Why does big business want to save the world?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/21/why-does-big-business-want-to-save-world

Version 0 of 1.

Consumers, stand by to feel increasingly uplifted and guilt-free! The foremost means of "empowering global consumers", The Global Consumer Goods Forum, took place in Paris last week, convening 1,000 "c-suite executives" (those with "chief" in their acronym) including 400 of the world's top CEOs.

Gatherings where global heads of snack development engage with emeritus professors of agricultural science on topics such as "creative capitalism" are increasingly common but the forum is the biggie. Every retailer and manufacturer wants to be seen and heard there.

This summit yielded innovations the planet can arguably do without (drones for crisp delivery?) and some it urgently needs. By the end of play on Friday, the consumer goods behemoths had committed to zero net deforestation by 2020 through the reform of supply chains, phasing out hydro fluorocarbons from refrigeration by 2015, ending junk food ads aimed at under-12s by 2018 and called for a binding global climate deal ahead of international talks next year.

To anyone who subscribes to Milton Friedman's view that "the only responsibility of business is to increase its profits", this is business overstepping its brief by some margin. Boring old corporate social responsibility has turned into a muscular version of values-led capitalism, filling a political vacuum. "If hundreds of the world's most powerful companies can agree to get behind an ambitious call for any type of political action, world leaders should pay attention," said Winnie Byanyima, executive director of Oxfam International.

If you're struggling to connect the selling of ice cream with ending global poverty, think of the mouth-watering opportunity these brands have to transform markets. The top 400 consumer goods companies (Proctor & Gamble leads, followed by Unilever) have combined sales of €2.5tn, employing 10 million people directly and 90 million others along highly complex supply chains. A shift from unsustainable sourcing in a commodity, such as palm oil, to sustainable should mean a shift in fortunes for the biosphere.

Without such a shift, the consequences are unthinkable. According to Oxfam's recent report, Standing on the Sidelines, by 2050 there could be an extra 25 million malnourished children aged under five and 50 million more people going hungry. The report says that the Big 10 food companies (including Nestlé, PepsiCo and Unilever), which emit more greenhouse gas emissions than Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway combined through their supply chains, must act now.

Mixed into this is the cult of the "hero" CEO. Paul Polman, the head of Unilever, pitches the company as values- rather than profit- driven and has taken a stand against both mindless consumption and quarterly reporting. Crucially, when it comes to encouraging other companies with limited interest in altruism to follow suit, he has ended a "decade of stagnant turnover".

Therein lies the rub. The system is still undeniably based on selling more stuff very fast – increasingly to emerging markets – and that involves exporting an unsustainable, fast-paced form of consumerism. Let's not forget the usual prefix of the "consumer goods" sector is "fast moving". Steadier, more sustainable models of consumption based on hiring, loaning and reuse are sometimes talked about, but aren't making a dent. It remains to be proved that we can have our sustainable cake and eat it.