ClimateVoices Featuring Paul Polman (AKA "Captain Planet")

Short interview with Paul Polman , business leader, campaigner, co-author “Net Positive."

You ran Unilever and made it a climate leader – but too few CEOs have followed suit. What advice do you have for other CEOs to make their companies real climate leaders – beyond just distant and flimsy net zero commitments?

“Since the pandemic began, we’ve seen more companies coming out with climate commitments. 63% of the Fortune Global 500 have 2050 emissions targets, which is up 12% in a year, and nearly half have set more ambitious 2030 targets. But only around a third have set targets for so-called “Scope 3” emissions, which come from their suppliers or the use of their products, despite the fact that Scope 3 emissions account for about 80% of the companies’ total carbon footprint. Many of the heavy emitters haven’t taken action yet at all.?

As long as we are still projected to increase temperatures well over 3 degrees celsius, we cannot sit still. We are already reminded daily of the devastating effects from global warming, and many of our earth systems are close to negative tipping points. There are many good reasons for companies to strive to become climate solutions, rather than carbon culprits, and the most compelling is the business case. The cost of inaction now far outstrips the cost of action. A study from Deloitte shows that if we stay on our current course, and stick to business as usual, costs could be as high as $178tr by 2050, whereas staying below 1.5 degrees would result in a benefit of $43 trillion. Many of the companies who are now actively leading on climate are attracting and retaining great talent, innovating more and performing better. Those making clear progress on reducing emissions are increasingly seeing this reflected in higher market valuations. It shouldn’t surprise us – these companies are positioning themselves to thrive in the low carbon economy that we will have to build, if we want to survive. Sustainability is as much a path to corporate success as it is a moral imperative.

We’re not yet in a position to tackle all emissions, but we certainly have the technology and ingenuity to cut emissions at the rate required by the Paris Agreement, which is roughly halving them each decade. For CEOs, what’s needed above all else is willpower. In the book I wrote with sustainability expert Andrew Winston , “Net Positive," we set out how business leaders can assume responsibility for their total impact, including Scope 3, and set targets in line with latest science, and do so in a way that clearly strengthens the company and builds value. Setting ambitious 2030 targets supported by clear implementation plans is key, as is putting an appropriate and effective price on carbon and embracing nature-based solutions. I would also urge more CEOs to be part of a new narrative around climate, where business sets out the opportunities and helps de-risk the ambitious policies we need from our political leaders.”

Patagonia just made a big move on climate, but their actions are seen as unrealistic for public companies. How do we push public companies – who have shareholders to answer to – to raise their climate ambitions?

“Yvon Chouinard has raised the bar on corporate leadership by giving his company to Mother Earth, and I have personally thanked him for that. More broadly, the B-corps movement is doing tremendous work in showing that companies can thrive by embracing their responsibility to a much broader mix of stakeholders. Indeed, what we saw at 联合利华 was that taking a long-term, multi-stakeholder approach – in which you act in service of your people, your suppliers, your customers, future generations and the planet itself – is the best way to deliver for your investors. Over a decade, the company consistently ranked first in the world for sustainability while our investor returns’ increased by 290%.?

Not every company can or should try to be Patagonia , but many more can play a much bigger role in restoring and regenerating our planet, in building stronger and more united societies, and benefitting as a result. It’s not always correct to assume it’s the shareholders who are holding them back. More and more investors are seeing decarbonisation, across the whole value chain, as an attractive proposition, and not only from a risk mitigation perspective, but to seize new opportunities for growth. Decarbonisation is the growth story of the century, and more investors are themselves committing to transition their own portfolios. At last year’s , the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero was up to $130tr of assets-under-management committing to net zero. No one expected that.

For a lot of companies, the bigger barriers are a lack of knowledge, or courage, or accountability. Often it’s fear of going out on a limb. What helps is coming together with others in the industry to look at collective action that benefits everyone. We did this in consumer goods, for instance, to move all of our refrigerators away from harmful gases, to give you just one example. Today I’m privileged to be involved in driving more of these industry collectives, including in food and fashion. Partnership and collaboration are the only way to drive the industry tipping points we need, with the speed and scale we need. There’s a well of collective courage out there, and if we can tap it we can accelerate.”

The Inflation Reduction Act will transform the United States economy.?Why do you think trade associations tried to block it, and why did they lose this time?

“This is another issue we talk about in ‘Net Positive’: the discrepancy between the climate commitments companies make, and the positions taken by their trade associations, which is exactly what we saw happen with the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). There are a number of what we call “elephants” in the room where this kind of inconsistency and even hypocrisy is a problem – not just climate, but also tax avoidance, human rights abuses in the value chain, corruption, big money in politics and so on. At Unilever we left some organisations, such as the American Chamber of Commerce ( U.S. Chamber of Commerce ), when their positions were incompatible with ours. The situation with the was regrettable and thankfully, as you say, the legislation still passed despite corporate efforts to block it. There is no easy fix, but public pressure helps, and the more that companies who get trade associations do their dirty work for them can be called out, by journalists, activists, and others, the better. We need this kind of scrutiny and transparency so customers, employees, NGOs, investors and other stakeholders can see which companies walk the talk, and which don’t.”

Bonus question: In Big Tech, they call me a “shit stirrer” – and I love that nickname. What’s your moniker?

“Well I’ve been called “Captain Planet” before, but I personally would say I’m a grateful member of tribe humanity – a tribe where we try to make the system work better for the billions, and not just a few billionaires.”

Keep up with ClimateVoices – now an online Q&A penned by leading climate thinkers and doers. Follow me to be alerted when additional interviews are published monthly.

The opinions and views expressed in this interview are solely those of the individual(s) being interviewed. They may not reflect the views, policies, or positions of ClimateVoice, the employer(s) of the individual(s) being interviewed, nor of any other organizations with which the individual(s) being interviewed are affiliated. This interview is intended for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as an endorsement or official statement on behalf of such employer(s) or organization(s).