A Stitch in Time...

I recently had the honor of representing my organization – Soorty Enterprises (Pvt) Ltd. – at the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) Leadership Summit 2020. My organization partnered with the UNGC to be part of a cohesive global action plan for the preservation of life and the environment.

...there wasn't a shared mechanism whereby all that individual-good could lean on, influence or achieve economies of scale.

I've had a long-standing opinion that most businesses - everywhere, not just in Pakistan - knew what was wrong and what their part in creating that situation was. But due to the various structures common to the global economy, didn't know how to do things differently. Whether it was community-wellbeing or environmental responsibility - one could, in isolation, commit to various endeavors such as reducing water usage, reducing carbon emissions, improving community linkages, etc.; but there wasn't a shared mechanism whereby all that individual-good could lean on, influence or achieve economies of scale. As I have familiarized myself, more and more, with the situation, I've come to some personal realizations that I'd like to share with you before sharing key-takeaways from the Summit:

 1) We've - jointly - created a situation for ourselves where now individual-good (as good as that may be, and there is no question that it is) isn't enough. As an operator in a vast value-chain, I cannot do more than what is the minimum necessary to retain competitiveness. At Soorty Enterprises, we’ve cut down our water usage up to 100 percent in some production processes with an average of 70-80 percent across the board. Our carbon emissions are orders of magnitude lower than what local and international environmental laws suggest they should be. We launched the largest industry-specific gender empowerment program in Pakistan, last year. And I’m sure there are similar statistics and endeavors presented by other large-scale exporting businesses in Pakistan in their own various fields.

But is that enough?

...increasing instances of disease and declining quality of life are also a part of this equation...

2) We've - jointly - finally begun (and I say this with a measure of conservatism) to come to understand the behemoth of environmental and ensuing social degradation that threatens to strike not in a few lifetimes from now, but in our own. Increasing storm density and strengths, decreasing crop yields, increasing locust swarms, declining water quality and provision mechanisms, to name but a few. But increasing instances of disease and declining quality of life are also a part of this equation, are they not?

What is then this latest COVID-19 epidemic?

 3) We still don’t know how to get out of the mess that we’ve created. In almost all instances – even that of the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) – all experts that I’ve had the pleasure of interacting with give us a relatively tenable roadmap to 2030 but only generalized, broad, vague and mellifluous expectations of what we aim to achieve by 2050. When I ask them, “why” – the answer is invariably, “we hope that by that time we will have discovered new technologies that will help us bridge the gap between 2030 and 2050”.

But can one, reasonably make or follow capital-intensive policy initiatives on the presumption of an ‘I’ll tell you when we get there’?

 4) World bodies – including the UN – have had a supportive role for industries and businesses but it has also been somewhat peripheral. They aren’t inside the value-chain; they are not integral and, hence, they are ignorable. The reason you and I are having this discussion is because I’ve volunteered – in good faith and with full knowledge of the impact my sector has had historically on the environment – to do so. But there is nothing making me do this. Why not? Its been a few decades since the MDGs and another several years since the SDGs were finalized. Why are we still only talking about partnering rather than well on our way down that joint-road?

 5) Businesses don’t operate on “feel-good altruism”. They operate on principles of profit, competition and progress. What is the business-case for adopting the SDGs? I know there is a complete body of literature that exists on it and I’ve had the privilege to read it but why isn’t it more accessible to people who – for example – have neither the time nor facility in digesting relatively complicated abstractions? What is the real-life marginal benefit to being a responsible producer?

These are questions I ask myself off and on and that is the mental construction with which I approached the UNGC Leadership Summit 2020. Now, for some observations from the sessions:

What is the real-life marginal benefit to being a responsible producer?

1) It felt good that there was more goal-centered discussion in these sessions. Half of the faces I saw – whether participating or presenting – had semi-forced smiles… putting a brave face on what really has us all horrified. COVID-19. But I think that also prompted everyone to have a more serious, more open discussion – even about matters that I’ve not heard being referred to before. The sessions, if you want to peg a term for them – were more “human”.

 2) I felt that – again due to prevailing conditions – the focus had shifted to ‘social welfare’ as opposed to ‘climate change’ in most of the discussions I attended. And it is understandable; with this crisis to bring with it a significant deterioration in the general quality of life, loss of wages and holdings, loss of social connectivity – the shift I mentioned isn’t unreasonable. But I still don’t see why the “environment” and the “human condition” are treated separately. Out of a few dozen speakers I listened to, only seven made any attempt to speak of both in some connected fashion while others chose to speak either of one or the other.

 3) This was my first UNGC Summit so I’m not really in a position to compare but at its peak (at least when I noticed) we had about 20,000 people tuned in to the virtual event. That is 20,000 different minds from different areas and different ground-conditions, who have reached the same conclusion and eager to dedicate their efforts and mental faculties to resolving humanity’s largest existential threat. It was, frankly, an inspiring and humbling realization when it struck. Well done, Team UNGC!!

I’d have appreciated more sector-specific or subject-specific sessions too.

 4) I had to shift between the Plenary and the Sessions often, so I’m not sure if what I’m about to say is valid or not. Please correct me if it isn’t. I felt that most of the sessions were structured to be region specific – and nothing wrong with that. But I’d have appreciated more sector specific (for example, Textile Industry or Automotive Industry or Oil & Gas Industry, etc.) or subject specific (carbon emissions, water recycling, water reclamation, agricultural efficiency, etc.) sessions too. They go a long way in giving people like me a more defined path forward.

 5) There really is no substitute toa real-life physical interaction. Virtual meetings can only get you so far.

I don’t think there is too much time left before we have to “do” rather than just “talk”. 

So, in closing, it was a very impressive Summit and it gives a lot of information and hope for the times in front of us. The only problem is I don’t think there is too much time left before we have to “do” rather than just “talk”.

Both as an individual and as an organization, we are eager to both know more actionable information and do more for the good of all. Honored for the invitation to participate.

Thank you.