Loading Data
Please wait a moment...
Update Cal.
2026.08
03
Mon
04
Tue
05
Wed
06
Thu
07
Fri
08
Sat
09
Sun
Update Calendar
2026.08
01
Sat
02
Sun
03
Mon
04
Tue
05
Wed
06
Thu
07
Fri
08
Sat
09
Sun
10
Mon
11
Tue
12
Wed
13
Thu
14
Fri
Loading Data
Please wait a moment...
Evening ESG news and briefings to wrap up your day.
With 100 days left before the Paris Olympics, the flame was lit on the 16th (local time) at the Temple of Hera in Olympia, Greece. This past March, the posters of the Paris Olympics and Paralympics were unveiled, announcing that the 2024 Summer Olympics had drawn near to us. The posters were handled by Ugo Gattoni, well known as a scarf designer for Hermès, who visualized the slogan "Games Wide Open," carrying the meaning that the entire city turns into a stadium. From the very size of the posters—containing Paris's landmarks and all sorts of symbols—they showed a look differentiated from past Olympics and drew the world's attention.[The interior of the Aquatics Centre, built with wood and recycled materials ©Salem Mostefaoui/Olympics.com]Before becoming a topic for its poster design, the Paris Olympics steadily emphasized "the sustainability of the Olympics." From the planning stage, it decided to minimize new construction for the Olympics and make maximum use of existing facilities. The newly built facilities are only the Olympic Village, the Aquatics Centre, the climbing facility, and the Adidas Arena, which correspond to about 5% of all facilities for hosting the Olympics. The Olympic Village is a facility where participating athletes will stay, and once the Olympics end, it is set to be used as ordinary residential facilities. Other facilities are likewise set to be converted into local infrastructure after the Olympics. It also took into account minimizing environmental impact from construction materials all the way to power supply.The Olympics in the Sustainability EraEntering the 2000s, the economic effectiveness of the Olympics was a subject of steady debate. Along the line of debate, the number of bidding cities that took up the challenge to host the Olympics also continued to decrease. At the time of the 2004 Athens Olympics there were eleven bidding cities, but they gradually decreased until, for the 2024 Paris Olympics, the final bidding cities were just two. Moreover, hard-prepared Olympics were often criticized by the international community for destroying the environment. Beijing, Sochi, and Rio—which hosted the 2008, 2014 Winter, and 2016 Olympics—were particularly so. Not only in persuading the international community but also local citizens, the justification and benefit of hosting the Olympics could no longer be explained without sustainability. Perhaps for that reason, the Paris Olympics has striven tirelessly, from immediately after its selection as host, to create and publicize a waste-free Olympics.Partnership in the Sustainability EraOlympic operation and promotion are aided not only by the host country but also by corporate partners. Partners that immediately come to mind at the words "Olympic partner" include Coca-Cola, Samsung, Visa, and Omega. They put their names on the partner list for this Olympics without fail. Besides such traditional partners, from the late 2010s, companies in the IT and digital categories, such as Intel and Airbnb, began to join as partners. But the most notable partner at this Paris Olympics is Deloitte. Deloitte participated in the 2012 London Olympics in a supporter role—a kind of advisory rather than a partner—but this Paris Olympics is the first time it has put its name up as a worldwide partner.It's the First ESG PartnerThe reason Deloitte became a worldwide partner is none other than ESG. Deloitte took on the role of supporting the Olympics' "2020+5" agenda by using its expertise in the ESG field. 2020+5 is an operational roadmap announced by the "International Olympic Committee (IOC)" in 2021, and includes the following content.[1. Sustainability] Focus on environmental protection, use of reusable and recyclable solutions][2. Digital Innovation] Make the games accessible to more people, enhance fan participation and experience][3. Financial Soundness] Maintain financial sustainability and strengthen the Olympic financial model][4. Strengthening International Cooperation] Strengthen cooperation with various sports organizations and improve global governance][5. Promoting Diversity and Inclusion] Pursue social integration and diversity, and all forms of discrimination and confrontation]Deloitte stated that, during the partnership period, it plans to carry out various activities related to climate neutrality, diversity, inclusion, and athlete support based on its ESG expertise. Exactly what help Deloitte is providing in this regard is not precisely known. Watching, from an ESG perspective, what role Deloitte—which has joined the Olympics—will play and how it performs is also one of the viewing points of this Olympics. by Editor N
Amid the International Energy Agency (IEA) stating that last year's carbon emissions recorded an all-time high, "Carbon Majors," a civic group that analyzes carbon-emitting-company data, announced on the 4th that energy companies' carbon emissions account for 80% of global emissions. The point is that, after the Paris Agreement, the carbon emissions of energy companies producing coal and cement actually increased.Literally translated, the name of the group that reported this fact, "Carbon Majors," means "the chief culprits of carbon." The group is known to have started on the occasion of a HuffPost article in 2013 that pointed out that a mere 90 companies accounted for two-thirds of global carbon emissions. Back in 2017, too, CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project)—a global civic group engaged in carbon-emission-reduction activities—revealed the fact that the carbon emissions of 100 energy companies accounted for 70% of global emissions. As Carbon Majors' data released this month revealed that energy companies' carbon emissions increased after the Paris Agreement—which targeted the reduction of greenhouse gases including carbon—voices continue that we must be vigilant about the climate crisis.[A graph of the increasing trend of global carbon emitted by major carbon-emitting companies ©Carbon Majors]Carbon Majors, which tracked the greenhouse-gas emissions of 122 energy companies, pointed out in its report that from after the Paris Agreement until 2022, a mere 57 energy companies were the chief culprits producing 80% of global carbon emissions. Over the same period, 117 companies produced 88% of global carbon emissions, and among these, state-owned enterprises directly operated by the state or belonging to the government amounted to 69%, while private companies amounted to 31%.[The top 10 companies with the highest carbon emissions after the Paris Agreement ©Carbon Majors]Among these, the energy companies with the highest shares are Saudi Aramco, Gazprom, Coal India, and others. According to Reuters, in reporting on these figures, Saudi Aramco refused to answer, and Gazprom and Coal India did not immediately respond. Carbon Majors' corporate carbon-emission data was also cited in a lawsuit filed this past March by a Belgian farmer against the French oil-and-gas company "TotalEnergies." That lawsuit is proceeding with the issue that TotalEnergies—one of the top 20 companies with the highest carbon emissions—bears some responsibility for causing the climate crisis and inflicting damage on agriculture.The Paris Agreement is a term referring to the 21st UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in Paris, France, in 2015, and has the significance that 195 countries worldwide participated in greenhouse-gas reduction. The Paris Agreement is meaningful in that, going beyond the 1997 Kyoto Protocol—which imposed greenhouse-gas-reduction obligations only on developed countries—it drew out an agreement in which the vast majority of countries worldwide would set greenhouse-gas-reduction targets and join in. The common goal adopted in the Paris Agreement is "preventing the Earth's average temperature from rising 2 degrees or more above pre-industrial levels." It is time to look back on the Paris Agreement's principle that each country's government has the obligation to slow global warming by demanding carbon-emission reductions from its own companies. by Editor N
It has been revealed that the global average temperature rose by 1.52°C in just one year—a shocking finding. Announced by the European Union's Copernicus Climate Change Service, this news has been met with the assessment that international efforts to prevent a 1.5°C rise in average temperature have been insufficient. The pace of global warming accelerated at an alarming rate last year, and we were able to feel the consequences through one extreme climate crisis after another. From massive wildfires in Canada and Australia to severe drought in Northeast Africa and catastrophic flooding in Pakistan, communities around the world spent their days scrambling to recover from natural disasters.[Massive wildfire in Chile in February, with an estimated death toll of approximately 100 ©BBC]There are various reasons why the 1.5°C average temperature threshold is critical. When climate change occurs, it can trigger extreme weather events such as heatwaves and heavy snowfall, cause sea levels to rise and inundate coastal areas, and threaten biodiversity—including the loss of 70% of the world's coral reefs. In an interview, Maya Singer Hobbs, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), stated: "It is important to keep the global average temperature rise below 1.5°C because the natural environment that produces the food we eat is known to be maintainable only when the temperature rises no more than 1.5°C." The target for limiting the average temperature rise was set based on the increase in the Earth's average temperature since the Industrial Revolution and is a medium- to long-term outlook established through the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. However, recent research has shown that, on an individual daily basis, regions around the world are already exceeding the 1.5°C average temperature, raising growing concerns. The BBC reported that Arctic temperatures have been rising approximately four times faster than other parts of the world since 1979, and that Africa's rate of warming since the 1991-2000 period has been faster than that of other regions as well.The pace of warming is faster than previously studied forecasts. Early last year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had projected that half of the Earth's surface would not exceed the 1.5°C threshold until the mid-2030s, but research published this year has raised the possibility that this could occur as early as 2029.[Record of days with average temperature rise above 1.5°C from 1971 to 2023 ©Global Footprint Network]When we enter an "overshoot"* state—in which the average temperature has risen more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels—the likelihood of reaching a "climate tipping point," where the environment deteriorates to a level uninhabitable for humans, increases significantly. For this reason, preventing a 1.5°C rise in average temperature before entering overshoot is critically important. To completely avoid overshoot, greenhouse gas emissions would need to be cut by 43% compared to 2019 levels, but there are now opinions emerging that overshoot is an unavoidable phenomenon and that minimizing the scale of damage is the best we can do. Reversing the situation after overshoot would require carbon capture technology on a massive scale, but such an approach faces not only enormous costs but also industrial and social limitations; therefore, there is a consensus that preventing overshoot in the first place is the top priority.*Overshoot: A situation in which greenhouse gas emissions exceed the amount that nature can absorb, causing the Earth's average temperature to rise beyond the 1.5°C threshold.A Positive Signal Amid CrisisDespite the grim outlook, there are positive developments underway. The cost of renewable energy continues to fall, and the scale of investment is growing. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), investment in clean energy reached approximately 1.7 trillion USD in 2023, surpassing investment in fossil fuels for the first time. This can be seen as a positive signal of the transition to clean energy. Because the impacts of global warming are particularly harsh on the economically vulnerable extreme poor, we must join forces as quickly as possible to avert the climate crisis. This is a moment that calls for determination beyond the interests of individual nations, for the sake of our shared future. We must face reality for the sake of future generations, and it will be the path to defending the 1.5°C Maginot Line of global warming.by Editor N
Among American teens and twentysomethings right now, the stainless steel tumbler "Stanley Quencher H2.0" from the popular insulated bottle brand Stanley is an enormous hit. America's Gen Z and Millennials spend their days collecting Stanley Quenchers in every color, decorating them, and showing them off with pride.[The Starbucks collaboration edition Stanley Quencher that sold out in 4 minutes ©TikTok]The Starbucks collaboration Stanley Quencher, sold exclusively at the U.S.-based retailer Target, sold out in just four minutes despite a purchase limit of two per person. With the collaboration tied to the upcoming Valentine's Day, the tumblers are being resold on eBay at five to six times the original price, reaching up to $300.[Resale price of the Starbucks collaboration edition ©Ebay]On the short-form platform TikTok, the Stanley Quencher—referred to as #StanleyCup—is classified as an "aesthetic" product, a term denoting fashion that expresses one's own distinct sensibility. American teenagers choose a Stanley Quencher in a color that matches their outfit when going out, adorn their tumblers with various accessories, and proudly showcase them on social media. Pop singer Olivia Rodrigo, who is hugely popular among American teens, revealed in an interview with GQ magazine that TikTok influenced her decision to purchase a Stanley. Having captured the attention of American teenagers in this way, the Stanley Quencher series has been releasing numerous limited editions and rapidly driving up sales.[Stanley's bestseller changed starting in 2020. ©CNBC]The Stanley Quencher series established itself as a massive trend when the new CEO Terence Reilly was appointed in 2020. Reilly is known as the figure who sparked a global Crocs boom by orchestrating collaborations with a wide range of brands while at Crocs. According to CNBC, Reilly discovered content in which a women's consumer group running a commerce blog called "The Buy Guide" had recommended the Quencher series, and proceeded to produce Quencher tumblers in the pastel tones the Buy Guide editors wanted. Since then, each time a new color was unveiled, the Quencher series enjoyed a steep upward sales curve, repeatedly racking up "sold out" signs for color after color. The vibrantly colored tumblers soon overtook the sales of the iconic "green Stanley cup," which had been Stanley's bestseller and brand identity up to the time of Reilly's appointment in 2020. In December of last year, the Stanley Quencher tumbler succeeded in selling 10 million units.Before the Quencher boom, Stanley was a brand that sold reasonably priced tumblers under $40 to male consumers such as construction workers and hikers, emphasizing powerful insulation performance. Today, however, Stanley has emerged as a flashy fashion item wrapped in an eco-friendly concept favored by women.The trend of consuming eco-friendly products is nothing new to us, and neither are the concerns surrounding them. Take eco-bags, for example. Once hailed as a quintessential eco-friendly product, eco-bags became a subject of worry because, despite being reusable items, they often failed to be reused enough times to genuinely benefit the environment, ultimately not delivering real environmental benefits. Stainless steel tumblers, too, face criticism that their production process uses energy inefficiently and that they require sufficient reuse to justify their environmental cost. The New York Times has reported that producing a stainless steel water bottle requires approximately seven times more fossil fuels, emits 14 times more greenhouse gases, and demands hundreds of times more metal resources compared to a plastic water bottle. The Canada-based International Reference Centre for Life Cycle Assessment and Sustainable Transition (CIRAIG) has published a report stating that "a stainless steel tumbler must be reused at least 220 times to have the effect of maintaining the global environment at a level that is not harmful to humans."Stanley is not ignoring these concerns and has pledged on its website that by 2025, at least 50% of its stainless steel products and 100% of its packaging will be made from recycled materials. The U.S. tech publication Wired noted that "the Stanley Quencher craze has demonstrated that eco-friendly products can become popular; the next milestone is to prove that a mass-consumption trend does not necessarily lead to increased waste and overconsumption." All eyes are now on where Stanley's eco-friendly mass-consumption trend will go from here.by Editor N
There is a saying that the internet is a virtual planet created by humans. Through our screens, we move back and forth between that planet and Earth hundreds of times a day. The internet, which enables experiences, encounters, and collaborations previously unimaginable with ease, has become one of humanity's most vital infrastructures. Yet this essential internet planet has one problem: it is consuming the Earth's resources—and that consumption is growing rapidly. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the number of people using the internet doubled between 2010 and 2023, while the volume of internet traffic surged by a staggering twentyfold.Our computers and mobile devices do not themselves emit carbon dioxide directly. But we ought to give at least some thought to the data centers that, after we request data through our devices, deliver that requested data to our screens. [Naver's Data Center 'Gak' in Sejong, with the largest server capacity in South Korea © NAVER]Data Centers vs. Renewable EnergyData centers are primarily responsible for storing and processing the vast amounts of data connected to the internet. Operating 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, data centers, together with data communication networks, account for 1 to 1.5% of global electricity consumption. While efforts are being made to reduce the power consumption of data centers—such as installing renewable energy generation facilities like solar power—many experts believe these efforts are still insufficient. Forbes reported an expert analysis showing that while the electricity consumption of large data centers grew at an average annual rate of 25% from 2015 to 2021, investment in renewable energy increased by only 7%. On top of this, the recent emergence of AI, which is now making its presence felt in earnest, is adding significant momentum to the growth in power demand. AI, Studying Without RestAI appears poised to continue learning without a moment's pause until the day it can work flawlessly on behalf of humanity. The problem is that the AI era has only just begun. The AI industry is growing by the day, propelled by generative AI and AI-powered mobile services. The global accounting firm PwC has forecast that the AI market will surpass two quadrillion Korean won by 2030. This means data centers will face a corresponding volume of queries—requests for information from databases—which will in turn drive up power consumption. Researchers at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam have released an analysis indicating that the electricity required by AI servers could reach 85 to 134 terawatt-hours (TWh) by 2027, roughly equivalent to the annual electricity consumption of the Netherlands.Could AI Solve the Problem After All?Paradoxically, the energy industry is attempting to use AI technology to solve the problem of energy efficiency. The idea is to move beyond simple power transmission and distribution by leveraging AI to manage electricity supply and demand in specific regions more precisely, and to optimize the charging and discharging cycles of energy storage systems. This concept is referred to as a "Virtual Power Plant (VPP)"—a notion that seems well suited to the virtual planet of the internet. Companies that operate hyperscale data centers, such as Microsoft, Google, and Amazon, are also reportedly working to make their data centers more environmentally friendly, especially in pursuit of the carbon neutrality goals they have each pledged. If we were to simply dichotomize the issue into AI's power demand versus the power supply from renewable energy, it would appear that AI's power demand is still growing faster for now. With AI technology having already penetrated nearly every industry, the response through renewable energy usage must accelerate at a pace matching the growth in electricity demand.by Editor N
Microsoft has claimed the top spot on the "2023 ESG 100 Best Public Companies" list* compiled by IBD, a U.S. media outlet providing stock market information. With growing interest in ESG investment portfolios over the past four years, the perception has also expanded that companies adept at managing ESG risks are stable, well-managed enterprises with high investment value. As ESG regulations have become increasingly stringent, the preference for companies prepared to respond flexibly to ESG demands has also risen.Keeping pace with this trend, IBD has been selecting its own list of the 100 Best ESG Companies for ESG investors over the past five years. And Microsoft, by applying ESG standards across multiple domains within a rapidly changing business environment, is regarded as one of the companies most actively practicing ESG management in the United States.*If you are curious about IBD's selection process for the 100 Best Companies, click here to read this article.[Microsoft IR Webpage ©MICROSOFT]Why Microsoft Took the Top SpotIBD selects its ESG 100 Best Companies from among companies that have received outstanding scores across five categories: Business Model and Innovation, Environment, Human Capital, Leadership and Governance, and Social Capital. Among these five, Human Capital and Social Capital correspond to the Social (S) dimension, while Leadership falls under the Governance (G) dimension. IBD noted that it follows the five-category classification established by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), a nonprofit organization founded in 2011. Microsoft achieved the top overall ranking across SASB's five criteria while also claiming first place within the computer industry, establishing itself as a company consistently practicing ESG management. IBD highlighted the following representative activities as the reasons behind Microsoft's number-one ranking:1. Leading the corporate carbon emission reduction trend2. Developing technology (e.g., Microsoft Cloud) that enables thousands of customers to set and achieve their own sustainability goals3. Supporting the White House's AI Bill of Rights and safeguarding labor rights4. CEO Satya Nadella's two promises: to deliver returns to shareholders, and to build a path toward a sustainable future for both the company and the planet together5. Setting corporate targets for carbon neutrality, water reduction, and zero waste by 2030The Light and Shadow of ESG LeadershipBeyond the environmental sphere—for which Microsoft is best known as a leading ESG responder—the company has made strides in the social dimension as well. In 2022, Microsoft formally announced that it had adopted the principle of respecting the right to form labor unions. Last year, the company partnered with the Communications Workers of America (CWA) to complete its acquisition of major gaming company Activision Blizzard*, and jointly announced a "labor neutrality principle," under which it would take a neutral stance when employees wish to join a union.*Activision Blizzard: The company behind well-known games such as Overwatch, Candy Crush, and StarCraft.[Components of the Human Capital Category ©MSCI]MSCI*, another issuer of major global investment indices, states that the human capital category consists of four elements: labor management, human capital development, health and safety, and supply chain labor standards. FTSE (Financial Times Stock Exchange) of the UK is another representative global investment indicator alongside MSCI. Unfortunately, however, Microsoft—which has been aggressively expanding its AI business this year—was reported to have notified approximately 1,900 employees, representing roughly 9% of the gaming division workforce centered on Activision Blizzard, of layoffs just three months after the acquisition.*MSCI, along with FTSE of the UK, is cited as a representative global investment index provider.ESG Management That Is Hard to Sustain ConsistentlyAccording to MSCI, ESG investing originated in the "socially responsible investing" of the 1960s. At that time, investors avoided putting money into companies associated with tobacco production or the South African apartheid* government, and as the scope expanded, it evolved into today's form of ESG investing. More recently, an investment trend has taken hold in which investment value is judged by applying both traditional financial criteria and ESG criteria.*Apartheid: The policy of racial segregation and discrimination that the South African government formalized into law during the Cold War era.However, investors differ in the investment criteria they favor, and companies find it difficult to satisfy every investor's preferences. The same holds true for ESG: among the multitude of ESG criteria, it is virtually impossible to concentrate on and satisfy only the ESG areas that investors care about. Moreover, practicing ESG management well does not mean there are no negative issues for investors to consider, and there are also voices of concern that a company might experience deterioration in its actual business performance while focusing on achieving its ESG goals. For these reasons, practicing well-balanced ESG management seems likely to remain no easy task for companies in the years ahead.by Editor N
A wave the size of a building crashed into the U.S. military base on Roi-Namur Island in the Marshall Islands. The Marshall Islands is a republic in the South Pacific composed of 1,156 islands and 24 atolls. Quite literally, a massive wave surged far inland. Fortunately, no serious casualties have been reported, but the U.S. Army stated that repairs to facilities and housing could take several months.[Roi-Namur Island, Marshall Islands © U.S. Army Garrison-Kwajalein Atoll]Footage capturing the sheer force of the waves went viral on social media, rapidly spreading news of the urgency and severity of the damage around the world. Within seconds of the video starting, the first wave smashes through the door and floods into the building, followed immediately by a second wave that raises the water to waist height. In just two waves, the scene turned into chaos, and all the lights inside the building went out as if a power outage had occurred.[Water Pouring into the U.S. Military Base @worldmaverik (Local Scuba Diving Instructor, Marshall Islands)]* Click to watch the video An Unusually High Wave: The Cause Was a Rogue WaveThe wave has been identified as being caused not by a tsunami (seismic sea wave) but by a rogue wave. A rogue wave is a phenomenon in which a wave reaching tens of meters in height suddenly appears amid ordinary waves, yet the exact causes of rogue waves and reliable methods for predicting them remain unclear. Only speculation and hypotheses exist suggesting that rogue waves may be the reason ships sometimes disappear without a trace. One thing, however, is certain: rising sea levels due to climate change have made the level of damage inflicted by rogue waves far more severe.The Marshall Islands: Fully Exposed to Climate ChangeIf the Greenland ice sheet were to melt completely, global sea levels are said to rise by at least six meters. Were that to happen, most of the Marshall Islands would also disappear from the map. This is because the average elevation of the Marshall Islands is a mere two meters, and even the highest point reaches only ten meters above sea level. Over the past twenty years, the rate at which the Greenland ice sheet is melting has accelerated fivefold. The Marshall Islands Ambassador to South Korea once appealed to developed nations through a media interview, urging them to redouble their efforts to reduce carbon emissions. While the damage from this rogue wave appears to have been concentrated on the U.S. military base, the island is naturally also home to many residents who suffered damage alongside it. For the United States, the damage is limited to one military base; for the Marshall Islands, however, it is the very foundation of the people's livelihood that has been harmed.Humanity Has Settled Close to the SeaThe problem of rising sea levels is not fatal only to island nations. Approximately 40% of the world's population lives within 100 kilometers of a coastline. According to research by the University of Melbourne, published in the journal Nature, rising sea levels could wipe out up to 20% of global GDP by 2100. Given this severity, the U.S. credit rating agency Standard & Poor's (S&P) has warned that businesses must absolutely prepare for rising sea levels. S&P is using its own analytical models to forecast the frequency of coastal flooding under various climate change scenarios, and the results confirm that rising sea levels can cause damage not only in coastal areas but also deep inland by following the flow of upstream rivers.[S&P's projected coastal flooding map for the Miami area in the 2090s (scenario assuming a doubling of greenhouse gas emissions by 2100) © 2023 S&P Global]Humanity, which has long focused on expanding its territory, now faces the crisis of that territory shrinking. While the entire world is suffering from climate change, regions like the Marshall Islands are being hit far harder. South Korea, surrounded by the sea on three sides, also has many vulnerable areas. The environmental group Greenpeace has even published a scenario in which the Marine City and Centum City areas of Haeundae in Busan are submerged. This is precisely why governments, local authorities, and businesses must all pay close attention to climate change and the resulting rise in sea levels.by Editor N
Every January, leaders from governments and businesses around the world gather in Davos, Switzerland to participate in the World Economic Forum. The 2024 WEF takes place over four days through January 19, and as in previous years, participants will discuss solutions to global challenges. This year's theme is "Rebuilding Trust."[European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen (left) speaking about the severity of disinformation. ©WEF]Ongoing Efforts to Overcome Crises at the World Economic ForumLast year's World Economic Forum focused heavily on "how to overcome the Polycrisis." There was a mountain of crises to address—COVID-19, the Ukraine-Russia war, economic recession and inflation, environmental issues, and more. This year's forum will once again explore ways to resolve global-scale crises. The polycrisis that persisted throughout 2023 remains unresolved, and has in fact led to prolonged economic recession and a severe climate crisis. This year, the WEF has dubbed this situation a "Permacrisis" and plans to seek both short-term strategies and long-term plans to overcome it.The four key agenda items put forward by this year's WEF are: ① Achieving security and cooperation in a fragmented world, ② Creating growth and jobs for a new era, ③ Harnessing AI to drive the economy and society, and ④ Designing strategies for climate, nature, and energy. Among these, let us take a closer look at the WEF's "Centre for Nature and Climate," which corresponds to the fourth agenda item.From Conference to Action: The Role of the Centre for Nature and ClimateThe World Economic Forum takes place just once a year, for only five days. So how are the collaboration strategies discussed at the forum actually implemented? If the execution of decisions made at the forum were left solely to individual governments and corporations, global-scale economic cooperation would likely end up as mere words, and collaborative relationships would come to nothing. To prevent this and ensure substantive economic cooperation takes place, the WEF operates various centers. In other words, the WEF holds its annual meeting each January, and then continues to execute the matters discussed through its centers throughout the year.If the forum is where government and business leaders gather to discuss agenda items, the centers are where the public and private sectors join forces to create synergies. The WEF operates ten centers (*) related to forum discussion topics. Among these, the Centre for Nature and Climate advances projects in which diverse stakeholders manage natural resources with the goal of achieving carbon neutrality. It encourages responsible use of land and oceans, and manages resources critical to us, such as food, water, and raw materials.* The ten centers are: Centre for Advanced Manufacturing and Supply Chains, Centre for Cybersecurity, Centre for Energy and Materials, Center for Financial and Monetary Systems, Centre for Health and Healthcare, Centre for Regions, Trade and Geopolitics, Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Centre for the New Economy and Society, Centre for Urban Transformation, Centre for Nature and ClimateThe Centre for Nature and Climate first established three solution goals: decarbonizing industry to achieve carbon neutrality, preparing for systemic transformation to protect nature, and managing resources for a better life. Core initiatives were also formed to execute each goal.[The World Economic Forum's Centre for Nature and Climate webpage ©WEF]The best-known initiative of the Centre for Nature and Climate in Korea is the "First Movers Coalition"—a coalition of companies that lead and pioneer on the world stage. As the initiative responsible for the Centre's first goal of industrial decarbonization, the companies belonging to the First Movers Coalition aim to halve carbon emissions by 2050. Starting with 35 member companies at its launch, the First Movers Coalition has grown into a major initiative of 95 companies in just two years. The WEF estimates that the efforts of its current member companies alone could reduce CO2-equivalent emissions by 29 million tons by 2030.There is also a Korean company that has joined the coalition. "Hanwha Ocean" is a member, actively participating alongside familiar global names such as Apple, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, and General Motors. Hanwha Ocean was the first Korean company to join the First Movers Coalition, and Hanwha Vice Chairman Kim Dong-kwan is participating as a speaker at this year's WEF.Another noteworthy initiative in the nature protection category is "1t.org." Named with the ambition to protect, restore, and grow one trillion trees by 2030. Trees and forests are vital resources that preserve biodiversity and combat the climate crisis. 1t.org encourages corporate participation to create a "forest restoration community" that everyone can join, and helps forge partnerships among local governments, businesses, and civil society. It also devotes efforts to fostering eco-preneurship so that companies can incorporate environmental considerations into their business activities. Over the past year, 85 companies across 65 countries have invested in 1t.org to preserve forests and committed to protecting eight billion trees.[Marine plastic waste filtered from a beach in Indonesia ©WEF]According to the World Economic Forum, ocean plastic pollution is another critical issue requiring attention. Each year, 11 million tons of plastic waste flow into the world's oceans, and some projections suggest that by 2050, there could be more plastic than fish in the sea. The WEF operates the "Global Plastic Action Partnership" as one of its resource management initiatives. Launched in 2018, it seeks to break away from the take-make-waste model and find ways to turn plastic into a circulating resource. Currently, over 400 organizations participate in the initiative, and 13 countries have committed to joining the plastic action effort. Indonesia, which generates 6.8 million tons of plastic waste annually, has pledged to reduce ocean-bound plastic pollution by 70% by 2025. Vietnam has committed to a 75% reduction by 2030, and Ghana has pledged to eliminate ocean-bound plastic pollution entirely.The Path Toward Inclusive Stakeholder CapitalismTo realize "inclusive stakeholder capitalism," the World Economic Forum demands that the governments and businesses partnered with each center "demonstrate real, tangible impact." While there are no explicit penalties for failing to keep promises, stakeholders share goals and actively participate by publishing their achievement rates each year. Let us look forward to seeing what direction of cooperation the World Economic Forum—which generates active collaboration among nations and corporations to solve vast global challenges—will propose this year.by Editor N