Rejected Companies
Portfolio 21 seeks to educate and motivate companies to improve their environmental sustainability performance.
By informing companies when they fail the screening criteria for our fund, and providing specific reasons why they were not included in Portfolio 21, we hope to bring environmental sustainability to their attention. Many companies do not understand the impending ecological crisis, let alone have plans to address this challenge. We believe investors can play an important role in raising awareness of environmental concerns. Following is a sample of the companies that have failed to meet Portfolio 21's rigorous company evaluation criteria.
| REJECTED COMPANIES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Date | Company | Comments |
| 4.3.08 | Metabolix | Metabolix is a Massachusetts-based biotechnology firm that specializes in bioplastics and biopolymers. Despite the ecological benefits of bioplastics, which utilize renewable resources, the company's unique and advanced metabolic engineering (i.e., industrial biotechnology approach) still presents a number of risks. For example, we are concerned that the company does not address containment or sterilization of GMOs (e.g., the bacteria that produce the desired enzymes and other proteins necessary for the bioplastics' production processes). Sterilization is a necessary step to ensure that the GMOs can't reproduce and "wander off" into the world, and is a requirement of Portfolio 21's Biotechnology Policy. |
| 3.31.08 | Calpine | Calpine's power generation portfolio is comprised of two generation technologies: natural gas fired combustion, and renewable geothermal facilities. Gas fired facilities account for the vast majority of the company's net capacity. Although it appears the company is dedicated to improving the energy efficiency and pollution prevention measures of its facilities, the extent of the company's capital expenditures is unknown. Portfolio 21 contacted Calpine for additional information on its operations and environmental initiatives; however, the company did not address our questions directly but instead referred us to its 10-k and an analyst presentation, neither of which addressed our specific questions. |
| 3.28.08 | Transport International | Transport International operates bus transportation, property holdings and development, and media sales. Despite Transport International's holdings in the mass transportation sector, the company lacks commitment to upgrading its fleet with increasingly strict Euro standard bus engines with high fuel efficiency. Only a small proportion of the company's fleet qualifies under Euro IV standards, thus increasing the company's liability for greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants. In addition, revenues from the company's bus transportation division have been shrinking over the last three years in favor to its property holdings and development division. The company fails to qualify for Portfolio 21. |
| 3.25.08 | Polycom | Polycom is best known for its video and voice communication systems, which promote virtual meetings and reduction of employee travel and associated greenhouse gas emissions. While the company does recognize the environmental benefit of its video products and has some strong initiatives in place, including RoHS compliance globally, Polycom does not have a climate change strategy, environmental management system, or any environmental reporting. |
| 3.24.08 | Coloplast | Coloplast is a medical devices company specializing in products for ostomy and incontinence. Due to its product range, the company's greatest risk is the use of PVC and phthalates (plasticizers that increase the flexibility of hard plastics) in its products. Overall, the environmental profile of PVC is negative, as it is considered by many to be the most damaging plastic to human and environmental health. Coloplast derives significant revenues from products containing PVC and phthalates, and consequently the company has failed to meet our criteria. |
| 3.18.08 | Pitney Bowes | Pitney Bowes' core business is the rental and sale of postage meters. While the company has many strengths, including its use of life-cycle analysis and partnership with the EPA to develop Energy Star guidelines for mailing machines, we were not able to determine if the company incorporates critical fundamentals. For example, the company sidelined sustainability reporting and only recently published a slim report. In addition, the company doesn't appear to have supplier guidelines and it is unclear what percentage of its facilities are covered by an environmental management system. |
| 3.12.08 | 3PAR | 3PAR is a high-tech storage company specializing in virtualization components that provide both energy efficiency and resource reduction to its customers. The company's software enables its customers to consolidate their data centers and remove a large portion of their existing servers. While this technology has inherent environmental benefits, the company also produces hardware. Because the company does not appear to have supplier guidelines, it consequently has additional risk associated with materials restrictions, materials availability, product end of life issues, energy efficiency, and direct/manufacturing pollution impacts. Due to overall lack of leadership, 3PAR failed to qualify for inclusion in Portfolio 21. |
| 2.28.08 | British Airways | British Airways greatest environmental impact is, not surprisingly, its climate change liability. While the company has reduced its emissions of CO2 from its UK properties and domestic flights, has not addressed the greenhouse gas emissions associated with its international flights. In addition, the company has lobbied against meaningful and effective carbon regulations, supporting only small insignificant "solutions." Lastly, British Airways does not provide comprehensive reporting of waste, has only just launched a project to recycle newspapers from short flights arriving into Heathrow, does not appear to have rigorous recycling programs, and fails to address GMO food issues. |
| 2.28.08 | Travelers | Travelers, a U.S.-based insurance company, has introduced or modified several insurance products/services to reflect its awareness of climate change. The company states that the analysis of climate change is a continuous process that encompasses not only Traveler's underwriting practices but also the management of the company's investment portfolio. However, the percentage of the company's product offerings that address the growing risks of climate change is unknown and presumed to be a small portion of total revenues. Moreover, Travelers has not developed a publicly available environmental policy and has not yet implemented an environmental management system. |
| 2.25.08 | MEMC Electronics | MEMC Electronics, headquartered in Missouri, produces silicon wafers for both the semiconductor and solar industries in nine production facilities across the world. Although the company's facilities have all received ISO 14001 certification, the company lacks environmental leadership. For instance, MEMC does not publish group-wide data on its environmental impacts and according to the EPA, MEMC has been sited on numerous occasions for noncompliance. MEMC also lags in its research and development efforts relative to its sector peers. |
| 2.25.08 | Infosys Technologies | Infosys Technologies, headquartered in Bangalore, India, provides IT consulting and software services to a wide range of industries. Infosys's business approach is based on the belief that in order to succeed today companies need to be positioned to operate in a flat world. "A flat world company produces where it is most cost-effective, sells where it is most profitable, uses information to its full capacity, collaborates to innovate faster and is well prepared for business cycles." While this scenario is forward-thinking, this business model/approach does not address the ecological constraints that will increasingly limit business as usual. |
| 2.25.08 | Scottish & Southern | Scottish & Southern is the largest non-nuclear electricity generator in the UK. The company is involved in research and development of low carbon technologies and has publicly committed to reducing the amount of CO2 per kilowatt hour of electricity produced. However, a significant portion of Scottish & Southern's energy portfolio is derived from coal, so the company does not qualify for Portfolio 21. |
| 2.19.08 | Bureau Veritas | Bureau Veritas specializes in assessment and certification services across numerous industries. The company is a market leader on the EU Emission Trading Schemes, provides air and emissions management services, and is an accredited valuator and verifier for energy projects. However, the company fails to connect the dots between environmental constraints and its own business model. Bureau Veritas does not show the environmental leadership to be qualified for Portfolio 21 at this time. |
| 2.19.08 | Fresenius Medical Care | Fresenius Medical Care operates in the field of dialysis products and services. Although the company has introduced an eco-ranking system for its dialysis treatments, Fresenius provides little detail on how this system has been utilized to lower the level of resources consumed in each treatment. Moreover, the company was unable to provide us with examples of how it has designed products with energy efficiency or other environmental issues in mind. Overall, Fresenius Medical Care lacks the environmental leadership and innovation to qualify for inclusion in Portfolio 21. |
| 2.13.08 | Watts Water Technologies | Watts Water designs and manufactures plumbing products for various markets including water quality, conservation, and safety. The company has some products that contribute to LEED points, including low-flow showers and faucets. However, these products represent a small proportion of total revenues and the company does not promote its water quality and/or conservation products as being the core of its business strategy. In addition, the company doesn't incorporate important environmental foundations such as a Design for Environment program or a climate change strategy. |
| 2.4.08 | Consolidated Water | Consolidated Water utilizes reverse osmosis to develop and operate water production and distribution systems in the Cayman Islands, the Bahamas, Barbados, the British Virgin Islands, Belize, and the United States. Reverse osmosis requires considerable energy. The company states that its plants are the most energy efficient available, however, efficiency measures are not calculated in terms of energy, water, or cost savings, and the associated capital expenditures are not disclosed. In addition, it is clear that the tourism industry represents a significant portion of the company's customer base. According to currently available data, 7% of the company's daily water capacity was distributed to one resort for the sole purpose of irrigating its golf courses. |
| 1.22.08 | VeraSun | While Portfolio 21 believes some biofuels have the potential to address climate change emissions, we are cautious about this blossoming industry. VeraSun produces corn ethanol and biodiesel from corn feedstock. There are numerous environmental concerns regarding corn ethanol when considering the full life cycle. In addition, VeraSun relies upon genetically modified corn in its fuels processing, thus failing to meet Portfolio 21's Biotechnology Policy. |
| 1.22.08 | Deere & Company | Deere & Company, also known as John Deere, has aggressively implemented a myriad of eco-efficiency initiatives at the company's facilities around the world. Moreover, some of the company's products "incorporate features to lessen environmental impact or advance sustainable production and efficiency." However, Deere's position and research on corn and soybean based fuels (the company actively promotes agricultural fuels, but does not support nor direct research dollars to the development of non-agricultural biofuels) is not compatible with Portfolio 21's investment criteria. This, combined with the company's poor environmental strategy and management capabilities, make Deere ineligible for Portfolio 21. |
| 1.22.08 | NTT DoCoMo | NTT DoCoMo (DoCoMo) is the largest mobile phone operator in Japan. Although DoCoMo does not manufacture mobile phone handsets, the company is involved in product development. Unfortunately, the transparency surrounding the company's green procurement policies, use of life-cycle analysis, and implementation of take-back programs is limited. The company fails to disclose the details and results of its environmental initiatives and has declining environmental trend data, so DoCoMo has not been included in Portfolio 21. |
| 1.8.08 | Donaldson | Headquartered in Minneapolis, the Donaldson Company develops and manufactures filtration systems and associated parts. A majority of the company's products provides ecological advantages; however, due to the company's poor transparency it is difficult to determine the extent of the company's environmental commitments and sustainability vision. |
| 1.8.08 | Alcon | Alcon is a Swiss eye care company that develops and manufactures surgical equipment and devices, pharmaceutical eye drops, and consumer vision care products. The company provides an environmental policy on its website; however, it does not convey an understanding of the importance of actions to minimize environmental impacts. Alcon's products, as well as the company's R&D efforts, do little to address today's ecological constraints and the company shows a lack of environmental leadership, undefined environmental policy, and weak performance metrics. |
| 1.8.08 | Energias de Portugal | Energias de Portugal's (EDP) core business is involved in the energy sector in the Iberian Peninsula, and to a lesser extent is involved in the generation and distribution of electricity in Brazil. Despite the company's commitment to grow its installed capacity of renewable electricity in the Iberian Peninsula, Portfolio 21's research indicates that currently just 8% of the company's installed capacity is derived from wind, while 49% of the company's installed capacity is derived from thermal (for which it can be assumed that a large proportion is being generated from coal). Until coal accounts for just a small fraction of the company's total electricity generation, and the company can address supplier performance/risks in regards to natural gas, EDP will not be considered for inclusion in Portfolio 21. |
| 12.19.07 | Naturex | Naturex is a French company that produces and sells plant extracts for coloring, flavoring, and stabilizing food or food products. While the company meets our biotechnology policy by only sourcing GMO-free agricultural products, it does not have any significant use of organic ingredients. Additionally, the company lacks strength in leadership, operational initiatives, and climate change efforts. |
| 12.14.07 | Teradata | U.S.-based Teradata is known for its data warehousing and analytic technologies, which add efficiency and ease to its customers operations. Unfortunately, these products do not provide any inherent environmental benefits. Recently, Teradata separated its global operations from its parent company, NCR Corporation. In doing so, Teradata adopted NCR's unimpressive Environmental, Health & Safety policies. Overall, there is little evidence indicating that Teradata has the leadership to identify its environmental risks or to develop environmental benefits in its products and services. |
| 12.13.07 | Marvell Technology Group | Marvell Technology Group, based in the U.S., specializes in the design and sale of semiconductors and hardware devices. Given the company's business structure, which is based on outsourcing the fabrication of its semiconductor devices, Portfolio 21 would expect the company to have strong and transparent supplier guidelines. Marvell does not appear to have such guidelines in place. Although at least one of Marvell's products meet the EPA's new Energy Star guidelines, it is not clear what portion of the company's products achieve significant energy efficiency gains. Marvell also provides inadequate communication on its environmental activities and initiatives, and has made little effort to identify the life-cycle environmental risks and benefits of its products. |
| 12.6.07 | Getinge | Getinge is a Swedish-based manufacturer and supplier of medical equipment. The company declares that its "overall objective is to minimize products' impact on the environment by utilizing resources efficiently in product development, manufacturing processes, and in operations." However, Getinge fails to provide adequate detail on how it considers environmental impacts in its product design and manufacturing processes, nor how such changes at the design level have resulted in reducing the company's overall footprint. While more than half of Getinge's facilities are ISO 14001 certified, the company's data quality is poor and the company has yet to set goals for each of its environmental performance indicators. |
| 12.5.07 | Goldman Sachs | Goldman Sachs, a U.S.-based investment banking and securities firm, has made commitments to the incorporation and consideration of environmental factors as part of its due diligence processes. However, the company does not provide examples of how its environmental risk analysis is incorporated into the company financial investments. In 2007, Goldman Sachs published its first environmental report, but the company provides inadequate communication on its environmental activities and initiatives to determine the depth of the company's commitment to environmental sustainability. |
| 11.26.07 | Enagas | Based in Spain, Enagas is involved in the transportation, regasification, and storage of natural gas; the company is not involved with the extraction of natural gas and therefore has lower levels of risk exposure when compared with a natural gas extraction company. However, 76% of Spain's natural gas imports are sourced from moderate or high-risk regions, such as politically unstable regions/countries with poor environmental and human rights records. Due primarily to P21R's concerns regarding the origins of Enagas's natural gas purchases, combined with the company's poor leadership and action in primary areas of concern, Enagas has been excluded from Portfolio 21. |
| 11.26.07 | Centrica | Portfolio 21 has defined natural gas as a desired technology/raw material that leads to improved environmental outcomes, but not sustainable outcomes. Furthermore, Portfolio 21 has identified extraction companies as having greater financial, social, and environmental risks than distribution companies. Given our investment philosophy that considers climate change and other ecological constraints, Portfolio 21 will not invest in fossil fuel extraction companies-even if they are only focused on natural gas. Given that Centrica is directly involved in natural gas extraction, the company does not meet Portfolio 21's investment criteria. |
| 11.26.07 | Societe Generale | Headquartered in France, Societe Generale provides commercial, retail, investment, and private banking services. Like many large financial institutions, Societe Generale is signatory of the Equator Principles and has also developed its own Social and Environmental Risk Assessment Tool (SERA) framework. Despite these tools, the company lacks the leadership necessary to incorporate environmental issues comprehensively into its investment and credit analysis and fails to address the indirect impacts of its lending practices. |
| 11.16.07 | Unibail | Unibail, a European commercial property investor and developer, recently acquired former rival Rodamco Europe, forming Unibail-Rodamco, and a property portfolio (mainly of shopping centers, office buildings, and exhibition centers) of $35 billion. The greatest environmental impact for Unibail-Rodamco revolves around environmental design principles in building standards and the manner in which its buildings are maintained and operated. Unfortunately, the company fails to address these issues. |
| 11.16.07 | Saint Gobain | Saint Gobain was last reviewed for potential inclusion in Portfolio 21 over three years ago. Since then the company has shown moderate improvement. More specifically, the company now discusses the environmental benefits (mainly energy efficiency gains) of its products. Unfortunately, just a small portion of the company's sales provide environmental benefits. Moreover, the company continues to utilize PVC in the manufacturing of some of its products, has increased its extractive operations, and continues to have a fraction of its facilities certified to ISO 14001 standards. |
| 11.13.07 | SOS Cuétara | SOS Cuétara is the second-largest Spanish food company, producing baked goods as well as olive and other vegetable oils. On three occasions, Portfolio 21 attempted to contact the company with questions about the company's biotechnology policies. To date we haven't received a response, so Portfolio 21 is unable to determine if the company meets our biotechnology policy. |
| 11.13.07 | Sony Financial | Sony Financial operates 3 business divisions: life insurance, non-life insurance (mainly auto insurance), and Sony Bank (retail asset management). Unfortunately, the company doesn't offer any products/services specifically targeted to promote green living, nor any products/services that provide an environmental benefit. Moreover, Sony Financial's website and annual report fail to provide information on how the company approaches ecological constraints, both in its products and throughout its operations. |
| 11.13.07 | Stericycle | Providing medical waste management services to customers all around the world, Stericycle states that it is committed to the environmentally responsible management of this waste. Despite the company's commitment to "move away from incinerators in North America" Stericycle has actually increased its incineration activities. Stericycle also lacks an environmental report and it does not appear that the company has implemented an environmental policy or an environmental management system. |
| 11.6.07 | Hain Celestial | Hain Celestial is a leading natural and organic food and personal care products company in North America and Europe. Well known brands include Celestial Seasonings®, Health Valley®, Avalon Organics®, and Spectrum Naturals®. While Hain has strength in organic products, the company has not completely eliminated genetically engineered ingredients from its products. The company states that its goal "wherever possible" is to ensure its products are GE-free. Based on this position, Hain Celestial failed to meet our biotechnology policy. |
| 11.6.07 | BNP Paribas | Headquartered in Paris, BNP Paribas provides corporate, retail, and investment banking services, as well as specialized financing, private banking, asset management, and insurance. Despite the bank's major presence in the project financing market, it is not a signatory to the Equator Principles. While Portfolio 21 has skepticism regarding the value of the Principles, we feel they are an important framework for the industry and may have a positive impact on the environmental implications of project financing as the standards are raised and improved over time. |
| 11.5.07 | Banco Itau | Banco Itau is one of Brazil's largest banks and offers a variety of services, including retail banking, insurance, corporate banking, project financing and portfolio management. While the bank is a signatory to the Equator Principles and has environmental requirements for evaluating projects, it is not clear that this self-imposed rule has resulted in more critical reviews. The bank seems to recognize its direct environmental impacts, and tracks its usage of energy, water, and paper, but it does not provide specific information on recycled paper content, does not purchase renewable energy for its thousands of branches, and does not offer green banking products. Due to the company's lack of leadership, lack of climate change strategy, and overall product and service deficiencies, Banco Itau failed to qualify for Portfolio 21. |
| 10.8.07 | SAP | SAP, a German business software company, was last reviewed and rejected by Portfolio 21 in December of 2001. At that time, the company indicated it was in the process of comprehensively examining its social and environmental impacts. SAP does not have the environmental impact and/or risks associated with manufacturing companies; however, SAP does impact the environment through its energy and paper consumption, business travel and employee commuting, product packaging and distribution, as well as through its suppliers and materials procurement. Several years later, the company continues to lack a comprehensive approach to evaluating or addressing environmental sustainability issues. |
| 10.2.07 | UPS | U.S.-based UPS, best known for its package delivery, also provides supply chain solutions and logistic services. Although the company has made significant investments in the development and testing of alternative fuel vehicles and has implemented several comprehensive environmental initiatives, there are several reasons for excluding UPS from Portfolio 21. First, less than 1% of the company's vehicle fleet is powered by such technologies. Second, although UPS' environmental accounting was above average, the data only covered the company's U.S. package operations. Finally, the company lacks a strategic climate change policy and fails to communicate the importance of climate change as a business risk and/or opportunity. |
| 10.2.07 | Wienerberger | Wienerberger, an Austrian-based building materials group, is primarily a brick manufacturer. Bricks have the potential to be made with a high proportion of recycled or industrial waste, in some instances over 90% recycled content. Unfortunately, Wienerberger indicates that less than 2% of its raw materials are derived from recycled materials. The manufacturing of bricks requires energy, in fact approximately 95% of the company's energy use is associated with manufacturing and yet the company does not provide absolute metrics and does not indicate that an energy reduction strategy is in place. Wienerberger did not demonstrate a commitment to environmental sustainability and was rejected for Portfolio 21. |
| 9.26.07 | Taisei | Taisei is a Japanese company that builds residential, commercial, and institutional buildings; provides civil engineering for roads, and operates real estate, resort development, and financial businesses. Portfolio 21 attempted to engage with the company on numerous occasions to gain more information about its Tropical Timber Policy, its Eco Model Projects, and its environmental management systems, among other issues. The company was not responsive and as a result, Portfolio 21 had insufficient information to warrant an approval. Until the company provides greater depth and quality in its public reporting, Taisei will not meet Portfolio 21's criteria. |
| 9.17.07 | Intertek | Intertek offers testing, inspection, and certification services to customers across numerous industries. Included among Intertek's environmental certification and assurance products are ISO 14001, WEEE, RoHS, GMO testing, and non-GMO certification. Despite the nature of the company's business, Intertek itself does not operate beyond compliance. To date, Intetek provides little environmental data and lacks sufficient environmental leadership to qualify for Portfolio 21. |
| 9.6.07 | ANSYS | ANSYS, a Pennsylvania-based company, develops and markets engineering simulation software used across a broad spectrum of industries, including aerospace, automotive, manufacturing, electronics, biomedical, and defense. ANSYS's software has been used for environmental gain, but the products' end-use provide little environmental benefit, and in some instances run counter to Portfolio 21's investment approach. Due to ANSYS's lack of emphasis and leadership on sustainability issues, the company does not qualify for Portfolio 21. |
| 8.28.07 | Cosan Ltd | Cosan Ltd., located in Brazil, is a leading global producer of ethanol and sugar (from sugarcane) and one of the world's largest renewable energy companies. Despite the seemingly clear environmental benefits, upon further investigation it became apparent that Cosan's activities also present serious environmental concerns. In February 2007, the Brazilian government announced plans to enhance its biotechnology initiatives over the next decade, including the development of a new strain of sugar cane that is resistant to drought. Moreover, Cosan's reported research and development activities mimic that of the Brazilian government's. Given the significant risks associated with genetically engineered crops, and the company's clear intentions of using genetically engineered sugarcane in the near future, Portfolio 21 has chosen not to include Cosan in the fund. |
| 8.22.07 | News Corporation | In 2006 and 2007, News Corporation, the sixth largest media conglomerate in the world, has made some significant strides in its environmental awareness. Most impressive is the company's commitment to become carbon neutral by 2012. However, with the exception of the company's climate change plan, News Corporation's environmental efforts are undeveloped. Although News Corporation is not a Portfolio 21 quality company at this time, we have encouraged the company to continue developing its sustainability strategy so that it has the ability to mitigate environmental risks while generating cost-saving opportunities. |
| 8.21.07 | Origin Energy | Origin Energy is an Australian-based company that is in the business of exploring for gas and oil in Australia and New Zealand. The company recognizes its climate change liability and reports its greenhouse gas emissions, however, investing in a company that has a core business in fossil fuel extraction does not align with Portfolio 21's investment philosophy. |
| 8.20.07 | Braskem | Braskem, a Brazilian petrochemical company, produces a wide range of thermoplastic resins that are incorporated into a variety of plastic products from food packaging to baby toys. In 2006, 6% of company revenues were derived from toxic materials, including PVC and benzene. The company has made several efforts to "green" its image, with efforts such as a Sustainability Report and ISO 14001 certification of its industrial units. The company is developing a new product it describes as "green polyethylene," which is made from sugarcane ethanol. However, the company does not seriously address either renewable (non-petroleum) sources or recycled sources as feedstock for its products, and as a chemicals company, has enormous environmental risks. |
| 8.20.07 | Aracruz Celulose | Aracruz Celulose is a Brazilian forest products company and is the world's largest producer of bleached eucalyptus pulp. The company supplies 27% of the global supply of this pulp, which is used to manufacture printing paper, writing paper, tissue, and toilet paper. Aracruz conducts genetic engineering research and applications for its Eucalyptus plantations, which are activities excluded by Portfolio 21's biotechnology policy. In addition, rather than following the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification process, the company utilizes the CERFLOR forest certification program, which has been highly criticized by a variety of NGOs focusing on forestry issues. |
| 8.16.07 | Sonova | Sonova is a medical equipment and supply company specializing in the development, production, and distribution of hearing systems for the deaf and hard of hearing. Compared with other companies in the healthcare industry, Sonova requires a minimal amount of resources to manufacture its products, but it also has done little to recognize or monitor its direct impact. While the company has recently begun to track its greenhouse gas emissions, it has not set any reduction targets. The company shows no leadership in public messaging, nor does it have a basic environmental management system or an environmental policy. We encourage the company to track its key environmental performance indicators at its administrative and manufacturing locations, recognize and evaluate its packaging impact, implement supplier guidelines, increase its election of renewable electricity, and address its climate change liability by developing and implementing an action plan. The company did not qualify for Portfolio 21. |
| 8.13.07 | ABM Industries | ABM Industries provides primarily janitorial services, as well as parking, engineering, security and lighting services to customers across the U.S. Although ABM acknowledges the movement toward environmentally friendly cleaning programs and continues to see growth in this area, the development of such programs are in their infancy. ABM also appears to be making environmental strides within its lighting service business division but this business division accounts for just a small part of the company's revenues. The lack of ecologically superior products and services, combined with the company's lack of environmental reporting, has resulted in the exclusion of ABM from Portfolio 21. |
| 8.10.07 | Nobel Biocare | Nobel Biocare operates through two business divisons: Dental Implants and Procera, which produces dental copings and bridges. Nobel Biocare reports on its major key performance indicators (electricity, water, and paper) and has achieved several environmental reduction targets. The company's facilities are also ISO 14001 certified. Despite this, Nobel Biocare's reporting and environmental initiatives are still of average to below-average quality. Moreover, Nobel Biocare's environmental policy lacks leadership and does not articulate a clear understanding of, nor a commitment to, sustainability. The company was not approved for Portfolio 21. |
| 8.7.07 | KBC | KBC, a Belgium-based bank, is aware of the direct environmental impacts generated by its customers and the projects it finances. To this end, the company is a signatory to the Equator Principles, has implemented an in-house lending policy that states it will not finance companies that are exposed to significant environmental risks (specifically the nuclear sector), and has incorporated the UN Principles for Responsible Investment into its investment analyses. However, KBC is lacking leadership in numerous other areas including procurement, waste and energy management, office-related achievements, and public messaging. While progress has been made, at this time KBC is not approved for Portfolio 21. |
| 8.3.07 | Tubacex | Tubacex manufactures stainless steel tubes and pipes. Unlike Schnitzer Steel, a Portfolio 21 company, which manufactures steel via mini-mills that utilize recycled steel, Tubacex uses virgin ore and traditional integrated mills. Integrated steel mills require extensive amounts of non-renewable raw materials and energy, and produce up to 28% more emissions than mini-mills. Despite the fact that the majority of Tubacex's facilities are ISO 14001 certified, given the company's high impact manufacturing methods and its poor reporting, Tubacex has not qualified for inclusion in Portfolio 21. |
| 7.31.07 | Titan Cement | Based in Greece, Titan Cement produces ready-mix concrete, fly ash, concrete blocks, dry mortars, aggregates, and other construction materials. Titan operates cement facilities, ready-mix concrete plants, mines, and quarries. The company has taken some steps to address its greenhouse gas footprint, but, on average, cement production emits 1 ton of CO2 for every ton of cement produced. In addition, the company operates mines and quarries, but makes little mention of the related environmental impacts and risks. The company shows no leadership in incorporating recycled raw materials into its products and has advanced the use of tires as a fuel source, which raises significant environmental concerns. Titan was not approved for Portfolio 21 due to its inherently unsustainable product range and lack of leadership on sustainability issues. |
| 7.30.07 | Stanley Electric | Stanley Electric, a Japanese company, is a manufacturer in the automotive equipment industry with a focus in automotive lighting. LED (light-emitting diodes) lights have significant energy efficiency benefits, it is not clear what percentage of the Stanley's lighting revenues are derived from LED lighting. Moreover it is not clear that the company recognizes the ecological benefits of LEDs. Despite the company's efforts in green procurement and the implementation of an ISO 14001 certified environmental management system, Stanley Electric's limited range of environmentally superior products, its poor communication on the environmental benefits of its products, and its overall lack of ecological leadership, has resulted in the exclusion of Stanley Electric from Portfolio 21. |
| 7.24.07 | Pentair | Pentair is a manufacturing company operating in the areas of Water and Technical Products. Although Pentair derives some of its revenues from water treatment systems, more than 50% of the company's revenues come from products and/or services with no ecological benefit, such as the company's pool and spa division. Despite the fact that Pentair is primarily a manufacturing company, it does not appear that the company has an established environmental management system or environmental policy. Pentair has expressed a growing emphasis on Lean Manufacturing; however, the company fails to track the eco-efficiency gains of such an approach, which adds to the evidence that Pentair lacks a sustainability vision. For the above mentioned reasons, Pentair has not been approved by Portfolio 21. |
| 7.18.07 | Royal Bank of Scotland | Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) is the second largest bank in the UK and the fifth largest bank in the world. RBS is also known as "The Oil & Gas Bank" due to its significant role in global project finance in the fossil fuel industry Portfolio 21 has serious concerns about the CO2 intensity of RBS's loan portfolio. While RBS is a signatory to the Equator Principles, implementation appears to be minimal as the company is currently involved with several projects that are in clear violation of the Equator Principles. Given the company's poor transparency regarding the implementation of the Equator Principles, its significant involvement in the oil and gas industry and its lack of environmental credit risk analysis in its lending business, RBS did not qualify for inclusion in Portfolio 21. |
| 7.18.07 | Yahoo | Since Yahoo! was last reviewed by Portfolio 21, the company has made a significant move to address what we consider the company's largest environmental impact: the energy consumption and subsequent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the company's servers. Yahoo has committed itself to becoming carbon neutral in 2007. Unfortunately, despite this pledge, Yahoo! has still not reported its GHG emission levels. Moreover, Yahoo still lacks a comprehensive environmental management strategy, fails to report on its key performance indicators, makes no mention of any reduction targets and does not publish an environmental or sustainability report. For these reasons, Yahoo has not been accepted for inclusion in Portfolio 21. |
| 7.10.07 | Bank of America | Recently, Bank of America announced a ten year, $20 billion initiative to "help fertilize green business practices." Although this initiative addresses both the company's direct and indirect impacts, Bank of America continues to provide no transparency regarding its lending portfolio, so Portfolio 21 has been unable to gauge the significance of this commitment. Moreover, Bank of America responded to our inquiry and indicated it was unwilling to provide answers to our specific questions or engage in dialogue around sustainability issues. Given the company's dated environmental reporting and unwillingness to engage, Bank of America does not meet Portfolio 21's criteria. |
| 7.9.07 | Lehman Brothers | Lehman Brothers is an investment bank headquartered in the U.S. with business activities spanning investment management, asset management, trading, and research, among others. The company recently published a report called The Business of Climate Change: Challenges and Opportunities. Despite this study, it does not appear that the results of the report are considered in the investment philosophy of the company. Specifically, the company has no environmental credit risk policy. In addition, the company does not track key performance indicators for its environmental impacts ,nor does it have a green procurement policy or standards. As a result, Lehman Brothers fails to meet Portfolio 21's sustainability criteria. |
| 7.9.07 | Australia and New Zealand Banking Group | Australia and New Zealand Banking Group (ANZ) is a financial institution engaged in general banking activities, including mortgage lending, international and investment banking, and investment management activities. The company has been recognized for its commitment to build a 6-star Green Star (similar to LEED certification) building to house its corporate headquarters in Melbourne, Australia, and has tracked its greenhouse gas emissions, energy, paper and water consumption since 2005. However, the company has no environmental credit risk analysis policy, does not offer any screened funds, and has no innovating environmental products (such as green mortgages). Additionally, the company was a late signatory to the Equator Principles. As a result of the company's lack of leadership, ANZ was rejected from Portfolio 21. |
| 7.6.07 | Wachovia | Wachovia is the fourth largest bank in the United States. In addition to Wachovia's commercial, retail and investment banking activities, the company is also involved in project financing and provides mortgage banking, advisory, and home equity lending services. Recently, Wachovia adopted environmental principles to guide its business and endorsed the Equator Principles to guide its project financing. Unfortunately, given the company's recent implementation of such principles, the gravity of Wachovia's environmental activities is insufficient to merit inclusion in Portfolio 21. |
| 7.6.07 | Millipore | Millipore provides products and services that improve productivity in biopharmaceutical manufacturing and in clinical, analytical, and research laboratories. While certain business units such as Filtration & Chromatography have clear environmental benefits, for example by enabling segregation and recycling of waste and water, the company's overall product range has few environmental benefits. Additionally, Millipore does not publish an environmental report of any type and the rigor of the company's environmental management system is unclear. As a result of the company's average product range, poor environmental reporting and lack of environmental leadership, Millipore has been rejected from Portfolio 21. |
| 6.26.07 | Grupo Ferrovial | Grupo Ferrovial is divided into three business divisions: construction, infrastructure, and services. Despite being praised by some for its developed sustainability strategy, Portfolio 21's findings did not reveal leadership in this area. More specifically, it does not appear that Ferrovial has done a review of the life cycle impacts of its business divisions. The company's environmentally related R&D expenses are minimal. Additionally, for a company this size, with a data system established for the company's environmental performance, Ferrovial's reporting quality is poor as the company fails to report on its company-wide environmental metrics and provides no reduction targets. Ferrovial was not approved for Portfolio 21. |
| 6.26.07 | Vinci SA | Vinci SA is the world's largest integrated construction and concession group. Vinci builds roads; offers electrical, mechanical, and civil engineering and construction services; and operates toll roads, parking garages, and stadiums. Despite the company's size and breadth of activities, Vinci reports environmental metrics on only 50% of its operations and no reduction targets have been set. Vinci also fails to provide information on its environmentally related R&D activities, or on its implementation of environmental considerations in the design and development of its projects. |
| 6.26.07 | Texas Instruments | Semiconductor development, manufacturing, and sales are Texas Instruments' largest business unit. The production of semiconductors uses enormous amounts of energy, water and process chemicals, including many with high GHG impacts. When compared with the ecological leaders of the semiconductor sector (STMicroelectronics and AMD), Texas Instruments is lagging. The company's efforts to improve the lifecycle environmental impacts of its products have been mediocre. Most disappointing is the fact that, despite the company's recognition of the risks associated with global warming, Texas Instruments does not quantify the total annual emissions of greenhouse gases produced by its operations. The company has not yet recognized sustainability as a major business opportunity and therefore has not been approved for Portfolio 21. |
| 6.26.07 | Dr. Reddy's | Dr. Reddy's, a vertically integrated pharmaceutical company, is headquartered in a region of India known as 'Genome Valley.' As one of the leading industries in the area, Dr. Reddy's has been cited as a major contributor of wastewater/effluent to the region's Common Effluent Treatment Plant (CEPT). Although the company claims to be acting beyond what is required by law, Dr. Reddy's poor transparency and lack of waste and wastewater reduction goals, along with its limited utilization of a certified Environmental Management System, make it difficult to determine the extent of the company's environmental activities. Due to the magnitude of the environmental degradation occurring in the Genome Valley area, Dr. Reddy's was not accepted for Portfolio 21. |
| 6.12.07 | Kesko | Kesko, a Finnish wholesale and retail company, derives the majority of its revenues from its Kesko Food business division. The company's house-label products are free from Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs); however, its biotechnology position is that "Kesko's decisions on selections are based on consumers' needs and wishes and Kesko can accept such GMO products in its product ranges . . . so our policy does not strictly exclude GMOs." Given this statement, Kesko does not meet Portfolio 21's biotechnology policy, which prohibits the use of GMOs in agricultural or food related applications. |
| 6.11.07 | Shionogi | Shionogi is a Japanese pharmaceutical company that manufactures and markets a wide variety of pharmaceuticals for human and veterinary applications. Unfortunately, despite the company's high level of transparency in its environmental reports, Shionogi was unwilling to engage with Portfolio 21 in regards to its biotechnology and animal testing policy. Given the company's lack of transparency surrounding its biotechnology and animal testing procedures Shionogi fails to meet Portfolio 21's criteria for inclusion. |
| 5.30.07 | Genentech | Genentech is a biotechnology company that develops, manufactures, and markets human pharmaceuticals. The company has chosen to concentrate its environmental efforts on factory level improvements rather than examining the environmental impacts associated with its products. Moreover, the company failed on numerous occasions to respond to Portfolio 21's specific inquiries regarding its biotechnology policy and/or philosophy. Due to the company's unwillingness to communicate its biotechnology policy Genentech was not approved for Portfolio 21. |
| 5.21.07 | Canadian National Railway | As a rail freight company, Canadian National Railway's service has inherent environmental benefits over air or road freight transport. However, Canadian National lacks the necessary leadership and sustainability vision to anticipate ecological risks and position itself to maximize benefits from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the climate change challenges we are facing. More specifically, the company does not publish an environmental report, has not implemented an environmental management system, and has a poor safety/environmental record. Canadian National Railway was not accepted into Portfolio 21. |
| 5.9.07 | Daiwa Securities Group | Daiwa Securities Group is engaged in four core businesses: retail securities, wholesale securities, asset management, and investment. Daiwa also offers several environmentally focused products and services including the development of a GHG emissions trading market via its 'Cool Bonds,' and is a signatory to the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI). The company recognizes the magnitude of environmental problems, however, the company's Corporate Social Responsibility strategy is still in progress. For example, Daiwa currently does not have an overarching environmental policy or management system in place. Moreover, the company is not transparent in how it applies the PRI principles to its own assets. Currently Daiwa does not meet Portfolio 21's criteria; however, we will consider reviewing Daiwa once the company's 3 year management plan is in place. |
| 4.25.07 | Corning | Corning is a leading manufacturer of glass products. Its business divisions include display technologies, telecommunications, environmental technologies, and life sciences. Corning also has a 50% ownership in Dow Corning. Corning gets some credit under our evaluation criteria; its product and service range includes a large amount of glass for high efficiency LCD screens and glass fiber optics (which have replaced copper due to reduced weight and improved efficiency). Corning also has strengths in R&D and pollution prevention. However, Corning lacks a sustainability strategy or awareness of ecological constraints, and their potential impact on the company's business. Corning's environmental reporting is sub-par and does not have a majority of facilities certified with an ISO 14001 Environmental Management System. Corning is also listed on the Toxic 100 list. As a result of these factors, Corning fails to meet our requirements for inclusion in Portfolio 21. |
| 4.25.07 | The Capita Group | The Capita Group is a service company that specializes in supporting and enhancing its clients' "back office" operations. For the Capita Group, the company's waste, energy use and business travel are the most significant factors contributing to the company's environmental footprint. Despite its recognition of environmental impacts, the Capita Group provides little evidence of its efforts to reduce energy consumption, increase office recycling, or limit travel. Due to the lack of data and poor reporting, the Capita Group was not accepted for Portfolio 21. |
| 4.25.07 | City Development Limited | City Development Limited (CDL) describes itself as a 'green' property developer. While we applaud the company's efforts for incorporating eco-features into its residential properties, there have been limited efforts to incorporate these features within the company's hotel sector, which generates the majority of the company's revenues. Additionally, the company lacks information on its materials and suppliers, a certified Environmental Management System, and transparent reporting on its efforts. City Developments does not pass Portfolio 21's criteria. |
| 4.25.07 | Headwaters | Headwaters, a basic materials company in the energy and construction industries, reports that approximately half of its revenues are derived from products and services aimed at reducing the environmental impacts of extracting the world's natural resources. Despite this fact, they are a far cry from 'renewable' energy sources. Additionally, the company does not publish an environmental report, it doesn't report on key performance indicators, there is no evidence of a guiding environmental policy, and no mention of an established environmental management system. Headwaters was not accepted into Portfolio 21. |
| 4.18.07 | AEON | AEON, a Japanese based company, operates discount stores and supermarkets that sell a wide range of products. The company markets TOPVALU "Green Eye"-labeled products that must meet five environmental criteria. However, the Green Eye products comprise a fraction of the company's total product range. AEON is still implementing its Environmental Management System, has not yet established comprehensive historical trends or set future targets for improvement, and thus fails to meet Portfolio 21's criteria. |
| 4.10.07 | Johnson & Johnson | Johnson & Johnson, a household name in the United States, manufactures and markets a range of products in the health care field. In evaluating Johnson & Johnson our major concerns were about the company's biotechnology policy. While we commend Johnson & Johnson for its willingness to engage with us on these issues, Portfolio 21 concluded that Johnson & Johnson's approach to biotechnology does not meet our investment criteria. |
| 2.14.07 | Ecolab | Ecolab provides cleaning, sanitizing, and pest elimination, as well as maintenance products and services for the hospitality, institutional, and industrial markets. Although Ecolab is one of the larger industrial-cleaner manufacturers to adopt the Green Seal mission, currently just 1% of the company's revenues are derived from environmentally preferable products. Moreover, the company has limited initiatives and discussion on the environmental safety of its raw materials, its supplier guidelines and its R&D into green chemistry, is limited. |
| 2.14.07 | Motorola | Motorola has strengths in setting and reporting Key Performance Indicators (i.e., tracking, reporting and target-setting of energy, waste and water use). It also has initiatives on climate change impacts and product take- back programs. However, Motorola continues to lag in the areas of raw material sourcing. The company has not yet committed to phase out the use of PVC or flame redardants (BFRs) and is only complying with the European environmental legislation RoHS and WEEE where required. Meanwhile, competitors Nokia and Sony Ericsson have achieved or committed to global compliance with RoHS and/or have phased out PVC or BFRs. Motorola has made little or no progress addressing the areas of greatest environmental impact, and does not pass Portfolio 21's criteria. |
| 2.14.07 | Salesforce.com | Salesforce.com's commitment to being carbon neutral is ahead of the curve, especially for a U.S.-based company. But the company's actions reveal that its understanding of ecological limits is minimal, and certainly not integrated into how the company operates its business. Salesforce.com has not undertaken any other initiatives to address environmental impacts, nor does the company communicate any understanding or commitment to environmental issues beyond its carbon neutral effort. |
| 2.12.07 | L'Oreal | L'Oreal—a company with over 20 different brands—manufactures, markets, and distributes health and beauty products across the world. L'Oreal's largest environmental impact is its sourcing and selection of raw materials. But it was only very recently (2005) that the company developed a methodology to assess its ingredients against a set of sustainability criteria. The assessment was piloted in 2006 and will "hopefully" be rolled out in 2007. L'Oreal does not use The Precautionary Principle, and its green chemistry initiatives appear limited. L'Oreal has also refused to sign the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics Compact and declined to supply information to Greenpeace about the hazardous substances used in its products. Based on the company's lack of leadership in the realm of raw material use and suppliers, L'Oreal is ineligible for inclusion. |
| 1.30.07 | Danisco | Danisco is one of the world's largest producers of food ingredients. In recent years the company's focus has shifted away from sugar, and with the acquisition of Genencor, it seems to be headed in the direction of the development and manufacturing of enzymes. This may have some environmental benefits, as enzymes tend to reduce the environmental impact of the processes they are applied to. However, there is inadequate attention to sustainability and transparency issues accompanying this transition (e.g., lack of supplier guidelines, leadership, reporting, and environmental management system). |
| 1.23.07 | Iberdrola | Iberdrola, an electric utility company based in Madrid, Spain, engages in the generation, transmission, distribution, and marketing of electricity and natural gas worldwide. Although the company generates power through wind, hydroelectric, and combined-cycle facilities (which operate with natural gas), 25% of the company's revenues are derived from the generation of nuclear energy. For this reason alone, Iberdrola does not meet Portfolio 21's sustainability criteria. |
| 1.5.07 | Cummins | Cummins is the world's leading manufacturer of large diesel engines. Although diesel engines are known for their improved emissions and fuel economy, Cummins is primarily building diesel engines for the Dodge Ram truck, a vehicle with poor MPG performance. Cummins is promoting the use of bio-diesel blends, but only the 5% plant derived fuel, also known as B5. Cummins is not promoting B20, B50, or B99 blends, which are commonly available on the west coast of the United States. Cummins also needs to improve its environmental reporting on manufacturing plants and production processes. |
| 12.12.06 | Nucor | Nucor's business model is based on steel manufacturing, a known "dirty" industry, which is clearly demonstrated by Nucor's ranking 14th on the Toxic 100 list. Steel manufacturing continues to be one of the world's most carbon and energy intensive industries, even when using mini-mill technology with scrap metal as the feedstock. Nucor recognizes the environmental impact its operations have and states that the company will continue to improve its environmental stewardship; however, specific indicators necessary to assess this performance are not disclosed. The company's poor reporting on greenhouse gas emissions and limited global warming strategy, as well as a lack of documented improvements in managing environmental risks, make Nucor ineligible for Portfolio 21. |
| 11.16.06 | Timken | The Timken Company manufactures industrial and automotive bearings and steel products. Although Timken has an environmental management policy, the company does not disclose environmental information or key performance indicators beyond hazardous waste and data on toxic releases. Additionally, Timken's discussions regarding energy efficiency are limited to the reduction of energy consumption associated with the manufacturing processes, without considering product design. Given Timken's lack of reporting, discussion of energy efficiency, and use of life cycle analysis, the company does not pass our sustainability criteria. |
| 10.31.06 | United Utilities | United Utilities' core business is the management of electricity, water and wastewater networks. Prior to the sale of its Green Energy business unit in December 2004, United Utilities' UUNW business division also encompassed more than 40 renewable energy projects throughout the UK. Since the sale of Green Energy, United Utilities' product range revolves solely around the distribution of energy and the extraction and treatment of water. Neither of which are particularly ecologically advantageous nor incorporate sustainability measures. Although the majority of the company's revenues are guided by an ISO 14001 certified environmental management system and biodiversity action plan, United Utilities decision to sell its Green Energy division, combined with the company's high use of energy and its toxic wastewater sludge, makes United Utilities ineligible for Portfolio 21. |
| 10.30.06 | Hospira | Hospira is a global leader in the development, manufacturing and marketing of specialty injectable pharmaceuticals and medication delivery systems for drugs and intravenous (IV) fluids. Hospira's promising new flexible IV-container, VISIV, is PVC/DEHP-free and weighs 40-60% less than other flexible IV containers. The environmental benefits of this product are clear, but sales are just a fraction of the company's total sales. In order to potentially qualify for Portfolio 21, we encourage Hospira to publish an environmental report, establish an ISO 14001 certified environmental management system, develop a greenhouse gas reduction strategy, and further develop the use of their life cycle analysis and design for environment principles. |
| 9.7.06 | AES Corporation | AES is a global energy holding company that, through its subsidiaries, operates a portfolio of electricity generation and distribution businesses in 25 countries on five continents. AES states that it is promoting alternative energy business activities, however, upon closer examination it is clear that AES's commitment to the environment and renewable energy solutions is slim. In truth, AES is a major player in the coal industry within the United States and abroad. The company does not report on its operational environmental metrics, and seeks only to comply with the minimal environmental laws and regulations. |
| 9.1.06 | JS Group | The JS Group, which resulted from the merger of INAX and Tostem, is divided into 6 companies, each specializing in the marketing or manufacturing of a specific building material and/or service. While certain companies within the JS Group have thorough and comprehensive environmental policies and initiatives in place, the Group's overall environmental policy and targets are vague. We encouraged the company to establish a group-wide ISO 14001 environmental management system, to purchase FSC certified wood, and to eliminate PVC throughout its companies. |
| 8.29.06 | Vail Resorts | While we commend Vail for its plans to offset 100% of its annual electricity use by purchasing 152,000 MWh of wind renewable energy certificates, Vail Resorts is not an industry leader. The company has violated the Clean Water Act and illegally destroyed wetlands, it has not become ISO 14001 certified, and it has yet to incorporate LEED building designs. |
| 6.28.06 | Delhaize Group | Delhaize Group lacks of understanding of the environmental impacts of its products. Delhaize does not have a global non-GMO policy for its private-label products and certified organic offerings are an insignificant portion of its worldwide sales. Portfolio 21's investment criteria reject agricultural applications of biotechnology as well as the negative environmental consequences of traditional agriculture. |
| 6.26.06 | Hang Seng Bank | Hang Seng Bank did not meet Portfolio 21's rigorous environmental sustainability criteria due to insufficiently comprehensive or transparent reporting of environmental policies and performance, especially in regards to product/service impacts, paper procurement, corporate and project lending activities, direct impact metrics and future initiatives and targets. |
| 6.20.06 | Barclays Bank | Barclays' implementation of the Equator Principles in project finance decisions is not consistent with a commitment to sustainability. We noted that the bank's financing of the Narmada Dam, The Trans Thai-Malaysia Gas Pipeline, and Karahnjukar, Iceland's largest hydropower project, are not in keeping with its commitment to the Equator Principles. |
| 5.30.06 | The Warehouse Group | The Warehouse Group could increase its efforts to analyze its supply and distribution chains, specifically in regards to the sourcing of FSC-certified or sustainable paper for the company's stationery division. We also encouraged the company to provide more transparent reporting of environmental initiatives and reporting. |
| 5.30.06 | Beiersdorf | We'd like to see Beiersdorf strengthen its efforts to perform lifecycle analyses on its products, specifically in regards to the chemical formulation of the company's products. We also encouraged the company to prove its commitment by providing solid environmental metrics on the company's operational and product impacts. |
| 5.30.06 | Thomson | We recommend Thomson perform environmental life cycle analyses on its products and services, expand its environmental management system company-wide, and provide a substantial sustainability report. |
| 5.17.06 | Plantronics | IPlantronics has invested resources in a LEED certified factory in China; we suggest the company bring up the level of its leadership in other areas of its business, such as product development, environmental management, and sustainability reporting. |
| 5.17.06 | AEON Credit | AEON Credit would benefit from adopting more environmentally stringent procurement policies and providing more substantial environmental reporting, including key environmental performance indicators and targets for improvement. |
| 5.16.06 | Deckers Outdoors | Deckers Outdoors is practicing life cycle analysis on two of its product brands, Simple Shoes and Teva. We'd like to see the company extend this analysis to the product design of its most lucrative footwear line, UGG. |
| 5.10.06 | Persimmon | Persimmon has dedicated time and resources to developing the company's Environmental Management System, as well as design innovations and efficient technologies. We would like to see these ecological designs become the company's minimum standards for all homes built, rather than being used occasionally and selectively. |
| 5.9.06 | Corning | Of Corning's 65 facilities, 23 are ISO 14001 certified. While this is a commendable first step, we encouraged Corning to implement a group-wide ISO 14001 environmental management system, to expand its environmental performance reporting to include materials recycled, and to set goals for each of its environmental key performance indicators. |
| 5.2.06 | ABN AMRO | ABN AMRO is to be complimented on its environmental leadership in many areas, but we asked the bank to reconsider its implementation of the Equator Principles in project finance decisions. We noted that the bank's financing of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline and the Sakhalin pipeline are not in keeping with its commitment to the Equator Principles. |
| 4.30.06 | Apple | While Apple has demonstrated an understanding of environmental issues in its product design and life cycle analysis, the company has just begun to show progress in the areas of recycling and take-back programs. As of April 2006, the company has not set any goals around its new recycling initiative and the company is not featuring it on its website. Additionally, Apple does not make information about its environmental efforts easy to access. This is compounded by the fact that Apple continues to lobby against State bills that would establish electronics take-back and recycling programs, and the fact that Apple has yet to publish an environmental report of any kind. As a result, Apple fails to meet Portfolio 21's environmental sustainability criteria. |
| 4.27.06 | BBVA | BBVA lacks a group-wide ISO 14001 certified Environmental Management System, strengthen its data quality, and transparently report on its progress. We also noted that the bank's financing of a Uruguayan pulp mill is not in keeping with its commitment to the Equator Principles. |
| 4.1.06 | Veolia Environment | Veolia Environment provides water treatment/distribution services that are not in alignment with the concept of environmental sustainability and is thus ineligible for the fund. |
| 4.1.06 | KBC | KBC would benefit from implementing an ISO 14001 certified Environmental Management System, incorporating environmental criteria in its asset management division, and transparently reporting on its progress. We also noted that the bank's financing of projects such as the Baku-Tbililsi-Ceyhan pipeline is not in keeping with its commitment to the Equator Principles. |
| 4.1.06 | Masco | Masco, a home improvement retailer and manufacturer, has just begun to track its direct environmental impact and has not yet established the database necessary to track the company's consolidated emissions, waste or the environmental impacts of its products and services. We encouraged the company to develop a method for tracking its data, as it is crucial to our ability to analyze the company's overall environmental initiatives. |
| 3.13.06 | Ito En | Ito En, a tea and beverage company, does not have a commitment to certified organic production of its raw materials for its line of tea, coffee, and fruit and vegetable beverages, it does not meet Portfolio 21's criteria. |
| 3.13.06 | National Bank of Greece | National Bank of Greece has made some progress on its sustainability efforts, but we recommended that the bank incorporate environmental criteria in its procurement standards, setting goals to reduce resource consumption, incorporating environmental criteria in its asset management division, and transparently reporting on its progress. |
| 3.13.06 | Fast Retailing | Fast Retailing would benefit from a group-wide Environmental Management System to assist the company in monitoring and reporting on its direct environmental impacts. Additionally we encouraged the company to report on the environmental performance of its manufacturing suppliers and expand its polyester fleece garment take-back initiative with life-cycle analyses on other product lines. |
| 3.13.06 | Itochu | Itochu's history of financing environmentally controversial projects and its selection of partners and suppliers do not meet our investment criteria. Portfolio 21 does not invest in companies that directly or indirectly engage in environmentally destructive or risky business activities. We also recommended that the company systematically analyze the environmental impacts of all operating units and subsidiaries and transparently report those findings in its environmental performance report. |
| 3.10.06 | Yahoo | Yahoo's environmental policy is still immature and makes little effort to identify and thoroughly communicate the company's direct environmental impacts or goals. |
| 3.10.06 | Puma | Puma's positive environmental initiatives, such as an organic cotton product line, transport of a majority of its products via sea freight, green building at its headquarters in Germany, and some product life-cycle analyses, are on the right track, but these efforts have no associated metrics or targets for reporting. It is difficult for us to determine Puma's environmental commitment, or the level of progress Puma has achieved to date. We have also questioned the company on its monitoring program for overseas subcontractors. |
| 1.18.06 | Fairmont Hotels and Resorts | Fairmont Hotels and Resorts has some excellent environmental initiatives at some of its locations, but the company would benefit from expanding those best practices company-wide and report regularly on its progress. |
| 11.22.05 | Endesa | Endesa made a substantial investment in increasing its European renewable energy portfolio over the next five years, but unfortunately it has an even larger continued commitment to nuclear power generation and carbon- and pollution-intensive fuels. |
| 11.22.05 | Nobel Biocare | Nobel Biocare has made progress in reduction of pollution and water consumption and certification of its Environmental Management System, but we recommended more thorough environmental reporting and further study of its products' life cycle. |
| 11.22.05 | Shiseido | Shiseido has made efforts in package design and recycling, but we expressed our concern about the company's raw materials sourcing and lack of a policy on chemical use. |
| 10.24.05 | Roche | Roche has introduced sustainability principles and applied eco-efficiency metrics to its processes, but we were disappointed that the company has made little effort to identify the life cycle environmental risks and benefits of its full range of products and services. |
| 10.24.05 | Fresenius | Fresenius has introduced sustainability principles and applied eco-efficiency metrics to its processes, but we were disappointed that the company has made little effort to identify the life cycle environmental risks and benefits of its full range of products and services. |
| 10.24.05 | Dr. Reddy | Dr. Reddy has introduced sustainability principles and applied eco-efficiency metrics to its processes, but we were disappointed that the company has made little effort to identify the life cycle environmental risks and benefits of its full range of products and services. |
| 10.5.05 | Essilor | Our letter to Essilor recognized the company's progress in certifying its Environmental Management System, but recommended more thorough environmental reporting and further study of its products' life cycle and recycling at end-of-life. |
| 8.23.05 | Exel | Exel, a UK based transportation and logistics company, failed to meet Portfolio 21's company evaluation criteria. In addition, Exel provided inaccurate information regarding its involvement in two U.S. EPA voluntary environmental leadership programs. We encouraged Exel to participate in the programs as they publicly claimed. |
| 7.26.05 | Terumo | In our letter to Terumo we note that the company has made little effort to identify the life cycle environmental risks and benefits of its products and services and thus runs the risk of making unwise long-term business decisions. |
| 7.26.05 | Centrica | In the case of Centrica, while the company is a pure play natural gas company, and has some small investments in renewable energy, it lacks the leadership necessary to anticipate and benefit from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the ecological crisis we are facing. Specifically, its very minor investments in renewable energy, designed only to meet regulatory requirements, don't demonstrate a leadership position in this area. |
| 7.26.05 | PNM Resources | Similarly, while PNM Resources has investments in wind energy, offers renewable energy options to customers, has decent CO2 emissions reduction goals, and aims to be a leader in promoting renewable energy, the fact that the company receives at least 30% of its energy from nuclear facilities, and has an investment stake in said nuclear facilities, makes PNM Resources ineligible for inclusion in our mutual fund. |
| 3.22.05 | Scottish & Southern Energy | In our letter to Scottish & Southern Energy we expressed our disappointment that the company has made little effort to identify the life cycle environmental risks and benefits of its products and services. We believe the company runs the risk of making unwise long-term business decisions, such as its recent purchase of two of Britain 's biggest and most polluting coal-fired power plants. This purchase almost doubled the company's generation capacity but drastically increased its carbon intensity and potential global warming liability. |
| 3.22.05 | Takeda | In our letters to Takeda, Tokyo Electron and Ito-Yokado we noted the companies do not appear to recognize or approach their environmental impact in any meaningful way (or have any significant achievements to report) and thus lack the leadership necessary to anticipate and benefit from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the ecological crisis we are facing. |
| 3.22.05 | Tokyo Electron | In our letters to Takeda, Tokyo Electron and Ito-Yokado we noted the companies do not appear to recognize or approach their environmental impact in any meaningful way (or have any significant achievements to report) and thus lack the leadership necessary to anticipate and benefit from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the ecological crisis we are facing. |
| 3.22.05 | Ito-Yokado | In our letters to Takeda, Tokyo Electron and Ito-Yokado we noted the companies do not appear to recognize or approach their environmental impact in any meaningful way (or have any significant achievements to report) and thus lack the leadership necessary to anticipate and benefit from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the ecological crisis we are facing. |
| 11.15.04 | Asahi Breweries | In our letters to Asahi Breweries, Carrefour and Marks & Spencer we noted a lack of understanding and leadership on organic food offerings. |
| 11.15.04 | Becton Dickinson | Becton Dickinson, Pearson and Swatch Group do not appear to recognize or approach their environmental impact in any meaningful way and thus lack the leadership necessary to anticipate and benefit from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the ecological crisis we are facing. This is also the case for Merck, where we have further concerns regarding the company's involvement in biotechnology. |
| 11.15.04 | BNP Paribas | PNC Financial has made little effort to identify the life cycle environmental risks of its products and services and has not integrated these issues into its credit policy. BNP Paribas is in a similar boat, and has also been involved in financing a number of controversial projects that have significant negative environmental and social consequences. |
| 11.15.04 | Carrefour | In our letters to Asahi Breweries, Carrefour and Marks & Spencer we noted a lack of understanding and leadership on organic food offerings. |
| 11.15.04 | Central Glass | Central Glass, Suez and Reckitt Benckiser manufacture and distribute certain products and services that are not in alignment with the concept of environmental sustainability and are thus ineligible for the fund (chemical fertilizers, poisons, electrical air fresheners and nuclear based electricity generation). |
| 11.15.04 | Gas Natural | In the case of Gas Natural and Honda we noted that although these companies are making good efforts to reduce their impact on the environment, they do not have long term strategies that position them well to deal with limited fossil fuel resources or global warming (Honda sees SUVs as its biggest growth market). |
| 11.15.04 | Honda | In the case of Gas Natural and Honda we noted that although these companies are making good efforts to reduce their impact on the environment, they do not have long term strategies that position them well to deal with limited fossil fuel resources or global warming (Honda sees SUVs as its biggest growth market). |
| 11.15.04 | Merck | Becton Dickinson, Pearson and Swatch Group do not appear to recognize or approach their environmental impact in any meaningful way and thus lack the leadership necessary to anticipate and benefit from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the ecological crisis we are facing. This is also the case for Merck, where we have further concerns regarding the company's involvement in biotechnology. |
| 11.15.04 | Pearson | Becton Dickinson, Pearson and Swatch Group do not appear to recognize or approach their environmental impact in any meaningful way and thus lack the leadership necessary to anticipate and benefit from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the ecological crisis we are facing. This is also the case for Merck, where we have further concerns regarding the company's involvement in biotechnology. |
| 11.15.04 | PNC Financial | PNC Financial has made little effort to identify the life cycle environmental risks of its products and services and has not integrated these issues into its credit policy. BNP Paribas is in a similar boat, and has also been involved in financing a number of controversial projects that have significant negative environmental and social consequences. |
| 11.15.04 | Reckitt Benckiser | Central Glass, Suez and Reckitt Benckiser manufacture and distribute certain products and services that are not in alignment with the concept of environmental sustainability and are thus ineligible for the fund (chemical fertilizers, poisons, electrical air fresheners and nuclear based electricity generation). |
| 11.15.04 | Suez | Central Glass, Suez and Reckitt Benckiser manufacture and distribute certain products and services that are not in alignment with the concept of environmental sustainability and are thus ineligible for the fund (chemical fertilizers, poisons, electrical air fresheners and nuclear based electricity generation). |
| 11.15.04 | Swatch Group | Becton Dickinson, Pearson and Swatch Group do not appear to recognize or approach their environmental impact in any meaningful way and thus lack the leadership necessary to anticipate and benefit from the business opportunities that will inevitably accompany the ecological crisis we are facing. This is also the case for Merck, where we have further concerns regarding the company's involvement in biotechnology. |
| 9.24.04 | Aventis | In our letter to Aventis we noted the company's general lack of effort on environmental issues. We are also concerned about its activities related to biotechnology and bioethics. |
| 9.24.04 | BAA | In the case of BAA, we rejected the company due to, among other things, the difficult industry it operates in and its approach to growth. While BAA doesn't operate airplanes, it does thrive on increasing air travel – which ultimately needs to be minimized in order to move toward a sustainable society. While BAA could take a business strategy of expansion through increasing the number of airports it operates, it has chosen to increase the number of runways at the airports it currently operates. |
| 9.24.04 | Balfour Beatty | Finally, our rejection of Balfour Beatty was based on the company's failure to make a strong connection between its business and environmental sustainability. The company has a tremendous opportunity to reduce the environmental impacts of its projects by utilizing environmental design and energy efficiency principles. |
| 9.24.04 | Saint Gobain | In our letter to Saint Gobain we noted a lack of understanding and leadership – for example some of the company's products have environmental benefits, but there is no communication on this issue. Additionally, the company has made little effort to identify the life cycle environmental risks of its products and services, and manufactures a variety of products containing PVC, a hazardous substance in production, use and disposal. And finally, the company's environmental management system is inadequate for the activities of the company's business. |
| 9.7.04 | Holcim | In the case of both Holcim and LaFarge, the companies recognize the significant environmental impact of their operations, in particular their use of energy and emissions of greenhouse gases. The primary strategy of these companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions is to utilize alternative fuels and raw materials (AFR). While we believe that using fly ash and other similar materials as alternative raw materials provides environmental benefits, we disagree with the perspective that burning hazardous waste and tires to fuel its operations (without the same emissions restrictions as a hazardous waste incinerator) is good for the environment. Additionally, the fact that neither Holcim nor LaFarge count the emissions associated with burning the waste in their greenhouse gas inventory undermines each company's stated goal of moving towards sustainability. |
| 9.7.04 | LaFarge | In the case of both Holcim and LaFarge, the companies recognize the significant environmental impact of their operations, in particular their use of energy and emissions of greenhouse gases. The primary strategy of these companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions is to utilize alternative fuels and raw materials (AFR). While we believe that using fly ash and other similar materials as alternative raw materials provides environmental benefits, we disagree with the perspective that burning hazardous waste and tires to fuel its operations (without the same emissions restrictions as a hazardous waste incinerator) is good for the environment. Additionally, the fact that neither Holcim nor LaFarge count the emissions associated with burning the waste in their greenhouse gas inventory undermines each company's stated goal of moving towards sustainability. |
| 8.27.04 | Danone | In April 2003 we sent our first rejection letter to Danone. While we received a response, it did not address our concerns. This rejection letter reiterated the primary issue for our rejection of Danone -- Danone's policy on GMO doesn't meet our strict non-GMO requirements. |
| 8.27.04 | Metro | In the case of Metro, we also found that the company's policy did not meet our non-GMO requirements. While the company currently has a non-GMO policy in place for some of its operations, as recently as December 2003 Metro was working to make genetically modified foods attractive to consumers and had been collaborating with Monsanto on an industry campaign backing genetic engineering. |
| 8.25.04 | Johnson & Johnson | The primary disqualifications for Johnson & Johnson were its lack of substantive policy on biotechnology and genetically modified organisms (while increasing involvement in these activities), its continuing engagement in animal testing of personal care and household products that is not required by law, and weak effort to analyze its products' life cycle impacts or its supply and distribution chains in light of environmental benefit or harm. |
| 8.25.04 | BASF | BASF was rejected due to its active involvement and support of genetic engineering for agricultural purposes, its revenues from oil and gas operations, activities in pesticide production and sales, and its manufacture of phthalates. |