Dear All,
Recently I have had correspondence with Marc Choyt a founding member of the Fair Jewelry Organisation establishing industry standards and best practise sharing for the diamond market.
From the exchanges I've had with Marc it definitely looks like they're very much on the ball trying to establish an ethical platform which sets them apart from the general jewelry trade.
Please take the time to view their org and the steps they're working towards to help establish a standard. http://www.fairjewelry.org/
All the best
Andreas
Monday, 17 December 2007
Friday, 7 December 2007
At IHT Luxury Conference, ethics are in vogue
Dear All,
The 'luxury ethical' mantra has resonated to the top of the supreme luxury brands, at the recently hosted IHT Luxury Conference in Moscow. The question is, do they truly believe in adopting or playing lip service to maintain a sales up-lift with their existing and potential customer base?
I'm confident in believing they actually want to make a difference. I welcome the leaders in their respective fields to set new industry standards and best practise sharing, how to be a 'luxury ethical' brand in the 21st century.
All the best
Andreas
The 'luxury ethical' mantra has resonated to the top of the supreme luxury brands, at the recently hosted IHT Luxury Conference in Moscow. The question is, do they truly believe in adopting or playing lip service to maintain a sales up-lift with their existing and potential customer base?
I'm confident in believing they actually want to make a difference. I welcome the leaders in their respective fields to set new industry standards and best practise sharing, how to be a 'luxury ethical' brand in the 21st century.
All the best
Andreas
Wednesday, 5 December 2007
The Ethical Consumerism Report 2007
Dear All,
Please find attached the latest 'Ethical Consumerism Report 2007' for the UK conducted by The Co-Operative Bank. In summary:
Household expenditure on ethical goods and services has almost doubled in the past five years: on average, every household in the UK spent GBP664 in line with their ethical values in 2006 compared with just GBP366 in 2002, an increase of 81 per cent. However, whilst the overall ethical market in the UK is now worth GBP32.3 bilion a year, up nine percent from GBP29.7 billion in the previous year 12 months, it is still a small propotion of the total annual household consumer spend of more than GBP600 billion.
Key Findings:
Please find attached the latest 'Ethical Consumerism Report 2007' for the UK conducted by The Co-Operative Bank. In summary:
Household expenditure on ethical goods and services has almost doubled in the past five years: on average, every household in the UK spent GBP664 in line with their ethical values in 2006 compared with just GBP366 in 2002, an increase of 81 per cent. However, whilst the overall ethical market in the UK is now worth GBP32.3 bilion a year, up nine percent from GBP29.7 billion in the previous year 12 months, it is still a small propotion of the total annual household consumer spend of more than GBP600 billion.
Key Findings:
- Ethical consumer market: Six per cent of the UK adult population (2.8 million people) are committed ethical consumers, shopping for ethical products and services every week
- Ethical behaviours: Across eitht seprate indicators, between 199 and 2007, UK consumers, across all age groups, reported an increase predisposition to ethical behaviours
- Average spend per household: The average amount spent on ethical products and services has almost doubled from GBP366 per household in 2002 to GBP664 in 2006
- Food and drink: Ethical sales now account for 5.1 per cent of the UK's total food and drink sales. Including consumer boycotts, this rises to 6.8 per cent. Sales of Fairtrade products have increased 46 per cent to GBP285 million
- Green home: Within an overall spend of GBP6.2 billion on environmentally friendly and energy efficient home products, spend on energy efficient light blubs has increased by 44 per cent to GBP26 million
- Eco-travel and transport: Six per cent growth to GBP1.7 billion reflects limited consumer choices for eco-travel. However, an increased proportion of consumers did report using public transport for environmental reasons, in 2006
- Ethical personal products: Overall spend is static at GBP1.5 billion. Consumers boycotts of clothing retailers did grow by 20 per cent reflecting a concern amongst some consumers that low prices could mean poor labour conditions
- Ethical finance: At GBP13.3 billion, 2006 saw the largest ever increase of monies channelled into ethical forms of finance, with a net increase of GBp1.7 billion over the 2005 value
The total value attached to ethical consumerism in the UK stands at GBP32.3 billion in 2006. This reflects the total economic value attached to the broad range of personal choices, be they food, finance or charitable donations. The luxury ethical market is represented within part of the whole sum. At some level the consumer is influenced by a concern for the environment, animal welfare or human rights.
In addition it reflects the economic value that consumers attach to ethical choices to support their community via local shopping or to boycott brands whose behaviour conflicts with their ethical priorities. At the end of the day its about choice and giving the consumer the knowledge and understanding to make that choice.
All the best
Andreas
Ethical shopping at the crossroads: out of the niche and into the mainstream
Dear All,
Today was spent at an all day conference called 'Ethical shopping at the crossroads'. It was insightful and yet at times rather frustrating. I was happy to be present as a delegate for the World Luxury Ethical Council and exchange ideas and contacts at the breakout sessions.
The key point which I took away from the whole day was 'sustainability' and the issues we face as consumers in the market between buying ethical and understanding the overall principles. The question which kept on coming up from the delegates is, whose responsibility is it? The Government; The Industry; The Individual Consumer? I believe its the consumer, we as individuals have a choice to pay or not to pay for the product or service. However, its up to ethical organizations and media to do their part in demystifying the terms of ethical business practises. Simpler and easier ratings and labels need to be applied across the board so it doesn't confuse the average consumer. Work is been done and yet we still have a lot of distance to cover to make things clearer.
I really feel like we're in the heart of the Victorian industrial revolution when the railway system was been laid out across Britain. Multiple gauges for railway tracks were been adopted and no industry standard had been established. So it was impossible to have a unified network until one industry gauge was recognized and set. This is where 'ethical business practises' are in terms of gauging and setting. Eventually, one system will apply........
All the best
Andreas
Today was spent at an all day conference called 'Ethical shopping at the crossroads'. It was insightful and yet at times rather frustrating. I was happy to be present as a delegate for the World Luxury Ethical Council and exchange ideas and contacts at the breakout sessions.
The key point which I took away from the whole day was 'sustainability' and the issues we face as consumers in the market between buying ethical and understanding the overall principles. The question which kept on coming up from the delegates is, whose responsibility is it? The Government; The Industry; The Individual Consumer? I believe its the consumer, we as individuals have a choice to pay or not to pay for the product or service. However, its up to ethical organizations and media to do their part in demystifying the terms of ethical business practises. Simpler and easier ratings and labels need to be applied across the board so it doesn't confuse the average consumer. Work is been done and yet we still have a lot of distance to cover to make things clearer.
I really feel like we're in the heart of the Victorian industrial revolution when the railway system was been laid out across Britain. Multiple gauges for railway tracks were been adopted and no industry standard had been established. So it was impossible to have a unified network until one industry gauge was recognized and set. This is where 'ethical business practises' are in terms of gauging and setting. Eventually, one system will apply........
All the best
Andreas
Saturday, 1 December 2007
Brits prepare for GREEN Christmas
Dear All,
The good ole' Brits are taking up the ethical GREEN Christmas shopping challenge to provide gifts to fill their stockings for family and friends. This is a recent survey conducted by the environmental charity Cool Earth.
Congratulations on those who are trying to make a difference in their own independent way. Every ethical green conscience action counts no matter how minor or major. Keep up the good work.
All the best
Andreas
Have a read at the latest article.
The UK is preparing for a green - rather than a white - Christmas this year, according to environmental charity Cool Earth.
In an independent survey of over 1,000 British adults, the charity found a range of ethical and environmental gifts were at the top of people's Christmas lifts.
They included a ipod solar charger, a wind-up radio, a bike to use instead of the car and an acre of rainforest.
However, Cool Earth found that not all ethical presents would be gratefully unwrapped on Christmas morning.
Consumers turned their nose up at elephant dung stationery as a festive gift.
Cool Earth Director, Matthew Owen, said: "Christmas is usually a time of excess so it's great to see that lots of Brits are planning on buying their friends and families a present that will protect rather than harm the environment this year.
"During the festive season, each of our carbon footprints will rocket as we over consume, travel more frequently and for longer and use lots more energy.
Therefore, we all need to do our bit and do something to redress the balance."
Government department Defra estimates that the UK's Christmas rubbish mountain includes one billion cards, six million trees, 80,000 tonnes of old clothes and other textiles and 83 square kilometres of wrapping paper.
It all adds up to a bloated festive season waste total of three million tonnes.
The good ole' Brits are taking up the ethical GREEN Christmas shopping challenge to provide gifts to fill their stockings for family and friends. This is a recent survey conducted by the environmental charity Cool Earth.
Congratulations on those who are trying to make a difference in their own independent way. Every ethical green conscience action counts no matter how minor or major. Keep up the good work.
All the best
Andreas
Have a read at the latest article.
The UK is preparing for a green - rather than a white - Christmas this year, according to environmental charity Cool Earth.
In an independent survey of over 1,000 British adults, the charity found a range of ethical and environmental gifts were at the top of people's Christmas lifts.
They included a ipod solar charger, a wind-up radio, a bike to use instead of the car and an acre of rainforest.
However, Cool Earth found that not all ethical presents would be gratefully unwrapped on Christmas morning.
Consumers turned their nose up at elephant dung stationery as a festive gift.
Cool Earth Director, Matthew Owen, said: "Christmas is usually a time of excess so it's great to see that lots of Brits are planning on buying their friends and families a present that will protect rather than harm the environment this year.
"During the festive season, each of our carbon footprints will rocket as we over consume, travel more frequently and for longer and use lots more energy.
Therefore, we all need to do our bit and do something to redress the balance."
Government department Defra estimates that the UK's Christmas rubbish mountain includes one billion cards, six million trees, 80,000 tonnes of old clothes and other textiles and 83 square kilometres of wrapping paper.
It all adds up to a bloated festive season waste total of three million tonnes.
Friday, 30 November 2007
WORLD NEWS: Luxury brands fail to make ethical grade
FT.com - Financial Times
By Vanessa Friedman
Some of the world's biggest luxury conglomerates have failed to make the grade in a ranking of ethical and environmental performance.
A report released today by the WWF, the conservation group, entitled "Deeper Luxury", gives Bulgari and Tod's, the Italian jewellery and accessory companies, a grade F for their "environmental, social and governance performance and reputation" in 2006 of the 10 largest publicly traded luxury conglomerates.
Their French, Swiss and US competitors do not fare much better. PPR, which owns Gucci Group, received a D, as did Swatch and Richemont, the Swiss watch and jewellery groups.
The highest grade - a C+ - was awarded to Hermès, L'Oréal, and LVMH.
There is no established methodology for assessing the industry's performance in the ethical and environmental area. To arrive at the grades, WWF collected data from analysts Ethical Investment Research Service (EIRIS), which uses company reports and information to track performance, which it may follow up with a questionnaire; and Covalence, a company that tracks public perception of a company through news reports.
The report's co-author An-thony Kleanthous, a senior po-licy adviser at WWF, said most of the luxury companies did well in some areas but were weak in others, hence the low overall scores.
PPR, for example, owns Puma, which is strong on em-ployment practices owing to the sweat shop scandals in the sports wear industry in the 1990s, but does little re-garding carbon emissions. Tod's poor showing was due to its failure to re-spond fully to EIRIS questionnaires. The company de-clined to comment yesterday.
"Honestly, I was surprised none got more than a C+," said Mr Kleanthous. "I think it comes down to the fact that luxury companies do not consider their products to be particularly damaging to the environment and there is a certain complacency in regards to the ex-plosive growth of new markets. They just don't think people are going to be asking the questions. But there has been a paradigm shift and that is just not true."
According to a recent issue of the New York-based Luxury Institute's Wealth Report, in a survey of 950 high-income American adults, "57 per cent . . . say they would pay higher prices for a brand that is recognised for socially responsible practices" and "70 per cent . . . seek out brands with superior environmental records".
"It is true this has not been a focus of PPR in the past, though that has now changed," said Laurent Claquin, PPR's senior vice- president for CSR, a department inaugurated only last September.
Mr Claquin said the department was created because PPR's chief executive, Francois-Henri Pinault, wanted to "signal his desire to do something serious in these areas", not because of the WWF report.
Mr Kleanthous said Richemont took steps in a similar direction last summer, releasing its first CSR report. The group declined to comment on the WWF publication.
The WWF report was inspired by "a desire to look at an industry that has a heavy impact on culture and the way people think", said Mr Kleanthous. "We are not trying to criticise these companies but to make a general point: responsible business practices can be a value driver, but they need to be systematically embedded in the DNA of a company," he added. "Comparison can be a powerful motivation to change."
Tiffany, Coach, Bulgari and Swatch did not return calls for comment. Hermès and Richemont declined to comment but a spokesperson for L'Oréal said: "We welcome all reports from respected organisations in this field as they are a useful tool for progress."
The spokesperson said that L'Oréal published its own sustainability report and was listed on the FTSE4 good sustainability index.
Hugh Morrison, a spokesman for LVMH, said: "We have invested a great deal in understanding the issues and developing strategies to be best in class - we certainly expect future surveys to show our continued progress in this field."
Have your say: Can luxury brands be ethical?
By Vanessa Friedman
Some of the world's biggest luxury conglomerates have failed to make the grade in a ranking of ethical and environmental performance.
A report released today by the WWF, the conservation group, entitled "Deeper Luxury", gives Bulgari and Tod's, the Italian jewellery and accessory companies, a grade F for their "environmental, social and governance performance and reputation" in 2006 of the 10 largest publicly traded luxury conglomerates.
Their French, Swiss and US competitors do not fare much better. PPR, which owns Gucci Group, received a D, as did Swatch and Richemont, the Swiss watch and jewellery groups.
The highest grade - a C+ - was awarded to Hermès, L'Oréal, and LVMH.
There is no established methodology for assessing the industry's performance in the ethical and environmental area. To arrive at the grades, WWF collected data from analysts Ethical Investment Research Service (EIRIS), which uses company reports and information to track performance, which it may follow up with a questionnaire; and Covalence, a company that tracks public perception of a company through news reports.
The report's co-author An-thony Kleanthous, a senior po-licy adviser at WWF, said most of the luxury companies did well in some areas but were weak in others, hence the low overall scores.
PPR, for example, owns Puma, which is strong on em-ployment practices owing to the sweat shop scandals in the sports wear industry in the 1990s, but does little re-garding carbon emissions. Tod's poor showing was due to its failure to re-spond fully to EIRIS questionnaires. The company de-clined to comment yesterday.
"Honestly, I was surprised none got more than a C+," said Mr Kleanthous. "I think it comes down to the fact that luxury companies do not consider their products to be particularly damaging to the environment and there is a certain complacency in regards to the ex-plosive growth of new markets. They just don't think people are going to be asking the questions. But there has been a paradigm shift and that is just not true."
According to a recent issue of the New York-based Luxury Institute's Wealth Report, in a survey of 950 high-income American adults, "57 per cent . . . say they would pay higher prices for a brand that is recognised for socially responsible practices" and "70 per cent . . . seek out brands with superior environmental records".
"It is true this has not been a focus of PPR in the past, though that has now changed," said Laurent Claquin, PPR's senior vice- president for CSR, a department inaugurated only last September.
Mr Claquin said the department was created because PPR's chief executive, Francois-Henri Pinault, wanted to "signal his desire to do something serious in these areas", not because of the WWF report.
Mr Kleanthous said Richemont took steps in a similar direction last summer, releasing its first CSR report. The group declined to comment on the WWF publication.
The WWF report was inspired by "a desire to look at an industry that has a heavy impact on culture and the way people think", said Mr Kleanthous. "We are not trying to criticise these companies but to make a general point: responsible business practices can be a value driver, but they need to be systematically embedded in the DNA of a company," he added. "Comparison can be a powerful motivation to change."
Tiffany, Coach, Bulgari and Swatch did not return calls for comment. Hermès and Richemont declined to comment but a spokesperson for L'Oréal said: "We welcome all reports from respected organisations in this field as they are a useful tool for progress."
The spokesperson said that L'Oréal published its own sustainability report and was listed on the FTSE4 good sustainability index.
Hugh Morrison, a spokesman for LVMH, said: "We have invested a great deal in understanding the issues and developing strategies to be best in class - we certainly expect future surveys to show our continued progress in this field."
Have your say: Can luxury brands be ethical?
Wednesday, 28 November 2007
'Luxury Ethical' EU Consumer?
Dear All,
What does it mean to be ethical? The term ethical is very wide and often used in a very loose fashion. Primarily to tap into the consumer conscience in hope for a sales uplift to reposition the brand qualities. The overall initiative of WLEC is in put the power of consumer choice back in their hands with knowledge and understanding on the terms of 'sustainable ethical economics'.
The following top-line list is a cross-board of ethical initiatives based upon internal and external business practises within an organisation.
The World Luxury Ethical Council: Ethical policy platform
Community Relations;
Corporate Governance;
Donations and Payments;
Environment;
Human Rights;
Marketplace Ethics;
Workforce.
Mintel Consumer Research clearly shows consumers want to know which companies respond to the ethical policy concerns in their everyday business. However, in the EU, the majority of people are dubious of the 'ethical' and 'responsible' claims made by business. 71% want more information on companies to decide for themselves whether a business is ethical or not.nMintel research shows that 63% of the EU public is prepared to pay a little extra for luxury products that meet higher ethical standards. The problem is there is little consensus over what constitutes 'responsible ethical business practise'. Across the board consumers are dubious about the claims businesses make; further consumer research in the EU market shows that:
68% believe companies pretend to be ethical to sell more products and services;
73% think it's not enough for companies to simply say they are ethical: but prove it;
82% believe its better for a company to be honest with consumers rather than pretend to be always squeaky clean.
The above ethical policy list will be an audit process conducted by 3rd party organisations which are independent of the World Luxury Ethical Council. There are presently 2 organisations which have agreed to work on the screening process, one for the internal audit and the other for the external audit. Upon which a rating system will then be put into place to show the consumer where the audited organisation ranks. Each ethical policy initiative will have its own ranking and some will be higher and lower than others. Its then up to the organisation which has been audited to maintain or improve on the areas which have been rated. The information will be provided to the consumer at large and their purchasing behaviour will decide to support the product or service in terms of the ethical standards set by the audited organisation. Rankings are not static, as the audit process is an annual process to maintain membership to the WLEC.
Bottom-line, I would like to be able to put the power of consumer choice back in their hands based on knowledge re: ethical standards, which supports the overall principle of 'sustainable ethical economics'. I don't expect all organisations to be perfect, but I believe we should provide opportunity in two areas:
best practise sharing
setting industry standards
All the best
Andreas Lim
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
