reduce emissions by nearly 50% and #water-use by 30% (per Tulane U), and will also reduce the need to deforest, displace indigenous people, and convert more land for the #cows to roam, for the animal feed #crops, for the roads to get to the cows & crops... plus #fertilizer etc etc. It's interesting that none of the gazillion articles I’ve skimmed so far have mentioned the potential #environmental #impact of this big announcement, and McD's hasn't estimated any reduction of beef in favor of chicken (though they mention that chicken is cheaper than beef). For McD’s, I can see why – #planetaryboundaries are neither the focus of their target customers, nor of their investors (“socially responsible” dividends be damned). But this is definitely something to watch (or eat). And let’s hope it’s better received that the McPlant they tried! Links: McD's role in beef supply chain: https://lnkd.in/eBr-25iN using excellent fundamental research by Gerard Rijk and Barbara Kuepper McD's as an ESG "leader"?: https://lnkd.in/eDvg_tp3 With link to a clip by comedian Jim Gaffigan ("it's McDonald's, not a farmers market!") who's now playing Veep candidate Tim Walz on SNL Swapping beef for poultry reduces emissions (Tulane U): https://lnkd.in/eZvfMK3s Shifting diets to reduce land conversion / deforestation (WRI): https://lnkd.in/es8qCqKU McPlant: https://lnkd.in/eYwUBxxR

Anybody else miss this new #deforestation bill introduced in US Congress during Climate Week? The "Combatting Global Deforestation Act" seems aimed at incentivizing #Nature-based Solutions (#NbS) in #EmergingMarkets through a #PublicPrivatePartnership that explicitly tries to be additive, and not duplicate similar initiatives by other governments. Here's what the Act does NOT seem to be doing: - No push for #disclosure of deforestation risk, deforestation-led #emissions (mostly the dreaded Scope 3 type), or #geospatial coordinates of suppliers, - No attempt to prohibit or limit #imports or government #procurement of deforestation-linked #soft #commodities - No mention of #dietshifts or even of #meat that is the main cause of #tropical deforestation. So, can't turn this into a meme: "They want to take away my #beef and turn me into a #soyboy!" Indeed, it is all about carrots, not sticks… So maybe it has a shot of passing?? And if it does, could it help other legislation that's got more sticks, like the #TREES Act in New York? "The legislation authorizes $3.5 billion over four years to finance forest conservation and restoration projects in developing countries, facilitated through long-term bilateral agreements between the State Department and governments or private entities that manage ecologically significant forested lands. These agreements will identify key challenges, ensure respect for human rights, support sustainable economic activities on protected lands, set clear conservation goals, outline practical strategies, designate responsibilities for involved parties, and provide assistance based on measurable project outcomes." https://lnkd.in/euAhrgxM https://lnkd.in/efRfDigz Thoughts? Jennifer Skene Shelley Vinyard Peter Lehner Richard Schrader Tony Lent Deborah Stern Brian Hensley Lara Gutiérrez Santander Jeff Conant Curtis Fisher Kerry Cesareo M Sanjayan

I spoke with Alastair Marsh from Bloomberg News this week (article below) looking at the pull back by some companies on their commitments. In the article and below I set out some thoughts on the need for the space to have practically focussed dialogues with companies, sectors and policy makers about the challenges in meeting targets. In retrospect in those heady days in 2020 of the Glasgow COP26/GFANZ it would have been far better for all headline targets to have come with a very bold Asterix that detailed the nuance of dependencies. A commitment to have lower emissions at some date in the future was easy enough to make when it felt distant and far off. Now we’re in that tough place where companies have to grapple with the complexities of the challenge and the hard work needed to deliver on what was promised. One of the most important dependencies relates to the public policy needed to enable a company or sector to achieve its goals. On the whole companies and investors commitments to targets, whilst important to signal intent, direction of travel and commitment of corporate leadership, cannot be delivered in a vacuum without matching enabling public policy. Of course public policy can be influenced by the company, investors and through the respective industry lobbies they fund, but they can only influence and do not control the outcome. Thus a clear dependency that has to be well understood and the subsequent emergence of Transition Plans (good practice detailed in the Transition Plan Taskforce (TPT) in the UK) today provides the perfect place for a company to articulate this. It is also one of the main reasons our fund along with Sjunde AP-fonden, AP7 have long focussed on the role of corporate climate lobbying and developed the Global Industry Standard on Responsible Climate Lobbying. It is important though to also continue to remind ourselves that this is a multi decadal re-engineering of the global economy. It will require constant recalibration as well as evolution of public policy as our understanding of issues, what credible impact looks like and data evolves. However, the space to understand the nuance, to enable honest recalibration of good intent / transition plans is increasingly shrinking given the challenging segregation into ideological camps and politicisation of so much of this agenda. But I do remain hopeful. Whilst some companies are pulling back there is also significant progress too as demonstrated by the State of Transition report produced by Simon Dietz and the team at the Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI) Global Climate Transition Centre at The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). The graphic I shared earlier in the week from the report (in the comments below) effectively visualises this. https://lnkd.in/eadMrb2K

On my first day of teaching at Columbia | SIPA, in the Sustainable Investing Research Initiative (SIRI) program run by the one and only Caroline Flammer, I realized why I loved it — it wasn’t just sharing with the next generation an insiders’ view of the interplay between policymaking and financial and corporate sectors. And it wasn't just bragging rights (though both are motivations!). It was that teaching is a natural extension of my favorite parts of consulting - working through complicated problems with amazing clients. Students come to class like clients come to a Zoom room -- with their individual stories and problems they want to solve. These could be advancing climate and nature-positive policies as well as economic development in their home country, applying engineering skills to social equity in innovation, or ensuring that a family business is sustainable through future generations. None of these problems can be solved without somehow working with (if not "within") the financial system, the corporate world, and the public sector. One can certainly try to solve problems by working “against” these institutions, but I'm not sure there are many successful examples that don't include violence. So, as a consultant to this group of exceptional students, I will be helping them understand the complex financial and other incentive structures in the worlds of policy, finance, and corporate (through the lens of nature and climate policies - hence the pic I just grabbed from outside my house) and identify specific points of leverage they can use to advance their causes more successfully than if they didn’t have these tools. Given my own background in Emerging Markets, and the fact that real economy supply chains and financial markets are global, we will be using examples from all around the world. If this resonates with you, check out my course! Investor & Corporate Stewardship: Influencing Policymaking around Climate and Natural Capital (INAF U6711)

Some of the world’s largest environmental groups have thrown their weight behind meat and dairy greenwashing projects, including “climate-friendly” beef, “net-zero” dairy, the meteoric rise of regenerative ranching, and hyper “efficient” Frankenchickens. On the other hand, most environmentalists are silent about meat's enormous pollution and climate impacts. To understand the often confounding and contradictory ways in which the environmental movement engages -- or doesn't -- with factory farming, I spoke with 40 activists. https://lnkd.in/e2VTEiuv