Corporate Social Responsibility « Official Timberland Earthkeepers Blog

Posts within ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’

Reducing Emissions – Not Boycotting Fuel

By admin / August 30th, 2010 / Categories: Corporate Social Responsibility

View comments

Comments

Editor’s note: The following was written in response to public confusion over the last few days about Timberland and an alleged boycott of fuel derived from oil sands.

When you fuel up your car, do you have any idea where – actually, physically, where — the fuel comes from? We don’t either. As our company doesn’t ship our products ourselves — we hire carrier companies to do it – we don’t have direct visibility to or authority over the choices our carriers make about the fuel they use to keep their trucks moving.

We do measure the greenhouse gas emissions associated with burning fuel to ship Timberland products. And like most people, we pay attention to our fuel consumption for cost and climate reasons. We have a dedicated team that spends a lot of time and effort calculating the most efficient transportation routes from Point A to Point B in order to reduce shipping time and save fuel, which helps us cut costs and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Other ways in which we’re working to reduce our transportation emissions include making modal shifts (e.g. moving products by barge instead of truck), and participating in a group called Clean Cargo that convenes brands and the carrier industry to measure and identify ways to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions associated with shipping consumer products. We also have one-on-one conversations with our carriers and potential carriers during our contracting process to understand what steps they’re taking to reduce their carbon footprint. This information informs our decision about whether to hire or keep carriers.

We also partner with organizations that can help us better understand environmental issues and how we might contribute to positive, sustainable solutions. For more than a year now, Forest Ethics has been teaching us more about the carbon intensity associated not with shipping, but with the feedstock that makes the fuel that goes into our carriers’ trucks. What we’ve learned is that some fuels require more energy to extract and refine than others. This information has helped us to realize that we need to look at the emissions associated with shipping our product the same way we look at the emissions associated with producing our product – from the original source (such as the well, in the case of fuel or the cow, in the case of leather) right through to the finished product.

Easier said then done, since we don’t own any of the trucks that ship our products or employ the people that fuel them up. We’re a very small fish in the very large ocean of brands that ship products all over the world – but what we can do is facilitate conversations with our partners that lead to holistic solutions that improve social and environmental impact. Currently, we ask our carriers to tell us what they’re doing to measure and reduce their greenhouse gas footprint from well head through to fleet efficiency and route optimization. We do not boycott fuels because as mentioned above, we don’t have enough visibility into the fuel sources our carriers use to do so intelligently … and also because we don’t believe boycotts are the best path toward collaborative problem solving or positive sustainable outcomes. We do stand committed to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions and to continuing to push the boundaries on what is considered part of our carbon footprint through measurement, productive conversation, and holistic action – not boycotts.

Betsy Blaisdell
Senior Manager of Environmental Stewardship, Timberland

Room for Improvement in Green Reports and Rankings

By admin / August 19th, 2010 / Categories: Corporate Social Responsibility, earthkeeping, green consumerism

View comments

Comments

As interest in and demand for eco-products increases steadily, so too does the number of lists, awards and entities attempting to qualify such products on their environmental attributes. The intent of these lists is usually to help inform consumers on which products and brands are leading the pack in environmental responsibility and which are not – something we at Timberland agree is critical in an increasingly crowded marketplace with limited third-party standards for product sustainability. Unfortunately, the crowded marketplace of unverified environmental claims is not alone; the field of lists, awards and entities creating “green rankings” has also produced a bevy of information, each relying on different definitions and criteria to determine which brands and products deserve to earn their highest green honor.

Case in point: earlier this summer, Timberland was included in an “Outdoor Gear Special Report,” published by Ethical Consumer, a group in the UK who defines itself as the “leading alternative consumer organization.” Their gear report reviews and rates more than 60 outdoor companies on their environmental and supply chain policies and provides readers with “best buy” advice based on their research.

Therein lies the problem – as it is with many of these kinds of guides and reports – the research. The Ethical Consumer report includes several inaccuracies and incomplete or outdated information … not to mention ratings based on the opinions and judgments of editorial staff, rather than validated third parties. Among the deficiencies in the Ethical Consumer report:

Companies (Timberland included) were repeatedly chastised for not responding to Ethical Consumer information requests. Timberland has asked Ethical Consumer to let us know who their inquiry was directed to several times — so we can figure out where the communication breakdown occurred — but we haven’t yet received any response.

Timberland received poor ratings in several categories because, lacking complete information, the Ethical Consumer team assumed the worst. For example – they called us out for selling merino wool socks. It is true that some merino wool comes from Australia, where mulesing is a serious animal rights issue. And since the Ethical Consumer team didn’t see anything on our website stating that Timberland does not contribute to the issue of mulesing, they assumed that we do. As a transparency and reporting expert, I’ll be the first to admit that we should make our merino wool policy (which requires non-mulesed certification from our suppliers using any Australian wool fiber in our products) prominently available on our website – a fix we’re in the process of making. However, assuming the worst leads the report writers to make judgments without real information – a practice the report in itself is trying to discourage.

Timberland and howies, a Timberland brand based in the UK, were both included in the report … and treated as one entity, sharing one supply chain, when in fact the two are entirely separate. In some instances the Ethical Consumer team used Timberland information to “rate” howies, which was both confusing and incorrect. This leads me to wonder what else they may not have had clear or complete understanding of. As a related error, in several instances the report references Timberland’s 2006 social and environmental performance … but we publish quarterly CSR updates and our most recent (longer) report of CSR data and performance was released in 2009.

Lest this feel like sour grapes from a company that received bad marks, Timberland was not alone in being criticized in the report … nor in criticizing the report. Other articles and blog posts have discussed the Ethical Consumer report and its shortcomings, including The Adventure Life, Treehugger, and Herald Scotland.

The Ethical Consumer report does have pockets of factual, useful information that consumers could learn from and companies could use to improve their sourcing and manufacturing operations. However, due to many inaccuracies and assumptions it’s nearly impossible to weed out what’s true from what is based on opinion. And Ethical Consumer’s gear guide is not the lone report that has inaccuracies or creates a list of recommendations or rankings that can’t be validated. A recent blog post by Marc Gunther makes a similar argument about another popular report (the 100 Best Companies list published by CRO Magazine). Opinions matter, but they shouldn’t be regarded as facts … and good intentions don’t necessarily make for fair and balanced reporting.

Without third-party standards to truly measure products sustainability, there will continue to be an abundance of rankings, lists and reports that raise awareness in general (which is a good thing), but don’t give consumers real tools to make responsible purchasing decisions (which is the detail we all lack for translating ideas into real change). To the folks at Ethical Consumer – whose tagline reads, “challenging corporate power since 1989” — I invite you to consider that there is often a missed opportunity for rankings organizations to verify information with the brands being scored. As someone who has worked for several advocacy and non-profit organizations, I don’t think such information sharing would skew factual evaluation, but instead could lead to accurate analysis of disclosure rather than judgment (or methodology)-created-in-a-vacuum.

As an example of how outdoor brands and editors with consumers’ best interest at heart can work in concert, I invite readers to visit www.ecoindexbeta.org. Here, stakeholders can review the Outdoor Industry Association’s Eco Index – a standardized tool (developed by more than 200 brands, including Timberland, and with input from external groups) to evaluate outdoor products’ sustainability performance. Is it the holy grail of transparency and product comparability? We’ll see what the beta test shows… hopefully the next Gear Guide will be better informed as a result.

Beth Holzman
CSR Strategy & Reporting Manager, Timberland

News Flash: Climate Legislation Lacks Leadership

By admin / July 23rd, 2010 / Categories: Corporate Social Responsibility

View comments

Comments

Page 3 of this morning’s Wall Street Journal announces, “Senate Halts Effort to Cap CO2 Emissions.“ I am outraged … but not surprised. Not in the least.

I was in Washington yesterday, on business unrelated to climate legislation — I was invited to a Congressional briefing on the role of private enterprise in rebuilding a devastated Haiti. That’s a topic for another blog post … but it almost doesn’t matter why I was there, since the experience is so often the same regardless of the focus. Too many so-called “leaders” posturing and posing and blowing hot air in form of prepared, approved, predictable remarks. Too many politicians that have been entrusted to lead, to put the best interests of their states and their constituents first, instead doing predictably nothing to fulfill their duties or address any interest that isn’t their own, or that of their party. Senate Democratic leadership shelved their cap-and-trade effort? The most astonishing part about that news to me is that the effort ever made it this far.

The article could have stopped there, one paragraph in, but goes on to offer half a page of familiar excuses from climate legislation opponents for why cap and trade is to be feared and avoided like a deal with the devil. I can see them — did see them, yesterday, our principled “leaders” — wringing their hands and shaking their heads and trying to work up expressions of earnest concern: “Cap and trade would kill jobs! Cripple our industries! Put us at a disadvantage to Chinese rivals! Force higher costs for consumers!” From Congress and the President — instead of legislation, instead of engaged democracy, we get the EPA setting guidelines in a backroom somewhere. This is not the way to make America energy independent, or to ensure that American business is sustainable–financially and environmentally.

Washington can – and will – continue on the path of pretense, working hard to appear to be working hard on the crisis facing our natural environment, while actually doing nothing — except making cheap headlines, by demonizing “fat cat bankers” or “scurrilous CEOs,” which earns a cheap laugh from the press, and maybe even earns votes from the manipulated masses. Is this what the greatest democracy in the history of humankind is reduced to — toxic rhetoric from the left and the right?

In the meantime, thank goodness for the creative power of the private sector. The solar industry will continue to expand (especially in China, where that government has decided that clean energy is a priority). And despite the absence of a clear policy, or even any real policy on sustainability, private enterprise, maligned by this administration regularly, will continue to reduce their emissions and lower their energy costs. It is good business, common sense, and competitive advantage to lower your environmental impact. No wonder our “leaders” in Washington don’t get it.

Timberland has reduced our carbon emissions by almost 40% against our 2006 baseline–lowering costs, making our business more profitable and more sustainable. We are a mid-size business competing in the global economy, and we are doing what our “leaders” say can’t be done — we are being competitive, and we are building sustainability into our business model.

Would a clear government policy on carbon help — the way a minimum wage or CAFE standards help industry? You bet. But as the Wall Street Journal article demonstrates clearly — if you’re waiting for leadership from the Beltway Denizens on climate change, settle in. Rhetoric aplenty … leadership, not a whit.

Someone let me know when there’s actual news breaking about principled leadership regarding climate change from this administration … in the meantime, I’ve got a responsible business to run.

Jeff Swartz
President & CEO, Timberland

Timberland Helps Local Scouts Spring Into Action

By admin / July 19th, 2010 / Categories: Corporate Social Responsibility

View comments

Comments

On Thursday July 15, Timberland had the privilege of hosting 43 Cub Scouts from the Daniel Webster Council for an afternoon of educational dialogue and arts and crafts. To the Cub Scouts’ surprise and joy, at the end of the day, they were awarded the “Spring into Action” patch:

“Doing well and doing good” was the focus of the opening conversation. It was discussed how we at Timberland believe in the power of people to transform their communities and make a difference in the world – that we ALL have an opportunity to make it better. It was illustrated how Timberland does just that – from the 40 hours of paid community service per year each employee is encouraged to utilize, to making shoe components from recycled tires and water bottles – which was a jaw-dropping fact, I assure you. We spoke of silver-rated tanneries and solar and wind powered factories. We spoke of LED light bulbs and carbon footprints.

The Scouts were asked to think about how this “doing well and doing good” platform translates to their lives. That the Earth is in need of our help – and every little bit we can do makes a difference. That we all need to be Earthkeepers.

The Scouts also played “TIMBO” – Timberland’s version of Bingo. Board squares consisted of items that could be recycled. Prizes were given to the first couple of Scouts with TIMBO – but also rewarded to the child that could guess what all the words had in common. We also all learned what an aseptic is (the airtight container that is used for sterilized packaging so that freshness is preserved – like with milk or juice – and it’s recyclable).

The next order of business focused on the importance of wildlife conservation. The Scouts painted birdhouses, and were provided bags of birdseed to fill them with. As some of the Picassos were still finishing up their birdhouses, other Scouts started working on the next project – pet rocks. The focus here was that there are fun ways to repurpose nature – even something as simple as a rock is transformed when two eyes are applied.

Lastly, we made God’s-Eyes. The relevance here was a nostalgic one. Not to date myself…but don’t we all remember making these when we were a child? Life wasn’t so complicated back then – heck, email didn’t even exist! The point was that they are just as much fun to make today as they were back then. The Scouts were amazed that it was so easy to make something so beautiful. (An added bonus — anyone who knows 29 year Timberland veteran George Belanger would have paid money to see him making one.)

After a little snack, we circled up and awarded the Cub Scouts their “Spring Into Action” patches. I thought it quite fitting that there were lug prints on the patch – to remind the Scouts of their time at Timberland – and to reinforce that we all need to do our part and be the best Earthkeepers we can be.

Timberland volunteers will long remember this day, and we are all thankful that the company has enabled us to have events such as this. It was all about the kids on Thursday, but planting the seed of environmental consciousness with today’s youth was personally a very rewarding experience, and I believe a very sound investment.

Kati Lynes
Timberland Sales Planning Manager

Boots on the Ground

By admin / June 8th, 2010 / Categories: Corporate Social Responsibility

View comments

Comments

Timberland has had the privilege of partnering with City Year for more than 20 years. What started out as a simple request — “We need boots. Please send some. Love, City Year” has over the years grown into a mutually beneficial relationship that has helped us create a deeper, broader, sustainable impact in our communities — and helped to equip thousands of young leaders to make their own difference on our world.

As 1,500 current corps members across the country prepare to graduate this month, we’d like to share the following excerpt from an essay written by a young corps member in Los Angeles. Whether you’re intimately familiar with the City Year organization or have never heard of it, it’s hard to read without feeling just a little bit hopeful (or maybe even a lot) about the future in these passionate, capable young hands.

(The City Year uniform) represents the unity we feel. Regardless of where we come from and where we serve, we are all at City Year for the same reason: We want to change things; we want to help. We are each spending a year serving full-time in schools and communities to make a difference in the lives of others. Or, as our motto puts it: “Give a year. Change the world.”

Along with what the uniform represents, it is also a constant reminder of many of the memories and lessons that I have learned from City Year. After serving for so long, a corps member is bound to bear some war wounds on their uniform. At this point, my boots are pretty worn out. On my right boot, there’s a streak of yellow paint from the day we painted a mural at Figueroa Elementary School. I could have tried to wash it off if I really wanted to, but I cherish this stain. It’s a reminder of the beautification work that we all do across Los Angeles.

* * *

Our uniforms aren’t just uniforms. They are symbols of what we stand for and what we have done. However, there is still a lot of yellow space yet to be filled, inevitably, with more paint and scuff marks.

There is still more work to do.

You can read the essay “No Ordinary Uniform” in its entirety on the GOOD website.

Earthkeepers on Youtube

Earthkeepers Twitter Feed

Blog Updates by Email

Meet Earthkeeper Heroes

Posts within ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’

Join the Movement

Earthkeepers on Youtube

Blog Updates by Email

Meet Earthkeeper Heroes

Find Earthkeepers @

Blogroll

Find Us Online

Other Timberland Websites

Our Company