Innovation Zero: Why You'll Want To Go Next Year

Welcome to our fifth 2024 edition of RADAR – our monthly email.

A 10-minute read from a design viewpoint to expand your perspective and deepen your knowledge, helping you better navigate the shifting world of brands and consumers.?This month, we are sharing our perspective and insights from Innovation Zero.

At the beginning of May Nick Dormon and I attended Innovation Zero at London Olympia, a conference billed as “scaling innovation to lead the low carbon transformation”.

?

With over 200 sessions spanning 14 dedicated forums - including Energy, Finance, Food & Agriculture, Industrial, Transport, Advanced Tech, Aviation & Shipping, Built Environment, and Carbon Markets - the conference offered a comprehensive platform for knowledge exchange, networking and broad skill-building.

?

Attendees were genuinely spoiled for choice with so much to take on-board across latest trends, policy, technology and announcements all in the realm of sustainability. The conference brought together a diverse array of stakeholders from policymakers, scientists, activists, technologists, politicians, industry leaders, finance experts, brands and think tanks from around the globe, serving as a dynamic stage for collaboration, idea exchange and inspiration.

?

We couldn’t have seen or participated in everything even if we had wanted to! Therefore we remained with the main stage on day one to tackle the big topics and focused on Food & Agriculture on day two given its relevance to our work in the FMCG sector.

?

Before diving into the overview of what we heard it is worth pointing out just what a high calibre event it was - a melting pot of ideas, opinions, innovations and insights, with world-class speakers and exhibitors all invested in shaping a sustainable future. In the opening address by Sir Liam Fox MP he proposed that “the answer is sitting in this room...”. Such was the standard of the attendees, on reflection he was probably right.

"The answer is sitting in this room..."

Urgency and Agency

The conference kicked off with a series of thought-provoking talks and panel discussions by esteemed speakers. Professor Jim Skea, Chair of the IPCC, set the tone with a compelling speech on the scientific context of climate change and a call for “urgency and agency” - action on the urgency of addressing the challenge and the agency of the individuals within the room.

Professor David King, from the University of Cambridge Centre for Climate Repair, echoed this sentiment, emphasising the need for immediate action to address our planet's rejection of our current lifestyle. With CCR’s mission focused on reducing CO2 emissions, removing excess CO2 from the atmosphere and refreezing the Arctic (yes, really!), the imperative was clear: we must strive for "net negative" emissions, not just net zero. It was remarked that net zero sounds easy!

?

Another key theme from the scientists in the morning sessions was the need to work in harmony with nature, not against it as it is a battle we are losing! We are “a part of nature, not apart from nature” was a great soundbite. There was also some on the panel that referred to the “Gaia Hypothesis” – understanding Earth as a single and self-regulating complex system, maintaining the conditions for life on the planet. However it was framed, the message was clear, that we must draw to a close our self-destructive phase and recognise the need for action. The scientific panellists did exclaim that they are growing a little tired of not being listened to.

"A part of nature not apart from nature"

Continuing to draw from scientific insights and real-world examples, speakers delved into the need for a paradigm shift towards net negative emissions and emphasised the importance of reframing the narrative around sustainability to a more positive story for driving change. This was highlighted later in the day in the communications conversation, that facts and figures aren’t sufficiently compelling to make humans change. To slightly misquote psychologist Jerome Bruner, “a fact wrapped in a story is 22 times more powerful than a simple fact”. There was broad consensus that the job of conveying the challenge is falling short. With targets, numbers and ambitions aplenty, most mere mortals are left dumbfounded by the expectations of the scientists. I believe this is where brands have a key role to play – they need to make it simple, comprehendible and make it actionable, wrapping it in a human story that makes it relatable.

?

The notion of relatability came up later in the morning with Professor Ed Hawkins referencing his climate stripes data visualisation. In this instance it was his socks that told the story! For those not familiar with the climate stripes, they were born from Professor Hawkins’s desire to clearly articulate the climate crisis beyond a spreadsheet and graphs. Through a series of vertical colour-coded bars they show clearly and vividly how global average temperatures have risen over nearly two centuries. What they clearly illustrate is the power of bringing the conversation to life. I may be slightly biased, but the role of design here is very compelling.?

Through other panel discussions key themes such as the escalating impact of climate change, the imperative for international cooperation, and the role of innovation at a systems level were explored in depth. From innovative approaches to climate communication to the financial implications of transitioning to a decarbonised future, attendees gained valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of the sustainability challenge.

?

A headline that stood out from these conversations was that the cost of action is huge, but the cost of inaction is also huge. Some panellists offered estimates to transition, one of which was $150 trillion over 30 years. There was limited nodding from other panellists regarding the magnitude, but agreement that not acting will throw up challenges that clearly go beyond pure financials. Food security equating to national security was one such example, immigration from more hostile environments another. A strong argument was presented that inaction would be more costly in the long run.

The cost of action is huge, but the cost of inaction is also huge?

?

The Power of Collaboration

Towards the end of the first day a panel consisting of Chief Sustainability Officers for Unilever, Amazon and HSBC took to the stage. Seldom do you get the opportunity to hear such influential stakeholders talk in unison. It was inspiring (and I have to say reassuring that these individuals are in these positions) to listen to some of the challenges and learnings from within their organisations.

?

Zak Watts (Amazon) talked about the need to progress beyond simply making commitments and move to action. So many businesses have ambitions to reach certain targets by 20XX but little detail about exactly how. As an example, 11% of Amazon shipments are already non-packaged, shipped in the primary pack only, with the obvious associated savings in carbon and cost. Perhaps made easier when you control the supply chain!

?

Upping the tension was Rebecca Marmot (Unilever) explaining how climate impact and risk is real within the business today, referencing the Spanish tomato shortage last summer that led to many out-of-stocks across Europe. Unilever has long been a vanguard of sustainability with the Unilever Sustainable Living Plan formulated well over a decade ago. This has now morphed into a fully integrated corporate strategy, the Climate Transition Action Plan. Time-bound costed roadmaps have been developed across the business groups resulting in targets and actions that are embedded in their respective financial growth plans.

?

Celine Herweijer (HSBC) explained how the process of compiling their roadmap was as valuable as the transition plan it delivered. So valuable in fact that it took double the allocated timeframe (it took a year) but the trade-off was considered good investment. She stressed how collaboration and learning across the entire value chain is essential for buy-in and accountability.

?

All three were in agreement that sustainability has to be integrated into the strategic plans at all levels through the business, and not an add-on or afterthought. This is consistent with what we are experiencing with our clients – sustainability has to be hard-wired into brand strategic plans in order to gain traction with marketing teams and be deployed to consumers in a meaningful manner at the right moment. Another point made that is very close to our hearts is the hugely important role that innovation plays in driving sustainability. Given the forum’s Innovation Zero title, that doesn’t really need explaining (but give us a call if you’d like to know more..!)

Sustainability has to be hard-wired into brand strategic plans?

Shift The Narrative

Day 2 started with opening remarks from the day’s host, David Shukman (former BBC Science Editor). He stressed a key point made throughout the first day, that we need to be talking in the present tense, not future. Very often what we read about relating to climate change (particularly in corporate comms) sets the ambition just out of today’s terms of reference, in effect making it someone else’s problem. This narrative needs to shift. Reference urgency and agency.

?

Following the main stage opening remarks Nick and I moved to the Food and Agriculture Forum for the remainder of the day. It covered topics such as soil health, regenerative agriculture, shifting diets, alternative proteins. Speakers underscored the interconnectedness of these issues and the need for holistic solutions that address environmental, social and economic dimensions. Another day of hugely interesting, brain-swelling conversations!

?

A point made by several panellists throughout the day is that agriculture is such a big issue. Massive and multifaceted at so many levels. Attention was drawn to the fact that it was only tackled for the first time at COP28 due to its complexity and emotional weight (national identities in some cases). But it is fundamental to the required change.

?

The theme of shifting the narrative came up in many contexts. As natural capital is now starting to be seen as a critical underpin of economic growth, there is the opportunity to reframe how nature is viewed in financial terms. By placing a value on nature, we can look to reduce impact, valorise that reduction and create a market where one hasn’t previously existed. Given that our current natural consumption is running at x1.6, i.e. we need 1.6 Earths to sustain ourselves (Dasgupta Review), intervention and innovation is required across the board.

We need to be talking in the present tense, not future?

Six Inches of Soil

It hadn’t previously crossed my mind just how thought provoking soil could be! A speaker in this forum stated an obvious but, pause-for-thought, fact that our existence relies on six inches of soil and rain (and I’d add some sunlight). The health of that soil is fundamental to the whole ecosystem. And it is the second largest store of carbon. For much of the last century soil was viewed as simply the ‘carrier’ for whatever multitude of additives farmers would apply. Where yield tonnage has been the only measure of success and reward for generations, this mindset is starting to change. Healthy soil is the foundation of our food chains, supports biodiversity and plays a crucial role in sequestering carbon dioxide from our atmosphere.

Healthy soil is the foundation of our food chains ?

The panel discussed how the reward criteria needed to change to a system goal of ecosystem services + yield/ output. Not just tonnage. This requires major shifts in policy and the entire farming business model. Big challenges.

?

Part of the major shift is the regenerative movement: the understanding and fitting within the rhythm and ecosystem of the natural world to allow it to regenerate, rather than the intensive depletion farming approaches. Although the term has been around for a while it has recently found its way into the public’s vernacular. There was agreement across the panel that “Regenerative” needs to be a farmer movement, not a marketing term that like so many other sustainability buzz-words falls out of fashion – although frustratingly it seems to have been co-opted. It was also stressed that the term shouldn’t be put in a narrow box, but should remain a broad definition else farmers become labelled as regenerative, as opposed to intensive. Interestingly, it was also discussed that it is “no longer enough to be sustainable, but regenerative”.

Shifting Diets

In the afternoon the conversations turned to the potential of shifting diets and alternative proteins in mitigating climate change and the importance of collaboration, innovation and policy support. We learned that to ensure our future food security and planetary health, we need to transform our diets and adopt more sustainable and healthy food choices. Can the two go hand-in-hand? Affordability was a major theme as well as policy directed towards consumers making the right choices. This is obviously a delicate issue from many angles, particularly that government intervention in diets isn’t a vote winner.

?

As the discussions focused on alternative proteins there was great excitement about the potential this space has to radically change GHGs. To put it in understandable terms, chicken is the most efficient animal protein. Alternative proteins are 60-70% more efficient than chickens. Allied to this is the huge gains in land use in moving away from conventional protein sources. However, there is still a very large job to be done in winning over the consumer from cost, education, appetite appeal and changing behaviours.

?

A stand-out statement from these sessions was “people won’t change their diet to save themselves, so why would they change to save the planet?”. There needs to be a big shift in people’s dietary choices. However, it was interesting to observe that the discussions were still referencing a binary system of either established proteins or alternative proteins. Surely there needs to be greater focus on a hybrid future – meat based burgers with a 30% protein substitute? A best of both approach?

?

This is an area where food manufacturers need to turn things on their heads. It is debatable whether mimicking current food systems is succeeding. The whole thing needs a rebrand.

? ? “People won’t change their diet to save themselves, so why would they change to save the planet?”? ?

I’ve only touched on a handful of the discussion points across the day. What was abundantly clear is that the industrialisation of farming has gone too far. It requires a rethink. But to state the obvious, farming is more than simply food production: ecosystems, community, security, welfare, livelihoods, technology, etc, etc. But this critical part of our existence is under threat. The capital cost of farming is huge while the risks are increasing as climate change impacts. The need to embrace and harness technology is essential but, and here is the but, the average age of a farmer is 58.1 years old (in the US)! Large parts of this equation don’t stack up in my head.

Summary

It was amazing to participate in such a broad-based forum, to understand the challenges and to see the bigger picture. It is all too easy to sit in our own silos and miss where the real gains are being made and potential opportunities sitting in the wings.

Innovation Zero 2024 was a world-class two days that significantly upweighted and updated our understanding of the very broad sustainability landscape that we can implement across our broad client-based sustainability programmes.

?

One quick side point - I’ve steered off the politics. The event provided a platform for many well-informed and well-intended politicians including Liam Fox, Jeremy Hunt, Ed Milliband, Claire Coutinho, George Eustice and Philip Dunne. Their presence relating to policy matters was important.

?

To return to the opening comment, that “the answer sits in this room.” It was evident that solutions and ideas exist at multiple levels across multiple industries and applications. However, I would also observe that a collaborative force is required. A force that can bring together innovation, systems, consumers, technology, brands, supply chains, commercial...the list goes on.

?

The role of design to challenge, provoke, simplify, inspire and foster collaboration - in essence, to serve as a galvanising force for change - is often overlooked in the search for low carbon transformations. Design played a large role in creating the current situation and must play an even greater part in creating the low carbon future.

#InnovationZero24

?