COP16, Nomad, Power, Philanthropy & TIME 500

1. Close of play for COP16

Struggling to find a clear summary of what’s been going on at #COP16? Glad we’re not the only ones…

As you’re reading this, the United Nations Biodiversity Conference (COP16) will be heading into its final day in Cali, Colombia. Set to take stock of progress towards reversing the rapid decline of biodiversity by 2030 and restoring harmony with nature by 2050 (which we cover in more detail in our recent Friday 5 Nature special ), expectations were high for this year’s discussions.

Although some highlights have trickled through - with the first-ever science-based targets for both freshwater and land adopted by Kering, GSK and Holcim - at the time of writing (a week and a half into discussions), the lack of clarity on progress towards goals and commentary on discussions underway is notable. It’s true that in COPs gone by (both climate and nature) the hard-hitting stuff often comes at the 11th hour. Nevertheless, considering the expectations and rise of nature up political and private sector agendas, we had expected more headlines to reach the mainstream news, other than the questionable accommodation that delegates have found themselves in.

There is a lot going on in the world - elections, wars, budgets and floods. It’s understandable that COP16 might not grab the front page. However, it’s not being given the best chance possible to cut through and reach the public. Past COP successes provide the playbook to follow – a clear narrative of what we’re trying to achieve, commentary on how discussions are unfolding, welcoming NGOs into the discussion to challenge, a location that encourages the private sector to pile in, and the infrastructure to support that engagement. Without these things, it’s difficult to build the public awareness and media scrutiny that is critical to put pressure on governments and delegates to make the tough decisions needed.

Let’s hope the 11th hour saves us once again…

2. Know the (nutri) score

If you’ve been grocery shopping in the UK, you’ll have seen a graphic on the front of your food indicating fat, sugar, salt and calorie content using red, amber, and green colours (the so-called “traffic light” system). These labels are designed to show how products stack up against each other health wise, allowing shoppers to make more informed choices about their diet. They are also –surprisingly – entirely voluntary.

But not if the CEO of Nomad Foods has anything to do with it. Earlier this week, Stéfan Descheemaeker, who heads up the frozen foods business, called upon the UK government to make it a requirement for all packaged foodstuffs to carry traffic light labels. He further suggested that food companies should be made to publish annual figures revealing what proportion of their sales are made of up of “healthy” and “unhealthy” products.

It may feel like a surprising time for companies – who are increasingly swamped by regulatory ESG reporting requirements like the EU’s CSRD – to be calling for more regulation. However, it’s as yet unclear what effect companies’ disclosure of sustainability performance via the ESRS – in what will be lengthy, data-driven, and not particularly consumer-friendly reports – will have on companies’ reputations with investors and the public, and on their actual performance across different sustainability dimensions. Mr. Descheemaeker’s comments show that many companies want to put information about their performance – and specifically, the health of their products – in front of consumers right now.

Descheemaeker hopes that regulating the disclosure of product health performance could start a “nutrition arms race” amongst food producers, pitting companies against each other to drive the creation of healthier products. We say: bring on the big guns.

3. Untapped Trillion

What percentage of philanthropic giving do you think goes to climate-related causes (everything from climate change, nature, conservation to animal welfare)? When we asked around the Good Business office, guesses ranged from 10%- 45%. We were all wrong. The actual figure is just 2%.

This revelation shocked us. Why is the climate crisis—the biggest issue facing humanity—being largely ignored when people and organisations choose causes to support? And why does it matter? Adam Fraser, CEO of Terraset and a friend of Good Business, has recently written about this pressing issue.

While philanthropy alone cannot solve the climate crisis, it plays a crucial role within the capital stack—the various layers of financing needed to fund climate-related projects and technologies. The global philanthropic market exceeds $800 billion annually and is expected to surpass a trillion dollars in the coming years. This trillion-dollar market represents a significant opportunity in our efforts to address the climate crisis.

Philanthropic capital also allows for rapid investment into innovation. Adam highlights that there are solutions, particularly for carbon removals, that need funding now to develop high-quality projects that can be scaled

We need to help people understand the impact that philanthropic donations can have on the climate crisis, rather than relying solely on government or the private sector. This involves better communication about innovative climate solutions and the genuine change they can bring, supported by transparent and measurable data.

Some organisations are excelling in this area and gaining significant publicity for their efforts. For example, Patagonia’s donations to environmental causes and the Rockefeller Foundation who recently shifted their focus entirely to climate change. We need more organisations to follow their lead and unlock more than 2% of that trillion-dollar market.

4. Piggy Bank Power Play

Research in Australia, Germany, and the US has unveiled a significant gender gap in investment decision-making, challenging our assumptions about financial equality in modern households. The study reveals that men consistently wield greater influence than their partners when it comes to investment choices. Two main reasons for this gap were identified—gender norms and individual characteristics. Husbands are often older than their partners, more likely to be employed, and higher earners, granting them more financial sway. Personality traits also play a role, with more assertive and extroverted personalities– traits often (though not always) associated with men – holding more bargaining power.

Despite the geographic focus of this study, this is a global issue. At Good Business, we've observed similar patterns in our work for the Gates Foundation supporting women's financial inclusion in Nigeria, making these findings closer to home both surprising and concerning.

The implications are significant. The research also suggests that men tend to take more risk when making decisions, so it’s possible that if men are making the decisions, their partners are being exposed to more risk than they are comfortable with.

To address this imbalance, efforts to promote gender equality must extend beyond the workplace and into the home, where social norms are first learned and reproduced. Children who grow up in households where financial decisions are made jointly are more likely to adopt these behaviours in their own relationships, perpetuating positive change.

The Goods: The Sustainability Standouts

The Goods usually highlights one company that is doing great stuff. This week we bring you not one, not a hundred, but 500.

This week, TIME released a list of the World’s Most Sustainable Companies . The inspiring lineup of global green champions isn’t just a popularity contest, as it’s backed by a methodology that draws on over 20 key data points, including social metrics like diversity and employee engagement, alongside climate metrics such as emissions and renewable energy use. Turns out, saving the planet is hard work—and these companies aren’t just talking the talk, they’re walking the walk.

The list shines a spotlight on companies from diverse sectors. From tech and banking to consumer goods and lifestyle brands, organisations worldwide are proving that doing good is indeed good business. These leading companies seem to share a common approach where sustainability isn’t just a function, but a mindset. Schneider, ranked #1 on the list, exemplifies this by embedding sustainability into its business model—from products to services—positioning itself as an “impact company,” a commitment highlighted by CEO Peter W. Herweck.

Looking ahead, the forthcoming CSRD regulations in EU are set to shake things up and make lists like these more impactful. With standardised reporting requirements, data across industries will be more consistent, enabling fairer comparisons and giving stakeholders a clearer view of sustainability efforts on a level playing field.

Our congratulations to all the companies on this list. Their achievements inspire businesses everywhere to rethink what’s possible, reminding us that no matter the sector and stage of the sustainability journey you’re on, there’s always room to do better for our planet.