By John Almandoz and Carlos Rey

It’s one thing to talk about corporate purpose, quite another to make it happen in a way that has real-world meaning for those at all levels of the organisation. In this article, the authors offer a framework designed to assist leaders in doing just that.

Corporate purpose has become a hotly debated topic in recent years, yet its practical implementation often lags behind the rhetoric. Defining purpose is only the starting point; the real challenge lies in living it—creating an emotional connection to a set of ideals and translating them into tangible actions and practices. Purpose is not a slogan; it is a strategic and cultural force that shapes how organisations operate and how they impact society.

This article explores purpose-driven leadership as a multidimensional concept, combining internal motivations—the intrinsic and transcendent motivations of employees—with external impact—in response to societal or environmental challenges. Drawing on insights from companies such as Unilever, Best Buy, ISS, La Fageda, Anglo American, and DaVita, we examine how leaders can embed purpose into the very fabric of their organisations—turning aspirations into reality.

Corporate Purpose Dimensions

Recent research identifies two complementary perspectives of purpose—inside-out and outside-in¹—along with three key dimensions—head, heart, and hands². Together (figure1), these lenses offer a robust framework for leading with purpose, enabling leaders to transform it from an abstract ideal into a living force that inspires people and shapes society.

Inside-Out and Outside-In Perspectives

Understanding corporate purpose begins with two complementary lenses: inside-out and outside-in. Together, these perspectives illuminate how organisations balance and integrate internal motivational alignment with the external impact that society increasingly demands.

• Inside-Out: this perspective focuses on aligning an organisation’s purpose with the values, beliefs, and aspirations of its members. When employees find personal significance in their work, they become more passionate and committed, contributing energy and creativity to organisational goals. Leaders play a critical role as “meaning-makers,” articulating a purpose rooted in core values and inspiring employees by making their impact visible—connecting daily tasks to service or a greater cause.
• Outside-In: this perspective emphasises a company’s responsibility to address broader societal and environmental challenges, such as social injustice and climate change. Leaders adopting this perspective act as “statesmen,” prioritising systemic impact, building legitimacy, and collaborating with external organisations to advance social causes.

The Three ‘H’ Dimensions of Purpose

Purpose is not one-dimensional. It comes to life through three interconnected dimensions—head, heart, and hands—that transform lofty ideals into strategy, emotion, and action.

The Head

Purpose must be clear. This dimension focuses on the rational articulation of purpose. It involves defining and clearly communicating the organisation’s reason for being, answering questions such as: What is our business for? What should our business become? The head dimension establishes a coherent vision that connects strategic objectives with societal contributions.

The Heart

Purpose must resonate emotionally, not just intellectually.

Purpose must resonate emotionally, not just intellectually. The heart dimension ensures that purpose aligns with the values and aspirations of stakeholders, creating a shared sense of meaning. Emotional engagement is cultivated through stories and narratives that bring purpose to life, inspiring genuine commitment and passion.

The Hands

Purpose must be operationalised. The hands dimension ensures that purpose is embedded in actions, decisions, and day-to-day operations. This includes aligning performance metrics, integrating purpose into incentives, and demonstrating commitment through leadership and participation in initiatives—even social movements. The hands dimension transforms purpose from an aspirational ideal into a lived reality.

The Six Key Drivers of Purpose Implementation

Purpose-driven leadership is not a one-time declaration; it is a continuous process that requires alignment across strategy, culture, and operations. Within the inside-out and outside-in perspectives—and across the dimensions of head, heart, and hands—we identify six fundamental drivers that enable organisations to lead with purpose effectively (see table 1).

1. Crafting an authentic purpose (Head–Inside-Out)

Defining and communicating a company’s purpose is the cornerstone of the inside-out approach. This involves articulating why the organisation exists and what makes it unique—not as a vague aspiration, but as a rational foundation for strategy and decision-making. A well-crafted purpose brings clarity, aligns teams, and strengthens identity.

Authenticity is critical. Purpose must resonate with the company’s values and culture, making it more than words on paper. Many organisations draw on founder motivations or internal stakeholder needs. For example, La Fageda was born from Cristóbal Colón’s vision to provide meaningful work for people with mental disabilities. Yogurt production became the means to fulfil a deeper social mission—the actual work could have been something very different— creating a strong sense of identity and shared meaning.

Similarly, Unilever, under Paul Polman, revisited its historical roots to shape a narrative that connected sustainability with its core business. DaVita engaged employees at every level to co-create and articulate its values, fostering ownership and alignment. Best Buy used executive retreats and workshops with frontline staff to define its values, which ensured broad buy-in, turning purpose into a shared commitment. Other companies may use tools such as the Ikigai framework—exploring the intersection of contribution, passion, capabilities, and financial sustainability—to help them define a purpose that inspires and endures.

2. Articulating how purpose addresses societal challenges (Head–Outside-In)

A purpose confined to internal motivations risks appearing self-centered or narrow. Increasingly, companies are redefining their purpose to address societal challenges—social, environmental, and ethical. This outside-in perspective involves engaging with systemic issues and aligning the company’s mission with broader stakeholder needs.

Unilever exemplifies this evolution. Beyond its roots in hygiene and nutrition, it championed sustainability and social equity through initiatives such as the Unilever Sustainable Living Plan, the €1 billion Climate and Nature Fund, and campaigns like #Unstereotype. Its brands integrate activism into messaging, advancing causes like climate justice and body positivity. The company’s commitment extends to ensuring living wages across its supply chain and combating modern slavery—actions that reinforce trust and legitimacy.

Other organisations, such as La Fageda and ISS, expanded their impact by supporting communities and improving working conditions. Patagonia shifted from producing outdoor gear to leading environmental activism. These efforts demonstrate that success can be measured not only by profit but by contributions to societal well-being.

3. Harmonising personal and organisational purpose (Heart–Inside-Out)

Purpose must be internalised—not just understood intellectually but felt emotionally. This inside-out “heart” dimension transforms corporate values into a shared source of motivation. When employees see how their work improves lives, engagement deepens. Motivation becomes more intrinsic and transcendent.

Best Buy’s CEO Hubert Joly reframed the company’s mission around “happiness,” inspiring employees by connecting their efforts to customer well-being. Research by Adam Grant shows that gratitude from beneficiaries significantly boosts employee commitment. Companies like ISS and DaVita reinforce this connection through storytelling, recognition rituals, and symbolic language—calling employees “teammates” or “citizens” and referring to the company as a “village.” These practices foster belonging and shared purpose.

True internalisation also requires leaders to show genuine care for employees, recognising their values and aspirations. Initiatives such as ISS’s community programs strengthen emotional bonds. Large-scale training, like Unilever’s personal purpose workshops, illustrates how embedding purpose throughout the organisation can inspire thousands and foster a vibrant, purpose-driven culture.

4. Inspiring stakeholders through purposeful brands and narratives (Heart–Outside-In)

Internal alignment is essential, but credibility depends on external legitimacy. Companies with a strong outside-in “heart” perspective inspire stakeholders by addressing societal challenges and championing meaningful causes. Leaders act as statesmen and responsible role models, setting industry standards and rallying others to create positive change.

Purpose-driven marketing connects brands with values. When companies weave their mission into slogans and campaigns, they differentiate themselves and build loyalty. Examples include Warby Parker’s “Buy a Pair, Give a Pair” initiative and Dove’s body positivity campaign, which embed social impact into brand identity. Rebranding around purpose can transform culture. DaVita, meaning “giving life,” rebranded itself and took that name to foster a community-first mindset focused on service. These narratives galvanise not only employees but also patients and their families and creates goodwill in the communities  proving that purpose can be both inspiring and commercially powerful.

5. Embedding purpose into behaviours and systems (Hands–Inside-Out)

Purpose must move beyond words and emotional connection to become actionable. The “hands” dimension ensures that purpose is integrated into core processes—recruitment, performance evaluation, promotion, and incentives. When behaviours and systems reflect values, purpose becomes a lived reality.

When behaviours and systems reflect values, purpose becomes a lived reality.

Companies operationalise purpose by equipping employees with tools and knowledge to embody values in their work. ISS conducts workshops for frontline staff, while DaVita uses recognition systems to reward values-driven behaviour. In both organisations, team-building activities connect leaders to the mission through service, reinforcing cultural alignment.

Measurable goals are essential. Leading companies like Unilever and Best Buy set ambitious targets—from sustainability milestones to employee engagement metrics. Tracking progress demonstrates commitment and builds trust among stakeholders.

6. Measuring impact and securing external validation (Hands–Outside-In)

Internal systems are vital, but self-assessment alone can lead to bias or complacency. To ensure objectivity, organisations increasingly adopt external frameworks such as ESG (environmental, social, and governance) criteria, SROI (social return on investment), and certifications like B Corp. These tools provide rigorous methods for quantifying impact and benchmarking against global standards.

External validation enhances credibility and drives continuous improvement. By integrating these frameworks into operations, companies demonstrate that their commitment to purpose is genuine, measurable, and aligned with societal expectations.

Starting from Within: Leadership at the Crossroads

Leadership stands at the crossroads of the inside-out and outside-in perspectives of organisational purpose, serving as the pivotal force that unites them. Great leaders don’t just connect with their organisation’s history and core values; they cultivate authenticity and pride among employees, building a strong, cohesive culture. This deep internal orientation, as shown in the example of La Fageda, can create lasting bonds, but risks an excessive company-centered outlook unless balanced with openness to the outside world.

Equally important is a leader’s ability to interpret and respond to the shifting expectations of society and external stakeholders. By integrating their organisations into broader social systems and engaging with groups such as unions, as demonstrated by ISS, and regulators, leaders ensure that their companies remain both legitimate and impactful beyond internal boundaries. The best leaders understand that external collaboration amplifies their organisation’s collective influence and credibility.

However, our research—based on these six cases presented in this article and over 100 companies studied across 15 years—shows an important sequence: authentic purpose-driven leadership starts from the inside-out and is reinforced by the outside-in engagement, not the other way around. True purpose isn’t imposed by outside pressures or regulatory demands. It’s first forged in a leader’s personal convictions, often rooted in the values and company history, then refined by responding to the world around them. When this sequence is followed, inside-out and outside-in perspectives reinforce each other, creating a meaningful and sustainable sense of purpose.

The six-drivers framework illustrates how purpose may spring from within, then may grow to shape the world outside, uniting personal conviction and societal impact. When leaders inspire their organisations with genuine purpose, they not only foster social change but also infuse daily work with meaning. Lasting purpose is not an external mandate; it is a journey that begins in the head, heart, and hands of leaders and radiates outward, transforming both business and society.

Cynthia Carroll’s early leadership at Anglo American shows how inside-out and outside-in purpose can be mutually reinforcing. She began with a deeply held personal conviction that every miner deserves to return home safely, which directly confronted one of the mining sector’s most entrenched societal challenges. Rejecting the industry’s fatalism about deaths, she reframed safety as a moral non-negotiable, then worked to translate this conviction into organisational purpose by building a guiding coalition of internal influencers who shared her intolerance for preventable harm and by inspiring broader stakeholders with a bold narrative of “zero harm.”

Yet she quickly discovered how difficult it was to embed this purpose into behaviours, systems, and mindsets across a vast, hierarchical, and historically divided organisation. With little external pressure for reform, Carroll deliberately activated outside-in forces by engaging the South African government, the National Union of Mineworkers, and local communities to form the Tripartite Alliance, an unprecedented partnership aimed at raising safety standards across the entire industry. She opened the company to public scrutiny, co-hosted a national safety summit, and initiated global benchmarking of best practices. The results were substantial: fatalities fell from 44 in 2006 to 17 in 2011, a 62 per cent reduction. Over time, she built mechanisms for measuring impact and securing external validation, revealing a central truth: authentic purpose can spark transformation, but operationalising it demands sustained coalition-building, systemic redesign, and the intentional mobilisation of societal actors.

About the Authors

John Almandoz, Professor of Managing People in Organizations at IESE Business School and Juan Antonio Perez López Chair, brings industry and nonprofit experience and Harvard training in organisational behaviour. He publishes on corporate purpose and societal institutions in top journals, and teaches leadership across MBA and executive programs.

Carlos Rey is founder of DPMC Foundation and Director of the Chair in Management by Missions and Corporate Governance at Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC Barcelona). He is the co-author of Management by Missions, published in six languages, Purpose-Driven Organizations: management ideas for a better world, and other books and articles in leading academic journals.

References

1. Almandoz, J. (2023). “Inside-out and outside-in perspectives on corporate purpose”. Strategy science, 8(2), 139-48.

2. Rey, C., Bastons, M., & Sotok, P. (2019). Purpose-driven organizations: Management ideas for a better world. Springer Nature.

Sources to read more about these companies

1. Joly, H. (2021). The Heart of Business: Leadership Principles for the Next Era of Capitalism. Harvard Business Review Press.

2. George, W. W., Palepu, K. G., Knoop, C.-I., & Preble, M. (2013, May 23). Unilever’s Paul Polman: Developing Global Leaders (HBS Case 413-097). Harvard Business School.

3. Almandoz, J., Lee, Y.-T., & Vila, N. (2010). “A Legacy of Purpose and Achievement at ISS Spain” (IESE Case DPO-0910-E). IESE Business School.

4. Segarra, M., Ochoa, I., & Segarra, J. A. (2008). “La Fageda: An Outrageous Initiative” (IESE Case IES227-PDF-ENG). IESE Business School.

5. O’Reilly, C., Pfeffer, J., Hoyt, D., & Drabkin, D. (2014). “DaVita: A Community First, A Company Second” (Stanford GSB Case OB89). Stanford Graduate School of Business.

6. Carroll, C. (2012, June). “The CEO of Anglo American on Getting Serious About Safety”. Harvard Business Review, 90(6), pp. 43–6.

The post Leading with Purpose: Uniting Inner Conviction and Societal Demands appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Richard Hatfield

The article argues that 800V battery architecture—not breakthrough cell chemistry—is the decisive lever for scalable, profitable EVs. By reducing current, heat, and material costs, 800V systems improve capital efficiency, fleet uptime, and residual value while future-proofing vehicles for ultra-fast charging infrastructure. Architecture, not chemistry, drives commercial success in modern markets.

As the global automotive industry moves toward mass-market electrification, a dangerous misconception persists among decision-makers: that the path to faster charging lies solely in the hands of materials scientists.

While billions are funneled into “wonder” cell chemistries like solid-state and silicon anodes, many OEMs are ignoring a systemic bottleneck already sitting on their assembly lines. Our experience at Lightning Motors—pioneering the first production 800V motorcycle—has demonstrated that battery architecture, not chemistry, is the primary determinant of commercial success in the high-performance EV market.

1. Capital Efficiency: Copper vs.Voltage

In a 400V system, the only way to increase charging speed is to increase amperage (current). This creates a domino effect of rising costs:

• Heavier Bill of Materials (BOM): High current requires thicker, more expensive copper wiring and connectors.
• Thermal Overhead: Increased current generates heat exponentially (I^2R), requiring larger, more complex, and more expensive liquid-cooling systems.

By pivoting to an 800V architecture, we achieve a “Power-to-Weight” breakthrough. We can deliver the same power with half the current, allowing for thinner wiring and downsized cooling hardware. For the OEM, this isn’t just an engineering win; it is a weight and cost-reduction strategy that directly improves margins.

2. Operational ROI: The “Downtime” Tax

For commercial fleets and high-utilization vehicles, time is literally money. A vehicle that is thermally limited during charging is an underutilized asset.

• Thermal Throttling: In 400V packs, the Battery Management System (BMS) is frequently forced to “derate” charging speeds to protect the hardware from current-induced heat.
• Throughput: An 800V system maintains peak charging rates for longer durations. This reduces the “dwell time” at chargers, increasing daily vehicle uptime and operational throughput.

3. Future-Proofing and Residual Value

The EV market is currently split into “Generation 1” (400V) and “Generation 2” (800V+). As 350kW+ ultra-fast charging infrastructure becomes the global standard, 400V vehicles are at risk of rapid depreciation.

From a strategic perspective, investing in high-voltage architecture is a hedge against obsolescence. Vehicles built on 800V platforms will retain higher resale value because they remain compatible with the next decade’s high-speed charging networks.

The Strategic Takeaway

Ultimately, charging speed is influenced by a complex ecosystem of factors; however, battery pack architecture is the foundational element that dictates whether a vehicle can safely and consistently translate its potential into real-world performance and profit.

For the modern automotive executive, the choice is clear: you can wait for a breakthrough in chemistry that may be years away, or you can optimize your architecture today to unlock the power you already have.

About the Author

Richard Hatfield is CEO & CTO of Lightning Motors Corporation, leading innovation in high-performance electric vehicle technology. With deep expertise in EV architecture and engineering, he guided Lightning to develop the world’s first production 800V motorcycle. Hatfield blends technical leadership with strategic vision to drive scalable, efficient electrification across industries.

The post The 800V Pivot: Why Architecture is the Foundational Lever for EV Scalability appeared first on The European Business Review.

A Legacy of Responsible Hospitality

Established in 1995, Mövenpick Resort El Quseir has long stood as a tranquil escape known for its Nubian architecture, stunning marine biodiversity, and understated elegance. Yet beneath its charming exterior lies a deeply rooted environmental ethos. For over a decade, the resort has implemented and continually expanded a suite of sustainability initiatives, positioning itself as a leader in the region’s green hospitality movement.

A cornerstone of this success is the resort’s Green Globe Platinum certification, which it has proudly maintained for ten consecutive years. This internationally recognized certification underscores Mövenpick El Quseir’s long-term commitment to responsible environmental management and sustainable operations.

Environmental Stewardship in Action

Mövenpick Resort El Quseir integrates sustainability into every facet of its operations. Central to its mission is reducing environmental impact while preserving the delicate ecosystem of the Red Sea.

One of the most notable efforts is the elimination of single-use plastics across the property. Through the adoption of BRITA water filtration systems and refillable glass bottles , the resort has dramatically reduced plastic waste. Moreover, its on-site organic farm not only supplies fresh produce to the resort’s kitchens but also decreases dependency on external supply chains, cutting emissions and supporting food security.

The resort also employs a GREENGOOD composting unit that transforms food waste into nutrient-rich compost, which is used to nurture both the farm and surrounding olive trees. This circular system demonstrates a thoughtful and efficient use of resources.

Energy and water conservation are high priorities. Mövenpick El Quseir has implemented a Building Management System (BMS), installed LED lighting, and utilizes energy-efficient appliances. Their goal is ambitious but clear: to reduce their carbon footprint by 50% by 2030. In parallel, water-saving fixtures and sustainable landscaping practices minimize water usage, and detailed metrics track liters consumed per room, per night.

Marine Conservation and Community Engagement

What truly distinguishes Mövenpick Resort El Quseir is its commitment to protecting the marine ecosystem and engaging with the local community. Our house reef is a paradise for divers and snorkelers, renowned for its breathtaking marine life and pristine coral formations.Partnering with EXTRA DIVERS and guided by an in-house Marine Biologist, the resort has undertaken reef conservation projects, coral planting, and regular underwater clean-ups to safeguard the Red Sea’s vibrant coral reefs.

On land, the resort is equally committed to community integration. Initiatives such as “A Kilo of Kindness”, which encourages guests to donate goods for local charities, and educational school field trips foster a culture of giving and awareness. The resort also supports local orphanages and public schools and collaborates with organizations like the Egypt Clothing Bank, donating linens and clothing to those in need.

Metrics That Matter

Mövenpick Resort El Quseir has mastered measuring sustainability. Their performance is tracked through detailed Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) across food waste, energy consumption, and water usage. These include:

• Carbon emissions in tons of CO₂
• Kilowatt hours per room per night
• Liters of water per room per night
• Percentage of recycled water
• Kilograms of composted waste.

These metrics not only demonstrate transparency and accountability but also help drive continuous improvement.

Looking to the Future

Sustainability at Mövenpick El Quseir is a long-term vision. Their roadmap to 2030 includes expanding renewable energy use, further reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and deepening community partnerships. By embedding sustainability into their business model, the resort ensures that environmental care is inseparable from guest experience and operational success.

Conclusion

Mövenpick Resort El Quseir is a unique coastal getaway, as well as a model of how hospitality can operate harmoniously with nature and society. Through strategic environmental practices, community engagement, and measurable outcomes, it has carved out a distinctive space in Egypt’s tourism industry. Winning the International Sustainability Awards 2025 is a well-deserved recognition of the resort’s enduring commitment to creating a greener, more inclusive, and more resilient future for hospitality.

Visit https://movenpick.accor.com/en/africa/egypt/el-quseir/resort-el-quseir.html to book your next experience today.

The post Preserving Paradise: Mövenpick Resort El Quseir Leads Egypt’s Green Tourism Movement appeared first on The European Business Review.

As world leaders convened in Belém, Brazil for COP30, António Guterres warned that the 1.5°C target of the Paris Agreement has now slipped out of reach, highlighting the failure of multilateral climate efforts. With few heads of state attending and the conspicuous absence of US President Donald Trump underscoring the extent of political paralysis, government-led climate action appears more ineffective than ever. This lack of political leadership was starkly reflected in COP30’s closing sessions, with France among the countries that decried the “incomprehensible omission” of the widely-demanded fossil fuel phaseout plan from the Brazilian presidency’s draft text.

Against this backdrop, the private sector is emerging as the main engine of environmental progress and the planet’s greatest source of hope. In many sectors traditionally associated with high carbon emissions – including mining, aviation and steel – forward-thinking companies are investing heavily in sustainable innovation to cut emissions and generate positive impact. Moving forward, the EU’s emerging approach to climate action will need to move beyond declaratory diplomacy and harness these actor’s scale, speed and ingenuity.

ArcelorMittal’s ambitious drive for green steel

Responsible for roughly 8% of global carbon emissions, the steel industry is one of the world’s toughest climate problems, with traditional blast-furnace production dependent on hard-to-decarbonise, coal-based processes and demand for steel only rising. By cutting out fossil fuels, green steel solutions, including hydrogen-based direct reduction and electric-arc furnaces powered by renewable electricity, offer a pathway to deep emissions cuts – yet scaling these technologies requires staggering investment and companies willing to take risks.

Luxembourg-based ArcelorMittal is one of the few steel players capable of doing just that. Through its XCarb programme, the company is placing multi-billion-euro bets on low-carbon technologies across several countries, from hydrogen-based pilots to large expansions of recycled-steel production. Across Europe, ArcelorMittal has recently enrolled plants in Belgium, France, Luxembourg and Spain into the Low Emission Steel Standard scheme it helped found last year. Meanwhile, ArcelorMittal’s $36 million XCarb investment in Boston Metal’s molten-oxide electrolysis technology is helping to create a future where steelmaking runs on renewable electricity rather than fossil fuels.

ArcelorMittal’s willingness to test and deploy new models at scale helps shift the entire market, with its massive size giving it unusual power to create demand for greener steel. Alongside this industrial heavyweight, disrupters like Stegra are playing a complementary and strategically-vital role. With its green steel plant in northern Sweden under construction – built entirely around renewable electricity, hydrogen-based reduction and modern electric-arc steelmaking – Stegra is pushing the frontier, demonstrating what a next-generation plant could achieve when designed specifically for climate action.

CMOC delivering sustainability building blocks

Much like steel, the mining industry is an essential industry for the global economy and supply chains that nevertheless carries a heavy climate legacy. In addition to contributing between 4%-  7% percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, the industry has long been linked to deforestation and biodiversity issues. Given the soaring demand for critical minerals, the mining industry must fundamentally re-image how raw materials are sourced, powered and processed.

Chinese mining giant CMOC Group is among the companies leading the much-needed progress. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), CMOC has invested in the 200MW Heshima Hydropower project to supply clean electricity to its copper-cobalt operations in Lualaba Province as well as its surrounding communities, with construction advancing well. By shifting toward hydropower, CMOC is helping to address mining’s pivotal energy challenge of massively producing the green transition’s key inputs while simultaneously reducing emissions.

Meanwhile, CMOC is equally embracing the electrification of site-scale mining equipment. To help advance its group-wide electrification strategy, the company has deployed a range of electric excavators, trucks and loaders at its Chinese operations to cut fossil fuel consumption and associated emissions, with its 132 EVs now accounting for over 93% of its haulage fleet.

Furthermore, in Brazil, CMOC has invested in retro-fitting machinery to boost energy efficiency via innovative heat-recovery systems, with the group’s local subsidiary generating 47GWh of electricity through residual heat recovered from its acid-plant operations. This kind of pragmatic innovation matters, demonstrating how mining can curb emissions from a more environmentally-responsible use of existing assets, with CMOC’s range of sustainability initiatives helping it maintain its ‘AA’ MSCI ESG rating in 2025.

Airbus innovating to clean the skies

Like mining and steel, aviation faces a structural climate challenge. Although the sector accounts for ‘only’ 2-3% of global CO₂ emissions, air travel demand is growing faster than other transport modes, which – paired with declining emissions in ‘easier-to-abate’ industries –  means aviation’s emissions share will surge without ambitious interventions. If aviation is to maintain its crucial economic benefits and social ‘license to operate,’ it must decouple rising traffic from rising carbon emissions.

For Airbus, aviation’s decarbonisation journey begins with the aircraft themselves. The European firm’s latest A320 and A220 families achieve roughly 20% lower fuel burn and CO₂ emissions compared with previous generation aircraft, thanks to aerodynamic refinements, lighter composite structures, and high-efficiency engines. Meanwhile, Airbus continues to invest in hydrogen aircraft concepts under its ZEROe programme, signalling that the company sees radical propulsion system innovation as an indispensable part of aviation’s decarbonised future.

On the fuel front, Airbus has committed that all its aircraft will be certified to fly with up to 100% sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) by 2030 – a major step given today’s supply constraints. To accelerate SAF production, the company has built partnerships across the ecosystem, from  joint SAF investments with Cathay Pacific to SAF trial schemes with major airlines. What’s more, Airbus is leading efforts to develop ‘Book-and-Claim’ systems, helping to stimulate global demand for fuels capable of curbing up to 80% of the sector’s CO₂ emissions.

For the stubborn remaining emissions, Airbus has partnered with direct air carbon capture firm 1PointFive and major airlines to establish a robust carbon removal credits system. Complementing this approach, Airbus’s satellite climate monitoring projects, like the Sentinel-6B satellite launched in November, deliver the high-precision atmospheric data needed to effectively target climate action.

The bottom line

COP30’s failure to deliver meaningful political momentum makes it abundantly clear that the planet can no longer wait for government leadership. While diplomatic gridlock deepens, businesses in high-emission sectors are proving that progress is possible through innovation, investment and measurable impact. With the private sector now setting the pace, governments must, at the very least, clear the way for those prepared to drive real climate action.

Disclaimer: This article contains sponsored marketing content. It is intended for promotional purposes and should not be considered as an endorsement or recommendation by our website. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research and exercise their own judgment before making any decisions based on the information provided in this article. 

The post EU Pivot Following COP30 Gridlock Underscores Vital Role of Private Sector Innovators appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Paolo Rigamonti

Europe’s farmers are adopting climate-smart agriculture to address soil degradation, extreme weather and declining yields. Drawing on examples across Europe and Mars partnerships with more than 300 farmers, the article highlights regenerative practices, financial and measurement challenges, and the role of collaboration between farmers, businesses and policymakers in scaling practical, resilient solutions.

Healthy soil is the foundation of resilient farming, secure food systems and ultimately, the health of our pets and our planet. It is not an abstract environmental concept. It is something farmers across our supply chain work with every day, season after season, and often under growing pressure.^[1]

Across Europe, that pressure is increasing. More frequent droughts, heavier rainfall and declining biodiversity are no longer future risks; they are today’s reality. Extreme weather is already costing European agriculture billions each year, with many farmers forced to absorb losses themselves. All of this is happening while margins remain tight, and support does not always reflect what is happening on the ground.^[2]

For business, this matters. As when farming systems become less reliant, supply chains become less predictable. Creating risk not only for farmers, but also for the businesses who rely on them.

Farmers and the private sector are already responding

And yet, what gives me confidence is the action I see farmers taking, working alongside technical partners and businesses like ours

From northern Poland to southern Hungary, the farmers we work with are not waiting for perfect conditions. They are taking practical steps to rebuild soil health, store more carbon and strengthen resilience on the land they know best. Climate-smart agriculture is not a theory for them; it is a set of tools they are already using to protect their businesses and their livelihoods.

At Mars, we have made a deliberate choice to work side by side with farmers as part of this transition. Today, we partner with more than 300 farmers across over 60,000 hectares in Europe within our pet nutrition supply chain. Together, we are supporting regenerative practices such as cover cropping, diversified rotations and reduced tillage which helps strengthen resilience where it matters most, on the farms.

The results on the ground are clear

Healthier soils absorb more water, reduce flood risk and help crops cope better during dry periods. In real terms, this means stronger soil structure, more stable yields and, critically, a return to profitability even in challenging seasons. ^[3] For farmers that confidence supports continued investment and for business, it underpins a more reliable and resilient supply chain over time.

One example is Antony, a farmer in our supply chain in south-east England, working heavy clay soils that are prone to waterlogging. Since introducing regenerative practices, he has seen clear improvements in water infiltration and soil structure. This has extended the window in which he can work his land after rainfall, reduced labour pressure and improved resilience during dry spells. As Antony puts it: “Crops look better, and profitability is returning even in challenging years.”

We see the same pattern in eastern Europe. In northern Poland, where another of our farmer partners, Izabela, has improved water retention on her land, helping her crops withstand prolonged dry periods while also absorbing intense rainfall. During a summer marked by unexpected floods, her fields remained productive when others struggled. For farmers like Izabela, progress depends on being rewarded for outcomes and given the flexibility to adapt practices to local conditions.

Risk remains the biggest barrier

Despite these successes, we should be clear about what is holding wider adoption back. The biggest barrier remains risk.

Transitioning to climate-smart agriculture often requires upfront investment in equipment, training and new ways of working. These costs are rarely insured and are largely borne by farmers themselves. While the benefits build over time, the financial exposure is immediate. Expecting farmers to shoulder that risk alone is neither realistic nor fair.

This is where public-private partnerships can make a real difference. By combining financial support with practical, locally relevant technical guidance, we can reduce risk and accelerate adoption where it matters most: on farm.

Measurement is another area where farmers need better support. They need confidence that improvements in soil carbon, biodiversity and water quality are being assessed in ways that are credible, consistent and practical. Clear, harmonised approaches help ensure progress is recognised and rewarded, while building trust across the value chain.

Collaboration is what allows climate-smart agriculture to scale in practice

Our partnerships with organisations such as Agreena, Biospheres, ADM and Soil Capital show what becomes possible when incentives, measurement and technical support are aligned around farmers’ needs. These collaborations help farmers adopt regenerative practices, track progress in a credible way and access financial mechanisms that support change over time.

But progress across Europe is uneven. In too many places, farmers face fragmented policies, inconsistent incentives and a lack of trusted local support. That uncertainty slows decisions and holds back farmers who are otherwise ready to move.

If we want climate-smart agriculture to scale, policy needs to make action easier, not harder. That means clearer rules, longer-term funding and advisory services that farmers can rely on, wherever they are based. Climate-smart agriculture will be critical to Europe’s net-zero ambitions, but it will not scale if the risk sits with farmers alone.

The opportunity now is straightforward: build on what is already working, remove the barriers that slow adoption, and scale proven approaches so more farmers, and the supply chains that depend on them, can succeed.

About the Author

Paolo Rigamonti is the Regional President at Mars Pet Nutrition. He previously led Mars Pet Nutrition UK from 2022 and expanded his responsibility to cover the UK, Ireland and Nordics cluster in 2024. In his leadership roles, Rigamonti has been noted for championing initiatives like the “Better Cities for Pets” programme. In his current position, he works closely with customers and partners across Europe to meet the needs of pets and pet parents.

References

^[1] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Better land, soil and water management key to feeding 10 billion people, FAO warns. FAO newsroom, 1 Dec 2025. Highlights the importance of sustainable land, soil and water management to feed a growing population

^[2] Reuters on extreme weather costs for EU farmers: Abnett, Kate. “Extreme weather costs EU farmers 28 billion euros a year, EU says.” Reuters, 20 May 2025. Reports that extreme weather is already costing European agriculture roughly €28 billion annually, with most losses uninsured.

^[3] Soil amendment and water absorption benefits: Organic amendments such as compost and other soil additives can improve soil structure* increasing water-holding capacity and moisture retention — helping soils absorb water more effectively.

The post Backing Europe’s Farmers is Key to Scaling Climate-Smart Agriculture appeared first on The European Business Review.

Sustainability is no longer a side project for forward-thinking companies. It is a core driver of resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. When built on solid foundations, sustainability shapes the sustainability of an organization and enhances its reputation. Yet lofty goals mean little without the right frameworks in place. Companies need clear structures to turn environmental, social, and economic ambitions into everyday decisions.

In this article, you will discover how an effective sustainability structure can:

• Define roles and responsibilities from executive sponsors to cross-functional teams
• Embed lifecycle thinking into procurement, product design, and other core functions
• Balance centralized oversight with local innovation and networked collaboration
• Measure progress using formal governance mechanisms and real-time data
• Evolve over time through phased maturity pathways and emerging technologies

Whether you are launching a new sustainability office or seeking to deepen impact across your value chain, this guide offers practical insights and models you can adapt to your organization’s size and stage.

Let’s begin by defining what we mean by organizational structures for sustainability and why they matter.

Organizational Structures for Sustainability: An Overview

Definition and Importance

Organizational structures for sustainability are frameworks that align governance, roles, and processes to advance environmental, social, and economic goals. These frameworks help embed sustainable practices across departments, ensuring decisions consider ripple effects in supply chains, operations, and reputation.

A sustainability structure also supports the sustainability of organizational performance by defining clear responsibilities from executive sponsors to cross-functional teams. With this foundation, companies can maintain focus and measure progress toward long-term success.

Modern organizations operate as ecosystems of departments, suppliers, regulators, and communities. Sustainability structures provide a holistic view that links material sourcing to environmental and economic outcomes. Embracing complexity and non-linear effects helps teams anticipate unintended consequences and drive resilient growth.

Historical Evolution

Sustainability structures emerged in the 1970s as standalone environmental units focused on compliance. In the 1990s and early 2000s, many firms shifted to integrated models that combined sustainability with core business functions. This change reflected growing recognition that sustainable practices drive innovation and resilience.

By the early 2010s, circular economy principles and digital tools had entered governance models. Companies were closing resource loops and using technology to track impact across value chains.

Current Trends

Today’s leading organizations favor decentralized and networked models. Self-organizing teams and cross-industry collaboratives harness complexity to scale solutions. This shift acknowledges that small changes in policies or materials can yield large impacts on performance and stakeholder value.

Sustainability Organizational Models: Centralized, Integrated, and Embedded

Centralized Model

The centralized model positions a dedicated sustainability office to lead strategy, reporting, and resource allocation. It simplifies decision-making with a clear chain of command and standardized policies. This approach suits organizations launching sustainability initiatives or focused on regulatory compliance. However, it can create silos if functions remain isolated from daily operations.

When to Use

• Early-stage sustainability programs
• Compliance-driven initiatives

Integrated Model

An integrated model embeds sustainability specialists in departments such as operations, procurement, and product development to foster cross-functional collaboration. Teams share accountability, aligning environmental and social targets with business goals. This structure enhances lifecycle thinking and accelerates decision-making by bridging functional gaps. Integrated models work well for firms scaling impact across complex value chains.

When to Use

• Complex value chains
• Lifecycle integration projects

Embedded Model

In an embedded model, sustainability becomes part of every employee’s role through built-in practices, metrics, and incentives. Governance is fluid, relying on decentralized teams, peer networks, and shared leadership. This structure drives a culture of continuous improvement and innovation at scale. It is best for mature organizations with strong leadership buy-in and cultural alignment.

When to Use

• Culturally mature organizations
• Innovation-driven objectives

Key Structural Dimensions in Sustainability Governance

Effective sustainability governance relies on four core dimensions: centralization, formalization, complexity, and hierarchy. These elements create a foundation of clear responsibilities, consistent processes, and efficient decision-making. By aligning these dimensions with sustainability objectives, organizations drive meaningful change at scale.

Centralization

Centralization refers to how decision-making and coordination are concentrated within a dedicated sustainability office or executive team. A central hub helps:

• Develop and transfer new sustainability knowledge
• Ensure consistent policies across business units
• Drive unified accountability for emissions and resource targets

This model can accelerate action in early-stage programs or compliance-driven initiatives. However, it may limit local innovation if teams feel disconnected from a central authority.

Formalization

Formalization covers the use of standardized policies, procedures, and compliance frameworks. In a field as complex as sustainability, formalization:

• Structures cross-functional workflows
• Clarifies reporting lines and documentation requirements
• Embeds sustainability into performance metrics

As of 2022, over half of organizations list sustainability among their top priorities, reflecting a shift toward formal governance to manage interdependencies and stakeholder demands.

Complexity & Hierarchy

Sustainability involves diverse stakeholders and competing interests, increasing organizational complexity. To manage this:

Managing Complexity

• Tailor structures to company size, sector, and maturity
• Use cross-functional teams to address interrelated challenges

Defining Hierarchy

• Establish clear authority and reporting lines
• Assign tasks and competencies in an orderly framework

A well-defined hierarchy supports the swift escalation of issues and integrates sustainability into strategic planning. Balancing complexity with a clear hierarchy ensures robust governance and sustained progress.

Roles and Governance Mechanisms in Sustainability Structures

Chief Sustainability Officer

A Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) leads corporate ESG strategy and signals senior-level commitment. Reporting directly to the CEO or another C-suite executive embeds sustainability in overall decision-making. The CSO coordinates cross-functional teams, manages key performance indicators, and represents the company in external forums.

Sustainability Councils and Committees

Board-level oversight often takes the form of a dedicated responsibility committee or integration across existing board committees. Executive sustainability councils bring together leaders from risk, supply chain, HR, and communications to guide strategy. Working groups, such as Nike’s Sustainable Business and Innovation team or IBM’s Corporate Responsibility Working Group, drive daily initiatives and track progress on priority topics.

Executive Sponsorship & Accountability

Executive sponsors champion sustainability targets in business units and link metrics to annual goals and performance reviews. Embedding ESG objectives in compensation plans creates clear accountability. Governance flexibility allows regional and functional teams to adapt programs to local needs while maintaining alignment with corporate strategy.

Maturity Pathways: Evolving Your Sustainability Structure

As organizations gain experience, they adapt their structure to match maturity. A clear pathway helps align goals, resources, and culture.

Assessment Criteria

• Goals alignment: departmental and executive targets
• Resource allocation: dedicated budget and staff
• Integration level: from separate offices to cross-functional teams
• Performance metrics: KPIs on emissions, waste, and social impact

Phased Evolution

Phase 1: Centralized

The organization sets up a sustainability office. Strategy, reporting, and resources flow from a single team. The focus lies on compliance and early wins.

Phase 2: Integrated

Specialists join core functions. Sustainability objectives tie to operations, procurement, and product design. Cross-team collaboration speeds decisions.

Phase 3: Embedded

Every role includes sustainability in daily tasks. Metrics and incentives reinforce behavior. Decentralized networks share best practices. Culture drives continuous improvement. Mature organizations may also make strategic financial decisions, such as choosing to invest in precious metals to hedge against market volatility while underpinning long-term sustainability goals.

Smooth transitions hinge on clear criteria and regular reviews. This structured pathway helps firms build capacity and scale impact over time.

Innovative Extensions for Future-Ready Sustainability Structures

Emerging technologies bolster sustainability structures by introducing adaptability and transparency that scale with evolving goals.

AI & Data Analytics

AI-driven models and real-time data analytics enable predictive resource optimization. Digital twins mirror operations to forecast energy use, pinpoint inefficiencies, and support scenario planning. This extension helps leaders prioritize interventions before issues escalate.

Blockchain Transparency

Distributed ledger systems secure supply chain data with immutable records. Smart contract frameworks automate carbon credit exchanges and certify green credentials, reducing fraud and building stakeholder trust. Transparent tracking streamlines audit processes.

Cross-Industry Collaboratives

Multi-stakeholder alliances break down silos between sectors. Shared platforms accelerate R&D, pool resources, and foster interoperable standards. Collaboratives scale innovative solutions by uniting companies, regulators, and NGOs around common goals.

In sectors like landscaping and grounds maintenance, specialized landscape management software provides the same visibility and control over resource use, helping teams optimize water, labor, and material flows.

Gamification Platforms

Behavioral design elements motivate teams through challenges, leaderboards, and reward systems. Gamified dashboards track sustainability KPIs in real time, encourage friendly competition, and reinforce long-term habits.

Implementing Your Sustainability Structure: Framework and Best Practices

Implementing your sustainability structure demands a clear framework for analysis, culture, and improvement.

Gap Analysis & Roadmapping

Start by benchmarking practices against goals. Identify gaps in governance and resource use. Create a roadmap with milestones, timelines, and budgets. Assign accountability to a Head of Sustainability or cross-functional team and integrate tasks into existing units.

Change Management & Culture

Secure executive sponsorship with a structured change model. Link ESG objectives to annual targets, performance reviews, and incentives. Train teams through workshops and embed sustainability in decision-making. Allow local units to tailor initiatives to regional needs.

Measurement & Improvement

Define KPIs: emissions, waste, and social impact, and apply a Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle. Use real-time dashboards for core teams and executive committees. Hold quarterly reviews to track progress, update roadmaps, and scale pilots. Engage external advisory councils for accountability and insight. Just as organizations rely on real-time dashboards to track ESG performance, individuals increasingly use tools from companies like TransUnion to access free credit checks, demonstrating how accessible, transparent data supports better long-term financial and sustainability decisions.

Conclusion

Building and maintaining an effective sustainability structure is essential for long-term success. By defining clear roles, aligning governance with your goals, and evolving your model as you grow, you can turn lofty sustainability ambitions into everyday decisions.

Key takeaways:

• Establish the right model for your stage, such as centralized, integrated, or embedded, to match your needs
• Clarify governance dimensions like centralization, formalization, and hierarchy for efficient decision making
• Assign dedicated roles, such as a Chief Sustainability Officer and cross-functional councils, to champion ESG targets
• Follow a phased maturity pathway to move from compliance-driven efforts to a culture of continuous improvement
• Leverage emerging tools like AI analytics, blockchain, and gamification to boost transparency, engagement, and impact
• Use gap analysis, change management, and real-time measurement to keep your roadmap on track and adapt as you learn

With these structures in place, sustainability stops being a side agenda and becomes the backbone of innovation, resilience, and growth. By putting in place a sustainability structure, you ensure the sustainability of the organization and position your team to thrive in tomorrow’s economy.

About the Author

Ellie Williams studied at Miami State University and majored in Marketing with a minor in creative writing. She enjoys doing freelance writing on general business, wellness, and lifestyle tips. During her free time she enjoys catching up with friends and family or attending local events. 

The post The Structures That Support Sustainable Success appeared first on The European Business Review.

The Relocation Paradox: Sustainability on Paper, Emissions in Practice

Corporate sustainability strategies often look impressive in board decks and annual reports. They highlight decarbonisation roadmaps, waste reduction goals, and public commitments that signal responsibility and control.

Then business relocation happens. Teams prioritise speed, continuity, and cost, and the move becomes a high-impact operational event with little ESG oversight. Teams make decisions fast, not sustainably.

That is where the paradox takes hold. Companies can reduce office energy use while increasing emissions through last-minute transport, urgent fit-out work, and the disposal of perfectly usable assets.

The disconnect is not theoretical. A relocation can undo months of reported progress in a matter of weeks. If businesses want ESG credibility, they need to treat moves as part of the sustainability system, not an exception to it.

What a Corporate Move Really Emits

Most organisations picture relocation emissions as a transport problem: a few removal vehicles, some packing materials, a short burst of activity. That framing misses the real footprint, because moving is rarely one clean journey from A to B.

The largest impact often comes from what gets thrown away. When teams discard usable desks, chairs, storage, or IT to “start fresh,” they trigger new purchasing. That replacement cycle carries heavy embodied carbon, and it quietly inflates the environmental cost of the move.

Logistics also multiply emissions in less visible ways. Poor consolidation leads to repeated trips. Late changes force urgent deliveries. Contractors travel back and forth across sites to fix issues that better planning could have prevented.

This is why relocation should sit inside ESG governance. Partnering with a commercial moving company that can track reuse, recycling, and disposal routes turns relocation from an unmanaged carbon spike into an auditable sustainability outcome.

The Carbon Spike Is Usually Self-Inflicted: Where Moves Go Wrong

Most relocation footprints do not come from bad intentions. They come from poor sequencing. Teams build the move around continuity, deadlines, and cost, then bolt sustainability on at the end.

That timing creates the damage. The biggest decisions happen first: teams choose what to keep, what to clear, how to route waste, and what data to record. If sustainability enters after that point, it can only audit the outcome.

Pressure also erodes discipline. Teams skip inventories, ignore reuse plans, and appoint suppliers without circular requirements. They clear floors quickly, mix waste streams, and lose traceability in the process.

The result is predictable. Companies drive up emissions through inefficient logistics and replacement purchasing, then weaken their ESG story because they cannot produce reliable evidence to support diversion and circularity claims.

The First 48 Hours Decide Your ESG Outcome

Relocations do not drift into high emissions by accident. Teams create the footprint in the first days, when they make fast choices that later become hard to reverse.

The first fork is asset value. Teams either treat furniture and IT as reusable resources or label them as waste. That single decision drives disposal volume, replacement purchasing, and embodied carbon.

The second fork is logistics design. Teams can consolidate journeys, sequence sites, and reduce repeat handling, or they can run multiple parallel workstreams that trigger extra trips, urgent deliveries, and avoidable rework.

The final fork is evidence. Teams either capture chain-of-custody data as they clear spaces, or they lose it. Without traceable records, sustainability teams cannot defend circularity outcomes, and the relocation becomes a carbon spike that the report struggles to explain.

Why Sustainability Reports Can’t Hide Relocation Impact Anymore

Relocations create a visibility problem for ESG narratives. A report can describe progress in emissions intensity, but a poorly managed move produces a sudden footprint that clashes with the storyline.

The issue is not only carbon. Relocations generate physical evidence: skips, pallets, redundant furniture, and decommissioned IT. People inside the company see it, and stakeholders outside can spot the contradiction when sustainability claims lack operational proof.

Sustainability reporting also faces a credibility test. When organisations cannot show where assets went, how much they diverted from landfill, or what they reused, they replace verified outcomes with estimates. That weakens assurance readiness and increases accusations of selective disclosure.

In a stricter ESG environment, transparency works both ways. Companies cannot rely on polished narratives when relocation decisions create measurable waste and emissions. They need traceable data that matches the sustainability story.

CSRD/ESRS Pressure Turns Relocation Into a Governance Problem

The European Union has raised the bar for corporate sustainability reporting through the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). It pushes companies to publish detailed, decision-useful sustainability information rather than broad claims that rely on trust.

CSRD reporting runs through the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), which structure what companies must disclose and how they should support those disclosures with evidence. That shift matters because it moves ESG from storytelling into governance.

Corporate relocations stress-test this new reality. A move changes transport emissions, triggers replacement purchasing, and determines whether an organisation treats assets as waste or manages them through reuse and circular pathways.

This is where compliance becomes operational. Companies need clear controls, supplier requirements, and auditable records that show where assets go and what outcomes the relocation delivered. If they cannot prove those outcomes, sustainability reports lose credibility under scrutiny.

Wrapping Up 

Relocation should not sit outside the sustainability strategy. It can create one of the largest short-term carbon spikes an organisation generates, and it often does so at the exact moment companies claim tighter control over their footprint.

In a stricter reporting era, credibility depends on alignment. If companies want stakeholders to trust their targets, they need to govern relocations with the same discipline they apply to energy, procurement, and waste. Measure the move, design for circular outcomes, and build an evidence trail that the sustainability report can defend.

The post The ESG Relocation Paradox: Why Your Sustainability Report Can’t Hide Your Moving Carbon Footprint appeared first on The European Business Review.

Flaws in Current Energy Systems

The world is still worryingly reliant on electricity generated from fossil fuels. Power stations burn coal, gas, or oil to supply homes and workplaces. This supply model clashes with how net-zero buildings operate. When you design a building around renewable input, you still connect it to a grid that prioritizes carbon-intensive generation. You cannot resolve that mismatch through building design alone. Exported electricity enters a system that does not distinguish between low-carbon and high-carbon supplies. This is why many developers aiming for net zero are taking on PPA advisory services in an attempt to secure fully renewable energy for their developments at a secure long-term price.

Traditional buildings rely on infrastructure built for one direction of flow. Centralized generators send power outward to end users. Net-zero buildings reverse that logic by producing surplus energy through the likes of solar panels, etc. When buildings export electricity, grids often lack the capacity or controls to manage it effectively. This can lead to connection limits, delayed approvals, or curtailed exports. These constraints appear even at a modest scale.

Changes in Household Energy Use

The current model works on the assumption that electricity consumption matches demand. Generation responds to usage patterns across the day. Net-zero buildings, however, disrupt that model. For example, renewable home generation tools like solar panels peak at specific times. You then need to adjust consumption to match availability. This requires changes in how you use energy rather than how much you use.

Battery storage offers a partial solution. You can store surplus energy for later use. Current storage systems impose limits through cost, efficiency, and lifespan. You cannot rely on them to solve timing mismatches at scale. Until storage improves, net-zero buildings will likely continue to face gaps between when energy becomes available and when it’s needed.

Gaps in Policy Support

Developers currently operate within policy frameworks that lag behind technical capability. Incentives exist in some regions, but mandatory standards remain limited. This slows adoption and reduces pressure on energy systems to adapt.

There is also uncertainty around grid access rules and export pricing. Without clear regulation, it can be a struggle to justify investment in infrastructure that supports distributed generation.

This lack of policy direction leaves individual projects to navigate constraints on their own.

What Net-Zero Buildings Expose

Net-zero buildings do not create new problems. They expose existing ones. You see where grids fail to support two-way flow. You see where generation mixes conflict with building-level design. You see where regulation blocks adaptation.

These observations matter because they point to system-level weaknesses rather than isolated technical issues.

Responding to the Limits

We cannot rely on incremental change. We need coordinated action across generation, infrastructure, storage, and regulation. Energy supply needs to align with low-carbon demand. Grids need to effectively manage decentralised input. Storage needs to support flexible use, and policy should clarify all uncertainties that currently destabilise the net-zero building sector.

Ultimately, building level solutions alone will not deliver system-wide change.

Conclusion

When you assess net-zero buildings in practice, you gain a clearer picture of the limits within current energy systems. These buildings show what you can achieve locally. They also show where infrastructure and policy fall short.

As adoption increases, pressure on existing systems will rise. You can treat that pressure as a warning or as a guide. If you respond with deliberate system-level change, net-zero buildings can help shape the next phase of energy transition rather than highlight its delays.

The post What Net-Zero Buildings Reveal About the Limits of Current Energy Systems appeared first on The European Business Review.

As expectations rise across global markets, the quality of sustainability reporting is increasingly used as a proxy for governance strength and strategic maturity.

Why Sustainability Reports Matter More Than Ever

Regulatory pressure is one obvious driver, but it is not the only one. Capital markets are paying closer attention to environmental, social, and governance performance. Supply chain partners want transparency. Customers expect accountability. Internally, executives want reliable data to guide decisions.

A strong sustainability report helps an organization:

• Communicate how ESG risks are identified and managed
• Show progress against stated goals, not just intentions
• Align sustainability initiatives with financial outcomes
• Build credibility with stakeholders across regions

Poorly structured reports, by contrast, raise questions about data quality and leadership oversight.

What Separates Strong Reports From Weak Ones

Not all sustainability reports are created equal. Some are long on ambition but short on substance. Others overwhelm readers with raw data but offer little interpretation.

The best sustainability reports tend to share several defining characteristics.

Clear Strategic Context

Leading companies explain why sustainability matters to their business model. They connect ESG topics to operational realities, market risks, and long-term growth plans. This context helps readers understand which issues are truly material.

Consistent and Comparable Metrics

High-quality reports use standardized metrics and apply them consistently year over year. This allows stakeholders to track progress and compare performance across time, rather than guessing whether improvements are real or simply the result of changed methodology.

Balanced Storytelling

Credible reports acknowledge challenges as well as successes. They discuss areas where targets were missed and explain what is being done to improve. This balance builds trust far more effectively than overly polished narratives.

Integration With Financial Performance

The strongest reports link sustainability outcomes to business results. Energy efficiency, workforce engagement, and supply chain resilience are discussed in terms of cost, risk reduction, or value creation, not as isolated initiatives.

How Leading Companies Approach Sustainability Reporting

Large multinational organizations have increasingly moved toward integrated reporting models. Rather than treating sustainability as a separate function, they embed ESG data into enterprise systems and governance processes.

This approach enables:

• More reliable data collection across regions
• Stronger internal controls and audit readiness
• Faster response to regulatory changes
• Clearer accountability at the executive level

It also supports scenario analysis, which is becoming a key expectation for climate and transition risk disclosures.

The Role of Technology in Modern Reporting

As sustainability requirements grow more complex, manual reporting processes are becoming unsustainable. Spreadsheets and disconnected systems struggle to keep up with expanding data needs.

Technology platforms are now used to centralize ESG data, apply consistent calculations, and generate reporting outputs aligned with multiple frameworks. Some organizations reference resources that analyze the best sustainability reports to benchmark their own disclosures and identify gaps. Insights published by platforms such as KEY ESG, which examine ESG reporting examples from leading companies, are often used as reference points rather than promotional tools.

The goal is not to automate reporting for its own sake, but to improve data quality and decision support.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Even experienced organizations make mistakes when developing sustainability reports. Common issues include:

• Reporting too many metrics without clear prioritization
• Changing methodologies without explanation
• Failing to link ESG data to strategy or risk management
• Treating the report as a marketing document rather than an accountability tool

Avoiding these pitfalls requires cross-functional collaboration and clear ownership of ESG data governance.

What Readers Look for in the Best Sustainability Reports

Different stakeholders read sustainability reports for different reasons, but several themes consistently stand out.

Investors want to understand risk exposure and long-term resilience. Regulators look for accuracy and alignment with reporting standards. Employees want to see whether stated values are reflected in action. Customers increasingly use reports to assess brand credibility.

The reports that resonate most strongly are those that address these audiences without trying to please all of them at once.

Sustainability Reporting as a Strategic Asset

The most effective sustainability reports are not written at the end of the year as a summary exercise. They are the output of systems and processes that operate year-round.

When sustainability data is reliable and accessible, organizations can:

• Monitor progress continuously
• Adjust strategy based on evidence
• Respond confidently to external scrutiny
• Strengthen internal alignment

In this sense, reporting becomes a strategic asset rather than a burden.

Final Thoughts

Sustainability reporting is no longer optional, and it is no longer superficial. The best sustainability reports reflect disciplined thinking, strong governance, and a willingness to be transparent about both progress and challenges.

As expectations continue to rise, organizations that invest in high-quality reporting practices will be better positioned to earn trust, manage risk, and compete in a market where sustainability performance is increasingly tied to long-term success.

For business leaders, the message is clear. Sustainability reports are not just about what a company has done. They are about how a company thinks about the future.

The post What the Best Sustainability Reports Reveal About Corporate Strategy Today appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Cassie Davison 

In this article, award-winning hospitality industry veteran, Cassie Davison, explores what founders and business owners can learn from hospitality about building sustainable businesses. Longevity comes from leadership clarity, protected standards, strong identity and belonging, not constant optimisation. By prioritising human experience, storytelling and consistent behaviour, organisations create trust, resilience and loyalty across industries over time and at scale.

Across industries, sustainability has become a dominant ambition. It appears in strategy documents, investment criteria and leadership discourse, often framed in terms of growth models, technology and resilience. Yet many businesses that achieve longevity do so not because they perfect their systems, but because they design organisations that people want to stay connected to.

Hospitality offers a compelling perspective on this challenge. It is a sector defined by human interaction, emotional labour and constant pressure. Margins are thin, expectations are high, and performance is judged daily by those experiencing the business in real time. Survival depends not on theory, but on behaviour.

When hospitality businesses succeed over the long term, they reveal something fundamental about sustainability: it is built through clarity, care and consistency. These lessons extend far beyond the sector itself and speak directly to founders and business owners navigating complexity in any field.

Sustainability begins with leadership energy

One of the most overlooked elements of sustainability is leadership endurance. Many businesses fail not because their market disappears, but because their leaders are depleted.

Hospitality exposes this reality early. Leaders who attempt to control everything burn out quickly. Those who last understand that their role is not to be everywhere, but to be clear. They protect their energy by protecting the principles that matter most.

This requires a shift in mindset. Sustainable leadership is not about heroic effort or constant optimisation. It is about creating conditions where good decisions are repeatable, even when the leader is not present.

At the centre of this is standards.

Standards create trust at scale

In hospitality, standards are not abstract. They are experienced immediately. Guests feel them in the atmosphere, the service and the details. Teams feel them in what is accepted and what is quietly corrected.

Crucially, effective standards are not about perfection. They are about pride. Pride in the experience being offered and in the way people are treated. When standards are clear and upheld consistently, they reduce friction. Teams know what is expected. Customers know what they can rely on.

For founders and CEOs, this has wide application. Without protected standards, organisations drift. Decision-making becomes reactive. Culture becomes inconsistent. Leaders compensate by intervening more frequently, accelerating exhaustion.

Standards, when held with care, create freedom. They allow trust to form and enable the organisation to function without constant oversight.

Clarity of identity is a strategic advantage

Hospitality businesses learn quickly that attempting to serve everyone leads to serving no one well. The venues that endure are those with a clear sense of identity. They know who they are for, and equally, who they are not for.

This clarity allows leaders to make better decisions. It becomes easier to evaluate opportunities, to hire aligned people, and to resist pressure to dilute the experience in pursuit of short-term gains.

In broader business contexts, this principle is often underestimated. Many organisations struggle not because they lack ambition, but because they lack definition. When identity is unclear, strategy becomes scattered and teams lose confidence.

Purpose-driven organisations operate differently. Purpose is not a mission statement; it is a filter. It guides decisions about customers, partnerships and priorities. It allows leaders to say no without apology, and to build businesses that attract the right stakeholders naturally.

Belonging as an organisational outcome

Hospitality, at its best, creates places where people feel they belong. This is not sentimentality; it is design.

Regular customers return because they feel recognised. Teams commit because they feel part of something that values them. These outcomes are created through consistent behaviour, shared values and emotional awareness.

Across industries, leaders are grappling with declining loyalty, disengagement and rising turnover. Incentives and policies have limited impact when people do not feel understood.

Belonging is not about comfort; it is about connection. When people understand what a business stands for and feel respected within it, they invest emotionally. This investment translates into trust, advocacy and resilience.

Sustainable organisations intentionally design for this. They consider how people experience the business at every level, not just what is delivered, but how it feels to be part of it.

Storytelling as organisational coherence

Every organisation tells a story. The question is whether that story is intentional or fragmented.

In hospitality, storytelling is rarely verbalised, but always felt. It shows up in how issues are handled, how feedback is received, and how consistency is maintained over time. These actions communicate far more than formal messaging.

For leaders, storytelling is a critical capability. It provides coherence in complex systems. It helps teams understand not just what is changing, but why. It creates continuity during periods of uncertainty.

Importantly, storytelling is not confined to marketing. It is embedded in leadership behaviour. When leaders act in alignment with stated values, they reinforce the story. When they do not, credibility erodes.

Sustainable businesses recognise that culture is not declared; it is demonstrated.

Why hospitality offers such a useful lens

Hospitality exists to bring people together. Its success depends on human connection, not just operational efficiency. When it works well, it becomes a place where people feel at ease, understood and willing to return.

Many sectors have distanced themselves from this human focus in pursuit of scale. Yet the challenges now facing organisations — disengagement, mistrust and burnout — suggest that efficiency alone is insufficient.

Hospitality reminds us that sustainability is relational. Businesses that endure are those that respect the human experience, both internally and externally.

In an increasingly automated and competitive world, loyalty is not earned through novelty or volume, but through consistency, care and clarity.

Sustainable businesses are not built by doing more. They are built by doing what matters, repeatedly and with intention. Hospitality, quietly and convincingly, continues to demonstrate how this can be achieved.

About the Author

Cassie Davison is an award-winning hospitality industry veteran, author of Stand Out Hospitality and business coach. With over thirty years in the industry, Cassie has built, grown, and led award-winning pubs, cafés, fine-dining restaurants, and even festivals from the ground up.

The post What Founders and Business Owners Can Learn From the Hospitality Sector to Create a Sustainable Business appeared first on The European Business Review.

Breaking Through Boardroom Resistance

The challenge facing sustainability advocates in the early 1990s was formidable. Board members and C-suite executives operated in a world of quarterly earnings calls, analyst expectations, and shareholder demands for immediate returns. Environmental initiatives were viewed as costs that would hurt competitiveness and reduce profitability.

The breakthrough came when authors began speaking directly to these concerns. Rather than asking executives to sacrifice profits for environmental protection, pioneering works demonstrated how sustainability could enhance shareholder value through operational efficiency, risk reduction, and strategic positioning for future market conditions.

What made these arguments particularly compelling was their reliance on peer validation. When dozens of global CEOs contributed to groundbreaking environmental business literature, they weren’t just endorsing abstract principles—they were sharing real financial results from their companies’ sustainability initiatives.

Stephan Schmidheiny and “Changing Course” – The CEO Manifesto

The 1992 publication prepared for the Rio Earth Summit represented an unprecedented moment of corporate environmental leadership. Stephan Schmidheiny, a Swiss industrialist, mobilized 50 chief executives from companies like 3M, DuPont, and Dow Chemical to document how they had achieved simultaneous improvements in environmental performance and financial results.

The book’s genius was its focus on eco-efficiency—a concept that resonated immediately with executives trained to optimize resource utilization. The framework showed how reducing waste, improving energy efficiency, and developing cleaner processes could cut costs while meeting environmental objectives. This wasn’t corporate social responsibility; it was superior operations management.

The case studies demonstrated quantifiable results that boards could understand. Companies reported substantial savings from pollution prevention programs while simultaneously reducing their environmental footprint. Schmidheiny’s work provided the evidence that convinced skeptical boards these weren’t theoretical benefits—they were actual financial returns that appeared in corporate performance metrics.

What made “Changing Course” particularly influential was its business-first approach. Schmidheiny and his collaborators spoke to corporate leaders in their own language—profit margins, competitive advantage, and operational efficiency—rather than moral imperatives. This pragmatic focus made environmental stewardship accessible to executives who might have dismissed more idealistic arguments.

Paul Hawken’s “The Ecology of Commerce” – Redefining Business Purpose

Paul Hawken’s 1993 masterpiece took a different approach, challenging the fundamental assumptions of industrial capitalism. Rather than focusing primarily on efficiency, Hawken argued that business could become restorative—actually improving the environmental and social systems it depended upon.

His work resonated particularly with entrepreneurial CEOs who were building companies from scratch or fundamentally transforming existing ones. Hawken showed how companies that invested in natural capital and developed closed-loop systems could achieve superior long-term performance while creating positive environmental impact.

The book’s emphasis on business model innovation rather than incremental improvement inspired executives to think bigger about what was possible. It wasn’t just about doing less harm—it was about creating net positive impact while building profitable enterprises. This vision attracted leaders who saw environmental challenges not as constraints but as opportunities for innovation.

Hawken’s argument that environmental and social factors were predictive of long-term business success provided a framework that would later become foundational to ESG investing. Early adopters who embraced his principles often found themselves ahead of regulatory requirements and consumer demands, translating into competitive advantages.

Ray Anderson’s Transformation at Interface

Perhaps no executive better exemplified the boardroom revolution than Ray Anderson, CEO of Interface Inc. After reading Hawken’s work, Anderson experienced what he described as an epiphany about his company’s environmental impact. He committed Interface to “Mission Zero”—eliminating its environmental footprint entirely.

The skepticism Anderson initially faced from his board and investors was substantial. A carpet manufacturer pledging to use renewable energy, achieve zero waste, and develop completely recyclable products seemed financially risky. Yet Anderson persisted, and the results validated his vision: Interface achieved significant cost savings through efficiency improvements while becoming one of the most admired companies in its industry.

Anderson became a vocal advocate for sustainable business, speaking to hundreds of other CEOs about how environmental leadership had enhanced rather than constrained Interface’s performance. His transformation inspired countless other executives to reconsider their assumptions about environmental stewardship and business success.

“Natural Capitalism” – The Systems Approach

The 1999 collaboration between Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins provided CEOs with a comprehensive framework for reimagining business models around sustainability. The book’s four principles—radical resource productivity, biomimicry, service and flow models, and investing in natural capital—offered concrete strategies that boards could evaluate and approve.

What made “Natural Capitalism” particularly influential in boardrooms was its emphasis on competitive advantage. The authors showed how companies adopting these principles could achieve cost structures, customer relationships, and innovation capabilities that competitors would find difficult to replicate. This transformed sustainability from a defensive move into an offensive strategy.

The Lovins brought particular credibility through their work at Rocky Mountain Institute, where they had demonstrated substantial energy efficiency improvements across numerous industries. Their technical expertise combined with Hawken’s business philosophy created a compelling case for fundamental transformation.

The book proved especially influential in showing how environmental constraints could spark innovation. Companies that viewed resource limitations as challenges often developed breakthrough technologies and business models that created competitive advantages in emerging markets.

From Pioneer to Mainstream

The transformation of CEO attitudes toward sustainability accelerated through the late 1990s and early 2000s. What began with leaders mobilizing their peers evolved into a broader movement as more executives recognized the business case for environmental leadership.

Business networks like the World Business Council for Sustainable Development provided forums for CEOs to share experiences and learn from peers who had successfully integrated sustainability into their strategies. These peer-to-peer exchanges proved more influential than any amount of external advocacy could achieve.

The competitive dynamics shifted as well. As leading companies reported financial benefits from sustainability initiatives, boards at competing firms began questioning why their companies weren’t capturing similar opportunities. What had started as voluntary leadership by a few pioneers became a competitive necessity across entire industries.

The Measurement Revolution

One crucial factor enabling boardroom buy-in was the development of metrics that could quantify sustainability performance in business terms. The literature emerging from Rio provided frameworks for measuring resource productivity, waste reduction, and efficiency improvements in ways that CFOs and boards could evaluate alongside traditional financial metrics.

This measurement capability addressed a fundamental challenge: boards can’t manage what they can’t measure. By providing concrete metrics for environmental performance, these frameworks enabled executives to set targets, track progress, and hold management accountable for results—the same approach boards used for financial objectives.

The Legacy in Today’s Boardrooms

The boardroom revolution initiated by these pioneering works has become the new normal. Today’s CEOs routinely commit their companies to science-based climate targets, circular economy initiatives, and stakeholder capitalism principles that would have seemed radical in the early 1990s.

Major corporations now tie executive compensation to sustainability metrics, embed climate risk in their enterprise risk management frameworks, and view environmental leadership as essential to their long-term competitiveness. This transformation directly traces its origins to the literature that convinced an earlier generation of CEOs that sustainability could drive shareholder value.

The authors succeeded because they understood their audience. Rather than demanding that business leaders choose between profits and planet, they proved these objectives were complementary. By speaking the language of competitive advantage and shareholder value, they made environmental stewardship a boardroom priority rather than a compliance department concern.

The post The Boardroom Revolution: How Three Books Convinced CEOs to Go Green appeared first on The European Business Review.

Together, these initiatives reflect a broader trend: science increasingly serves as a bridge across borders at a time when diplomatic relations are strained and the world urgently needs inclusive, evidence-based collaboration.

Several international initiatives supported by Rosatom, including Impact Team 2050, the Obninsk Tech Leadership Academy, and the Global HackAtom student championship, bring together early-career scientists to collaborate on shared challenges such as clean energy, climate adaptation, and equitable technological development.

While the programmes differ in format and geography, they share a common premise: that young professionals can drive cooperation more effectively when they learn from one another directly, outside of political frameworks.

In Obninsk, home to the world’s first nuclear power plant, the Obninsk Tech Leadership Academy has become a hub for international training and dialogue. The programme welcomes young specialists from various regions to learn project management, communication, and technical skills relevant to modern energy systems.

One of its flagship initiatives, the [in]Visible Power Female Leadership Camp, focuses on empowering young women in STEM. The camp combines mentoring, workshops and technical visits, emphasising leadership grounded not only in expertise but also in ethics, cultural awareness, and social responsibility.

“Leadership in science is as much about empathy and awareness as it is about expertise,” said the programme curator Darya Kalenbet. “The camp enables participants to define their own paths and recognise how cross-cultural collaboration can strengthen the global scientific community.”

The Academy’s participants stay connected through collaborative projects, forming an emerging global network of young professionals committed to sustainable development.

Ahead of the UN Climate Conference COP30 in Brazil, Impact Team 2050 launched a series of youth-focused events across Latin America designed to spark dialogue on the role of nuclear technologies in sustainability.

These activities included hackathons, local youth conferences and thematic forums in Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil. Participants explored solutions to regional challenges such as water scarcity, environmental protection and energy access, engaging researchers, students, community leaders and environmental activists.

Discussions ranged from small modular reactors and nuclear medicine to food security and climate mitigation demonstrating how young people in the region view technology as integral to long-term climate strategies.

In addition to these initiatives, the anniversary year for the Russian nuclear industry saw the first-ever Global HackAtom, a 24-hour international student championship focused on applying nuclear and related technologies to real-world problems.

Launched in a global format in 2025, the programme included national rounds in ten countries, among them Bolivia, Brazil, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Namibia and Russia, with more than 650 students taking part.

The final stage, held in Moscow during World Atomic Week, challenged participants to propose future-oriented concepts in space exploration powered by nuclear technologies. Projects included ideas for interplanetary travel, modular space reactors and technological infrastructure for deep-space missions.

The 2025 championship was won by TUPI Tech, a Brazilian team that developed a conceptual modular reactor for space applications, a project widely praised for its creative integration of engineering and scientific vision.

Across all these initiatives, a common thread emerges: science as a shared language. Instead of exporting ready-made solutions, the programmes encourage mutual learning and exchange of perspectives among young engineers, environmental activists, scientists and community leaders.

The focus on youth engagement – with many participants being women in STEM – supports broader goals of inclusion, diversity and equitable capacity building in global science and technology.

As global challenges become more complex, cooperation in areas such as clean energy and technological innovation becomes essential. These youth-driven programmes demonstrate how scientific collaboration can create spaces for constructive dialogue even in times of geopolitical tension.

By bridging cultures, disciplines and regions, initiatives like Impact Team 2050, the Obninsk Tech Leadership Academy and Global HackAtom highlight the role of young scientists as informal diplomats advancing not only technological solutions, but also understanding, empathy and shared purpose.

The post How Youth-Led Nuclear Initiatives are Shaping a New Era of Science Diplomacy appeared first on The European Business Review.

UK businesses now see commercial solar installation as a cost-effective answer to increasing energy bills and sustainability targets. Government incentives and more efficient technology make solar panels a smart investment that can cut long-term energy costs. But how does the ROI of solar panels for commercial buildings work, and what do businesses gain? This blog post will look at the financial perks of investing in solar energy how businesses can get ROI, and why now is the best time to switch.

1. How Commercial Solar Installation Delivers ROI

The main money-making perk of commercial solar installation is the profit businesses can make. The cost to buy and set up solar panels might look big at first, but the money saved and gains over time make up for the initial expense.

Return on investment from solar energy comes from cutting energy costs. Companies with solar panels make their own power so they don’t need to buy as much from the grid. The more power a business uses the more it can save by switching to solar. As time goes on, businesses see lower power bills, and these savings grow a lot as energy prices go up.

UK businesses can expect their solar installation to pay for itself in 4 to 7 years on average. Once this happens, companies get free energy for the rest of the system’s life, which lasts 25 years or longer. This leads to decades of cheap electricity so the ROI keeps growing long after the break-even point.

2. Government Incentives and Financial Support

The ROI of commercial solar panels has become so appealing because of the government incentives and financial support available to businesses that adopt renewable energy. The UK government has set up several programs to encourage companies to install solar panels. These programs make the initial investment more affordable and boost the overall ROI.

A big draw is the Smart Export Guarantee (SEG), which started in 2020. It lets companies sell extra electricity their solar panels make back to the national grid. This means companies can cut their energy bills and make money from extra energy they don’t use.

Besides the SEG, companies can get other money help, like grants and tax breaks when they want to put up solar panels for commercial buildings. For instance, some energy-saving tech might have zero VAT making it cheaper to switch to solar power.

If you’re ready to start with solar installation and check out local options, you can Find Trusted Solar Panel Installers Near You  to see the best deals in your area.

3. Cutting Operating Costs and Reliance on Energy Providers

Solar panels on commercial buildings also help businesses lower their dependence on outside energy suppliers. UK energy prices have climbed for years leaving companies more exposed to sudden price jumps. By putting in solar panels, businesses can make their own power, which cuts down on how much they need from the national grid.

This energy independence gives you more control over your operating costs. If you run a business that uses a lot of energy, like a factory, store, or hotel, you can save a lot of money. Using less power from the grid also shields you from unpredictable energy markets so your business won’t be hit as hard if energy prices go up in the future.

When you use sunlight for power, you can keep your energy costs steady. This helps a lot with planning and budgeting. These long-term savings play a big part in figuring out if it’s worth the investment.

4. Increased Property Value

For commercial property owners, putting solar panels on commercial buildings can boost the property’s value. Buildings that save energy are in high demand, and companies with solar setups appeal more to potential buyers and renters.

Solar panels don’t just cut ongoing energy costs; they’re also a selling point for buyers aiming to lower their operating expenses. Many would-be tenants or buyers will pay extra for a property that already has solar panels, since they’ll save on electricity bills.

As commercial properties shift towards energy-saving solutions, adding solar panels can give property owners an edge in the market, whether they want to sell or rent out. This bump in property value adds to the overall return on investment from installing solar.

5. Boosting Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Brand Image

Today’s businesses need to show they care about sustainability. When making choices, people, workers, and investors often look for eco-friendly practices. Adding commercial solar panels helps companies cut energy costs and shows they care about the environment.

Solar power is clean and renewable. It doesn’t create greenhouse gases or pollution. This makes it a good choice for businesses that want to reduce their carbon footprint. By using solar energy, companies can support green energy efforts. This can improve how people see their brand and attract customers who care about the environment.

Businesses aiming to meet CSR targets can install solar panels on their commercial buildings to reach sustainability goals and reap financial benefits. As sustainability grows in importance, companies that put money into renewable energy have a better chance of building customer loyalty and standing out from their competitors.

6. Tax Benefits and Incentives for Renewable Energy Investments

Besides government programs like the SEG, businesses that invest in solar panels can also get tax breaks. The UK government provides various allowances and tax incentives to push renewable energy adoption making it even more appealing to install solar panels.

For instance, companies can reap the benefits of the Annual Investment Allowance (AIA). This allows them to subtract the cost of solar panels and other renewable energy equipment from their taxable profits. As a result, it cuts down their business taxes right away and improves the return on investment for solar projects.

When companies make use of these perks, they can balance out the upfront costs of installation and boost their overall returns. Solar power isn’t just good for the planet – it’s also great for your wallet.

7. The Long-Term Financial Impact

The ROI of commercial solar panels increases as time passes. The upfront costs of setting up can be steep, but the money saved in the long run makes up for these expenses. Solar panels can give companies cheap power for many years offering a steady and known energy source that protects businesses from energy price hikes.

As companies keep cutting their power bills and making money from extra energy through plans like the SEG, they’ll see their investment pay off more and more. As solar tech gets better and cheaper, the chance to get a high ROI is getting bigger.

Conclusion

Putting commercial solar panels on your business in the UK can boost your profits. The government offers incentives, you’ll save money on energy for years, your property value will go up, and your company will look good. Solar energy pays off. Over time, your business can enjoy cheap power for decades. It’s a smart money move that helps the planet too.

No matter if you run a small shop or a big company, solar installation can help you save money long-term, cut energy costs, and prepare for the future. To find the best choices for you and get quotes from local installers, Find Trusted Solar Panel Installers Near You: Get Local Quotes in 24 Hours.

The post The ROI of Commercial Solar Installation: How Businesses in the UK Benefit appeared first on The European Business Review.

1. How the Power Distribution System Operates
2. Business Impact of Reliable Electrical Power Delivery
3. Key Components and Operational Considerations

Without a reliable power distribution setup, companies cannot maintain productivity, supply chains stall, and economic activity slows.

How the Power Distribution System Operates

A modern electric power distribution system consists of distribution lines, transformers, switches, and protective equipment engineered to deliver energy efficiently and safely. Transmission networks carry high voltage energy over long distances, but once the power is closer to consumers, distribution systems reduce the voltage through a distribution transformer, allowing power to be delivered safely. This ensures customers receive the right amounts of electrical transformer needed for everyday operations. Whether overhead or underground, the distribution system must remain resilient and scalable to support the growing demand for electric power.

Business Impact of Reliable Electrical Power Delivery

For industries and organizations, dependable electrical infrastructure is not just beneficial—it’s essential. Reliable distribution of electrical energy helps businesses operate machinery, power digital systems, maintain data centers, and support continuous manufacturing processes. A failure in this system can interrupt operations, cause financial losses, and negatively impact end users across the region. As energy demands rise, engineers focus on improving system integration, protection, and automation to ensure stable service delivery.

Key Components and Operational Considerations

In a typical utility network, distribution network elements include transformers, breakers, smart meters, and monitoring tools, all working together to maintain safe current levels. Modern development strategies involve enhancing network reliability, enabling better control, and reducing downtime. Companies rely on intelligent systems that ensure uninterrupted power, further advancing efficiency. Energy generation may happen far away, but the final stage of distribution brings power directly to the customers who depend on it for daily activities.

The post How Modern Electric Power Distribution Systems Support Reliable Energy Delivery for Businesses and Consumers appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Richard Dickenson

Energy policy in Germany changed almost overnight at the outset of the Ukraine War. For years, Berlin had banked on a stable flow of cheap Russian gas to keep its factories running and its homes warm. Then, suddenly, the pipelines went cold. What followed was, on one hand, a change in supply contracts, but more importantly marked the start of a wholesale rethinking of how Germany powers itself.  

Just days after the war began, then Chancellor Olaf Scholz stood before the Bundestag and announced that Germany would finally build its own liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals. It was something energy analysts had speculated about for years, but the economics never made sense. The war changed that. 

What followed was a transformation few would have predicted in Germany’s famously cautious energy bureaucracy. After Scholz’s Bundestag address, the country went from having no operational LNG import terminals to rolling out its first floating facilities in record time. The first, a floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU) at Wilhelmshaven, was commissioned just ten months later. Others followed at Brunsbüttel and along the coast, with an additional floating facility at Stade also underway. These FSRUs act as mobile gateways, docking offshore and feeding regasified fuel directly into Germany’s pipeline grid. 

Longer-term, Berlin plans to transition these emergency installations into permanent on-shore terminals — with the government seemingly backing the initiative. Lawmakers passed the LNG Acceleration Act, fast-tracking approvals that would normally take years.  

But not everyone is cheering. Environmental groups and researchers say the government is overbuilding. They warn of stranded assets, oversized capacity and increased dependence on fossil fuels. Yet the importance of ‘transition fuels’, or fuels that help power the energy transition, cannot be understated. While burning at least 30% cleaner than the coal they replace, LNG and other natural gas-based fuels provide energy independence and security that much of the world is seeking — not just Germany. In fact, Germany’s energy independence manoeuvre is being closely watching by other nations also experiencing an energy crunch and supply shifts. Meanwhile, the Bundestag insists that a “safety buffer” is necessary, not just for Germany, but to support neighbours like Austria, the Czech Republic and Ukraine, who are also scrambling to replace lost Russian gas supply. 

LNG has gone from fringe to frontline for most nations’ energy strategy. For decades, LNG was limited to only a small number of countries with adequate infrastructure and necessity for natural gas dominant energy mixes. Germany, well-connected by pipelines, didn’t see the point of building out expansive LNG facilities. 

The shift has already paid off — U.S. exporters were among the first to step in, quickly becoming the main suppliers to Germany’s new terminals. By 2024, over 90% of all LNG imports into Germany came from the United States. The transatlantic energy relationship is deepening both commercially and geopolitically. 

Flexibility is LNG’s biggest asset. It can be shipped from wherever there is supply without being tied to a single pipeline like its natural gas parent. That flexibility helped stabilise Germany’s energy system in the face of one of the biggest supply shocks in post-war history. It also allowed energy markets to think more long-term about the energy transition and the important of gas-based transition fuels in it. 

Some of the terminals are already being designed with this future in mind. The government says many of the new facilities could be adapted to handle green hydrogen or ammonia, aligning with the country’s decarbonisation goals. The specifics are still being worked out. 

Companies have had to pivot just as quickly. From traders and infrastructure developers to port operators and logistics providers, the LNG boom has created a new web of actors working to make this shift viable. 

BGN Group has heavily expanded its LNG operations in the Mediterranean and, given the renewed demand in Germany, will likely see even more business across the rest of Europe. The firm, well-known in the oil and gas sector, is also a large buyer of American LPG (a sister fuel to LNG) and has grown its business in East Asia where it sells crude, LNG and LPG. It is traditional oil and gas operators like BGN that contribute to the flow of gas into newly expanded LNG markets — with Germany’s supply crunch acting as a catalyst. 

While not everything has gone smoothly for Germany — a floating terminal off the island of Rügen sparked a fierce local backlash, for example — the country has established a successful LNG blueprint for other nations. 

Further, and despite the scale of investment, a good portion of the LNG arriving in Germany isn’t staying there. It is flowing to countries like Austria and the Czech Republic whose landlocked territory relies on port-heavy neighbors. Funnily enough, Germany has effectively become a regional energy hub. 

For now, the terminals are running at pace. They have brought some relief to gas markets and bought Germany time to keep building up renewables. The balance between energy security and climate ambition remains delicate. 

If all goes to plan, the next decade should prove that LNG was the right bridge and not a costly detour. The dependency on pipelines is over. Germany has stepped onto the global LNG stage and shown the world how LNG infrastructure can be properly implemented. There’s no reversing that lesson. 

About the Author

Richard Dickenson is an entrepreneur in the green energy space. He has led development projects in East Africa, China and across the Middle East. Richard is driven by his passion for innovation and technological progress. Richard studied in the United States and Canada and has been working in the field for over five years. 

The post Germany’s Energy Independence Lesson and its LNG Blueprint appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Javier Cabello Llano, Professor Ambika Zutshi and Sahan J. Fernando

The jewelry industry is facing rising pressure to ditch wasteful, exploitative practices and embrace sustainability. Here, the authors present their a vision of how the 10R framework could be applied to give the sector a much-needed revamp incorporating the principles of the circular economy.

The jewelry industry

The global jewelry industry, valued at 300 billion dollars and with an estimated growth rate of 4 percent annually until 2030, is heavily dependent on non-renewable resources. The rising demand for jewelry has raised concerns over the environmental and social impacts of the industry beyond the on-material sourcing, to incorporate carbon emissions and labor exploitation. Increasing pressures to adopt sustainable practices (Lin & Sai, 2023) and the principles of sustainable fashion emphasize the importance of reducing the environmental and social impacts of the jewelry industry by facilitating circularity in business models.

The adoption of circularity in the jewelry industry offers three benefits. First, it enhances economic value through securing raw material supply, reducing cost, innovation, and minimizing waste (Faccioli et al., 2023). Second, enhanced economic value enables organizations to shift capital and resources to areas of high productivity and greater yield, such as product availability, new product development, and business expansion. Third, circularity in the jewelry industry appeals to a sustainability-conscious customer base in the target market and enhances brand equity (Lin & Sai, 2023). Here, we present our recommendations for supply chain practitioners using the 10R framework to facilitate the circular economy in the jewelry industry.

The 10R framework for the jewelry industry

Figure 1 illustrates operationalization across the various stages of the jewelry supply chain to facilitate circularity by optimizing material usage and extending product life cycles. The jewelry life cycle can be broadly classified into three categories of circularity.

Figure 1: The 10R framework in the jewelry industry 

Category 1: Smarter product use and manufacture

This first category includes thought-provoking steps for practitioners to advance the circular economy in the jewelry industry by refusing (R0 Refuse) unsustainable materials and rethinking (R1 Rethink) design and production to minimize waste and resource use (R2 Reduce). By adopting alternative, eco-friendly materials and more ethical practices, manufacturers can reduce reliance on non-renewables and lower environmental impact.

Category 2: Extend the lifespan of the product and its parts

This second category is about extending product lifespans using multiple options, including reusing (R3 Reusing), repairing (R4 Repair), and refurbishing (R5 Refurbish) of jewelry pieces. Nonetheless, staying competitive requires a constant supply of new designs and poses a challenge for circular opportunities when trying to remanufacture (R6) and repurpose (R7) existing jewelry items into new designs.

Category 3: Useful application of materials

This category includes the critical step in closing the loop by establishing recycling systems (R8 Recycle) and recovering (R9 Recover) materials from unsold or discarded jewelry, supporting both sustainability and emerging consumer preferences. This is achievable, as demonstrated by some start-ups (e.g., Oushaba, Lylie, The Royal Mint’s 886, So-Le Studio) who have been focusing on creating jewelry from discarded materials.

There are several opportunities for practitioners to move the conversation from circulatory challenges in the jewelry industry to having practical strategies to achieve the same. Table 1 overviews these strategies by showcasing the example of a bracelet. It outlines actionable interventions across the Level 1 processes for APICS frameworks: Product Life Cycle (PLCOR), Design Chain (DCOR), Customer Chain (CCOR), and Supply Chain (SCOR). These strategies can assist managers and industry partners to design and manage products with circularity in mind, whilst simultaneously balancing their profit margins. From selecting sustainable raw materials and modular designs to enabling take-back programs and recycling pathways, these strategies encourage reflection on critical questions such as, “Have you considered alternate materials or adaptive product designs?” or, “How can your supply chain better support product recovery and reuse?” These recommendations aim to support more sustainable and resilient business models within the jewelry sector.

In summary, the first step in working towards circularity in the jewelry industry is identification, followed by integrated efforts from key stakeholders across the upstream and downstream supply chain. This piece provides reflection and action points for supply chain practitioners using the 10R framework, incorporating aspects of reverse logistics systems for product return, use of standardized and recyclable materials, and design simplification to facilitate disassembly and reuse. Further, embracing extended producer responsibility (EPR) and cross-sector partnerships can unlock broader circular solutions, particularly in the use of non-renewable resources. Nonetheless, establishing a circular economy in the jewelry industry is only a beginning. It must be continuously evaluated and improved in the design, sourcing, production and disposal stages to remain effective and resilient over time.

About the Authors

Javier Cabello Llano is a PhD student at the Technical University of Denmark. His research focuses on supply chain and operations management, with a big interest in how companies can remain responsive while pursuing sustainability. He is especially engaged with challenges in the fashion industry and other dynamic markets, aiming to bridge performance and responsibility.

Professor Ambika Zutshi is Dean of ACU’s Peter Faber Business School and author of over 100 publications focused on CSR, higher education, supply chain management, and stakeholder relationships. Editorial board member of the International Journal of Consumer Studies, and editorial advisory board member of Management of Environmental Quality.

Sahan J. Fernando is a PhD candidate at Deakin Business School, Australia. He holds qualifications as a Bachelor of Business Administration and a Master of Business Administration. His research interests include entrepreneurship, social issues in management, cross-sector partnerships, and institutional theory. He is also a Senior Lecturer at the University of Colombo, Sri Lanka.

References

1. Faccioli, G., Martin, K., & Sheehan, E. (2023). “Global Powers of Luxury Goods 2023”. In Deloitte. Retrieved December 4, 2023, from https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/Industries/consumer/analysis/gx-cb-global-powers-of-luxury-goods.html

2. Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. P. (2017). “Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions”. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005

3. Lin, Y., & Sai, N. (2023). “Ethics and sustainability in the jewellery industry”. Frontiers in Business, Economics and Management, 7(3), 187–93. https://doi.org/10.54097/fbem.v7i3.5533

The post 10R for Circularity in the Jewelry Industry appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Séverine Mastikian, Maros Mraz and Vikas Dubey

As Europe pursues climate change targets and digital sovereignty, its rail network risks falling behind. Legacy systems, slow moving pilots, and talent shortages are stalling progress. But there is hope. Future Railway Mobile Communications System pilots are showing promise in the drive to lead in the 5G-enabled transport era.

With the EU targeting climate neutrality by 2050, the rail industry stands at a pivotal point in its history. Ambitious EU goals to triple high-speed rail traffic and double freight volumes present a rare opportunity to reposition rail as the backbone of sustainable mobility. But realising that vision will take more than new infrastructure. It calls for reinventing how Europe’s railways communicate, operate, and innovate.

At the core of this transformation is the Future Railway Mobile Communication System (FRMCS), a 5G-based standard replacing the Global System for Mobile Communications—Railway (GSM-R) (figure 1). Developed by the International Union of Railways, it offers faster, more reliable communication to support the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) and advanced train control (European Train Control System, ETCS level 2+). Unlike standard 5G, FRMCS is designed for mission-critical railway operations, ensuring secure, interoperable communication, while standard 5G can support passenger services, asset monitoring, and station connectivity. FRMCS is the keystone for a digitally connected rail ecosystem, one designed to deliver safer, smarter, more seamless journeys while advancing the EU’s climate goals under its Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy.

Figure 1: How GSM-R and 5G-FRMCS stack up against today’s needs.

The stakes: Safety, sustainability, and market share

The case for 5G-FRMCS goes far beyond compliance or modernisation. It’s a strategic race for relevance. As aviation and automotive options become greener, rail must compete not only on sustainability, but also on performance, reliability, and passenger experience.  5G-FRMCS enables that leap. It unlocks capabilities that modernise many layers of rail operations, from real-time diagnostics and predictive maintenance to automated train control and seamless cross-border communication.

As aviation and automotive options become greener, rail must compete not only on sustainability, but also on performance, reliability, and passenger experience.

In fact, 91 per cent of the 800 rail industry executives surveyed cited improved passenger experience as a top expected benefit of 5G-FRMCS (see figure 2). They also highlighted expected benefits such as lower operating costs (87 per cent), increased reliability (82 per cent), better interoperability (80 per cent), and enhanced safety (76 per cent), while more than half (57 per cent) anticipate benefits in revenue growth. In other words, 5G-FRMCS offers value across the board, from traveler satisfaction to network efficiency.

Figure 2: Rail leaders expect 5G-FRMCS to deliver widespread gains, from passenger experience to safety.

Crucially, FRMCS is also a climate imperative. With GSM-R nearing obsolescence, its maintenance is becoming increasingly expensive and resource-intensive. Retiring legacy systems and transitioning to 5G-FRMCS is necessary to cut lifecycle emissions, increase energy efficiency, and help meet the EU’s target of a 90 per cent reduction in transport emissions by 2050.

Yet, despite the overwhelming consensus on its importance, the shift to FRMCS remains sluggish. New research from Accenture (based on a survey of 800 executives across Europe’s rail ecosystem and interviews with senior stakeholders) found that just 24 per cent of respondents feel ready to make the transition. Most projects remain in pilot or early planning stages.

The roadblocks: Complexity and inertia

If the benefits are clear, why the holdup? Multiple, overlapping challenges form a web of resistance. Technologically, FRMCS is still maturing, with limited off-the-shelf solutions. Financially, the return on investment remains hard to quantify; just 17 per cent of executives feel confident estimating implementation costs. Two in three executives cite a lack of international agreement on technical solutions as a major obstacle, while 40 per cent of rail operators admit they are waiting for others to make the first move.

One chief technology officer summed it up: “The practical dimension is still not fully understood. The deployment itself will be a huge challenge.”

Funding uncertainty also weighs on operators. While many have historically depended on EU support, the future is less assured. In fact, 40 per cent of the executives that Accenture surveyed believe that the government will fully fund 5G-FRMCS implementation, and 59 per cent admit they are delaying investments in anticipation of that funding.

The takeaway is clear. Organisationally, fragmented stakeholder interests across operators, infrastructure managers, equipment vendors, and regulators make coordinated action difficult. Yet, no one player can lead this urgently needed push for change at scale.

Proof points from early movers

To break the deadlock, the industry needs evidence and momentum. Fortunately, use cases from around the world are already showing what’s possible.

In China, for instance, Guangzhou Railway has deployed a 5G-powered shunting yard that increased capacity from 8,000 to 10,000 trains per day while reducing staffing needs by 30 per cent. They also introduced AI-assisted suspension inspections that now take two minutes instead of two hours.

FRMCS is designed to deliver safer, smarter, more seamless journeys while advancing the EU’s climate goals.

In Europe, Deutsche Bahn is integrating FRMCS infrastructure into the Hamburg-Berlin corridor renovation, with passive infrastructure made available to telecom providers such as Deutsche Telekom and Vodafone. Switzerland’s SBB has piloted installations along key routes. In the UK, the Connected Heartland Railways project is testing public-private models that extend network benefits to surrounding communities.

These examples show that 5G-FRMCS is no longer theoretical. It’s being deployed, delivering results and creating momentum , especially when paired with broader infrastructure upgrades.

A playbook for moving forward

So how can rail leaders turn intention into action? Accenture’s research identifies five strategic imperatives:

1. Build compelling use cases: Look to global exemplars, not just for mission-critical functions. Passenger-facing and operational innovations like high-speed Wi-Fi and real-time journey information strengthen the business case for funders and boards.
2. Take a strategic approach to migration: Develop rigorous test strategies that ensure reliability, security, and operational continuity. Partner with mobile network operators (MNOs) and technology providers to access skilled talent and accelerate technical readiness.
3. Rethink the operating model: Move from hardware-centric to software-centric architecture. Replace rigid procurement with agile frameworks like innovation partnerships and competitive dialogues. Ensure coordination across operations, IT, and infrastructure to unlock the full potential of data-driven rail operations.
4. Upskill for a 5G-enabled future: Only 28 per cent of operators are prioritising workforce transformation. Success will depend on the right training and making teams fluent in network slicing, cybersecurity, AI, and 5G systems integration.
5. Pursue creative funding models: Just 24 per cent of operators are actively exploring non-traditional funding approaches like green bonds and public-private partnerships, which can help close the investment gap (see figure 3).

Figure 3: Leading operators are adopting innovative funding models to close the investment gap.

Practice should shape policy

Regulation remains a significant variable in the FRMCS equation. The EU’s MORANE 2 project is expected to finalise technical specifications by 2026, but waiting for the paperwork to catch up could cost Europe its lead. As with other frontier technologies, practice must inform policy, not the other way around.

Finland’s Digi Rail initiative offers a useful model. By piloting FRMCS on mobile network-operated infrastructure, it is not only reducing capital intensity but also generating real-world data to shape regulatory frameworks. This early-mover approach is helping Finland test what works, and influence EU-wide guidance in the process.

This test-and-learn approach should be the norm. Industry stakeholders, including rail operators, infrastructure managers, and MNOs, should engage proactively with regulators, sharing pilot results and proposing practical, scalable rules. Europe doesn’t need lockstep conformity; it needs interoperability, safety, and momentum.

The broader stakes are impossible to ignore. FRMCS sits at the intersection of climate ambition, digital sovereignty, and industrial strategy. It offers Europe a rare opportunity to lead not just in transport, but in infrastructure innovation. But that window is closing.

As one executive puts it: “We know we have to move. The question is, do we wait for perfect conditions, or do we help create them?”

The playbook is here. What remains is action – confident, coordinated, and urgent.

About the Authors

Séverine Mastikian, EMEA Transport & Logistics Lead at Accenture.

Maros Mraz, Industry X, Transport & Logistics Lead for Austria, Switzerland and Germany at Accenture.

Vikas Dubey, Global Rail & Transit, Research Lead at Accenture.

The post How 5G-FRMCS Can Accelerate EU’s Rail Transformation appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Matias Pollmann-Larsen and Dominic King

As European companies grapple with severe disruption on multiple fronts, climate risks might seem a distant threat. However, our analysis suggests extreme heat, flooding and other climate hazards could drive business losses of $600 billion annually by 2035. Business leaders must act now to mitigate economic loss, adapt to boost revenues and collaborate to strengthen ecosystems.

Companies in Europe are grappling with severe disruption on multiple fronts: trade tensions and territorial wars, macro and political instability, persistently high energy and living costs. Against this backdrop, the focus for many business leaders is shifting to short-term survival, as opposed to longer-term sustainability. But could deprioritizing climate risk today undermine competitiveness tomorrow?

The threat of inaction is certainly rising. Europe’s summer heatwave saw the hottest June recorded in both Spain and England, as well as wildfires hitting over a million hectares of land. And last year, we witnessed devastating floods across the region, perhaps most notably in Valencia. Almost three-in-five businesses in Europe say extreme heat affected their operations over the last 12 months^[i]; total damages from natural disasters are estimated at €30 billion.^[ii]

As the region warms at twice the global average rate,^[iii] President Ursula von der Leyen noted recently that the “growing burden of climate change [is] impossible to ignore.”^[iv] Responding to the Omnibus package, the European Central Bank noted that climate risks have “profound implications for both price and financial stability.”^[v]

The question for business leaders then is not whether to build climate resilience—but how to gain a competitive edge in doing so.

Businesses facing a $1 trillion bill

Our recent report, Business on the Edge: Building Industry Resilience to Climate Hazards,^[vi] offers a sobering assessment of the mounting threats to business. Produced in collaboration with the World Economic Forum, it explores the risk to fixed business assets in 20 industries from extreme heat, wildfires, drought, water stress, tropical cyclones, coastal flooding and fluvial flooding. When factories lose water supply, or data centres overheat or offices and fields are flooded, business costs rise; for example, through rising insurance premiums, expensive repairs, unfulfilled orders or less productive workers.

We expect these climate-driven losses to reach $600 billion annually by 2035—equivalent to removing Sweden’s economy from global GDP every year. By 2055, losses are projected to exceed US$1 trillion per annum, broadly equivalent to Switzerland’s entire economic output. In Europe, extreme heat, followed by fluvial flooding and water stress, are projected to be the most damaging hazards. The recently released EU ‘Competitiveness Compass’ calls for “improving critical infrastructure resilience [as] a changing climate and extreme weather events increasingly threaten European economic security.”^[vii]

Telcos and utilities in the eye of the storm

Companies cannot afford to wait—especially those in capital-intensive industries. Our analysis finds the average European telecom company faces losses of up to US$573 million per annum due to the sensitivity of data centres and network infrastructure to extreme heat. Expected losses accruing to the average regional utilities (up to ~US$386 million) and energy (~$248 million) companies are also significant.

The scale of the impact should concern all business leaders. However, as they navigate rising costs driven by the energy transition, data center capacity constraints, trade tensions and other disruptions, just how severe is the risk? To answer this question, we compared fixed asset losses against company earnings. This showed that climate-driven costs equate to an average drop in earnings of 6.7–7.5% by 2035 for companies headquartered on the continent, accelerating to 9.4-11.6% by 2055. Once again, the hit in some industries will be much worse. The average telecommunications and utilities company faces losses equivalent to more than a fifth of earnings in 2035.

To put this into perspective, S&P 500 profit margins dropped 15.3% during the depths of the Covid-19 pandemic. However, that was a temporary shock, mitigated by vaccines and government stimulus. In contrast, climate-driven losses will compound every year.

A more resilient, more competitive Europe

Despite mounting risks, there is a tendency to view climate adaptation as a long-term concern, especially given Europe’s focus on economic competitiveness. However, the two are not mutually exclusive: every $1 invested in climate resilience returns an estimated $2 to $19.^[viii] A robust grid failure contingency plan, for instance, can prevent catastrophic business disruptions; pivoting R&D can unlock fresh revenue streams in new, fast-growing sustainable markets.

The Clean Industrial Deal (CID)—the EU’s joint roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonization—provides impetus. By supporting energy-intensive industries and clean-tech manufacturing, redesigning permitting, procurement and taxation rules and reducing external dependencies, CID encourages companies to lower emissions. More importantly, by providing investors with greater certainty on Europe’s climate ambitions, it encourages adaptation, reducing the perceived trade-off between growth and resilience while accelerating demand for green products and services.

Scaling climate resilience with technology

How companies across the region respond to the challenge of climate change will depend on the nature and location of their fixed assets. But any strategy should be underpinned by three pillars: mitigating economic loss, adapting to boost revenues and collaborating to strengthen ecosystems.

Losses can be avoided by mapping climate risk exposure, contingency planning and diversifying supply chains. Revenues can be bolstered by understanding changing consumption patterns in a warmer world and tapping into new circular business models. Ecosystems can be strengthened by developing regenerative practices, early warning systems and nature-based solutions.

Emerging technologies such as AI are critical enablers of each pillar of climate resilience. Retrieving asset-level data from extreme weather simulations can inform more robust scenario plans. Imagine working closely with a ‘climate agent’ that autonomously layers climate risk into capital maintenance and investment decisions. AI can also enhance product and service adaptation to evolving consumer needs in a changing climate.

For example, energy companies across Europe are using technology to boost grid resilience as extreme weather events intensify. They are employing AI to predict outages and optimize maintenance schedules, helping ensure a more reliable energy supply. Moreover, energy grid digital twins enable simulations of different operational scenarios to minimize downtime and enhance efficiency.

The stakes are high. As climate hazards intensify, physical infrastructure will deteriorate, supply chains will fracture and markets will shift—jeopardizing both lives and livelihoods. The pressure to prioritize short-term financial performance is strong in Europe today, but companies that fail to embed climate resilience into their strategy will erode their competitive position. Business leaders must act now to mitigate risks, seize new opportunities, and ensure long-term success in a more hostile climate.

About the Authors

Matias Pollmann-Larsen, Global Sustainable Value Chain Lead – Accenture

Dominic King, Research Lead, EMEA – Accenture

References

^[i] Morgan Stanley (2025). Companies See Sustainability as a Way to Create Value. https://www.morganstanley.com/insights/articles/corporate-sustainability-signals-report-2025

^[ii] MunichRe (2025). Climate change is showing its claws. https://www.munichre.com/en/company/media-relations/media-information-and-corporate-news/media-information/2025/natural-disaster-figures-2024.html

^[iii] European Commission (2023). European State of the Climate Report. https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/2023-european-state-climate-report-confirms-alarming-trend-climate-change-impacts-our-continent-2024-04-22_en

^[iv] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_25_285

^[v] ESG Today (2025). ECB Warns EU Against Removing 80% of Companies from Mandatory Sustainability Reporting. https://www.esgtoday.com/ecb-warns-eu-against-removing-80-of-companies-from-mandatory-sustainability-reporting/

^[vi] World Economic Forum (2024). Business on the edge. https://www.weforum.org/publications/business-on-the-edge-building-industry-resilience-to-climate-hazards/

^[vii] European Commission (2025). A Competitiveness Compass for the EU. https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/10017eb1-4722-4333-add2-e0ed18105a34_en

^[viii] World Economic Forum (2024). The Cost of Inaction. https://reports.weforum.o0.rg/docs/WEF_The_Cost_of_Inaction_2024.pdf

The post Can European Business Leaders Afford to Deprioritize Climate Risk? appeared first on The European Business Review.

1. Precision agriculture and data analytics

Precision ag starts with better field awareness. Sensors, drones, and GPS show where crops need help, so inputs go only where they matter. That means fewer passes, less waste, and steadier yields across the field. According to the USDA’s NIFA, these tools raise productivity while reducing water, fertilizer, and pesticide use for safer, more resilient systems.

Data science then turns raw measurements into decisions. According to the GAO, precision tech can cut costs and protect water by applying inputs precisely, while “adoption hurdles” include complexity and up‑front expense. AEM’s studies quantify gains: higher output, better fertilizer placement, and less chemical and fuel use. VITech and Farmonaut highlight how AI models and satellite imagery sharpen scouting, timing, and variable‑rate work.

2. Smart irrigation and weather‑aware water management

Water is often the tightest constraint. Smart irrigation uses soil‑moisture probes, weather data, and automated valves to deliver the right amount, at the right time. According to DTN, precision approaches reduce waste, protect resources, and improve farm quality of life, because fewer emergency pivots and fewer overwatered blocks mean calmer days.

The impact is measurable. AEM reports meaningful water savings from precision practices at scale. Practical deployments pair rugged computers with IoT sensors to watch soil and actuate pumps in real time, as Teguar notes, while analytics platforms tune schedules season‑long. Together, they save water, energy, and operator time.

3. Precision nutrition and agronomy platforms

Nutrient efficiency is central to profitable, climate‑smart farming. ICL Group’s digital agronomy arm, Agmatix, unifies messy field data and turns it into fertilizer plans that match crop demand. Agmatix explains how big‑data tools improve trials, close data silos, and support regenerative practice tracking so rates, timings, and blends align with goals and regulations. According to Agmatix, those analytics help agronomists and growers raise yields, cut waste, and report outcomes with confidence across regions.

4. Field robotics and autonomous equipment

Repetitive jobs steal time and wear out crews. Robots and driver‑optional machines handle mowing, weeding, and in‑row tasks with consistent passes and precise positioning. According to Nationwide’s farm research, automation reduces manual labor and injury risk while keeping operations productive through labor shortages. Real deployments are growing. According to Advantech, vision‑guided harvest robots identify ripe fruit and lift capacity as rural workforces age. Recent funding highlights momentum: the Wall Street Journal reported Bonsai Robotics raised capital to speed orchard automation for tree crops. In indoor systems, Agritecture documents how robots manage seeding and harvest to maintain quality and throughput.

5. Controlled‑environment agriculture (CEA) and vertical systems

CEA brings the field indoors, controlling light, temperature, humidity, and nutrients. The result is steady output, tight resource control, and less exposure to extreme weather. According to Agritecture, automation inside modern facilities plants, feeds, monitors, and harvests crops to reduce labor needs and keep quality consistent. Robotic harvesting is particularly important in CEA, where ripeness windows are short. According to Agritecture’s robotics coverage, vision systems spot ripe produce and pick quickly, cutting losses and improving packouts. These integrated platforms help operators align yields with demand and reduce water use compared with open‑field systems.

6. Livestock wearables and digital traceability

Animals generate data too. Wearable sensors and smart ear tags track location, activity, and health signals to catch problems early and guide feeding. According to Farmdeck and Farmbrite, RFID ear tags speed ID checks, weight logging, and treatments, saving labor while building cleaner records for audits.

Those same data streams strengthen traceability from paddock to processor. According to Farmdeck’s traceability features, satellite‑enabled and RFID tags support full event logging and biosecurity. Research on agricultural wearables shows rapid progress in standalone sensing, pointing to earlier disease detection and better welfare with lower input waste.

7. Unified farm management software (FMS)

Data only helps if it’s organized. FMS platforms pull in maps, sensor feeds, equipment logs, and work orders to simplify daily planning. According to Farmbrite, modern growers use these dashboards to schedule tasks, forecast yields, and separate signal from noise in everyday decisions.

Integration matters beyond row crops. According to PondIoT, unified tools now connect crop, livestock, and even aquaculture workflows, while DLL notes that data‑driven technology improves resource use and profitability when paired with the right financing and adoption plan. That combination speeds ROI and de‑risks upgrades for family farms and large enterprises alike.

8. Supply‑chain transparency and waste reduction

Efficiency doesn’t end at the farm gate. Digital traceability follows products from field to shelf, improving recall speed, quality claims, and buyer trust. According to Forward Fooding, blockchain and digital ledgers increase transparency and accountability across food chains.

The payoff is large. The World Bank estimates blockchain‑enabled traceability could reduce global food losses by up to 30 million tons annually if deployed at scale. Industry analysis shows these systems also curb fraud and waste while helping procurement teams source responsibly and verify sustainability.

Key takeaways

Across these eight areas, efficiency comes from knowing where to act and when to act.
According to AEM and GAO, precision tools raise output, save inputs, and protect resources—yet adoption support and training still matter. With platforms like ICL Group’s Agmatix and a growing ecosystem of robotics, sensors, and software, farms can scale results while meeting tougher climate and reporting standards.

The post How Agtech Solutions Improve Farming Efficiency appeared first on The European Business Review.

Today, the principles of the circular economy occupy a leading place on the global agenda. Europe and the world are on the threshold of rethinking their relationship with resources: the traditional “extract–produce–discard” model no longer satisfies regulators, major manufacturers, or investors. How a circular economy can be built within a single country, how this model is structured and why it works in an economy where recycling remains expensive, as well as the key industry trends – are the focus of this article.

European Expectations and Regulations

Recycling today is no longer merely a social trend or the prerogative of progressive companies. It has become a major economic driver – provided that countries are prepared for it, with the infrastructure and technologies needed to return used materials back into the economy. Each year, the European Union raises the bar on how much material must be recycled. Regulators demand less waste, more reuse, and a higher share of recycled content in production. Countries that fail to comply with these regulations face substantial fines.

One example is the new comprehensive Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR, Regulation (EU) 2025/40), which introduces requirements for recyclability, recycled content, and packaging design with recycling in mind. The regulation will come into force in stages, with a significant tightening of criteria expected by 2030–2035. For businesses, this is no longer simply a matter of corporate social responsibility, but a real necessity to adapt supply chains and raw material flows. The alternative is to risk fines and loss of market access.

Who Will Buy Recycled Plastic?

Demand for recycled materials in Europe is growing, but unevenly so. Some sectors – such as packaging and automotive manufacturing – are already preparing to incorporate recycled materials, while others remain hesitant due to price competition with cheap virgin polymers, logistical constraints, and concerns about material quality. Institutional players note that demand will increase in the coming years, especially in sectors where regulation mandates recycled content. However, growth in recycling capacity slowed in 2023–2024 due to high energy costs and reduced investment. This creates a window of opportunity for players that combine technological flexibility with control over their supply chains.

Latvia’s Plan

In 2020, Latvia approved the Action Plan for Transition Towards Circular Economy 2020–2027, a comprehensive roadmap designed to put the country on a circular economy trajectory. The document provides for improved resource efficiency, an increased share of secondary materials, the development of recycling infrastructure, and the creation of demand for products made from recycled materials. Special emphasis is placed on educating businesses and the public, as well as stimulating sectoral investment.

However, actual performance still lags behind ambition. A key indicator – the circular material use rate, which measures the share of materials returned to the economy – remains stable at around 5%. In other words, most materials in the country still enter the economy from primary sources rather than through recycling. This signals the need for a deep restructuring of Latvia’s collection, sorting, and recycling systems.

The transition is hindered by systemic obstacles. Separate waste collection is unevenly developed, resulting in low-quality feedstock and higher recycling costs. Secondary raw materials lose competitiveness when prices for virgin polymers fall. The market is unstable, with sharp fluctuations in recycled material prices complicating investment decisions. Technological limitations add to the challenge: many processing lines are not adapted to new types of plastics and mixed streams, including biomaterials.

Companies That Close the Loop

Against this backdrop, companies that integrate multiple stages of recycling – from collection and sorting to logistics and the production of recycled pellets – stand out. An integrated model makes it possible to standardize feedstock quality, accelerate the adoption of new technologies, and reduce transaction costs. For Latvia, this is particularly important: achieving the goals of the national plan largely depends on the resilience of such operators, capable of assuming the risks associated with sector development.

An example of a systemic approach today is the group of companies comprising SIA Zalais Cikls, Green Plastics, Loid Logistics, and Naura. The founder of the group, Aivars Sveida, has been in this business for more than 20 years. When environmentally responsible approaches to secondary raw materials were only beginning to emerge in Europe, he recognized the potential of this niche. He started as a manager at a recycling company, and after managing to effectively save it during a crisis, he became a co-owner.

The Latvian circular economy model that Aivars Sveida’s group is building today differs markedly from the familiar notion of “put plastic in a container and someone will recycle it somewhere.” This is about a closed-loop chain that the entrepreneur deliberately constructed over many years – from waste collection to pellet production and equipment servicing. Such an approach minimizes losses, improves feedstock quality, and keeps economic value within the country.

SIA Zalais Cikls is the core company responsible for purchasing waste from small businesses and large agricultural operators, sorting it, and distributing it to clients. SIA Loid Logistics handles transportation. SIA Green Plastics processes plastic, and SIA Naura repairs machinery and rents out equipment.

The Circular Economy in Action

The first link in the chain is the company that purchases secondary raw materials from local waste management operators. Each Latvian city has its own collector, and sorting standards vary widely, so quality assessment – and, if necessary, additional cleaning – takes place at a central warehouse. Volume then comes into play: the larger the batch, the higher the price that can be obtained from major processors. During periods of low prices, the company holds onto materials, relying on its infrastructure and experience. In essence, this functions like a commodity market: understanding seasonal fluctuations helps improve supply margins.

The next stage is the conversion of collected plastic into pellets at the Green Plastics plant. The company specializes in polymer recycling and pellet production, which are then used as raw materials for new manufacturing – from industrial tooling to consumer goods. This is where the greatest economic value is added: pellets are worth more than sorted waste, creating additional value within the chain. Moreover, Green Plastics was among the first in Europe to start working with PLA (bioplastic). Because the company assembled its own production line, it was able to experiment – and in the process, the team succeeded in recycling bioplastics as well.

For the entire system to function smoothly, an in-house logistics network is essential. This role is fulfilled by Loid Logistics, which transports waste from local operators to Zalais Cikls warehouses and then delivers materials and pellets to processing plants. The decision to move away from external transport was strategic: it reduces operating costs, eliminates dependencies, and keeps working capital within a single ecosystem.

The final – but crucial – link is Naura, the company responsible for renting and repairing recycling equipment. Initially, the group had to rely on third-party service providers, but high costs prompted the creation of an in-house technical unit. Over time, Naura developed specialists capable of servicing not only internal facilities but also equipment at external enterprises. This significantly reduced costs while keeping economic benefits within the group’s own structure.

A Bet on In-House Development

One of the key factors that sets Aivars Sveida’s group apart from most recyclers in the region is its focus on in-house engineering development. In a market where equipment is traditionally purchased “turnkey” from major manufacturers, his team chose a different path: assembling production lines independently, combining the best technical solutions observed at dozens of plants across Europe.

Aivars explains: “While selling raw materials, I visited many facilities and saw which equipment worked best. But for each plant, ‘best’ meant a specific component – one had the best shredder, another the washer, another the extruder.” Drawing on this experience, he and his engineers assembled their own installation, combining the most effective elements into a single line.

In effect, it is an engineering ​​assemblage made up of top-tier components. “It’s like building a car with the best parts available: an engine from Mercedes, suspension from BMW, an interior from Lexus,” he says.

The result proved competitive not only technologically but also economically: the cost of the equipment was five times lower than comparable market alternatives.

Trends in the Recycling Market

Today’s recycling market trends are shaped at the intersection of economics, regulation, and technology. Recycling costs are rising: expensive electricity and cheap oil make virgin plastic more attractive than secondary raw materials. At the same time, EU regulatory pressure is increasing – environmental taxes on packaging are being introduced, and requirements for recycled content are being tightened. This gradually pushes the industry toward mandatory circularity and creates demand for high-quality recycled plastic. These same mechanisms also provide subsidies to recyclers, helping to keep their business models viable. Market consolidation is evident: smaller companies are unable to withstand the pressure and are exiting the sector.

The post How Latvia Is Building a Circular Economy appeared first on The European Business Review.

Rethinking Personal Care Products

Many personal care products are packaged in plastic that takes hundreds of years to decompose. Toothpaste tubes, shampoo bottles, and soaps all contribute to this growing waste problem. Choosing products designed with sustainability in mind is a simple but powerful step. For example, switching to eco-friendly foaming hand soap not only reduces plastic waste but also often incorporates plant-based ingredients that are gentler on ecosystems. These small swaps may seem insignificant individually, but they help drive demand for sustainable manufacturing and reduce the overall footprint of our daily routines.

The Power of Sustainable Cleaning Supplies

Household cleaning products are another area where everyday choices can have far-reaching effects. Conventional cleaners often contain harsh chemicals that can harm aquatic life when they enter waterways. Eco-conscious alternatives, including concentrated solutions, refillable systems, and biodegradable ingredients, minimize this risk. By consistently choosing sustainable cleaning supplies, households can collectively reduce chemical pollution and decrease the amount of single-use plastic that ends up in landfills.

Reducing Energy and Water Waste

Many products we use daily also have indirect environmental consequences. Appliances like washing machines, dishwashers, and water heaters consume electricity and water, which often come from non-renewable sources. Opting for energy-efficient versions or using products that require less water can significantly reduce our environmental footprint. Even small behavioral adjustments, such as running full loads of laundry or turning off taps when not in use, contribute to meaningful conservation.

Supporting Circular Economy Products

A circular economy aims to keep materials in use for as long as possible and minimize waste. Products designed with reusability or compostability in mind are perfect examples. Items like refillable cleaning sprays, reusable food wraps, and biodegradable packaging help close the loop, keeping resources from ending up in landfills. When consumers actively choose products that can be refilled, recycled, or composted, they send a clear signal to manufacturers that sustainable design is not just appreciated; it’s demanded.

Mindful Shopping and Consumer Awareness

The environmental impact of everyday products extends beyond what’s inside the packaging. Transportation, manufacturing methods, and sourcing practices all contribute to a product’s overall footprint. By researching brands, choosing locally produced items when possible, and supporting companies with transparent sustainability practices, consumers can influence the market to prioritize eco-friendly initiatives. Even small actions like selecting concentrated solutions that require less packaging or opting for biodegradable alternatives can ripple out to broader industry change.

The Collective Effect of Small Choices

While one person switching to eco-friendly products may not seem monumental, the collective effect of millions of people making conscious choices is transformative. Every refill, every biodegradable package, and every plant-based ingredient adds up to reduce waste, conserve resources, and protect ecosystems. Over time, these everyday decisions shape market trends, encourage innovation, and make sustainability an accessible part of daily life.

Conclusion

Everyday products are more than mere conveniences; they are tools that can help shape a sustainable future. By choosing eco-friendly personal care items, sustainable cleaning supplies, and energy-efficient appliances, consumers can contribute to meaningful environmental change. Small, intentional choices accumulate, proving that our daily habits matter. By embracing mindful consumption, we not only improve our own lives but also leave a healthier planet for generations to come.

The post How Everyday Products Can Make a Big Environmental Impact appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Mita Mallick

Retaining talent goes beyond paychecks. Employees stay when they feel valued through benefits that support wellness, homeownership, and lifelong learning. From wellness platforms like Wellhub, to mortgage support with Multiply Mortgage, to book reimbursements, creative perks foster connection, stability, and growth—building loyalty while strengthening both employee wellbeing and organizational success.

Retaining talent in a competitive labor market isn’t always about “just paying them more money” to stay. Sure, we all want to be paid well. And sometimes, it is not just the generous base pay, the bonus, and stock options that get us to stay. It’s the unique and differentiated way our leaders, and employers, help us feel valued and supported.

Start with these creative benefits to show employees their employer is going beyond just what they see in their paychecks:

1. Give your employees the power to focus on their wellness

The foundation of good leadership starts with taking care of ourselves. When we don’t sleep well, don’t eat right, get little to no exercise, and don’t spend time with our loved ones, we can find ourselves creeping into bad boss behaviors. Because taking care of each other in the workplace starts with taking care of ourselves. Investing in your employees’ wellness is an investment in your business.

More and more employees are focused on the rising importance of wellness. It’s the quest to get better health, better fitness, better nutrition, better appearance, better sleep, and better mindfulness. But this goes beyond just providing a gym reimbursement membership, this means giving employees the power, and the choices, to focus on their overall wellbeing.

Look into partnering with corporate benefits platforms that help plan for every employee. Choose platforms that connect employees with various options for fitness, mindfulness, nutrition, and sleep, and allow employees to make their own choices. Some platforms even offer challenges for employees to participate in and build community and connection.

There’s an increasing trend where employees are finding connection and camaraderie through shared wellness activities as opposed to traditional bonding events like happy hours. Employee wellness programs can be intentionally designed to amplify this, creating a vibrant community where everyone feels supported and inspired to thrive together.

Companies using platforms like this have seen widespread adoption. 61% of employees had no gym membership prior to using this type of platform, and they have led to a 35% reduction in annual employee healthcare costs (in a time when healthcare costs are about to rise significantly), plus a 30% reduction in turnover. A type of benefit like this can be more powerful than adding a couple of hundred dollars to someone’s paycheck.

2. Support employees in putting down roots and building community

Employees who own their home and put down roots into a community are far less likely to leave your company and relocate somewhere else. And yet many individuals aren’t able to afford a home. Middle-class families in half in less than half of the U.S. can afford an average priced home. 92% of individuals who would like to own a home said “they were at least somewhat stressed about buying” one in 2025. According to a Clever Real Estate study, 32% of Americans are afraid they won’t be able to make housing payments as a result of today’s economy.

Here’s where leaders and companies can step in: Offer resources and support your employees’ ability to purchase their first home. Partner with companies that offer employees one-on-one sessions with mortgage advisers, employee education sessions around the home purchase and financing process, and mortgage interest rate discounts of up to .75%.

Homeownership has become increasingly out of reach for many Americans, and interest rates aren’t expected to fall to 2020 levels ever again. When you help employees put down their roots and build community, they become more invested in your company. They are also more invested in the life they are building and are less likely to move jobs and uproot their families to another location. They are more likely to stay and grow their careers with your organization.

3. Enable employees to continuously be learning on their own

According to LinkedIn’s Workplace Learning Report, 88% of organizations are concerned about employee retention. Survey respondents also shared that the number one retention strategy was to provide learning opportunities. On average, companies spend more than $340 billion on employee training and development, approximately $1500 per employee every year. This burden of learning can not solely be on leaders and human resources to help employees learn. We need to enable employees to continuously learn on their own.

Consider implementing a book reimbursement benefit to encourage a culture of learning. Allow employees to reimburse any books where they are learning a new skill, expanding their world view, or keeping up with current events. This could also include podcasts and subscriptions to publications. Encourage employees to share what types of content they are consuming. You can support them in starting book clubs, hosting authors in the office for “ask me anything” events, and brainstorming what learnings they could implement into the business.

Sometimes it is not just paying individuals more, giving them a spot bonus, or offering them another stock grant, that keeps them working with us. It’s when we think about what our employees need and support them both in and outside of the office, that’s when we start to see them succeed, thrive and want to stay.

About the Author

Mita Mallick is a Wall Street Journal and USA Today Best Selling Author. She’s on a mission to fix what’s broken in our workplaces. Her highly anticipated next book is The Devil Emails at Midnight: What Good Leaders Can Learn From Bad Bosses. She has been both a marketing and human resources executive with a track record of transforming businesses. She’s a LinkedIn Top Voice, and a highly sought-after speaker who has advised Fortune 500 companies and start-ups alike.

The post How Creative Benefits Can Help Companies Retain Talent in this Competitive Labor Market appeared first on The European Business Review.

“Green” capital no longer finances only wind farms or solar panels. It now funds influence — shaping who will own, regulate, and profit from the world’s next great resource: hydrogen.

The European Union’s Hydrogen Bank, the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), and Asia’s LNG-to-H₂ programs are not separate policy experiments; they are legal and financial weapons in a global competition for the future of energy.

The question that defines this decade is no longer who will innovate first, but rather:

Who will own the green transition — the engineers, the investors, or the lawyers?

I. The Green Mirage — When Capital Meets Control

In 2025, global investment in clean energy surpassed $2 trillion. Yet real returns are declining. Behind the optimism, a quieter struggle unfolds — a struggle over legal definitions, taxonomies, and control.

The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) has been labeled a “disguised trade barrier.” The U.S. IRA effectively excludes non-American supply chains from hydrogen credits. Meanwhile, several Asian jurisdictions have created “hydrogen havens” — low-regulation zones where disclosure is optional and subsidies are opaque.

The result is a patchwork of incompatible systems, where investors navigate not just markets, but ideologies. What was once environmental policy has become legal warfare.

Green lawfare — the use of legal standards as tools of economic competition — now determines where capital flows, and who benefits.

For investors entering this arena, specialized legal insight has become indispensable. Advisors in fields like Energy Law & Infrastructure Legal Advisory now play the role once held by engineers — translating political ambition into enforceable contracts and risk-proof structures.

II. The Hydrogen Trap — The Billion-Euro Legal Minefield

Hydrogen has become the symbol of a decarbonized future, yet it may also be the biggest legal risk of the decade.

Across the EU and MENA, over 40% of large-scale hydrogen projects are delayed due to legal disputes. The root cause is not technological failure, but uncertainty over ownership and liability across the hydrogen value chain.

Who is responsible if a pipeline ruptures at the border between two states? What happens when carbon emissions exceed the thresholds defined in a “green certificate”? Who absorbs the loss if a government revokes subsidies midway through construction?

In Spain, a joint venture was frozen after conflicting definitions of “renewable hydrogen” between the investor and the grid operator. In the UAE, a dispute arose between a European trader and a local partner over certification guarantees. In North Africa, arbitration was initiated over ownership of by-products generated in a hydrogen conversion plant.

Hydrogen, it turns out, is not only a chemical challenge but a jurisdictional minefield. Each molecule of “green gas” carries the weight of multiple legal systems.

III. The Cross-Border Battlefield — Law as Geopolitics

Every new interconnector, hydrogen corridor, or LNG conversion route is now a geopolitical statement.
Cross-border agreements between the EU, MENA, and Eastern Europe blur the lines between trade law, security, and diplomacy.

The EU’s contracts for hydrogen imports from North Africa involve multiple arbitration regimes. The U.S., China, and Saudi Arabia are building competing legal blocs around energy security. Meanwhile, Ukraine, the Balkans, and the Caucasus are emerging as the new corridor of European energy law, linking transmission, storage, and guarantees of origin under overlapping jurisdictions.

In this environment, legal architecture has become the new infrastructure. The return of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, the rewriting of the Energy Charter Treaty, and the rise of private arbitration centers are redrawing the energy map more decisively than any pipeline.

As one industry insider notes, “Every pipeline today is a treaty in disguise.”

IV. Winners and Losers of Legal Intelligence

The winners of the energy transition will not necessarily be the companies with the most capital or the newest technology. They will be those who think legally — who integrate “legal foresight” into their investment strategy.

Winners:

• Funds that build multidisciplinary due diligence teams combining engineers, economists, and legal strategists.
• Corporations that create internal regulatory risk boards to monitor ESG, CBAM, and supply chain exposure.
• Lawyers who can speak both the language of energy markets and public international law.

Losers:

• Those who rely solely on outdated project finance models, ignoring arbitration risk and policy cycles.
• Companies that see ESG as a marketing checkbox, not a contractual framework.

In the green economy, ignorance of law isn’t just expensive — it’s existential.

V. Legal Power as the New Energy

The 21st century’s great competition is no longer for physical resources, but for the right to define what counts as green.

States that control legal standards are building economic hegemony. Energy corporations are transforming into legal operators — drafting their own charters, compliance systems, and certification regimes.

The next global conflict in energy will not be about territory or pipelines.
It will be about jurisdictional power — who sets the rules, who enforces them, and who profits from compliance.

Law is the new energy currency. Those who control the rules, control the transition.

Epilogue — Law as the Ultimate Renewable

The next energy frontier will not be defined by innovation alone. It will be shaped by the legal minds capable of structuring certainty amid global volatility.

For investors and governments alike, the ultimate renewable resource is trust — and it can only be generated through legal intelligence.

• Rostyslav Nykitenko
• International Legal Strategist | Founder of Nykitenko Legal
• Advising investors and energy companies on legal architecture for the global energy transition.

The post Green Capital: The Secret War for the Energy Future appeared first on The European Business Review.

Over 1.3 billion people live with disabilities yet their entrepreneurial potential remains overlooked. Entrepreneurs with disabilities innovate, seize opportunities, and reshape markets. With inclusive ecosystems supportive policies and strong networks they can drive innovation, resilience, and economic growth. Supporting them means unlocking a powerful source of creativity and transformation. 

The World Health Organization reports that over 1.3 billion people worldwide are living with a disability. It is the largest minority in the world, and a group that anyone can join at any time. Because disability is not necessarily permanent; it can also be temporary. Too often, they remain excluded from mainstream economic life. And with an unemployment rate that is twice the national average, it goes without saying that career prospects are sometimes compromised., But is starting a business necessarily the default choice for people with disabilities? But framing it this way misses the point.

Entrepreneurs with disabilities do more than create livelihoods; they generate innovation, competitiveness, and social impact. Their lived experience becomes a strategic resource, helping them navigate uncertainty, adapt to constraints, and solve problems in original ways. They identify unmet needs, spot gaps in existing systems, and anticipate opportunities, building ventures that are economically viable and socially meaningful. Blind since birth, Baptiste “realized the lack of interest, and the media treatment on the subject of parasport.” Driven by this observation, he launched an organization to publicize and promote parasports and their athletes. “It was about undertaking something. It was an idea. As I went along, I built something important.” Step by step, he shaped an editorial line and gathered a community around his desire to inform and encourage participation in sport. “It reaches a lot of people.” His presence on social media quickly gained influence, and he began using it not only to raise awareness of parasport but also to inspire change in the job market for PwD by spotlighting remarkable and motivating profiles. “I went further than just the sports sphere. Now I’m really in the disability sphere in the broadest sense, and also impacting the professional world, human resources and project managers.”

Research tends to view entrepreneurs with disabilities as a homogeneous group, at the risk of failing into clichés. Yet it is important not to fall into clichés. The most common one is that of the ‘everyday fighter,’ the entrepreneur who constantly overcomes challenges. Conversely, it would be misleading to pretend they are just like any other entrepreneur. A balance must be struck. They are not different from others; they are different like others. It is this very otherness that is a source of richness. Contrary to stereotypes, entrepreneurs with disabilities start businesses not only out of necessity, but also to seize real opportunities. Decisions are opportunity-driven, informed by strategic planning and experiential knowledge. Daba has built her company around two complementary areas. The first is a general-interest sector that serves the broader mission and purpose of her work. The second is a business arm that sustains and finances the activities of the non-profit side. Her goal “is to change perceptions on disability issues, and on the business side, it provides support for companies and clients through consulting, communication, and events.” Entrepreneurs with disabilities position themselves deliberately in the market, mobilize resources, and structure organizations to maximize impact and sustainability. Drawing on social, human, and network capital, they gain legitimacy, attract critical support, and remain adaptable to shifting market conditions. Societal prejudice may exist, but it does not necessarily determine entrepreneurial choices. Their scope can be broad, ambitions high, and objectives strategically aligned. At just 25 years old, Vincent, who has been blind since birth, has already launched three companies. His entrepreneurial journey began with a platform designed to connect restaurant owners and consumers. He then went on to create a business specializing in three-dimensional screens, giving blind individuals the ability to make the most of their mobile phones. “My latest company is my favorite.” Today, this third venture offers consulting, training, and support services to law firms. “We are growing very, very fast.”

This potential does not emerge in isolation. Organizations and institutions play a central role in providing enabling environments. The threat of budget cuts looming over social and solidarity economy organizations could jeopardize this essential support for entrepreneurs with disabilities. Targeted funding, tailored incentives, and structured mentorship programs strengthen opportunity recognition and decision-making. Incubators and training initiatives can go beyond foundational skills, offering sector-specific expertise, market insights, and tools to integrate inclusion and social responsibility into business models. Collaborative networks and entrepreneurial communities allow experiential knowledge to combine with broader industry perspectives, fueling innovation and scaling ventures. Public policy is equally decisive. Inclusive ecosystems that bring together policymakers, social sector actors, vocational organizations, and industry stakeholders create the structural framework that supports entrepreneurs with disabilities at every stage. Well-designed policies embed accessibility and inclusion into entrepreneurship, encourage adaptive business models, reward socially responsible innovation, and integrate disabled entrepreneurs into mainstream networks. If the State is the guarantor of the common good, it cannot, on its own, carry out all the actions in support of people with disabilities. Entrepreneurs with disabilities are increasingly numerous. Entrepreneurship offers them the possibility to flourish on their own terms, for who they are rather than for who others would want them to be.

The evidence is clear. Entrepreneurs with disabilities are already innovating, adapting, and leading change. Yet their potential remains underutilized because the ecosystems around them are not designed with inclusion at their core. This is a missed opportunity not just for individuals, but for economies and societies that need resilience, innovation, and fresh ideas more than ever. Business leaders can design funding, mentoring, and innovation programs that actively include disabled entrepreneurs. Institutions can integrate inclusion into training and incubation programs. Policymakers can embed accessibility and support into every stage of the entrepreneurial process, from education to finance to market access. Some entrepreneurs with disabilities require the support of caregivers, whose status deserves to be formally recognized. Supporting entrepreneurs with disabilities is not charity, it is a strategy for innovation, resilience, and growth. The choice is obvious: either continue to overlook this potential, or build economies that are inclusive, dynamic, and future-ready. Entrepreneurs with disabilities are ready.

About the Authors

Julien Billion holds a PhD in Sociology (EHESS), a PhD in Management Science (Polytechnic Institute of Paris), and a habilitation in Management Science (Polytechnic Institute of Paris). As a professor at ICN Business School and an affiliated researcher at the CEREFIGE laboratory of the University of Lorraine, he is an expert in social innovation and social entrepreneurship. He is the author of numerous articles, books, and documentaries in these fields.

Christel Tessier Dargent is an ESCP Business School alumni and Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship at Jean Monnet University and CoActis Research Lab, Saint-Etienne, France. Previously a manager at Accenture, Christel conducts research on inclusive entrepreneurship and responsible entrepreneurial education, with a particular focus on necessity entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship by persons with disabilities.

Jérémie Renouf leads the Entrepreneurship specialization and the incubator at ISC Paris Business School. His expertise lies in career mobility, hybrid and inclusive entrepreneurship. He holds a PhD in Entrepreneurship and has previously worked as a Startup Project Manager at EDF, as an Entrepreneurship Advisor at AFE (acquired by Bpifrance in 2019), at Boulogne-Billancourt City Hall, and as an Incubator Project Manager at Cnam.

The post Unlocking Potential: Supporting Entrepreneurs with Disabilities appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Jens Laue, Matthew Robinson, Monique de Ritter and Michela Coppola

As Europe recalibrates its sustainability regulations, it may seem natural for businesses to ease efforts in collecting and integrating sustainability information. Yet the real opportunity is to move ahead — strengthening data, talent, and technology so that sustainability information becomes a driver of innovation, resilience, and long-term competitiveness.

“Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.”

Thomas Edison’s words resonate stronger than ever today as businesses face growing uncertainty around the future of sustainability regulation in Europe. Yet within the complexity lies opportunity for those willing to engage with regulation as a catalyst rather than as a constraint.

Over the past five years, the EU has set a global benchmark with the EU Taxonomy, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), and the proposed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). The direction was clear: mandate detailed sustainability data disclosure to drive transparency, improve risk-management, and steer businesses towards sustainable, resilient models.

But even as rules shift, one signal remains clear: sustainability is becoming a long-term driver of performance and innovation.

Now, with economic headwinds and growing competitiveness concerns, reducing regulatory and administrative burdens is a key priority for governments, industry lobbies, and lawmakers. In this context, the European Commission proposed the Omnibus Simplification Package, which, if adopted in its current form, would significantly reduce the scope and depth of sustainability disclosure and due diligence requirements.

These moves have sparked debate. Is the EU recalibrating or retreating from its Green Deal ambitions? Is this no longer the EU’s “man on the moon moment”? Amid the uncertainty, the challenge for companies is to decide how to treat sustainability data in this shifting context.

The risk lies not in regulatory fluctuations, but in treating the collection of sustainability information as a compliance task rather than a strategic capability. Businesses may be tempted to pause or scale back efforts to collect high-quality sustainability data. But even as rules shift, one signal remains clear: sustainability is becoming a long-term driver of performance and innovation. Those who invest with foresight instead of pausing can gain a competitive advantage.

Accenture’s research shows that three strategic actions can turn sustainability regulation into a business advantage: building intelligent data infrastructure, embedding ESG metrics into core decision-making, and empowering teams to act on sustainability intelligence. Companies that take these steps are best placed to lead, regardless of how the regulatory landscape shifts.

Regulation as a driver of innovation

Leading businesses already recognize that if they embrace sustainability regulation in spirit, not just letter, it can become a source of strategic advantage.

A recent Accenture survey across five major European economies reveals a growing recognition of this mindset. Over half of business leaders already see sustainability regulation as a driver of competitiveness now. The figure rises to 65 percent in the medium term and 72 percent in the long term, evidence that more companies see the broader intent of regulation as a tool for national advantage (see figure 1).

Figure 1: Business leaders view sustainability regulation as a competitiveness driver

This perspective, however, goes beyond the aggregated, national level. Many leaders also recognize tangible benefits for their own organizations. Over half (54 percent) anticipate overall positive outcomes from current and upcoming sustainability legislation. And while rising operating costs are a concern, the top three expected outcomes are all positive: driving innovation, building brand trust, and staying ahead of investor and consumer demands (see figure 2).

Figure 2: Top anticipated outcomes of EU sustainability legislation

By treating sustainability data not as a reporting chore but as raw material for better decisions, companies can unlock powerful value.  Financial and non-financial performance should not be managed in isolation, nor should investment decisions be made in silos, as there is a strong correlation between traditional business decisions and sustainability impacts, and vice versa. Currently, fewer than 30 percent of large European firms integrate non-financial, ESG data into their decision-making processes but that’s changing. Nearly 60 percent expect to do so within three years, indicating that building a “sustainability intelligence” capability is becoming a strategic differentiator.

Turning sustainability data into a business driver: Three strategic actions

Forward-thinking companies are already taking strategic actions to harness sustainability intelligence. Their approach offers clear lessons for others, centered on three actions that deliver both immediate impact and long-term benefit:

1. Build robust, data-driven sustainability infrastructure to turn compliance into insight

For many companies, the challenge is not just a lack of information; it’s also the lack of infrastructure to make sense of it. New regulations are accelerating the demand for high-quality, granular, and auditable non-financial data. Yet most firms treat reporting as a siloed, manual exercise, narrowly focused on compliance. Organizations taking this reactive stance have limited strategic visibility and run the risk of falling behind more data-fluent competitors.

Leading organizations, on the other hand, are:

1. Adopting cloud-based solutions to streamline data management and enable real-time updates
2. Leveraging AI and machine learning to automate data classification, validation reporting, and analysis
3. Integrating sustainability metrics into enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems to enhance reporting accuracy, enable decision making, and generate efficiency.

These technologies are becoming core to how companies track, analyze, and act on sustainability signals.

Ørsted, for example, uses SparkCognition’s AI-powered Renewable Suite to integrate financial, operational, and third-party data—including weather forecasts—onto a single platform. This cloud-based system enhances data quality, enables self-serve models for actionable insights, accelerates fault detection, and fosters collaboration across the enterprise.

UPS spent years developing ORION, an AI-powered logistics engine that optimizes delivery routes in real time. The system not only cuts emissions, it also boosts operational efficiency, turning sustainability into a bottom-line driver.

A robust, connected data ecosystem can transform regulatory effort into an operational edge. By providing real-time insights, it can shift businesses from box-ticking to agile innovation, value creation, and industry leadership.

2. Embed non-financial intelligence into core decision-making

Building infrastructure is just the start; the real edge comes from using sustainability intelligence to guide strategy, operations, and capital allocation.  Few organizations are there yet. Forward-looking companies go beyond compliance, treating non-financial data as a lens for risk, opportunity, and long-term value, embedding ESG insights into core decision-making to anticipate change, seize advantage, and drive sustainable growth. To move from intent to impact, they focus on:

1. Developing integrated dashboards where leadership can access both financial and non-financial KPIs
2. Using AI-powered analytics to forecast risks and opportunities related to ESG performance
3. Aligning sustainability goals with investment and innovation strategies to attract responsible investors and future-proof the business

By embedding ESG metrics into enterprise dashboards and decision architectures, companies gain clearer insight into supply chain resilience, product lifecycles, climate risk, and stakeholder expectations.

Building infrastructure is just the start; the real edge comes from using sustainability intelligence to guide strategy, operations, and capital allocation.

For instance, BlackRock’s Aladdin Climate translates climate science and policy scenarios into climate-adjusted valuations, risk metrics, and financial models, equipping investors to anticipate how environmental risk will reshape valuations across portfolios.

This strategic integration treats sustainability intelligence as a strategic asset and drives better risk-adjusted returns, sharper innovation, and stronger stakeholder alignment.

3. Empower teams to act on sustainability insights

Data and dashboards mean little unless they drive action. Leading companies pair tools with talent and culture, embedding ESG intelligence into operations, adapting models, and bringing together the right skillset to use sustainability intelligence in real time, at scale. Measures include:

1. Upskilling employees in ESG analytics and data-driven decision-making
2. Embedding sustainability expertise across departments, ensuring that non-financial performance is part of business planning and operations.
3. Encouraging cross-functional collaboration between sustainability, finance, and innovation teams.

The answer is not to create isolated ESG teams, but embed sustainability literacy across functions and empower decision-makers—whether in finance, procurement or product development—to act with confidence and speed. This requires new capabilities, new incentives and, often, new governance models that align sustainability goals with operational execution.

Companies that equip teams with the right data, skills, and authority are creating cultures of continuous innovation, where sustainability is not just an objective, but a mindset.

Sustainability intelligence as a competitive advantage

Europe’s regulatory landscape may be shifting, but the direction is clear for businesses: sustainability is a defining force in how value is created, measured, and delivered. It remains a powerful driver of long-term competitiveness and innovation.

The European Competitiveness Compass and amendments put forward in the Omnibus Proposal underscore the need for a balanced approach, but simplification need not undermine the long-term benefits of sustainability initiatives. Organizations that invest in data capabilities, integrate non-financial metrics into decision-making, and build a sustainability-focused workforce will be better equipped to thrive in a rapidly evolving global economy.

The companies that invest with intention will be the leaders. They are building the infrastructure to turn compliance into insight. They are embedding sustainability intelligence into strategic decisions. And they are empowering teams to act on that intelligence, transforming sustainability from a reporting exercise into a source of resilience, efficiency, and growth.

In a time of uncertainty, the biggest risk is inertia. Competitive advantage will flow not to those who wait for regulatory clarity, but to those who use this moment to future-proof their business.

Sustainability is no longer a cost to manage. It is a capability to master.

About the Authors

Jens Laue is a Managing Director and Accenture’s global lead for Sustainability Measurement, Analytics, and Performance services.

Monique de Ritter is the Sustainability Measurement, Analytics, and Performance research specialist within Accenture Research.

Michela Coppola is the global CFO and Enterprise Value research lead within Accenture Research.

Matthew Robinson leads the sustainability team within Accenture Research.

The post Beyond the Regulatory Checkbox: Navigating Europe’s Shifting Sustainability Rules with Strategic Intent appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Maria Brinck

Businesses can thrive globally by integrating environmental, social, and governance principles into long-term strategy, demonstrating that responsibility and profitability go hand in hand. 

In business, two things have traditionally mattered above all else: growth and profit. Everything else is often treated as window dressing. If a new CEO sought to implement voluntary safety measures to protect humanity—measures that would significantly reduce quarterly profits—she likely wouldn’t remain CEO for long. This reality helps explain why 68 percent of species on Earth have gone extinct in the last five decades, why each summer brings record-breaking heat waves, and why society accelerates toward environmental and technological cliffs as companies compete to develop AI and other high-risk innovations, consequences be damned.

This raises a critical question: is capitalism itself the problem?

The answer is both yes and no. Free market capitalism has lifted billions out of poverty, generated unprecedented innovation, and connected nations economically and culturally. This interdependence can create peace, as seen in the unlikely prospect of a war between China and the United States, whose economies are deeply intertwined. Businesses have enormous potential to advance humanity and global unity, especially those that operate across multiple countries, cultures, ethnic groups, and religions.

However, the detrimental effects often attributed to capitalism are not inevitable. They result from short-sighted greed and suboptimal leadership choices rather than any structural requirement of the system. The following are key shifts organizations must make in order to achieve profits without sacrificing the wellbeing of people or the planet.

Adopt holistic decision-making frameworks—ones that value employees, communities, and the environment as much as profits. Contrary to popular belief, there is no legal obligation for companies to prioritize shareholder profits above all else. Emerging initiatives, such as the “Universal Declaration for the Rights of Mother Earth,” challenge this notion by advocating for the recognition of ecocide as a crime prosecutable by the International Criminal Court, alongside genocide and war crimes. These movements underscore that businesses can integrate a broader perspective into decision-making, valuing social, environmental, and economic outcomes equally, not only for ethical reasons but because they align with long-term business viability.

Value stakeholders, not just shareholders. As a leadership consultant, I emphasize that the ruthless “make money while we can” mentality is not just unethical—it is outdated. Modern, effective leaders recognize the importance of valuing stakeholders rather than focusing solely on shareholders. While the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, they are fundamentally different. A shareholder owns stock and seeks the highest financial return on investment. Rising stock prices create profit opportunities, especially in today’s era of algorithmic trading, where many shares are held for mere fractions of a second. Investors, including pension funds, typically care less about individual companies than the overall performance of their portfolios.

By contrast, a stakeholder is anyone who can impact or be impacted by a company. Stakeholders include employees, suppliers, distributors, customers, regulators, and even external partners. Modern European and global leaders recognize that a company’s operational footprint—on air, water, land, wildlife, and future generations—must be considered alongside financial performance. Patagonia’s founder Yvon Chouinard captured this philosophy when he famously said, “Earth is now our only shareholder.”

Embrace annual reporting instead of quarterly reporting. Prioritizing shareholder interests over those of stakeholders harms both business and society. CEOs fixated on short-term gains to satisfy shareholders may neglect the long-term health of the company and its wider impact on society. This dynamic is reinforced in the United States, where publicly held companies must report quarterly to Wall Street. Research published in The Accounting Review demonstrated that shorter reporting intervals “engender managerial myopia,” reducing long-term investments, operating efficiency, and sales growth.

Companies reporting annually, as opposed to quarterly, achieved 10 percent greater annual sales as a percentage of assets, 3.5 percent higher annual sales growth, and 1.5 percent higher return on assets. Frequent reporting pressures executives to prioritize short-term results, often at the expense of sustainable long-term strategies. By contrast, longer reporting cycles—more common in the European Union—encourage leaders to make decisions that improve long-term viability, maximize profits sustainably, and allow executives to “do the right thing.”

Paul Polman’s tenure as CEO of Unilever from 2009 to 2019 exemplifies this approach. Together with Andrew Winston, he co-authored Net Positive: How Courageous Companies Thrive by Giving More Than They Take. Polman shifted Unilever from quarterly to annual reporting while embedding environmental and social responsibility into the Unilever Sustainable Living Program. Under his leadership, Unilever outperformed rivals, achieving returns more than double the FTSE index.

Alignment of profit and ethics is possible

The business case for responsible leadership is clear. Acting responsibly toward people and the planet reduces costs, mitigates climate risks, and enhances insurability and investment appeal. Long-term strategies also stabilize companies, nurture a culture of care, and cultivate employee engagement and purpose—critical factors for attracting and retaining talent, the most valuable asset in business.

European regulators and investors increasingly recognize that environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors are not optional but central to sustainable growth. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) exemplifies this shift, requiring companies to report their impact on people and the planet with the same rigor as their financial results. This aligns with the global trend of redefining corporate purpose beyond mere shareholder profit.

Modern leadership is therefore not about sacrificing profit for ethics; it is about aligning the two. By prioritizing stakeholders, extending financial reporting horizons, and integrating environmental and social responsibility into strategy, companies can thrive while contributing to a sustainable, equitable, and prosperous future. The leadership we need is bold, forward-thinking, and guided by the principle that long-term success requires doing the right thing for people, the planet, and profit alike.

About the Author

Maria Brinck is a top leadership training expert and Gallup Strengths Certified executive coach. She is the founder of Zynergy International and author of The Leadership We Need: A New Mindset for a Brighter Future. Maria helps leaders unlock hidden strengths, build thriving teams, and achieve sustainable success.

The post 3 Key Organizational Shifts to Bolster Profits, People, and the Planet appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Joyce Coffee

Climate change is disrupting businesses everywhere—wiping out supply chains, shuttering SMEs, and threatening global markets. Yet resilience is the hidden advantage. Companies that act now—strengthening operations, suppliers, and communities—won’t just survive the next disaster; they’ll capture market share, secure capital, and lead in the climate-defined economy.

Climate Change: The Defining Business Trend

When executives talk about the “future of business,” they often highlight digital transformation, artificial intelligence, or breakthrough technologies. These are indeed transformative. Yet beneath them lies a force that shapes markets, technologies, and societies alike: climate change.

A 2024 report by The European Investment Bank found that 66% of surveyed global companies experienced climate-related disruptions to their operations, but only 22% had a climate resilience strategy. In Europe alone, extreme events such as heatwaves, floods and storms cost the continent approximately €145 billion in economic losses over the decade to 2022.

Climate disruption is not just another risk on a long list. It is the defining business trend of our era—a force multiplier that intensifies other risks and touches every geography and sector. Floods and droughts threaten logistics networks; wildfires and heatwaves disrupt workforce health; storms cut supply chains and halt production. From corner bakeries to multinational corporations, no enterprise is insulated.

From Survival to Competitive Advantage

Small enterprises employ over two thirds of Europe’s workforce and account for a over half of GDP. Yet they are among the most vulnerable. Research from the United States showed that 40% of small businesses never reopen after a disaster. These figures may be American, but the reality is global: SMEs everywhere sit on the frontlines of climate disruption.

But resilience is not only about survival. Businesses that prepare—by elevating critical equipment, training staff, digitizing insurance records, diversifying suppliers, or rehearsing continuity plans—are the ones that reopen first. In doing so, they capture market share while competitors falter. They also strengthen their case with insurers, lenders, and customers. What begins as a defensive act becomes a competitive advantage.

The Corporate Supply Chain Challenge

For large companies, climate disruption poses a different but potentially existential threat. It is not only their own facilities at risk, but also the far-flung networks of suppliers that provide critical goods and services.

The World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2025 identifies extreme weather as the world’s second most urgent risk today, and the number one risk of the decade ahead. Supply chain chokepoints—from droughts in Chile’s copper mines to low water levels on the Rhine River—show how disruptions in one region can cascade through global production systems. When Hurricane Helene damaged quartz facilities in North Carolina in 2024, semiconductor manufacturing was threatened worldwide.

The lesson is clear: resilience cannot be confined to headquarters. Large companies must help strengthen the small suppliers who anchor their value chains. If these SMEs collapse under climate stress, the corporates they serve will face stranded assets, lost revenue, and reputational damage.

Building Resilience in Parallel

Resilience must therefore be pursued on two tracks—small businesses protecting themselves, and large corporations investing in their supply chains.

For small businesses, the most effective strategies begin with identifying local climate risks and prioritizing those most likely to cause severe disruption. Action must follow quickly, whether that means retrofitting properties against floods, securing safe working conditions during heatwaves, or setting up alternative suppliers for critical inventory. Organizing information is another underappreciated discipline: having insurance documents, vendor contracts, and emergency contacts in cloud-based systems allows for quicker recovery when disaster strikes. And businesses that rehearse their response plans—through drills or tabletop exercises—recover more confidently and maintain customer trust.

For large companies, resilience begins with visibility. Few firms have clear insight into their Tier 2 or Tier 3 suppliers, yet these are often where vulnerabilities lie. Mapping supplier locations against climate hazard data uncovers weak links that might otherwise remain hidden until disaster arrives. From there, resilience requires partnership. The most effective corporates do not impose one-size-fits-all requirements; instead, they co-design solutions with suppliers, listening first to their needs.

Some companies are already demonstrating what this looks like in practice. Nespresso has worked with TechnoServe to provide drought resilience support to coffee farmers in Ethiopia and Kenya, distributing over a million shade trees to improve yields in hotter conditions. PepsiCo has financed simple irrigation systems for smallholder farmers, reducing drought risk while securing its own supply of ingredients. AB InBev has partnered with The Nature Conservancy and WWF to restore upstream watersheds, protecting barley supplies while improving water security for local communities. And H&M has aligned its payment terms with resilience goals, giving suppliers the financial breathing room to adapt to seasonal climate risks.

These examples illustrate a new paradigm: resilience as shared value. By financing adaptation, providing technical capacity, or reforming sourcing terms, corporates ensure continuity in their own operations while strengthening the communities and suppliers they depend on.

The Business Case for Resilience

For skeptics, the question remains: why invest in resilience now? The answer lies in both economics and expectations.

On the economics side, studies consistently show resilience pays off. The UN Office for Disaster risk reduction estimates that every dollar spent on resilient construction saves four dollars in recovery costs. Insurers and investors increasingly reward firms that can demonstrate adaptation measures. And companies that bounce back quickly from shocks protect revenue, capture market share, and reassure stakeholders.

On the expectations side, resilience has become part of a company’s social license to operate. Communities and customers expect firms to safeguard workers and neighbors. Investors are pressing for ISSB-aligned disclosures of supply chain risks. Regulators are increasingly attentive to stranded assets.

Climate resilience is no longer a “nice to have.” It is a boardroom imperative central to competitiveness and long-term growth.

From SMEs to Multinationals: Interdependence in Resilience

The reality is clear: SMEs cannot build resilience in isolation, and large companies cannot thrive without resilient suppliers.

A family-owned shop may elevate its utilities to stay dry during floods, but it relies on fair insurance terms, timely financing, and accessible resources. A global food and beverage company may secure water efficiency in its plants, but unless its smallholder farmers adapt to drought, production is at risk.

Resilience is therefore not an individual asset but a collective dividend—shared across value chains, industries, and economies.

First-mover Advantage Through Resilience

The 2020s are already the most expensive decade on record for climate disasters. With warming locked in, disruption will intensify. The businesses that succeed will be those that see resilience not as compliance or philanthropy, but as strategy.

For small businesses, resilience means clear-eyed risk assessment, practical action, disciplined information management, and readiness to recover. For large companies, it means mapping supply chains, listening to suppliers, sharing capital, and embedding resilience into sourcing and disclosure practices.

From the smallest storefront to the largest multinational, climate resilience is the hidden advantage that will separate the companies that merely endure from those that thrive in the climate-defined future.

About the Author

Joyce Coffee is president of Climate Resilience Consulting and a leading global expert on climate adaptation strategy, advising companies, nonprofits and governments worldwide on building resilience in markets and communities. She is also co-author of The Resilience Advantage: A Small Business Guide to Preparing for Floods, Heatwaves, Wildfires, and Other Climate Disasters.

The post Climate Resilience: The Hidden Advantage for Small Firms and Global Supply Chains appeared first on The European Business Review.

Cross-Border Health Security

The international dimension of climate health risks became starkly apparent during recent disease outbreaks. When dengue cases surged globally in 2024, the outbreak didn’t follow neat national boundaries. Countries across multiple continents experienced simultaneous increases in transmission, driven by climate conditions that created optimal breeding environments for Aedes mosquitoes across vast geographic regions.

Dr. Madeleine Thomson’s experience as co-chair of Columbia University’s working group on global health security provided direct insight into how climate health threats challenge traditional approaches to international cooperation. Disease surveillance systems, vector control programs, and health emergency responses that were designed for national contexts often prove inadequate when facing climate-driven health risks that operate at regional or global scales.

The WHO Collaborating Centre structure represents one model for addressing these cross-border challenges. Thomson’s work directing the WHO Collaborating Centre on Malaria Early Warning Systems created a framework for sharing climate-health expertise and methodologies across countries while respecting national sovereignty and local contexts.

The Challenge of Scientific Coordination

International scientific collaboration in climate health faces unique challenges that differ from other forms of research cooperation. Climate data, health surveillance information, and research capacity are unevenly distributed globally, creating power imbalances that can undermine effective partnership.

Many countries at highest risk for climate-sensitive diseases have limited meteorological infrastructure, sparse health surveillance systems, and few researchers with climate health expertise. This creates dependencies where vulnerable countries must rely on external institutions for basic environmental monitoring and disease prediction capabilities.

Thomson’s approach to addressing these inequities involves building local capacity rather than simply providing external expertise. During her field work in Africa, including operational research supporting The Gambia’s national impregnated bednet program, she observed how sustainable health interventions require local ownership and expertise rather than external dependency.

Institutional Frameworks for Cooperation

The World Health Organization provides the primary institutional framework for international health cooperation, but climate health challenges strain existing WHO mechanisms. Traditional disease-specific programs may be inadequate when climate change simultaneously affects multiple diseases across diverse geographic regions.

Thomson’s work with the Meningitis Environmental Risk Information Technologies (MERIT) research consortium illustrates how specialized networks can address specific climate health challenges while complementing broader WHO activities. MERIT focuses on meningococcal meningitis in Africa’s Sahel region, where climate variability drives epidemic patterns that require coordinated regional response.

These specialized networks operate through what might be called “epistemic communities”—groups of experts who share common knowledge and approaches to specific problems. In climate health, these communities often include meteorologists, epidemiologists, entomologists, public health practitioners, and social scientists who must work across disciplinary boundaries.

However, sustaining these collaborative networks requires ongoing institutional support and funding. Research grants typically support projects for 3-5 years, but building effective international collaboration often requires decade-long commitments to relationship building and capacity development.

North-South Research Partnerships

Climate health collaboration frequently involves partnerships between institutions in high-income countries with advanced research capacity and institutions in lower-income countries that face the highest disease burdens. These partnerships can provide valuable benefits but also risk recreating colonial patterns if not structured carefully.

Thomson’s current role at Wellcome involves funding research teams across 12 countries to develop digital tools for climate-sensitive disease response. This approach emphasizes supporting locally-led research rather than imposing external solutions, recognizing that effective tools must reflect local contexts, capacity, and priorities.

The 24 research teams funded through this initiative include institutions in Vietnam developing E-DENGUE outbreak prediction systems, African teams working on malaria early warning tools, and Latin American groups focusing on dengue prevention strategies. Each project addresses local needs while contributing to global knowledge about climate-health relationships.

Data Sovereignty and Sharing

International climate health collaboration increasingly confronts questions about data sovereignty and equitable sharing arrangements. Climate and health data often have commercial or strategic value, creating tensions between open science principles and national interests.

Satellite data from government space agencies is generally available for research use, but health surveillance data frequently remains within national systems. This creates challenges for developing regional or global prediction models that could benefit multiple countries.

Thomson’s experience with international data sharing reveals the importance of building trust through sustained relationships and demonstrating clear benefits for data-contributing countries. Early warning systems must provide valuable information to local health officials, not just serve external research interests.

Some initiatives are developing governance frameworks for equitable data sharing that ensure benefits return to communities and countries providing data. These frameworks attempt to prevent extraction of valuable information from vulnerable countries while building genuinely collaborative research relationships.

Capacity Building and Knowledge Transfer

Effective science diplomacy in climate health requires sustained investment in capacity building rather than one-way knowledge transfer. Many countries need strengthened meteorological services, enhanced disease surveillance systems, and training for health professionals in climate-health relationships.

Thomson emphasizes that capacity building must address fundamental knowledge gaps. She advocates for incorporating “fairly straightforward information on climate and environmental disease drivers in all epidemiological training that happens around the world.” This educational foundation enables health professionals to understand and use climate information effectively.

International training programs increasingly emphasize South-South learning, where countries with similar climate and disease challenges share experiences and expertise. Brazil’s experience with dengue control, for example, provides valuable lessons for other tropical countries facing similar challenges.

Crisis Response Coordination

Climate-driven health emergencies often require rapid international coordination that challenges existing diplomatic and institutional mechanisms. The 2016 Zika outbreak in the Americas demonstrated both the potential for international cooperation and the limitations of current systems.

Thomson’s analysis of that outbreak revealed how climate variability, globalization, and urbanization combined to create conditions for rapid international spread. The response required coordination between health agencies, meteorological services, research institutions, and international organizations across multiple countries.

However, the response also revealed gaps in international preparedness. Early warning systems existed in some countries but not others, research capacity was concentrated in wealthy countries, and information sharing mechanisms proved inadequate for the speed of outbreak spread.

Building Resilient Networks

Global health networks increasingly emphasize building resilience rather than just responding to specific threats. This approach recognizes that climate change will continue creating new combinations of health risks that cannot be fully anticipated.

Resilient networks require multiple types of connections: scientific collaboration for research and knowledge sharing, operational partnerships for surveillance and response, diplomatic relationships for policy coordination, and community connections for local implementation.

Thomson’s experience spanning academic research, WHO collaboration, and foundation work provides insight into how these different types of partnerships can reinforce each other. Academic collaboration builds scientific understanding, WHO frameworks provide legitimacy and coordination mechanisms, and foundation funding enables sustained relationship building.

Technology Transfer and Innovation

Science diplomacy in climate health increasingly involves technology transfer and collaborative innovation. Countries with advanced AI and satellite capabilities can share tools and expertise with countries that have extensive field experience and local knowledge.

This exchange can be mutually beneficial when structured appropriately. High-income countries gain access to field sites, local expertise, and validation opportunities for new technologies. Lower-income countries gain access to advanced tools and training while maintaining ownership of local data and implementation strategies.

Professional development initiatives emphasize building research partnerships that strengthen local capacity rather than creating dependency relationships. This includes training programs, equipment sharing, collaborative research projects, and visiting scholar exchanges.

Regional Approaches to Global Challenges

Some of the most effective climate health cooperation occurs at regional levels, where countries share similar climate patterns and disease challenges. The Sahel region of Africa, for example, experiences similar patterns of meningococcal meningitis related to seasonal climate variability.

Regional approaches can address climate health challenges more effectively than either purely national or global initiatives. Countries in the same region often share vectors, pathogens, climate patterns, and migration routes that create common health risks requiring coordinated response.

Thomson’s work with MERIT demonstrates how regional research consortiums can address specific climate health challenges while building networks that strengthen broader cooperation. These regional partnerships often provide stepping stones toward more ambitious global collaboration.

The Diplomacy of Scientific Uncertainty

Climate health science involves significant uncertainties that complicate diplomatic coordination. Climate models provide probabilistic predictions rather than definitive forecasts, disease outbreak predictions have inherent uncertainty, and the effectiveness of interventions varies by location and context.

Managing these uncertainties in international cooperation requires developing shared understanding of what scientific information can and cannot provide. Thomson notes that “predicting exactly what, where and when is really difficult. Instead we need to prepare ourselves to be able to respond rapidly to a broad range of possible threats.”

This perspective suggests that science diplomacy in climate health should focus on building adaptive capacity rather than trying to eliminate uncertainty. Countries need systems that can function effectively despite incomplete information and evolving threats.

Future Cooperation Frameworks

As climate health risks intensify, new forms of international cooperation are emerging that blend scientific collaboration, diplomatic coordination, and operational partnership. These frameworks attempt to address the limitations of existing institutions while building on successful models.

Multi-stakeholder initiatives involve academic institutions, government agencies, international organizations, and private sector partners in sustained collaboration. Platform approaches create shared infrastructure for data sharing, tool development, and capacity building that multiple countries and organizations can use.

However, the success of these new frameworks depends on addressing fundamental questions about equity, sovereignty, and sustainability. Effective climate health cooperation requires mechanisms that serve the interests of all participating countries while prioritizing the needs of populations most vulnerable to climate health risks.

The Imperative for Sustained Partnership

Climate change ensures that health threats will continue evolving, requiring sustained international cooperation rather than crisis-driven responses. Thomson’s career spanning field research in Africa, WHO collaboration, and international climate health leadership demonstrates the time and relationship-building required for effective partnership.

The most successful climate health cooperation often emerges from sustained personal and institutional relationships built over years or decades. These relationships provide the trust and shared understanding necessary for effective collaboration during health emergencies.

As climate risks intensify, the countries and communities best positioned to protect population health will be those that invest in building and sustaining these collaborative relationships. Science diplomacy in climate health isn’t just about sharing data or technologies—it’s about building the human networks and institutional frameworks necessary for collective action against shared threats.

The warming world demands new forms of cooperation that recognize health security as a global public good while respecting national sovereignty and local contexts. The science is clear about the risks ahead; the remaining challenge is building the diplomatic and institutional capacity to respond collectively and effectively.

The post Madeleine Thomson on Collaboration in a Warming World appeared first on The European Business Review.

If people don’t feel like they have a purpose, they tend to drift. I believe that our primary purpose needs to be to look after ourselves. This is selfless because we can’t give from an empty cup.  If you commit to recharging your battery every day, you will always be on purpose.

Having run wellbeing workshops all over the world, I know that the culture, country, psychographic or demographic I’m presenting to doesn’t matter. Wherever I am, less than half of my audience would say they have a strong purpose —that is, a distinct purpose that they wake up with every morning, knowing what they want to do with their life and, most importantly, why.

What I’ve seen through coaching is that if people don’t feel like they have a purpose, they tend to drift. If they don’t have a strong enough why, they don’t have the motivation to prioritise their own wellbeing. Typically, most of us think about purpose as outward-looking, with a focus on helping others, which is a good thing. However, I believe that our primary purpose needs to be to look after ourselves. This is selfless —rather than selfish —because we can’t give from an empty cup. You can’t be the best version of yourself with an empty battery —and you surely don’t want to be the one to end up needing help because you pushed yourself to breaking point.

If you commit to recharging your battery every day, then no matter what you’re doing, no matter what path you’re on, you will always be on purpose. As you recharge, you become the best version of yourself and start to thrive sustainably. This, in turn, inspires and encourages others, and has a positive impact on all your relationships. Once you are thriving sustainably, you will have the energy to uncover your strengths, passions and beliefs, and how you can use these to help others. You can then combine them to formulate a more defined purpose. My personal purpose is ‘to inspire others to reconnect to self and others through nature’.

I do this through many pathways, whether it’s speaking, coaching, consulting or just being there for someone. Rather than asking yourself, ‘What can I do?’, consider first asking yourself, ‘What kind of person do I want to be? What qualities, values, strengths and passions do I appreciate in myself and others?’ When you can find the things that are important to you —and not just what others expect of you —you can contribute to making those things happen. You become part of a greater community and feel you are contributing to something outside of yourself. This helps you feel connected and valued, and improves your self-worth. To help find your purpose, ask yourself these important life questions:

• Why do I want to be the best version of myself?
• What or who am I really doing it for?
• What kind of person do I want to be?

Prioritising yourself —and then others

When we talk about wellbeing and wellness, we are talking about two different things. Wellbeing means ‘to be in a comfortable state —mentally, emotionally, physically and

spiritually’. Wellness means ‘to make the deliberate effort to nurture your wellbeing’.

You really do have to prioritise yourself first to make sure you can continue to thrive sustainably and give the best version of yourself to others. I’m sure you are aware of the two versions of yourself —the one where you are full of energy and life, nothing seems to bother you and everyone enjoys being around you, and the one where you feel like you are just surviving and everything seems to get on your nerves. This version of you gets frustrated easily, and even the simplest roadblocks feel like you’re trying to move heaven and earth —and that’s just trying to open the strawberry jam jar!

Being kind to yourself isn’t just a nicety; it’s your birthright and, if you’re not already, you need to get good at it. If you don’t have enough self-worth or self-love, you won’t have the motivation to make that deliberate effort to want to look after yourself. Next time you’re looking in the bathroom mirror, look at yourself —really look at yourself —deep into your eyes as if you’re admiring a beautiful work of art. When you’ve connected with yourself, say, ‘I see you’. And keep saying it until it registers, until you feel it deep in your heart and you truly believe it. You’re worthy.

Edited extract from Energised: The Daily Practice of Connected Leadership and Sustainable Wellbeing (Wiley $32.95) by Tim Jack Adams. 

About the Author 

Tim Jack Adams is a global speaker and a pioneering thought leader in human sustainability and performance and has spent over a decade guiding leaders and teams to reconnect with themselves and others through nature. Join The Great Reconnect movement at http://www.greenx7.com.

The post Why Finding Your Purpose is More Important than Ever appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Patrick Reichert and Vanina Farber

This piece explores the ripple effects of America’s retreat from humanitarian aid and what it means for fragile states, global stability, and future financing models for the sector.

In 2023, the United States accounted for 42% of global humanitarian aid.

On July 1^st, 2025, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), for decades a cornerstone of global relief and development, officially shut its doors. Funding to thousands of life-saving aid programs was terminated. Local clinics, food distribution centers, refugee camps, and education projects lost critical support. In total, close to $40 billion in annual assistance evaporated with the agency’s closure, leaving a gaping void in the global humanitarian landscape.

The decision to shutter USAID wasn’t made in a vacuum. For years, foreign aid faced mounting criticism over failed projects, excessive overhead, and programs that created dependency rather than development. Critics also pointed to the system’s over-reliance on a single donor—a structural vulnerability that aid experts had long warned about.

With the wholesale shutdown of USAID, that structural vulnerability has been laid bare in the starkest terms. Whatever the system’s flaws, it had become the backbone of global emergency response. Furthermore, the majority of that response had clear, measurable impact. Emergency food assistance, vaccine distribution, HIV treatment, disaster relief: these are not experimental programs but proven interventions with well-documented results.

Although shortcomings in the humanitarian system have become increasingly apparent, reform should strengthen the foundation, not bring the whole structure down. This crisis has exposed the urgency to establish a new architecture: one that breaks down silos between humanitarian, development, and peacebuilding efforts; reduces dependency on any single state donor; and fosters collaboration among governments, international organizations, private philanthropy, and local communities. Instead, what we are seeing is not transformation but outright dismantling — leaving millions to bear the cost while the sector scrambles to rebuild from the ground up.

Unfortunately, last month, that void has deepened.

On July 17^th, 2025, Congress passed the Rescissions Act of 2025, eliminating an additional $9.4 billion in unobligated foreign assistance and public broadcasting funds. Nearly $8.3 billion of that came directly from international aid budgets, slashing planned spending on humanitarian relief, health programs, democracy promotion, and economic support. Despite bipartisan concern, the bill passed narrowly along party lines and was swiftly signed into law. Though narrower in scope than the USAID shutdown, it reinforces a troubling trajectory: the dismantling of foreign aid as we know it.

It’s hard to overstate how disruptive USAID’s closure is to the humanitarian sector. In 2023, the United States contributed~$68 billion the world’s humanitarian aid. Of that, USAID’s direct spending accounted for about $40 billion, around 59% of the U.S.’s total humanitarian aid effort.^[1] The agency is being folded into the state department, where it is to be replaced by a successor organization called “America First.”

With the funding cuts, humanitarian operations worldwide came to a standstill. For these programs, and the communities that depend on them, the opportunity to secure new resources and either complete, hand over, or responsibly close out their work is vanishing fast.

For implementing partners already reeling from USAID’s collapse, the Rescissions Act is a double-whammy. In some cases, planned back-up funding is now gone. In others, program transitions that were expected to be gradual are being aborted. And for fragile states that depended on American assistance—from Ukraine to Sudan, Congo to Gaza—the risk of a full-blown humanitarian collapse is growing by the week.

Amidst this uncertainty, we conducted a targeted analysis of USAID’s final funding obligations to understand where the gaps are sharpest—across geographies, sectors, and delivery partners. Our goal was to identify the most exposed communities and programs, and to help inform decisions about where resources and attention are most urgently needed.

Where the Gaps Are Sharpest: Who and What Is Most Affected?

Analysis of USAID’s FY2024 obligations reveals the scale and scope of the disruption. Across more than 24,000 funding records, more than $35 billion had been committed globally. With many of these activities now paused or cancelled, critical humanitarian services face an existential threat.^[2] At an average cost of $4,500 to save a life through proven global health interventions like malaria treatment or child illness prevention, the $35 billion lost from USAID’s shutdown represents an opportunity cost of over 7.7 million lives.

Many of the hardest-hit countries include Ukraine, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Ethiopia: each expected to receive $1–6 billion in assistance. This funding spanned emergency food aid, healthcare, economic support, and more, all of which now faces uncertainty. Ukraine alone accounted for ~$6 billion of assistance in 2024, largely to bolster its war-torn economy and public services. Likewise, critical humanitarian and health programs (from emergency food aid to HIV/AIDS treatment) comprised some of the largest slices of the USAID portfolio.

Map of USAID 2024 Funding Obligations

USAID 2024 Obligations by International Sector & Implementing Partner

Ukraine: A Wartime Lifeline Cut Off

For Ukraine, USAID’s closure could not have come at a more precarious time. Ravaged by ongoing conflict and economic strain, Ukraine had become the single largest beneficiary of U.S. foreign aid via USAID in 2024, receiving roughly $6 billion. This figure included nearly $3.9 billion in direct budget support to keep the Ukrainian government and essential services running, as well as hundreds of millions for infrastructure and energy repairs to keep the lights on during wartime.

That lifeline has now been severed. The macroeconomic support that helped Ukraine pay salaries, stabilize its currency, and maintain critical public utilities is gone. Likewise, USAID-funded projects shoring up Ukraine’s electricity grid and heating systems have been left in limbo. The consequences are already looming. Without USAID, Ukraine faces a massive budget shortfall in the midst of a costly war and humanitarian crisis. Funds that had been sustaining hospitals, schools, and social safety nets have dried up. While European and other allies may try to fill some gaps, the sudden loss of U.S. economic support poses risks to Ukraine’s stability and its ability to provide basic services during the conflict.

Democratic Republic of Congo: Humanitarian Lifelines Severed

In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), home to one of the world’s most complex and protracted humanitarian crises, the end of USAID funding has been devastating. With more than $1.3 billion in USAID obligations in 2024, the DRC now faces funding shortfalls for programs including food aid, healthcare, and conflict mitigation for millions of Congolese civilians and refugees from abroad.

Aid agencies on the ground warn of immediate and life-threatening impacts. According to Manenji Mangundu, Oxfam’s country director, “USAID cuts will have an immediate and devastating impact on millions of the world’s most vulnerable people who depend on humanitarian aid for survival.”^[3] In eastern Congo’s conflict zones, where over half a million people were already desperate for food, water, and shelter, the sudden funding halt means relief efforts are grinding to a halt.

USAID-funded food convoys and nutrition programs are being suspended, and NGO-run health clinics are running out of supplies. Agencies that relied on U.S. funds for everything from cholera prevention to support for displaced families now find themselves without resources, forced to make decisions about who gets help and who is turned away.

The loss of U.S. aid is also causing chaos for the organizations themselves. Most humanitarian groups in DRC depended heavily on USAID grants; without them, many programs face closure and staff layoffs. Oxfam estimates that the health of up to one million people is now at risk in DRC due to cuts in vital clean water and sanitation services, heightening the threat of disease outbreaks like cholera and measles.^[4]

The Scale of Human Impact: Food, Health, and Fragile States

Of all the sectors upended by USAID’s closure, emergency food aid may be the most immediately consequential. The shock comes at a time when global hunger was already at record highs. The U.N. World Food Programme (WFP) – the world’s largest hunger relief agency, has sounded alarm bells about a massive funding shortfall. In March 2025, WFP warned that 58 million people worldwide are at risk of extreme hunger or starvation unless urgent funding is secured, after seeing drastic donor shortfalls this year (including the loss of U.S. contributions). The agency’s donor income in 2025 is projected to be 40% lower than the year before, a gap that “threatened feeding programmes in 28 crisis zones around the world” from Congo to Sudan, Syria to Yemen.^[5]

The United States has long been WFP’s largest donor, so the abrupt halt of USAID-administered food funding forced WFP to contemplate deep cuts. With donor budgets shrinking and U.S. foreign aid in flux, the agency faces tough choices about where – and whether – it can deliver food aid. WFP’s own estimates show it may receive only about $8 billion of the $16.9 billion it needs to assist 123 million people in 2025.^[6] The funding shortfall comes even as private donations have tripled since 2019. However, private donations only account for ~3.5% of WFP’s funding, nowhere near enough to compensate.

Even before the USAID shutdown, WFP and other agencies had begun rationing aid due to funding gaps. For example, in East Africa, refugees in countries like Ethiopia and Kenya saw their food rations cut by up to 40% in 2023–2024 because donor money wasn’t keeping up.^[7] WFP officials are prioritizing “the worst-affected regions and stretching food rations” as far as possible, but they acknowledge that they are approaching a funding cliff with life-threatening consequences.^[8]

Programs in Sudan, South Sudan, DRC, Palestine, Syria, Yemen, and other hotspots are at risk of suspension in the coming months if new funding doesn’t materialize. In humanitarian terms, this means millions of hungry people could be cut off from food assistance. The most vulnerable – including children, displaced families, and refugees – will feel it first. Already, in Bangladesh, WFP has had to reduce rations for Rohingya refugees due to lack of funds.^[9] In Afghanistan, Yemen, and Syria, programmes to prevent child malnutrition are being scaled back and could halt entirely. The USAID freeze adds immense pressure to an already strained system. The coming months will determine whether stopgap measures can avert the worst outcomes, or whether 2025 will see a dramatic spike in famine and undernutrition because the world’s largest donor stopped feeding the hungry.

Health Programs in Peril: The case of HIV/AIDS

The human impact of the aid cutoff is equally stark in the health sector, particularly for disease-specific programs that had depended on U.S. leadership. One of the most illustrative is the fight against HIV/AIDS. For two decades, the U.S. (through U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and contributions to the Global Fund) led a global campaign that saved millions of lives and brought AIDS under control in many countries.

However, when the U.S. government paused all foreign assistance, it caused an instant rupture in HIV services: deliveries of life-saving HIV medicines were interrupted, and prevention programs for at-risk populations were halted across dozens of countries.^[10] Millions of people who depend on consistent antiretroviral treatment and outreach support were suddenly and abruptly cut off, left without care from one week to the next.

UNAIDS, the United Nations agency leading the global HIV response, has issued dire warnings. According to UNAIDS projections, if U.S. support for HIV programs is not quickly restored or replaced, the world could see an additional 6 million new HIV infections and 4 million AIDS-related deaths between 2025 and 2029.^[11] “This is not just a funding gap. It’s a ticking time bomb,” said UNAIDS Executive Director Winnie Byanyima, noting how services have “vanished overnight” in some places and health workers have been sent home. The progress of the last decades is at risk of unraveling: before the crisis, global HIV infections and deaths had been steadily declining (new infections were 40% lower in 2024 than in 2010), but that hard-won progress could reverse if treatment and prevention stall out now.

Amid this bleak outlook, there was one notable exception. Following bipartisan pushback, the Senate amended the Rescissions Act of 2025 to preserve PEPFAR funding, stripping out a planned $400 million cut.^[12] This move protected a cornerstone of the global HIV/AIDS response, ensuring that key services—such as antiretroviral distribution and testing—can continue in the short term.

However, the safeguard appears to apply only to PEPFAR. Other HIV/AIDS initiatives, particularly those funded through USAID or routed through broader global health platforms, were not exempted. With nearly $8 billion in international assistance rescinded overall, the fallout for HIV programs outside the PEPFAR umbrella is significant. Community-based prevention efforts, health systems strengthening, and cross-cutting support services are among the casualties, leaving dangerous service gaps in many countries.

On the ground, the disruption also entails knock-on effects. In countries like Mozambique, more than 30,000 health personnel (many of them involved in HIV and TB programs) have lost their jobs as U.S.-funded projects shut down.^[13] Such losses not only hurt HIV treatment delivery but also weaken healthcare overall, as these workers also handle maternal health, vaccinations, and more.

Beyond HIV/AIDS, other health initiatives are suffering a similar fate. Tuberculosis clinics and outreach programs, some funded through USAID’s global health security efforts, are reporting shortages of medicines and diagnostic kits.^[14] Malaria control programs that depended on U.S. funding for bed nets and spraying have scaled back, even as cases surge in places like Ethiopia.^[15] Maternal and child health programs, from vaccine campaigns to nutrition for pregnant women, are likewise facing gaps.

In summary, the global health safety net has unraveled. The sudden withdrawal of the world’s largest donor is being measured in clinic closures, medicine stock-outs, and lives at risk. Whether it’s an HIV-positive mother in Kenya, a malaria-stricken child in Ethiopia, or a TB patient in Ukraine, vulnerable people are seeing their lifelines weakened. Health experts fear that without an urgent solution, the coming years could see resurgences of epidemics that had been under control, and a loss of confidence in health systems in some of the world’s poorest countries.

Can the Void Be Filled?

The closure of USAID’s programs in 2025 sent shockwaves through the humanitarian sector. The passage of the Rescissions Act of 2025 has now cemented a broader shift: a systemic retreat of the United States from its long-held role as the world’s leading humanitarian donor. Together, the agency’s shutdown and the rescissions mark an abrupt and ideologically driven pivot in U.S. foreign policy, one that deprioritizes humanitarian principles in favor of short-term domestic optics.

Front-line services have been disrupted, implementing partners destabilized, and local capacity gutted. In conflict zones and refugee camps, people who yesterday had food, medicine, or shelter provided by an American-funded project are waking up today to nothing. The ripple effects will not stop here. With each round of funding clawbacks, the humanitarian landscape becomes more fragile, more reliant on fewer actors, and more vulnerable to political shocks. The instability has rippled through organizations as well – tens of thousands of aid workers have lost employment globally due to the cuts, undermining local capacities built up over years.^[16] It is a stark reminder of the interdependency and fragility of the humanitarian system and how quickly gains can be reversed.

Yet, amid the uncertainty, there are seeds of adaptation. Other nations and international institutions are under pressure to step up their contributions, even as many face their own budget constraints. Philanthropic actors, exemplified by Project Resource Optimization (PRO)^[17], are innovating to plug critical gaps, however modestly. And affected communities and governments are striving to do what they can to fill the void – whether it’s health ministries reallocating scarce domestic funds to keep HIV clinics open, or local NGOs rallying volunteers to continue aid distribution on a shoestring. These efforts highlight the resilience and resourcefulness within the humanitarian sector.

Still, the road ahead remains challenging. The scale of disruption, $30+ billion annually, is not something that can be easily or quickly patched. The worry is that without prompt action to restore funding streams, today’s cutbacks will become tomorrow’s full-blown catastrophes – be it famine, disease outbreaks, or instability from unaddressed crises. The international community is therefore at a crossroads. Will new coalitions of donors emerge to restore at least a portion of the lost aid? Will cost-effective initiatives like PRO inspire more strategic giving to soften the blow? Can some projects spin-off into revenue-generating programs? Or will the world’s vulnerable populations simply be left to bear the brunt of a political decision beyond their control?

The 2025 USAID closure has infused a sense of urgency and clarity about what is at stake. This moment demands not just emergency stopgaps, but a fundamental rethinking of how global aid is structured, financed, and sustained. The old model—with its heavy dependence on a single donor and rigid institutional silos—has proven dangerously fragile. The new architecture must be more resilient: distributed across multiple funding sources, integrated across sectors, and rooted in partnerships that strengthen rather than replace local capacity.

The hope is that this crisis will catalyze not just a restoration of funding, but a reimagining of the humanitarian response itself. The Rescissions Act should be a rallying cry for systemic change. The world cannot afford for the lights to go out, but neither can it afford to simply flip the same old switches. The system holds—until it doesn’t. Now it’s time to build one that will.

About the Authors

Patrick Reichert is the Associate Director & Research Fellow at the elea Chair for Social Innovation at IMD. Patrick conducts research at the intersection of entrepreneurship, finance and social impact, with a particular focus on the mechanisms and practices that investors use to seed investment in social organizations.

Vanina Farber is the elea Professor for Social Innovation and Dean of the EMBA Programme at IMD. Vanina is a macroeconomist and political scientist specializing in humanitarian finance, impact investment, and social innovation, with more than twenty years of experience in research, teaching, and consultancy. At IMD, Vanina designs and directs the Driving Innovative Finance for Impact (DIFI) program, equipping leaders with tools to drive sustainable financial solutions.

References

^[1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/feb/13/donald-trump-elon-musk-usaid-soft-power?

^[2] Analysis draws upon data from the official US foreign assistance website: https://foreignassistance.gov/

^[3] https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/oxfam-reaction-usaid-funding-cuts-drc

^[4] https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/oxfam-reaction-usaid-funding-cuts-drc

^[5] https://www.reuters.com/world/uns-wfp-says-58-million-face-hunger-crisis-after-huge-shortfall-aid-2025-03-28

^[6] https://executiveboard.wfp.org/document_download/WFP-0000161321

^[7] https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/ng-interactive/2025/feb/21/the-impact-has-been-devastating-how-usaid-freeze-sent-shockwaves-through-ethiopia

^[8] https://www.reuters.com/world/uns-wfp-says-58-million-face-hunger-crisis-after-huge-shortfall-aid-2025-03-28

^[9] https://www.reuters.com/world/uns-wfp-says-58-million-face-hunger-crisis-after-huge-shortfall-aid-2025-03-28

^[10] https://www.unaids.org/en/impact-US-funding-cuts

^[11] https://healthpolicy-watch.news/millions-at-risk-of-hiv-infection-and-death-after-us-funding-cuts-warns-unaids

^[12] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/17/us-senate-passes-aid-public-broadcasting-cuts-victory-trump

^[13] https://healthpolicy-watch.news/millions-at-risk-of-hiv-infection-and-death-after-us-funding-cuts-warns-unaids

^[14] https://www.unaids.org/en/impact-US-funding-cuts

^[15] https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/ng-interactive/2025/feb/21/the-impact-has-been-devastating-how-usaid-freeze-sent-shockwaves-through-ethiopia

^[16] https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/10/06/2025/cuts-usaid-fallout-continues-part-2

^[17] Project Resource Optimization (PRO) is an independent initiative formed in 2025 with a singular mission: to channel resources to the most urgent and effective aid programs left stranded by USAID’s shutdown. PRO uses rigorous analysis, sector expertise, and a “living” database of projects to guide donors. It scours the list of cancelled or paused USAID programs to identify those that are high-impact, cost-effective, and time-sensitive – for example, a partially completed health clinic that just needs a few months of funding to finish, or a food aid program mid-way through feeding a community. These vetted opportunities are then shared with philanthropies, charities, and even high-net-worth individuals who are eager to step in and contribute funding.

The post When the Lights Go Out: America’s Retreat from Global Humanitarian Aid appeared first on The European Business Review.

This article gives an overview of how digital and environmental science tools like AI, life‑cycle analysis and carbon‑labeling are optimizing the entire food‑system and bringing in a new era of transparency, sustainability and data-based decision making. New technologies are also ensuring long term food security – particularly through the increased availability of “low-carbon proteins” – for a rapidly expanding world population. It also features a selection of companies that are pioneering different food tech solutions and driving innovation across the wider Food Tech sector.

The Role of AI in Developing Sustainable Nutrition

AI – generative and predictive – is emerging as one of the key enablers in the development of sustainable nutrition and alternative protein inputs. Farmers and agronomists are increasingly benefiting from platforms that use AI and machine learning to leverage data gained from satellite imagery, drones and other IoT devices to implement precision irrigation, nutrition and crop protection solutions.

CNNs (Convolutional Neural Networks), RNNs (Recurrent Neural Networks), and LSTMs (Long Short-Term Memory networks) permit highly sophisticated analysis of spatial and temporal data to allow adaptive yield predictions. On a research level, AI algorithms are transforming the genetic engineering of proteins and enabling the precision fermentation of microbes to create high quality edible proteins. AI also predicts yields for modified seeds and can optimize extraction and processing techniques to achieve optimal protein content in foodstuffs like flour. AI also optimizes the downstream end of the supply chain, improving logistics and distribution, predicting consumer demand and reducing wastage.

Life‑Cycle Assessments and Environmental Impact

A life-cycle assessment (LCA) evaluates the environmental impact of a crop or food product across its entire life cycle, through land use, planting and growth, harvesting and processing, distribution, retail and waste disposal. An holistic assessment that accurately measures the environmental impact of irrigation, fertilization, farm vehicle fuel consumption, and every other factor, allows genuine and verifiable transparency with regard to sustainability. Reliable LCAs permit strategic decision making about crop choices and identify areas within the food supply chain that require improvement.

Achieving Standardization through Collaborative Platforms and Consortia

A high level of standardization is essential to achieve sustainability in agriculture. Diverse stakeholders need to operate and make assessments according to common definitions, metrics, data standards, and agreed best practices. These can be applied on a regulatory level, or through investor or industry backed networks. Once there is alignment on benchmarks and frameworks, growers and retailers – and consumers – can accurately compare the carbon footprints of proteins and identify genuinely “low carbon proteins”. As consumer awareness grows, all carbon claims must be science-backed and subject to full transparency.

Major Innovators in the Sustainable Nutrition Sector

Benson Hill, Inc

Benson Hill is a Missouri based seed innovation company that leverages the natural genetic diversity of seeds to create optimal nutritional outcomes. Benson Hill is a leader in the utilization of proprietary genetics and AI-driven seed breeding, and has a strong focus on sustainability and delivering full supply chain traceability. Benson Hill technologies include platforms and tech stacks like eMERGE® Genetics, CropOS® and Crop Accelerator. These technologies have led to innovations like ultra high protein soybeans (for high protein flour), yellow peas with an enhanced protein content. Benson Hill also develops low-carbon animal and aquatic feeds that contribute indirectly to a stronger food supply chain.

ICL Group

ICL Group is a leading specialty minerals company and one of the world’s largest manufacturers of fertilizers by volume. The company leverages its mineral expertise, and other advanced technologies, to innovate across the AgTech and FoodTech sectors. Agmatix is an agro informatics company that is part of ICL’s AgTech digital solutions. The Agronomic Software Suite contains a variety of digital tools that can help growers to maximize protein‑crop yields with minimal inputs. Agmatix’s Agronomic Trial Management tool is particularly useful for collaboration between stakeholders conducting on-farm experiments and field trials.  Agmatix also offers predictive (AI and ML) modelling and insights, and a Sustainable Agriculture platform that can provide powerful inputs for sustainable nutrition innovation.

SunOpta, Inc

SunOpta is a multinational food and beverages company, founded in Canada and based in the US. It has a strong focus on plant and fruit based organic foods and a corporate culture and outlook that was already highly receptive to the concept of sustainable nutrition. SunOpta has a range of non-dairy milk alternatives that obtain protein from soy, almonds and oats. Innovations include OatGold, an upcycled oat protein powder that is used in breakfast cereal and Soy Supreme Fiber‑Reduced powders. The company’s soy-derived Okara powder is another low-carbon protein that is nutrient-dense and sustainably produced. SunOpta technologies are providing improved consumer choice and creating commercially viable examples of low-carbon proteins.

Arcadia Biosciences

Arcadia Biosciences is a California based company focused on agricultural biotechnology and specifically on enhancing the nutritional value of crops. Arcadia Biosciences is pioneering the development of enhanced wheats that provide improved protein and amino acid content, as well as containing a greater density of other essential nutrients. The company’s GoodWheat line is also engineered for reduced allergenic gluten content. Arcadia also acquired the rights to Tritordeum, a durum wheat and wild barley hybrid with a high protein content and greater resilience to abiotic stresses for improved sustainability. Wheat and its derivatives are an essential food staple and Arcadia is making a valuable contribution to food security through its innovation.

Conclusion

Companies like ICL Group, Benson Hill and SunOpta are demonstrating that there is clear consumer demand for sustainable nutrition and that emerging technologies like AI and machine learning are making the sector not only commercially viable, but increasingly profitable. Companies that can deliver positive life cycle assessments and align themselves with standardized benchmarks and frameworks can channel technological expertise and innovation into the penetration of new markets. The wider spectrum of sustainable nutrition.

The post Sustainable Nutrition Through Cutting Edge Food Tech Solutions appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. Pedro Cesar Martinez Moran and Dr. Simon L. Dolan

In today’s ever-evolving world, it’s crucial to look beyond the surface and recognize the potential dangers lurking in the unseen corners of our society. While the idea of a hidden harmful society may seem daunting, it also presents us with a powerful opportunity for awareness and growth. This article sheds light on these issues with the hope of empowering all of us (communities, political leaders, corporations and academic institutions) to take proactive steps toward positive change. Ignoring these challenges may seem easier, but envisioning a healthier and more sustainable future requires us to confront the realities that many may overlook.

Introduction

We live in a time when society, far from being a refuge of support and growth, can become a source of silent harm. A harmful society is one that, consciously or unconsciously, normalizes behaviors that hurt, exclude, or humiliate others. It is not just about great acts of violence or injustice but about an everyday culture where damage – emotional, social, symbolic – is reproduced without question.

In a harmful society:

• My judgment is the only valid one. I contrast my analysis with those who will corroborate my analysis. I reject those who force me to rethink.
• Criticism, sometimes ruthless, replaces the rational.
• Appearance is valued more than well-being.
• Social networks become free administrators of empty sentences and self-promoting sentences. There is no room for fair judgment.
• Relationships – family, work, affective – are destroyed by struggles for power, control or ego.
• Sustaining or promoting mental health is minimized or ridiculed.
• Success is measured in terms of performance, not balance or humanity, not employing value added to community or to society.
• Good manners are seen as a weakness.

The most complex aspect of a harmful society is that many of its practices have become so common that they go unnoticed: ignoring someone as a form of punishment, mocking under the pretext of humor, making irony an insidious source of punishment and humiliation, constantly competing, speaking ill of others to validate themselves. Such is not only a society that allows harm, but one that, many times, encourages it, normalizes it and even rewards it.

The danger of this type of society is not always obvious. “He disguises himself in successful speeches, hides behind screens, and feeds on the fear of not fitting in.”¹ Little by little, it erodes mental health, destroys collective trust, and creates a culture where toxic individualism prevails. It makes us forget that what is truly human is to take care of others, not to crush them.

If we are not aware, we risk perpetuating this damage. For this reason, it is urgent to question the values that are imposed on us, to build communities based on respect, solidarity and common welfare. Only in this way can we transform a harmful society into a society that heals.²

Conflicts have always existed. They have diverse origins such as different ethnicities, religions, political ideologies, social differences and economic inequalities, access to and possession of territories, and the tenure of natural resources. The consequence of many of these conflicts has been confrontation, war, destruction, partial or total. The trail of hatred and revenge has fueled the behaviors of generations and generations.

Society has been generating models for overcoming these conflicts. Peace treaties, reconciliation processes, mediation and negotiation tables have been instruments used to eradicate future disputes. Such confrontations are elevated to a higher level. Entire territories and countries or population centers are involved in the fight. Either from within the opponents or together with the support of third parties, an end is sought for them. Rarely have the means of pacification managed to have a sense of anticipation.

In recent years, a set of disputes, fights, and confrontations with lower participation of contenders have appeared, which leaves a silent trail of damage. Due to their magnitude and the various scenarios in which they occur, it is difficult to avoid not being involved in any of them. The stealthy sum it produces leads to perpetuating that we are facing a harmful society with different ramifications.

The dark side of social media

In the digital age, spaces that should foster connection and growth have too often become places of revenge or disqualifications.

On social networks, validation has become a bargaining chip. Personal worth seems to be measured in likes, followers, and viral content. This system drives constant competition for attention and approval, leading many people to distort their identity, hide their pain, or even attack others to gain visibility. Behind the screens, the other is dehumanized. Hate speech, cancellation without reflection and the pressure to appear to have a perfect life are clear symptoms of a society that feeds on judgment and not on understanding.

The silent damage of breaking friendships

Divorces and separations are, by nature, complex and painful processes. However, when one or both members of the couple act out of resentment, the need for revenge or the desire to hurt the other, the damage that is generated goes far beyond the emotional. Instead of closing a stage with respect and maturity, a cycle of psychological violence, manipulation and deep wounds that can last for years is opened.

One of the most harmful behaviors is the use of children as a tool to punish the other parent. This can be reflected in parental alienation when one parent emotionally manipulates children into rejecting the other. This type of behavior has devastating consequences for the children, who carry a divided loyalty and emotional confusion that can mark their development, in addition to hurting the excluded father or mother.

Another common behavior is the distortion of reality in legal processes. Exaggerating or inventing situations to gain advantages in matters such as custody, pension or the extinction of the existing condominium not only delays the judicial process but also contaminates relationships and emotionally wears down everyone involved. This instrumentalization of justice for vengeful purposes shows a clear intention to harm the other beyond what is reasonable.

The constant reminder of events that have occurred in the past, with an extensive litany of dates, places and details, far from paving the way, feeds gasoline on the irreducible fire of hatred.

Passive-aggressive attacks are also frequent, such as defaming the ex-partner in front of friends, neighbors, family or even on social networks. This type of behavior seeks to destroy the reputation of the other, generating social and emotional damage that is often irreversible.

Silence becomes a weapon of destruction. All communication is cut off. Messages are no longer answered, which, inevitably, need another one back. Sometimes, open dialogue is suddenly replaced by a cold and freezing silence.

These attitudes not only prevent a healthy separation but also perpetuate a negative bond between people who should no longer have any relationship than is strictly necessary, especially if there are children involved. Sustained and nurtured resentment damages mental health, prevents the closure of the cycle and makes it difficult to build new personal or family relationships.

The real problem is not the divorce itself but how it is managed. When the breakup becomes a battlefield where the focus is to win or make the other suffer, everyone loses. Opting for respect and dialogue, as difficult as it may be, is the only way to mitigate the pain and prevent a separation from becoming a permanent wound.

When a friendship is broken with the intention of hurting

Friendship breakups, although less visible than those of a couple, can be just as painful. There are records of divorces and separations but none of broken friendships. And when such breakups come with a load of resentment or with the clear intention of hurting, the damage can be deep and lasting.

Cutting off all communication without explanation or applying the silent treatment for a long time can leave the other in a situation of bewilderment and pain, especially if the relationship was close.

One of the most toxic behaviors in these situations is to speak badly of the ex-friend to third parties, seeking to isolate him or her socially or destroy his or her image. This not only fuels conflict but creates unnecessary divisions in common groups and sows mistrust.

Another form of harm is the revelation of shared secrets, a direct betrayal that goes to the heart of the trust that once united both people. Breaking that implicit pact not only hurts but leaves a mark that is difficult to erase.³

The use of silence as punishment is also common. Cutting off all communication without explanation or applying the silent treatment for a long time can leave the other in a situation of bewilderment and pain, especially if the relationship was close.

The problem isn’t that friendships end—it’s natural for some relationships to change or dissolve over time—but the way some people choose to close those ties: with anger, manipulation, or contempt.

Closing cycles with dignity, even in friendship, is a sign of emotional maturity. When the intention is to harm, the one who loses the most is not always the other: it is oneself.

Family conflicts: When the bond becomes a weapon

Family conflicts, while inevitable in many cases, can become deeply destructive when behavior is guided not by the desire to resolve but by the desire to hurt. In those moments, the emotional closeness that binds family members together becomes the sharpest weapon.

One of the most common and harmful acts is bringing up past mistakes to humiliate or manipulate the other. Instead of addressing a current problem, old wounds are used as a form of punishment. This not only poisons the present but also prevents any possibility of honest reconciliation.

It is also common to take sides within the family, where a marked division is generated between “mine” and “yours”, deteriorating the family fabric and leaving some members emotionally isolated. This dynamic fuels resentment and breaks trust.

Silence is also used in this area. Ignoring, excluding, and cutting off communication are powerful means of emotional violence. In a family, being ignored hurts more than being yelled at.

Silent violence in education

In schools and universities, emotional damage is often hidden behind jokes, group dynamics or non-explicit hierarchies. Bullying among peers, humiliation disguised as humor, systematic exclusion or favoritism by teachers are forms of daily violence that rarely transcend. As in other close relationships, the damage is more serious because it is born from coexistence and apparent normality and because, many times, those who suffer it do not feel legitimized to name it.

Formal and informal authority protects the one who commits the punishment. The victim feels different moods, in many cases, even contradictory. Demonstration of the complex psychological situation that drags and leaves the suffering evil.

Silent hostility in neighborhood communities

Neighborhood communities, neutral spaces for coexistence, can become scenarios of sustained conflict and subtle emotional damage. Unlike major social confrontations, here, the discomfort is built in silence through small but persistent gestures, looks of contempt, rumors that circulate in the corridors, repeated complaints, indirect comments or the simple act of ignoring the other deliberately.

Many times, these conflicts do not have a specific origin but are fed by prejudices, lifestyle differences, or resentments accumulated over time. Disputes over the use of common spaces, noise or the rules of coexistence are transformed into personal battles where the objective is no longer to solve and becomes to punish, point out or marginalize.

This type of damage is difficult to denounce or make visible because it moves in the implicit. There are usually no direct insults or physical aggressions, but there is an atmosphere of constant tension that wears down the emotional health of those who inhabit it. The victim often ends up isolated, not knowing how to act without appearing to be exaggerating or combative.

Coexistence, when contaminated by contempt or indifference, can become a hostile environment. And the saddest thing is that this type of passive violence usually lasts for years, becoming normalized.

Invisible wear and tear in work environments

Work, beyond its productive function, is a space of human bonds, and as such, it can also be the scene of harmful dynamics that, although not always expressed openly, undermine the emotional health of those who suffer from them. In many work environments, mistreatment does not occur in shouting or explicit aggression but in more subtle forms: exclusion from important conversations, constant indifference, passive-aggressive comments or a systematic lack of recognition.

The damage is aggravated when these attitudes are normalized under the logic of “that’s the way things are here” or when those who suffer it are afraid to point it out for fear of reprisals, isolation or loss of employment. Rigid hierarchies, poorly managed competitiveness and a lack of safe spaces for dialogue favour this type of silent violence. Often, what appear to be “work tensions” are sustained forms of emotional harassment.

In these environments, people may experience anxiety, low self-esteem, insomnia, and even physical symptoms without clearly identifying the cause. Everyday hostility, when it becomes part of the landscape, leaves deep marks and affects not only professional performance but also personal life.⁴

Efficiency and productivity have become a supreme value. Burnout is glorified as a sign of commitment, while minimizing the importance of emotional well-being. Toxic environments, unfair competition, and a lack of empathy among colleagues are signs of a culture that rewards results, not humanity. In many cases, those who speak out are silenced for fear of reprisals or the stigma of being “problematic”.

Work should be a place where one can grow, contribute and feel a part of something. When it becomes a field of constant emotional exhaustion, the damage transcends work: it erodes the dignity and well-being of those who suffer from it.

Conclusion

We have built systems that harm instead of caring, that isolate instead of uniting. A harmful society is not born from a single act but from small collective decisions that normalize injustice and despise vulnerability.

The solution is not only to resist but to transform. It is urgent to reclaim authenticity, both in what we share and in how we work. We need spaces that promote real conversations where people are valued beyond their achievements. Only in this way can we break the cycle and build a better society.

Harmful society presents multiple dangers that affect not only individuals but also the community. These dangers can manifest themselves in various ways, from toxicity in interpersonal relationships to the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes to misinformation and emotional manipulation.

One of the most concerning aspects of a harmful society is how it can affect people’s mental health. The pressure to meet unrealistic standards can result in anxiety, depression, and a decline in self-esteem. In addition, the toxic environment can encourage destructive competition rather than collaboration, which in turn limits creativity and personal growth.

However, all is not lost. It is critical that we become aware of these dangers and work together to build a healthier, more positive environment. By promoting empathy and open communication, we can dismantle harmful stereotypes and foster relationships based on respect and support.

Likewise, education plays a central role. Informing ourselves about the harmful effects of disinformation and developing critical thinking will allow us to make more informed decisions and contribute to a more inclusive society.

Each of us has the power to be an agent of change. By adopting a positive mindset and supporting those around us, we can build a community that values collective well-being over societal pressures. Let us accept the responsibility to transform our society, addressing the dangers and always choosing what edifies and uplifts. Change starts with us!

About the Authors

Dr. Pedro Cesar Martinez Moran is the Director of Master in Talent Management at Advantere School of Management. Since 2017, he has also been the Director of Master of HR at he Pontificia University of Comillas. In addition to academic work, he has worked in different roles as senior executive and senior consultant. Currently he is a member of the board of the Global Future of Work Foundation (www.globalfutureofwork.com).

Dr. Simon L. Dolan is a professor at Advantere School of Management and the University of Comillas. He is the former director of the ESADE Future of Work Chair. He has a PhD in People Management and Work Psychology from the University of Minnesota and is a former full professor at ESADE, the University of Montreal, McGill University, Boston University, and others. He has published over 80 books, including academic textbooks in HR, in English, French, and Spanish. He is the co-founder and president of the Global Future of Work Foundation (www.globalfutureofwork.com).

References

1. We prefer not to mention specific names, but feel free to apply it to some political leaders or CEOs of very well-known companies.

2. We recommend reading Dolan S.L. Garcia S., Richley B., (2006). Managing by Values: A Corporate Guide to Living. Being Alive and Making a Living in the XXI Century (Palgrave Macmillan); Dolan S. L. (2020). The Secret of Coaching and Leading by Values: How to Ensure Alignment and Proper Realignment (Routledge).

3. In a recent book on trust building, there is an entire chapter that discusses trust in the family and how to build it. The book is currently available in Spanish and French only. Dolan S.L. Brykman K, Diez Piñol M., (2025) “Construir la Confianza“, McGraw Hill; Dolan S., Brykman K., (2025) Déchiffrer le code de la confiance, Presse de l ‘Université du Québec. 

4. For more on that, read in Dolan S.L. (2023). De-Stress at Work: Understanding and Combatting Chronic Stress (Routledge); Dolan S.L. (2007). Stress, Self-Esteem, Health and Work (Palgrave-MacMillan).

The post Unveiling the Shadows: Understanding and Transforming Hidden Societal Risks appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. George Sammour

This article explores how business schools can transform education by embedding sustainability and innovation across curricula, research, teaching, and operations. Drawing on global frameworks like the UN SDGs, it outlines actionable strategies to develop responsible leaders equipped to address pressing global challenges, foster social impact, and drive systemic change.

In today’s rapidly changing world, challenges like climate change, social inequality, and economic uncertainty call for thoughtful and comprehensive approaches to leadership and decision-making. Business schools possess a unique opportunity and responsibility to be part of the solution to these challenges. They must go beyond traditional instruction of management skills, and how to run businesses or develop profit-making strategies. Business education needs to foster leaders who can think critically about the broader values of business decisions.

This transformation can be achieved by embracing sustainability concepts and rethinking business education in terms of the curriculum, teaching, research, and service. In this context, the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) offer an opportunity for business schools to work together with their stakeholders to shape a sustainable future. By integrating principles such as climate action, gender equality, and quality education into the curriculum, research, lifelong learning, and partnerships, business schools can empower students to address such challenges. When sustainability becomes part of daily campus life, not just a topic in the classroom, it inspires students to think critically, act with purpose, and design solutions that create value for both business and society. This transforms business schools from places of learning into contributors to positive social change. The following insights, from key sources, presents how integrating sustainability into business education is already making a difference.

When sustainability becomes part of daily campus life, not just a topic in the classroom, it inspires students to think critically, act with purpose, and design solutions that create value for both business and society.

According to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals framework¹, when business schools align their curriculum with the SDGs, they create an institutional framework that supports global sustainability efforts. This adoption helps them meet broader social responsibility expectations while improving internal policies and practices. As a result, courses are redesigned to reflect actual global challenges, faculty gain new purpose in teaching impact-driven skills, and students conceive their future as change makers, while the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) emphasizes that business schools are in a unique position² to adapt the UN SDG framework to their specific regional or institutional context. This adoption allows business schools to focus on SDGs that resonate most with their mission and stakeholders. Business schools can create customized courses, research initiatives, and partnerships, which supports the relevance of sustainability efforts within local economic, cultural, and environmental settings. Furthermore, initiatives like the Business School Impact System (BSIS)³  of the European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD), which requires business schools to integrate SDGs into business education, transform business education in three ways. First, it enhances curriculum relevance by connecting classroom learning to pressing global challenges; second, it strengthens stakeholder engagement through partnerships with local communities, governments, and industries; and third, schools gain competitive advantage by measuring and showcasing concrete SDG impacts, such as reduced carbon footprints or improved gender balance in leadership programs.

As described in the Sustainable Development Goals and Institutions of Higher Education (2022)⁴ report, integrating sustainability principles into business education prepares graduates to become responsible leaders and promotes business schools’ societal impact. Aligning SDGs with curricula by connecting classroom learning to real-world case studies enhances relevance, with 85 percent of recruiters prioritizing graduates’ sustainability literacy. Furthermore, the report revealed that schools embedding SDGs in their business curricula, positioning themselves as hubs for innovation and policy influence, witnessed a 30 percent increase in applications and 50 percent more industry partnerships.

Therefore, integrating sustainability concepts into business schools’ curricula, research, students’ activities, and services presents an opportunity to prepare future leaders equipped with business acumen committed to contributing to sustainable development. Thus, business schools must develop a clear action plan to embrace sustainability and innovation as core objectives of their operations. This requires taking a comprehensive approach that focuses on making real and measurable changes to how business education is shaped. The following actions comprise the main drivers of business education transformation towards sustainable development.

Curriculum Transformation

Sustainability and innovation must be embedded across all business disciplines, not limited to electives. The Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) and the UN SDG principles should be integrated into all key business areas, including finance, accounting, marketing, operations, technology, and strategic planning. Specialized tracks in areas such as sustainable finance and social entrepreneurship should complement this integration. Relevant case studies, industry reports, and interdisciplinary research must supplement traditional teaching material. Additionally, academic programs must include systems thinking to help students understand the interconnection of business, society, and the environment.

Innovative Teaching

Business schools need to shift from traditional lectures to active, experiential learning. Imagine campuses not just as places of study, but as real-world learning hubs where students work on sustainability solutions, whether by consulting with real businesses and NGOs, solving real-world problems, or participating in simulations that test their responses to complex ESG risks. Students’ participation in case competitions helps them develop critical decision-making skills in dynamic, realistic environments. Furthermore, business schools can empower sustainability clubs led by students to support them to lead, launch impactful initiatives, and inspire their peers through campaigns and peer learning.

Research and Thought Leadership

To transform business education, business schools must become centers of impactful research. This can be achieved through establishing dedicated sustainability research clusters, funding faculty and student research, and supporting interdisciplinary collaborations, which will accelerate knowledge creation. Industry partnerships are equally important. By co-authoring case studies with companies, researchers ensure that their work addresses real-world challenges while giving students exposure to current business needs. Furthermore, business schools can amplify impact by offering executive courses that translate research into practical tools for business leaders

Strategic Partnerships and Networking

Collaborations with leading sustainable corporations, NGOs, and social enterprises offer students and faculty valuable insights and real-world exposure. Engaging alumni in working in sustainability and participating in global initiatives like PRME or GBSN can amplify the school s influence and access to best practices. Business schools can significantly enhance their sustainability efforts by forming strategic partnerships and alliances with neighboring or regional academic institutions. These cross-campus alliances enable schools to combine resources, expertise, and influence to drive meaningful change.

Institutional Commitment

By systematically aligning their operations, governance, and reporting with sustainability values, business schools reduce their environmental impact and serve as living case studies for responsible institutional management. This begins with achieving operational sustainability through pursuing certifications for campus buildings (e.g., LEED)⁵, implementing comprehensive waste reduction programs, and transitioning to renewable energy sources. To demonstrate accountability, schools should publish detailed annual sustainability reports that transparently track progress across key areas: curriculum integration of sustainability concepts, research output on ESG topics, carbon footprint reduction, and community engagement initiatives.

Business Education for a Thriving Future

Modern business education has become about shaping leaders who can balance economic success with the health of our planet and the well-being of society. By embedding sustainability into every aspect of their programs, curriculum, research, partnerships, and operations, business schools can shift from passive observers to architects of systemic change. Graduates armed with this mindset will redefine success, turning resilience into competitive advantage and purpose into measurable impact. Slow, small steps are no longer enough; the future will be led by institutions ready to take actions to make sustainability a core part of leadership, not just an optional add-on.

About the Author

Dr. George Sammour is Associate Professor at Princess Sumaya University for Technology, Jordan. His expertise includes data analytics, business intelligence, and e-learning. He serves on editorial boards and accreditation committees, mentors universities in AACSB accreditation, and has published widely while leading quality assurance and academic development initiatives in higher education.

References

1. United Nations. Integration of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) across the University. Retrieved from https://sdgs.un.org/Integration

2. AACSB. How Are Business Schools Engaging in the SDGs? Retrieved from https://aacsb.edu

3. EFMD. Business School Impact System (BSIS) and the Integration of SDGs. EFMD Blog, 2023.

4. Sustainable Development Goals and Institutions of Higher Education. (2022).

5. LEED Certification. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. U.S. Green Building Council. Retrieved from https://www.usgbc.org/leed

The post Transforming Business Education Through Sustainability and Innovation appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr Rich Stockdale

Nature is becoming the next billion-dollar frontier. With carbon markets maturing and nature credits rising, ecosystems now offer scalable, high-return assets. This article makes the case for nature as critical infrastructure — revealing why forward-thinking investors are moving fast, and why the next unicorns will be rooted in the ground.

An unexpected email landed, inviting us to speak with the senior leadership team of a major financial institution and share a little about our work and the lessons we’ve learned along the way. Several weeks later, after walking them through our model, projects, and impact, the Managing Director leaned back in his chair, paused thoughtfully, and said, “This must be what it felt like when people first heard of Google.”

At the time, it felt like an incredible compliment. But looking back, it reflected a growing realisation: that natural capital markets could scale with the same velocity and transformative power as the early internet. The feeling in that room wasn’t just curiosity but conviction about the future.

Welcome to the Green Inflection Point

Picture the year 1994. You’re in a meeting where someone introduces the concept of a decentralised, data-driven network poised to revolutionise every industry. Most people dismiss the idea. A few crazy ones, the misfits and the rebels, they pay attention. Three decades later, those few helped build trillion-dollar technology giants.

We now stand at a similar crossroads. But this time, the pitch is even more ambitious: forests function as carbon data centres, peatlands serve as natural cloud storage, and ecosystems form the essential infrastructure of tomorrow. What if climate change isn’t just an existential threat, but the greatest unrealised economic opportunity of our time? Then, conservation isn’t a financial drain – it’s a high-growth sector, offering substantial returns on investment, meaningful positive impact, and massive scalability.

In this new era of climate urgency, nature is emerging as the next Silicon Valley.

From Altruism to Asset Class: The Evolution of Conservation

Historically, conservation has been perceived as philanthropic, important, yet economically irrelevant. That perception is now outdated. Natural capital, which encompasses the quantifiable value of ecosystems and biodiversity, is entering mainstream financial markets. Carbon credits, biodiversity units, and water quality credits have become tradable commodities.

This shift is backed by real financial momentum. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, valued at $1.6 trillion, now assesses nature-related risk across 96% of its portfolio. Institutions like BlackRock are tracking biodiversity exposure. Climate Asset Management has secured over $1 billion to invest directly in environmental restoration, and here in the UK, we’ve built a Natural Capital Portfolio valued at more than £200m.

This is the hostile takeover of ecological collapse – a chance to disrupt the climate crisis and profit as a result.

Ecosystems as Infrastructure: Forests, Peatlands, and Wetlands

Think about digital infrastructure. Billions have been spent building the internet- server farms, fibre optic cables, and satellites. Now, as we face the environmental crises of the 21st century, we require infrastructure that can regulate climate, store carbon, and ensure access to clean water. Fortunately, nature already provides this; however, until now, we’ve never paid the bill.

Forests, peatlands, and wetlands provide essential environmental services: they store carbon, regulate water, and reduce climate-related risks. These natural systems function like living infrastructure, improving over time and delivering both ecological and economic value. Instead of depreciating like man-made assets, they appreciate through restoration and thoughtful stewardship.

Oxygen Conservation manages over 43,000 acres of UK land—land that integrates carbon sequestration, renewable energy, habitat creation, and community benefit (such as homes and jobs in rural communities). These are high-performing environmental assets.

Nature as a Prime Investment Class

Regulatory frameworks are reinforcing this shift. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) are embedding nature into financial and compliance systems.

Simultaneously, market expectations are rising. Consumers are demanding authenticity and transparency over any suggestion of greenwashing. Corporations are seeking credits and metrics backed by science, integrity and transparency. The result is a consolidation toward high-integrity, high-quality nature markets.

To meet this demand, Oxygen Conservation developed the Stockdale-Winter Carbon Curve — a pricing model that forecasts significant rises in high-quality carbon credits (and, in time, nature credits) aligned with project quality and market maturity. Importantly, the carbon market has laid the groundwork for these emerging nature markets. Systems for verification, pricing, and trading developed for carbon are now being adapted to accommodate biodiversity and ecosystem services, creating a scalable framework for natural capital investment.

Innovation Beyond Digital: Conservation Tech and Strategy

Technological innovation is beginning to reshape conservation in promising ways. Blockchain technology is being tested to improve transparency in nature credit transactions. Artificial intelligence is showing potential for supporting real-time biodiversity monitoring. Satellite imagery is enabling early efforts in ecosystem assessment at scale. While these tools are still developing, they hint at a future where environmental restoration is powered by digital precision and data-driven decision-making.

Yet the more significant innovation lies in strategic design. At Oxygen Conservation, projects combine rewilding with renewable energy, regenerative agriculture, and nature-based tourism. These layered revenue models resemble Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) but are grounded in ecological regeneration.

In 2024, Oxygen Conservation declined a £250 million investment because it would have constrained our operational agility. Just as early tech entrepreneurs resisted venture capital terms that compromised vision, nature innovators are protecting their mission to move fast, think differently, and stay purpose-driven.

Resilience as Strategy: Nature and Corporate Risk Management

Business resilience today demands integration with environmental systems. Climate instability is now a direct operational and financial risk. Companies that embed natural capital into their supply chains and risk frameworks are not just reducing harm; they are increasing adaptability.

Nature is the only infrastructure that strengthens over time. A restored watershed today offers long-term insurance (in every sense) against drought, water shortages, and wildfires. It also supports biodiversity and offers the potential for recreation and wellbeing. These outcomes are trackable and certifiable, giving business leaders measurable confidence.

Investing in Ecosystems, Where Unicorns Roam

In 1994, backing the internet required foresight. Today, backing nature is almost embarrassingly obvious. The environmental crises we face demand investment strategies that are ethical, scalable, and profitable.

Nature has the potential to transform not only how we mitigate climate risk but how we structure economies around resilience and regeneration. Nature is not the next Silicon Valley. It is something even bigger. And the green economic transition is already underway.

The next unicorns won’t be digital avatars or yet another app. They’ll be deeply rooted in real landscapes, scaling not through code alone but through carbon, community, and climate resilience. The future economy will be regenerated by ecological intelligence, systems thinking, and radical collaboration.

Imagine the most exciting IPO of the next decade: a company restoring thousands of acres of degraded land, issuing verified nature credits, generating wind energy, hosting ecotourism experiences, and using AI to monitor biodiversity gains in real time.

This is where the smart money is moving. Because ecosystems aren’t mythical beasts. They’re real, they’re powerful, and they’re where the next unicorns are already starting to roam.

The question for investors and business leaders won’t be, “Why support nature?” It will be, “How did you miss the biggest green IPO of the century?”

About the Author

Dr Rich Stockdale is a transformative leader, pioneering environmentalist and author of Scaling Conservation. With a PhD in data science, Rich combines relentless commitment with visionary thinking to redefine our relationship with the natural world. In 2021, Rich founded Oxygen Conservation with Oxygen House and has rapidly built one of the world’s most impactful natural capital portfolios, valued at hundreds of millions of pounds and actively transforming thousands of acres into thriving ecosystems for people and wildlife.

The post What if Unicorns Roam in Peatlands: Investing in Nature’s Next Billion-Dollar Frontier appeared first on The European Business Review.

The implications for global food security are obvious, but a new generation of researchers and agronomists – often in partnership with major corporations – are innovating to develop climate resilience technologies and to enable adaptive farming methods that boost crop yields, reduce farmer overheads, and protect the environment.

This article gives a useful overview of the new technologies and novel solutions that are delivering climate resilience at field level, and features four companies whose AgTech innovations are contributing to long-term food security during one of the most challenging periods in the history of agriculture.

Next Generation Technologies for Adaptive Farming

All crops need an adequate supply of clean water in order to thrive. One of the salient challenges facing farmers as temperatures rise is access to irrigation water. This is compounded when agriculture competes with expanding urban areas and industry for affordable water supplies.

Precision data-driven irrigation methods, using soil sensors, drone (or even satellite) imagery and data analysis systems can direct pH optimized irrigation at a highly localized level – either through drip irrigation or rotor sprays. There are also initiatives to develop circular water economies at a strategic level. Desalination plants and urban wastewater recycling initiatives, powered by green energy, have considerable potential to provide irrigation water on a large scale.

The development of drought tolerant seeds is a key tool for adaptive farming, increasing options for growers in a changing climate. Biostimulants can also protect plants against abiotic stresses caused by extreme weather events, with additional potential to improve soil health.

Data-driven predictive analytics can alert farmers to impending weather events and also to the likelihood of outbreaks of crop diseases and pest infestations. An additional benefit of predictive analytics is their role in improving the availability of index-linked weather insurance for the agricultural industry, allowing farmers to hedge against climate related risks.

Four Companies Innovating for Climate Resilience

ICL Group (NYSE: ICL) (TASE: ICL)

ICL Group is one of the world’s leading specialty minerals companies. It is also one of the largest fertilizer manufacturers in the world and is offering advanced chloride‑free and low-salt fertilizers that enhance plant osmotic balance under drought stress. Crop nutritional solutions like Foliar Fertilizers, Solinure and Nova cover a range of grower requirements and are designed for ease of use and simple integration into precision agriculture fertigation and foliar plans.

ICL’s chloride-free fertilizers are proven to boost yields (ICL reports that Solinure enabled 13% yield increases and an 8.2% in gross income for users during trials), while minimizing negative environmental impacts, contributing to sustainability, and also offering utility in regenerative agriculture where soil health is an issue.

Bayer CropScience – Bayer AG (FWB:BAYN)

Bayer CropScience is conducting advanced research into genetic engineering and trait development with the wider goal of developing climate resilient adaptive farming solutions for farmers around the world. The company is particularly focusing on drought- tolerant biotech traits that improve root architectures for optimized water uptake.  A leading solution is DroughtGard® Hybrids which helps corn plants maintain growth when water supplies are restricted.

Bayer CropScience also provides next generation seed coating solutions and treatments (including advanced polymer coatings). The company’s Acceleron® portfolio can improve seed resilience for key staple crops like corn, cotton and soybean through bio-enhancers that protect against nutrient and moisture stress, and chemical defenses against nematodes, insects and disease.

CropX

Efficient water use is one of the core pillars of climate resilience. The ability to eliminate waste through precision irrigation systems is a gamechanger for farmers in arid or drought afflicted regions. CropX provides soil‑moisture sensors and AI‑powered irrigation recommendations to cut water use by up to 30%. The CropX platform uses realtime data to provide actionable insights that allow farmers to precisely irrigate crops before they show signs of distress.

Growers using CropX are able to monitor soil moisture content, actual evapotranspiration and plant health remotely (via apps and mobile devices) and rely on automation to irrigate proactively and on a highly localized basis. CropX is empowering farmers with data-based decision making, and is reducing critical overheads through optimization and efficiency savings.

Planet Labs PBC (NYSE: PL)

Planet Labs is an American company that pushes the boundaries of current technologies through its miniature satellites known as Doves (as well as RapidEye and upcoming Pelican constellations). The satellites deliver information to a variety of users, including climate resilience and crop yield protection stakeholders. Planet Labs provides field-scale resolution that enables detailed crop monitoring and soil health tracking.

Planet Labs satellite imagery is usually updated daily and can provide valuable advance warning of extreme weather events and generate drought alerts. As technologies develop and become more scalable, satellites are expected to play an increasing role in climate resilience. Plant Labs is a leader in the commercial satellite sector and is expected to make a growing contribution to climate resilience.

Conclusion

Major corporations, often in partnership with academia and startups, are developing the emerging technologies and delivering novel solutions for climate resilience. The goal of a smart global agricultural system where flexible adaptive farming practices are the norm is attainable within a generation.

The farming industry is in a pivotal period and companies like ICL Group, CropX and Planet Labs, and dozens of other innovators, are harnessing technology to beat climate change and deliver lasting food security.

The post Climate Resilience in Farming: How Emerging Technologies Help Farmers Adapt appeared first on The European Business Review.

Switching to plastic-free packaging isn’t just good for your planet, but also good for your public reputation – plus it will save you money. Below are just a few ways to go plastic-free with your packaging in 2025.

Cardboard containers

Cardboard boxes have long been a reliable alternative to plastic containers. In the last couple decades, there has been an increasing shift to cardboard in both store and shipping packaging. Items like CDs and sandwiches that commonly used to have plastic casing are now almost always sold in cardboard containers. There are many different types of cardboard to choose from for different uses – including the option of recycled cardboard.

Paper bags

Plastic bag taxes have encouraged more stores to switch to paper bags. Although not as durable, paper bags can still be used for most items from takeaway meals to clothes. There are paper bag printing companies that can print your logo on the side of the bag – often providing more salience than a plastic bag. When it comes to heavier loads, reusable plastic bags-for-life should be encouraged – although made from plastic, they have the ability to be used again and again, and so help to reduce disposable plastic waste. 

Aluminium food containers

Cardboard containers are not always effective at holding wet foods. Aluminium food containers may be a better plastic alternative in these cases, and are commonly used by modern takeaway restaurants. Heavy duty kraft food trays are another plastic-free option that are made from wood pulp.

Kraft paper tape

It’s possible to use cardboard and paper to ship many items. But what about when it comes to tape? Kraft paper tape is an eco-friendly alternative to plastic tape that can help to reduce plastic waste created by traditional tape. It’s just as strong and is being increasingly used by companies.

Hive style paper wrap

What about things like bubble wrap? Is there a plastic alternative? Hive style paper wrap is currently one of the best bubble wrap alternatives, offering much of the same cushioning properties. Other plastic-free packaging filler materials include the likes of shredded paper and paper roll. Consider testing these different fillers to see if they are just as effective.

Conclusion

There are many plastic-free packaging alternatives that you can explore, and the choices are only becoming greater and better as new materials such as mushroom, seaweed and corn starch continue to be developed. There may still be some cases where plastic is better, but in most cases going plastic-free is just as practical, while also being greener and more affordable. 

The post Are You Using Plastic-Free Packaging? appeared first on The European Business Review.

The Energy Transition is an enormous opportunity for Europe to harness its millennia of engineering expertise and lead the world in addressing the existential issues of the 21^st century: sustainability and the energy transition. Simply put, sustainability is living within our means while the Energy Transition does just that, doing more with less. Two sides of the same coin.

One truly significant initiative, and central to a successful energy transition, is the widespread adoption of District Heating. While European governments at all levels, energy providers, and energy consumers are for once all aligned, the true drivers of the transition are the innovative and pragmatic engineering solutions from such industry leaders as ISOPLUS.

This is great news for the continent.

Europe’s Opportunity, the World’s Gain

– Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Columbia University

Public policy analyst and former director of The Earth Institute, expert on the topics of sustainable development and economic development. Speech to the European Parliament in May, 2025.

The Energy Transition is the most important initiative in the history of the world and the ambition needed to implement it is daunting. The stakes couldn’t be higher, as well as securing our own future and that of our children, the Energy Transition is also an opportunity to establish European energy independence. The urgency of this has been made starkly evident by recent events in Europe and their geopolitical impact.

There is very good news though. Europe does indeed stand for climate action and much progress has been made in many areas. The most significant is District Heating — it has been recognised across Europe as a cost-effective shortcut to a greener, cooler world and adoption is rapidly increasing. And will further accelerate in the foreseeable future.

District Heating is a major contributor to the Energy Transition as its impact is huge. Household heating uses over 20% of Europe’s total energy and both reducing that, or changing to renewable energy sources, will have a significant climate impact. District Heating is basically the infrastructure that connects old and new renewable energy sources to millions of households and enterprises across the continent (67 million citizens so far, and rising). Its adoption is being increasingly supported by EU legislation and implemented by enterprises such as ISOPLUS that are on a profound mission, to make energy networks ever more affordable. ISOPLUS provides the innovative pipe networks that are the hidden, but essential, the infrastructure fundamental to successful District Heating.

ISOPLUS – Driving the Winds of Change

– Benoit Lejeune, Managing Director, ISOPLUS France

ISOPLUS

Founded in 1974, ISOPLUS is present in over 30 European countries and, for example, is the market leader in pre-insulated District Heating energy networks in Germany and has a major 35% in Europe’s most highly competitive and developed market in Denmark. Headquartered in southern Germany, with production in Thuringia (and France, the Czech Republic, Finland, Italy, Austria, Romania, Denmark and Serbia). ISOPLUS is a true pan-Europe enterprise built on Europe’s unique engineering heritage, guaranteeing Europe’s future.

The ISOPLUS Group produces over 4,000 km of rigid pipes and around 1,000 km of flexible pipes every year at the 9 production sites – over 1,200 km of which are in Germany. The assortment counts 300,000 products in its German catalogue alone (and 20 new products weekly) and three to five months stock on hand for fast response to individual customer demand.

Simply put, ISOPLUS manufactures pipe systems and networks. The concept of a pipe is certainly simple. A straw in a cocktail glass, or a bottle of lemonade, demonstrates it admirably. It transports a liquid from the glass to the mouth without spillages or leakages. But don’t be fooled by that word “simple”. The engineering and expertise that goes into an ISOPLUS pipe network is anything but.

Pan–European Projects, Local Impact

From renewable biomass-driven networks in France to rapid municipal deployments in Eastern Europe, ISOPLUS is adapting its modular pipe solutions to vastly different technical, geographical and regulatory needs.

One example is the WarmtelinQ project in the Netherlands, Europe’s largest long-distance District Heating pipeline. Built by Gasunie to transport residual heat from the Port of Rotterdam through South Holland, it will serve approximately 120,000 homes and businesses between Rotterdam and The Hague. With around 80 km of pre-insulated pipe scheduled and designed to withstand challenges like river crossings, ISOPLUS is supplying all of the pre-insulated steel pipe systems—delivered sustainably using rail transportation and e-trucks.

Another flagship project is Obrenovac–New Belgrade in Serbia. Led by PowerChina and Serbian utilities, the initiative includes a ~25 km pre-insulated steel pipeline linking excess heat from the TENT A power plant in Obrenovac to New Belgrade. With a total capacity of 600 MW, it is designed to significantly reduce gas reliance and CO₂ emissions. ISOPLUS contributes almost 40 km of DN1000/1200 steel pipes (in 16 m lengths—special in both dimension and logistics) as well as smaller diameters. These systems are engineered to handle complex river and highway crossings, ensuring safe, long-term resilience.

– Rogier van Overvest, Managing Director, ISOPLUS Benelux

The Pipes are Calling

– Bo Olsen, Managing Director, ISOPLUS Denmark

A pre-insulated pipe that will carry hot water to a home, factory or institute, with minimal heat loss, buried in any kind of earth, dry, sandy or water-logged, with an operational life expectancy of 50 years is not simple to design or produce. A pipe that is also self-monitoring, that detects and informs the operator of a leak, and where the leak is, is a complex engineering feat. And a piping system connecting multiple heat source to thousands of heat consumers is even more complex still. And not just heat, depending on the climate, these pipe systems can carry cooling water or, indeed, any liquid to anywhere.

A single pipe is one thing, a network of pipes connecting thousands of homes is another. If every chain is as strong as its weakest link, it is ISOPLUS’s mission to make sure there is no weak link in a District Energy network, for at least the next half a century. Individual pipes are designed to last for 50 years. So, no weak link means durability, minimum heat loss, maximum inter-connectivity and overcoming the greatest impediment to the Energy Transition, cost.

Cost is the elephant in the room. It is the overriding concern of everything ISOPLUS does. So, as pre-insulated, self-diagnosing, complex piping systems are fundamental to a successful District Heating network they have to address the issue of cost head on. Producing energy networks is a delicate balancing act between cost and quality, getting this right is the deciding factor determining the success of District Heating projects. And ISOPLUS is getting it right. In all facets of designing, implementing and maintaining District Energy networks.

That includes customer peace of mind. Customers are now not only independent of the heat source, they can also adopt the latest technologies unobtrusively. Their heating infrastructure can last for generations with maintenance costs just a distant memory.

The Customer Calls the Shots

– Axel Kirstein, Managing Director, ISOPLUS Germany

To put this in perspective, the cost of the energy transition is reckoned in billions of euros and has been the biggest impediment to progress, particularly in housing. Estimates for the investment in District Heating needed in Germany, if emission targets are to be met by 2030, are €43.5 billion. On the other side of the equation, the cost of renovating around 20 million houses in Germany, needed for alternative heating technologies, to today’s standards is estimated at €500 billion to €1,500 billion. An absolutely huge sum.

This modernization is not needed in District Heating, although it is not a bad idea to insulate a home and benefit from the lower energy bills, a massive saving. In addition, pre-insulated pipe systems also reduce installation and operating costs. Secure, sealed and quality networks deliver the heat to where it is needed, not into the ground. This also leads to substantial energy savings, which in turn further reduces operating costs for supply companies and heating costs for consumers. The pipe systems are tailor-made, adapted to each project’s energy mix and technical constraints. They can connect to any energy source supporting the entire energy transition: wind, water, solar, Biomass and green hydrogen, heat from waste or surplus heat from factories, and whatever comes next.

But why now? After all, District Energy has been around since the Romans and the value in providing clean energy and national energy independence has been recognised in Scandinavia since the 1970s. What has changed?

What’s New?

– Aurélie Beauvais, Managing Director of Euroheat & Power

District Energy has arrived big time as over the last decade, the European Union, and the UK, has recognised its importance to the energy transition. Today, District Heating in Europe is promoted, supported and governed by a comprehensive legislative framework aimed at decarbonising the heating and cooling sectors, enhancing energy efficiency, and integrating renewable energy sources.

District Heating in Europe is promoted, supported and governed by a comprehensive legislative framework aimed at decarbonising the heating and cooling sectors, enhancing energy efficiency, and integrating renewable energy sources.

This recognition of District Heating, primarily as a way to energy independence, started in Scandinavia after the 1973 oil crisis. Since then, District Heating technology has been subject to continuous innovation and development. As has the Europe wide legislative framework, adapting national best practices on a European level. An outburst of common sense if you will. Europe is learning best practices from Europe. How cool is that?

Ahead of the game, the largest system in Europe is in Copenhagen where 98% of homes are connected to the District Heating network with 100,000 added in 2024. More good news is that the rest of Europe is seriously playing catchup, backed by EU and national legislation.

District Heating adoption is going to grow dramatically.  Although Germany and the UK, as examples, lag Scandinavia at the moment the adoption rate there too will grow rapidly. Look at Germany. There is now Mandatory Heat Planning for all municipalities. Large ones, over 100,000 inhabitants, must develop heat plans by June 30, 2026. Smaller ones have until June 30, 2028. These plans should identify areas suitable for District Heating expansion, assess renewable energy potentials, and outline strategies for decarbonisation.

In the UK, in designated heat network zones, certain buildings may be mandated to connect to energy networks, potentially affecting development plans. In France, municipalities with District Energy networks meeting specific criteria (e.g., using at least 50% renewable or recovered energy) can designate areas where connection to the District Heating system is mandatory for new buildings or during major renovations.

These mandates may result in communities being tasked with developing energy plans, including District Heating, despite lacking the necessary expertise—while numerous qualified experts remain untapped, waiting for a call.

The Future Beckons – Who You Gonna Call?

– Stephan Brandligt, Vice President of Energy Cities

ISOPLUS has thousands of collective years of pragmatic District Heating experience for potential customers to use. The right questions identify the real requirements and therefore the right answers. So, ISOPLUS is a single contact for any customer embarking on an energy transition. Just as the individual end user does not need to have a deep understanding of home heating/cooling technologies, or future developments, ISOPLUS fulfills these roles for any District Heating project.

– Bo Olsen, Managing Director, ISOPLUS Denmark

District Heating market penetration is going to grow extensively. When it comes to total cost of ownership, future renewable energy source flexibility, ease of maintenance and, most importantly, peace of mind for the customer, there is no compelling alternative. It is an idea that has been a long time coming, but now that the significance of this technology has been recognised, it is here to stay.

Why Home Heating?

– European Commission, Clean Energy for All Europeans Package

The question is: Why is home so important to the energy transition and a logical place to start? The answer is: Because in home heating we get the biggest bang for our buck. Our homes consume a quarter of all the EU’s energy production, and heating the home and providing hot water accounts for nearly 80% of that quarter, so 20% of the continent’s entire energy requirements. Therefore, any significant reduction in home energy requirements, or increase in the use of renewable energy sources, can make a huge difference to global warming gas emissions and our wellbeing. The global aviation industry for example accounts for only 2.5% of global CO₂ emissions. The potential energy savings are correspondingly low.

District Heating is therefore the sensible place to start the transition, as its impact will be significantly greater. The same goes for establishing energy independence.

National Energy Independence…

– Pedro Dias, Secretary General of Solar Heat Europe

Energy independence was the driving force behind Denmark’s adoption of District Heating as the major source of home heating in the 1970s. It was a farsighted decision. Removing the direct connection between the energy sources and the home allowed the country to connect whatever renewable energy source became available, without knowing what they would be, with a minimum of disruption and, of course, cost.

The same holds for much of Scandinavia, Stockholm and Helsinki both have District Heating coverage over 90%. Elsewhere, in Germany for example, District Heating was not seen as significant to the energy transition until 2015, resulting today in a relatively low 16% of homes benefiting from these technologies.

…a Byproduct of Saving the Planet

– Thomas Nowak, Secretary General of the European Heat Pump Association

District Heating is an ever growing success story. Global warming is still the biggest issue in the history of the planet. Global warming and the resulting energy transition (global cooling, if you will) is still the biggest show in town. But the Energy Transition, the largest project undertaken by mankind, is making real, sustainable progress.

Out of the limelight, out of the scope of international climate events, European solutions are being designed, developed and implemented. You still won’t see ISOPLUS products on a daily basis, but you might walk over them, hidden but essential. These are the real heroes of the energy transition. Human ingenuity expressed through engineering, it was never otherwise.

The winds of change really are being driven by industrial and technical excellence and innovation.

The post ISOPLUS – Hidden but Essential appeared first on The European Business Review.

The health sector has gone through some testing times since Iñaki Ereño became part of it in 2005, including COVID-19. Now Group CEO of Bupa, he puts into focus the group’s priorities and achievements, as well as its ambition to become the world’s most customer-centric healthcare company.

Hello, Iñaki. Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today. To begin, you’ve had a remarkable journey from leading Sanitas (part of Bupa) in Spain to becoming Group CEO of Bupa. What key experiences have shaped your leadership style?

I first joined Sanitas in 2005 and it’s hard to believe that it is now 20 years ago! I became CEO in 2008 and that timing coincided with the Spanish financial crisis. That was a very hard situation to navigate, and it had a huge impact on my leadership style, because to survive we needed to choose a growth mindset no matter what the obstacles were. We had to find new, creative ways to work and to be resilient through it all.

Another experience that shaped my leadership style was the knowledge that healthcare as an industry needed to transform. As a sector, healthcare has been slow to digitise. We wanted to offer something different and provide care in a way that customers experience other consumer products and services so that it is on their terms.

My leadership style evolved again during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was a very intense period. We were caring for people in very tough situations and some of our patients and residents did not survive this terrible virus. We wanted to honour them and make sure that we always spoke their names and that those impacted were all remembered for the people they were, and not as a statistic. The organisation demonstrated its immense capacity to be caring at this time and that has shaped my leadership style, too.

How have these experiences influenced the way you steer a global healthcare business today?

We can never be complacent. That’s especially true for a global healthcare company, where our customers are relying on us to deliver for them in one of the most important areas of their lives. Bupa is over 75 years old, which is a wonderful achievement, but we need to keep adapting. We are a unique company who do not have shareholders. Our structure means we are able to reinvest our profits back into the business and into our purpose, ensuring we are constantly improving the services we provide for our customers.

These improvement ideas can be small, for example training our dental reception teams to be able to detect a nervous patient and put them at ease when they arrive for an appointment. Or, the innovation can be in the form of much more significant business initiatives; for example we are making a significant investment in expanding mental healthcare support by opening 200 mental health facilities called “mindplaces” worldwide.

Since taking the helm in 2021, what shifts or transformations are you most proud of initiating?

We’ve grown hugely as a business over the past few years; we now have more than 60 million customers worldwide and 100,000 colleagues. We’re growing faster than the market average, too, and that is testament to the hard work of the teams around the world and their growth mindset, and I’m truly inspired by them.

We’ve also made a lot of progress towards our ambition of becoming the world’s most customer-centric healthcare company. We’ve built a customer system so we can listen to our customers’ feedback right across the organisation via a customer listening app, and we’ve asked all our colleagues to listen and generate ideas to improve the experience that we provide wherever possible.

Since 2022, we have listened to nearly 200,000 customer calls and made over 24,000 customer improvements. As a result of this, our customers’ likelihood to recommend us is now much higher than ever before, which makes us all incredibly proud, while recognising that there is always more we can do.

This focus on our customers and their experience has also had a significant impact on our colleagues and their sense of pride. We measure colleague engagement twice a year and our latest results from May 2025 saw 87 per cent of colleagues participate and give an engagement score of 83 per cent. I am especially positive because there were so many comments provided, which shows that our people believe we take their feedback very seriously, too, which we definitely do.

Having worked across diverse markets in Europe and Latin America, what leadership lessons have you learned from managing teams across different cultures? How have these insights shaped your approach to leading Bupa?

It has been extremely valuable to build a broad perspective from working across our different markets. A big reflection for me is how to communicate well and keep it simple. We want our strategy to be understood around the world by every colleague, which means we need to be simple, clear, and consistent.

In 2021, one of the first projects we introduced was the launch of an internal communications platform so that all our 100,000 colleagues could connect with each other. Through this platform, there are hundreds of groups which have been spontaneously created on different topics, where our people can ask each other questions, share problems, and find solutions together, no matter which country they are working in.

While we’re a global company that benefits from global collaboration, it’s clear that each market faces a range of different needs and challenges, whether that’s different regulatory environments, healthcare landscapes, or cultural trends. It is so important to empower the local management teams, who know their market and are best placed to take care of the customers who live there.

Fostering innovation at scale is a major challenge for any multinational. How are you cultivating a culture at Bupa that empowers employees to take smart risks and learn from both success and failure?

One of the biggest shifts has been reshaping Bupa’s culture. In early 2021, we consulted with the leadership team about streamlining the company’s values and together we refined them from seven down to three: Brave, Caring, and Responsible.

We consulted with the leadership team about streamlining the company’s values and together we refined them from seven down to three: Brave, Caring, and Responsible.

Caring and Responsible were more established and expected values, but Brave was deliberately new. Bravery is central to the culture we’re building here at Bupa. That means pushing boundaries, taking calculated risks, and innovating – and that applies to everyone.

We want all our colleagues to be involved and to think of innovation as both the big, exciting, strategic ideas and the small suggestions that each make such a difference for our customers. With our customer listening app and the ability to listen and make improvement suggestions, we’ve tried to create a tool that enables every single colleague to be able to innovate.

How is the business’s leadership focusing on fostering talent and supporting people’s careers at Bupa?

We’ve had a strong learning and development programme in place for our colleagues for years, but we’ve recently made additional investments to ensure that our people have the skills and confidence to thrive in their careers and change the future of healthcare.

In June 2025, we launched a global initiative, known as Bupa Campus, that is bringing together the best in physical and digital learning experiences, creating a modern way of growing the skills of our people, to deliver better care for our customers. While it is a global programme, it will be tailored to the specific needs of each market.

We also take advantage of our global footprint to learn from each other, offering short-term placements, long-term relocations, or temporary secondments to the various Bupa offices across the globe. We want to do even more to offer mobility in a flexible way and to encourage more colleagues to try something new, boosting their skills and capabilities.

Bupa’s ambition is to become the world’s most customer-centric healthcare company. How is your digital health solution Blua transforming the healthcare experience for customers globally?

Blua, our digital health solution, is core to our customer-centric philosophy. Blua gives our customers access to virtual consultations, digital health programmes, and remote healthcare, which is revolutionising the way we deliver care. And our customers agree – we’re seeing widespread adoption across our markets, with 7.5 million customers already using the service globally.

Blua is always evolving. A good example of this is the “Monitor your Health” feature used by our Spanish customers with chronic illnesses like arrhythmias or high blood pressure. Instead of waiting for issues to arise, the “Monitor your Health” feature detects early warning signs, enabling patients to set goals and make lifestyle adjustments proactively, helping to prevent potential health problems.

Blua also integrates with customers’ wearable devices to sync their real-time health data directly with a team of healthcare professionals, including doctors, psychologists, nutritionists, personal trainers, and physiotherapists.

In 10 years, I think we’ll look back and wonder how we managed our health without this kind of digitisation. The potential is massive.

You’ve spoken passionately about the link between planetary health and human health. How is Bupa embedding a sustainable approach into its global operations?

It’s undeniable that human health and the health of the planet are linked. To help people stay healthy, we are working to help create healthy environments where everyone can thrive. We call this our “better world” strategy and there are three core elements.

Firstly, we want to help even more people access affordable and preventative healthcare. We have set ourselves the target of helping 25 million people in this way by 2027.

Secondly, we want to help improve the environments where people live: cities. As part of our ongoing “Healthy Cities” initiative, we’re working to get our people, customers, and communities active. We want to support at least 50 cities to become healthier places to live in over the next few years by investing in projects that champion healthier, more inclusive communities and that ultimately will contribute towards creating a healthier society.

Lastly, we want to invest in nature restoration, too, reducing our impact on the planet and restoring key nature ecosystems. Our intention is to ensure that 75,000 hectares of nature can be restored in order to support people’s health. It’s a big, ambitious plan but one that we are tremendously excited about delivering.

As you look to the future, what is your vision for Bupa’s role in shaping global healthcare?

It’s an incredibly exciting time; we want to become the world’s most customer-centric healthcare provider and redefine what people expect from a healthcare provider.

Through this process, we know that we will find solutions and create tools that we can share beyond Bupa, finding new methods to help the whole healthcare sector improve how we serve customers and patients. We want to encourage even more sharing between private healthcare providers and public health systems for the benefit of all.

This will be a game-changer for global healthcare, revolutionising our ability to prevent and treat disease so we can live longer, healthier, happier lives.

And finally, as a CEO, how do you define success?

We have a method for measuring success that we call a “performance triangle”. As you would expect, there are three elements, given that it’s a triangle! Financial performance is obviously key. Making sure we have a strong, sustainable business that is generating profit and enabling us to reinvest in our purpose is one of the core elements.

In addition, we must prioritise customer experience. Having customers that recommend our services to others and that choose to stay with us and trust us to look after their health needs is a critical factor in our success.

And finally, it’s about doing the right thing for our colleagues, investing in their development, supporting their careers, and listening to their feedback. High rates of colleague engagement are the third element to our triangle.

Success, to me, means delivering each of these factors in balance, so that each side of the triangle is equal, ensuring that one aspect does not overpower the others. Strong financial performance, and customers who highly recommend our services, and a team of colleagues who are highly engaged and want to do their best work is when we know we have been successful.

Executive Profile

Mr. Iñaki Ereño is Group CEO of global healthcare company Bupa. Appointed in 2021, he is responsible for managing the business’s worldwide operations and heads up the Chief Executive Committee, driving the performance of the business and setting the strategic agenda. He was previously CEO of Bupa Europe and Latin America, and CEO of Sanitas (part of Bupa).

The post Healthcare with the Customer Front and Centre: Interview with Mr. Iñaki Ereño of Bupa appeared first on The European Business Review.

The Architectural Impact on ESG Performance

While many associate ESG progress with financial policies or HR initiatives, physical infrastructure plays a critical, yet often underestimated, role. Companies seeking to achieve measurable ESG outcomes must now integrate sustainability at the design phase before a single wall is erected or a light switch flipped. This is where architectural studios emerge as key strategic partners. Far beyond blueprints and facades, forward-thinking studios design spaces that align with sustainability benchmarks, energy modeling, green certifications, and even employee wellbeing metrics.

Architectural Studios as ESG Enablers

Architectural studios today are not merely service providers; they are consultants in ESG-driven transformation. Top-tier firms now offer design solutions embedded with sustainable practices from passive solar orientation and green roofing systems to modular construction that reduces waste. They are fluent in LEED, BREEAM, and WELL standards, and proactively advise clients on how to future-proof developments against climate regulations and stakeholder expectations. By integrating ESG from the ground up, these studios help businesses move beyond reactive compliance into proactive value creation.

ESG Metrics in Action: Designing for Accountability

So what does ESG-oriented design look like in practice? On the environmental side, architectural studios are incorporating smart energy systems, natural ventilation, renewable materials, and biodiversity-enhancing landscaping. Socially, inclusive design is gaining traction ensuring accessibility, psychological safety, and community integration. Governance is reflected in transparent project reporting, lifecycle cost analysis, and stakeholder involvement from early-stage planning.

Such multidimensional thinking transforms a traditional office building into a strategic ESG asset reducing operational costs, supporting CSR goals, and improving brand reputation.

Future-Proofing Investments with Sustainable Design

Investors are increasingly factoring ESG scores into valuation models. That means companies with outdated, energy-inefficient buildings may see reduced asset value or even reputational risk. In contrast, businesses that partner with architectural studios to develop sustainable, high-performance spaces are gaining a competitive edge. These spaces not only align with ESG reporting frameworks but also attract eco-conscious consumers, tenants, and employees. In short, ESG design isn’t just ethical, it’s profitable.

Challenges and the Way Forward

Despite the momentum, there are barriers to overcome. Budget constraints, regulatory inconsistencies, and limited ESG knowledge among mid-sized firms can slow progress. However, the architectural sector is responding with scalable solutions offering design packages tailored for SMEs, lifecycle analyses that justify upfront costs, and even AI tools that simulate ESG outcomes before ground is broken.

Choosing the Right Architectural Studio for ESG Alignment

To truly benefit from ESG-integrated design, businesses must choose partners who demonstrate both creativity and compliance. When evaluating architectural studios, decision-makers should look beyond aesthetic portfolios and assess ESG literacy, certification track record, and collaborative processes. Ask: Do they measure lifecycle emissions? Do they integrate diverse user needs? Are they comfortable presenting to boards and sustainability officers? The best studios speak the language of both design and business.

Where Design and Responsibility Meet

The pressure to meet ESG goals is not going away, it’s intensifying. But within this pressure lies opportunity. By collaborating with architectural studios that prioritize sustainability, companies can transform their physical environments into powerful expressions of their ESG commitments. This isn’t about greenwashing. It’s about designing a future that’s functional, equitable, and environmentally sound.

The post Designing for ESG: The Role of Architectural Studios appeared first on The European Business Review.

The 2025 event attracted a highly targeted, pre-qualified delegation of senior executives representing some of the most prominent global retail brands, including Amazon, Nike, Hugo Boss, Shein, Levi Strauss & Co., HelloFresh DE, Dolce & Gabbana, TikTok, and many others. Attendees participated in a robust programme of 7,500 intensive one-to-one meetings, strategically connecting suppliers with buyers to foster productive business relationships and collaborations.

“There’s no comparison between other events and DELIVER. DELIVER is far more effective when it’s organising meetings and events. We absolutely love the format and the caliber of delegates you bring to us!” commented Seham Al Balushi, Marketing & Communications Director at Asyad Express.

Several new initiatives marked the 2025 event, notably the “Women in Retail Breakfast,” hosted by Sunaina Kohli from The Human Difference, and the introduction of Elite Tables, offering roundtable discussions focused on critical supply chain challenges. The event also featured a C-Suite Dinner the evening before on 3 June, further enhancing networking opportunities among senior executives.

The Sustainability Lounge was another successful addition, prominently featuring a “Wish Tree” that captured attendees’ aspirations for sustainability advancements. Moreover, DELIVER formally launched its Sustainability Initiative through an inaugural Client Focus Group, moderated by renowned climate advocate Christiana Figueres (Founding Partner, Global Optimism; Former Executive Secretary – UN Climate Change Convention), DELIVER’s Founder & Chairman Stephane Tomczak, and representatives from consultancy MiNDO. This initiative provided an open forum to address sustainability challenges and will serve as a platform to actively drive the industry forward in achieving its sustainability goals—reinforcing DELIVER’s ongoing commitment to meaningful, action-oriented progress within the logistics community.

Prominent guest speakers further enriched the conference experience with 50+ hours of conference content on offer across the 2 days. Jo Malone CBE shared entrepreneurial insights, while Christiana Figueres facilitated the Sustainability Initiative Focus Group, did a fireside chat, participated in a book signing, and presented the Sustainability Award, underlining her pivotal role in global sustainability advocacy.

The event’s keynote theatre featured influential voices, including Maria Hollins, CEO of Ann Summers, and Ajit Sivadasan, President of Global eCommerce at Lenovo, offering valuable perspectives on navigating complex retail landscapes. Kate Hardcastle MBE, known as “The Customer Whisperer,” effectively hosted the Keynote Theatre, guiding impactful discussions on customer-centric approaches and retail innovation.

A central highlight of DELIVER Europe was the annual Vendor Awards, celebrating excellence among suppliers in the retail and commerce sectors. Fully voted for by the attending retailers, this year’s winners included Relay, receiving the Game Changer Award; Bring, honored with the Sustainability Award; parcelLab, recognised for Customer Experience; KLAREO, identified as the Rising Star; and DP World, acknowledged with the Brand Excellence Award.

The tenth-anniversary was also celebrated with a memorable exclusive party sponsored by DP World, featuring an acrobat, a dance act and a live performance from acclaimed DJ Bob Sinclar, providing attendees a vibrant networking and celebratory experience.

Looking forward, DELIVER continues its global expansion, announcing upcoming events in major international markets, including:

• DELIVER America in Las Vegas (29+30 October 2025)
• DELIVER Middle East in Dubai (21+22 January 2026)
• DELIVER Asia in Singapore (4+5 March 2026)
• DELIVER Europe in Amsterdam (3+4 June 2026)

Further details and future updates can be accessed via the DELIVER website.

Press & Media contact at DELIVER:

• Elena Regan marketing@deliver.events

The post DELIVER Europe 2025 Delivers Success: Highlighting Sustainability and Innovation in Retail Logistics appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Wytse Kaastra, Matthew Robinson, Babak Moussavi and Josh Elkind

The authors would like to thank Rebecca Tan and Dominic King for their contributions to this article.

Europe’s lead on decarbonization has not translated into competitive advantages. But the continent’s policy aims are increasingly to foster growth in new sustainable markets. In response, companies should rethink their market positioning, accelerate decarbonization, and embrace more radical forms of collaboration.

Europe leads on decarbonization. Two-thirds (67 per cent) of the largest European companies are cutting operational emissions—typically by more than 3 per cent annually.^[i] Nineteen per cent have set a date by which their operations will have net zero carbon emissions. But a further 64 per cent of large European companies have set date-bound commitments to be net zero not only in their operations but also in their upstream and downstream value chains.^[ii] This is more than twice that of their non-European peers.

Can Europe translate this climate leadership into competitive advantage? Such a coupling is possible: since 1990, the bloc has cut emissions by 37 per cent while growing GDP by over 68 per cent.^[iii] But it’s not inevitable. Mario Draghi warns that decarbonization “could run contrary to competitiveness” if the transition isn’t affordable for consumers and profitable for businesses.^[iv]

Europe has three key pathways to turn decarbonization into a competitive edge: lowering costs, strengthening geopolitical resilience, and opening new avenues for growth.

It starts with energy. Europe’s reliance on energy imports has left companies facing electricity prices that are 2-3 times those in the US—a massive drag on competitiveness, especially for heavy industry.^[v] The faster Europe can shift to clean, secure, domestic sources of power generation, the sooner companies can escape turbulent energy markets and destabilizing price shocks.

This is happening. The EU sourced 47 per cent of its electricity from renewables in 2024^[vi] at prices not seen since before Russia invaded Ukraine.^[vii] The levelized cost of electricity for solar and wind fell further below that of fossil fuels^[viii] while the share of electricity generated from solar overtook coal for the first time ever.^[ix] This shift is producing real savings and less exposure to volatile energy imports. The EU avoided €59 billion in gas and coal imports thanks to new wind and solar capacity added since 2019.^[x]

The next step is to then translate the transition into long-term growth. It is within this context that the European Commission is betting that simplified ESG reporting and reinforced support for clean industrial production will ensure that decarbonization is an opportunity, not a hindrance. The Omnibus package aims to make Europe a less expensive place to do business by streamlining sustainability compliance requirements and reducing the reporting burden on companies by 25 per cent.^[xi] The stated goal is not to roll back commitments, but rather to address the most widely cited barriers to scaling green solutions—the regulatory landscape and permitting delays.^[xii] The Clean Industrial Deal aims to reinforce the business case for decarbonization by supporting the transition of energy-intensive industries and mobilizing €100 billion towards clean-tech sectors so that domestically produced net-zero technologies can supply at least 40 per cent of the EU’s deployment needs by 2030.^[xiii] Electrification of the power sector will be vital, with at least €1 trillion of cumulative investment needed by 2030 in renewable energy sources, as well as utility-scale batteries and electrolyzers for hydrogen production.^[xiv]

These bloc-level imperatives extend directly to individual European enterprises. To carve out a differentiated position, companies need to review and refresh their growth strategy, specifically to address the following three questions.

1. Which sustainable markets will you serve?

In a decarbonized economy, the typical products and services that companies sell will look very different. Many markets remain dominated by offerings that are set to become obsolete. Consider that European companies are increasingly fighting for a slice of the electric vehicle (EV) market. But in Europe, sales of EVs still only comprised 21 per cent of total vehicle sales in 2023.^[xv] Put another way, most customers were likely sold a car that will no longer be legal to purchase in 2035.^[xvi] The work remains, but so does the growth opportunity; the global market for clean technologies is projected to reach €600 billion per year by 2030.^[xvii]

It’s not just EVs. By 2022, heat pumps, much more efficient than traditional gas boilers, had been installed in 16 per cent of Europe’s building stock—which is to say, many more retrofits are still to take place.^[xviii] Sustainable aviation fuel is still a relatively low share of the fuel mix in planes, but demand will rise as airlines evaluate their few options for decarbonizing. And green cement and steel remain nascent materials, but they represent the better, cleaner products of the future.

Emphasizing the development and production of sustainable technologies at home will allow European companies to compete with Chinese peers in the future.

Europe has signalled that future growth areas are low-carbon. More than one-fifth of clean and sustainable technologies—such as wind turbines and electrolyzers—are developed in the EU.^[xix] Three-fifths of heat pumps sold in Europe are produced domestically.^[xx] Even in the UK, now outside the single market, the decarbonization sector’s total economic value added grew by 10 per cent in 2024 while supporting nearly one million full-time jobs.[xxi] Emphasizing the development and production of sustainable technologies at home will allow European companies to compete with Chinese peers in the future.  Organizations like the European Raw Materials Alliance aim to diversify supply chains and make better use of the resources already available in Europe—whether that be via extraction, processing, or circularity.^[xxii]

It is within this growth context that companies wishing to remain competitive need to reevaluate their core offerings, and pivot where necessary. Most have got the memo; our research found that 84 per cent of the largest European companies are developing new products and services with more sustainable outcomes in mind.^[xxiii] The maturing net zero economy may represent “the economic growth opportunity of the 21st century.”^[xxiv] But realizing it demands innovation.

2. How will you accelerate your own decarbonization?

Portfolio shifts are necessary for companies to remain competitive in a decarbonizing market landscape. But they are not sufficient. Economies and markets will transform—but so must the companies that operate within them. The regulatory signals indicate that businesses that decarbonize will have the advantage. Consider the logic of measures such as the Emissions Trading Scheme and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. By directly tying carbon to costs, companies that wish to operate under the regulatory aegis of Europe are incentivized to decarbonize. And every unit removed from the production process shows up as less embodied carbon in new or existing products themselves.

But more pertinently, cutting carbon often is cutting costs—over the longer term at least. On-site renewables should lead to lower running costs. Closed-loop systems entail less waste and greater efficiency. Building insulation and LED lighting mean less money leaking out of walls and windows.

This requires capital investment. The trick will be to mobilize investment now by promising strong future returns from clean, competitive energy and industrial products. High upfront costs typically remain a barrier to such decarbonization investments, especially in heavy industries.[xxv] Driving costs down to tipping points—like those reached by solar and wind—will unlock scaling and wider adoption. Long-term financing and a mix of public and private funding, including shared costs and green bonds, are essential to accelerate progress.

Again, most European companies are aware of the benefits of cutting carbon—and are more likely than their counterparts in other regions to be taking tangible action to decarbonize. Across 15 of 21 decarbonization levers that we analyzed, at least half of the largest European companies showed evidence of implementation. Action is not yet happening fast enough, with only 21 per cent of companies on track to reach net zero in their operations by 2050.^[xxvi] But a critical mass is moving in the right direction.

3. How will you take the way you work with others to the next level?

Companies that attempt to decarbonize alone will incur unnecessary costs that will hinder competitiveness. And such an approach is probably futile anyway; the complexities of modern industry mean companies have interdependencies—and Scope 3 emissions—in other sectors and countries. The energy transition itself is dependent on critical materials that are typically sourced from across borders. Ramping up domestic extraction, processing and recycling can mitigate the risk of supply disruption, but cross-border supply chains are unlikely to be disappearing anytime soon.^[xxvii]

Decarbonizing while bolstering competitiveness is especially challenging given the systems-level change that it represents. If entire markets are indeed to be transformed, disparate actors across those markets will need to work together to make that happen.  This means collaboration both within and across industries—think of energy or resource providers aligning with automotive firms, or (regenerative) food producers working with retailers, or manufacturers coordinating with policymakers to roll out new infrastructure. And this isn’t just in pursuit of making new things, but also to make sustainable choices more relevant in customers’ lives, thereby collectively bringing about necessary demand shifts. This will necessitate speaking to a wider set of motivators, such as identity, well-being and affordability.^[xxviii]

If entire markets are indeed to be transformed, disparate actors across those markets will need to work together to make that happen.

The regulatory landscape in Europe is itself increasingly structured to incentivize collaboration. Think of supply chain due diligence requirements for example. Or consider sector-wide emissions targets that induce the pooling of non-competitive data to create benchmarks and share best practice. It’s no surprise, therefore, that 81 per cent of the largest European companies are members of organizations that drive forward collective sustainability goals.^[xxix] Europe’s regulations may not always work as intended, as noted above. But if the Omnibus proposals resolve this, streamlined compliance obligations should not inhibit collaboration and innovation.

Time to get to work

None of this will be easy. Unlocking new growth will require upfront investment, openness to experimentation, and likely even the winding down of previously dominant business lines. But new tools are available—including AI. Accenture’s previous research with the United Nations Global Compact has shown how AI can be a catalyst for achieving bold, sustainable goals.^[xxx] In fact, Europe already holds a slight edge in using AI for decarbonization—with 20 per cent of its largest companies deploying AI for this purpose compared to 14 per cent globally.^[xxxi] Equally important, businesses must remember that only by integrating advanced digital platforms into a dynamic and interoperable foundation can the full advantages of AI be realized.^[xxxii]

Enormous potential remains. By scaling up AI adoption and focusing on its decarbonizing capabilities, European companies can explore and exploit new avenues of sustainable growth faster and more collaboratively. They must seize this opportunity to reignite their competitiveness.

About the Authors

Wytse Kaastra leads Accenture’s EMEA sustainability practice and is the global lead for sustainability services in resources industries. 

Matthew Robinson leads the sustainability team within Accenture Research.

Babak Moussavi is a senior principal within Accenture Research, focusing on net zero.

Josh Elkind is a research specialist within Accenture Research, focusing on sustainability.

References

^[i] Accenture (2024). Destination Net Zero

^[ii] Based on analysis of the largest 2,000 companies globally.

^[iii] European Commission (2024). Climate report shows the largest annual drop in EU greenhouse gas emissions for decades

^[iv] European Commission (2024). https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e481fd-2dc3-412d-be4c-f152a8232961_en

^[v] European Commission (2024). https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e481fd-2dc3-412d-be4c-f152a8232961_en

^[vi] Ember (2025). European Electricity Review 2025

^[vii] European Commission (2024). Market analysis – European Commission

^[viii] International Renewable Energy Agency (2024). Renewable power generation costs in 2023

^[ix] Ember (2025). European Electricity Review 2025

^[x] Ember (2025). European Electricity Review 2025

^[xi] European Commission (2025). https://commission.europa.eu/news/commission-proposes-cut-red-tape-and-simplify-business-environment-2025-02-26_en

^[xii] World Economic Forum (2025). WEF_Delivering_on_the_European_Green_Deal_A_Private_Sector_Perspective_2025.pdf

^[xiii] European Commission (2025). https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-competitiveness/clean-industrial-deal_en

^[xiv] Eurelectric (2023). Decarbonisation Speedways

^[xv] International Energy Agency (2024). Trends in electric cars – Global EV Outlook 2024 – Analysis

^[xvi] European Parliament (2022). EU ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2035 explained

^[xvii] European Commission (2023). Factsheet: Make Europe home of clean tech industries.pdf

^[xviii] European Heat Pump Association (2023). European Heat Pump Market Statistics Report 2023

^[xix] European Commission (2024). https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e481fd-2dc3-412d-be4c-f152a8232961_en

^[xx] European Heat Pump Association (2024). European Heat Pump Market Statistics Report 2024

^[xxi] CBI (2025). Growth and innovation in the UK’s net zero economy

^[xxii] European Raw Materials Alliance (2025). https://erma.eu/

^[xxiii] Accenture (2024). Destination Net Zero

^[xxiv] The Guardian (2025). Labour’s clean energy plan will not only cut emissions but lift hundreds of thousands out of fuel poverty | Ed Miliband

^[xxv] Accenture (2023). Powered for Change

^[xxvi] Accenture (2024). Destination Net Zero

^[xxvii] European Commission (2023). Factsheet: European Critical Raw Materials Act.pdf

^[xxviii] Accenture (2023). Our Human Moment: Cracking the Code

^[xxix] Accenture (2024). Destination Net Zero

^[xxx] Accenture (2024). Gen AI for the Global Goals

^[xxxi] Accenture (2024). Destination Net Zero

^[xxxii] Accenture (2024). Reinventing with a Digital Core

The post Can Europe Inc. Make Decarbonization its Competitive Edge? appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Rob Passmore

As pressure builds globally to tackle river pollution, it’s becoming clear that outdated monitoring methods are the bottlenecks to real progress. In this article, Rob Passmore, CEO of Additive Catchments, explores how methodologies incorporating AI, sensor networks, and shared data infrastructure can help the water sector transition from fragmented, reactive responses to collaborative, intelligence-led action.

River pollution is one of the most urgent and visible environmental challenges facing countries across Europe. Almost 71% of surface water bodies in Europe, show poor ecological status. Nutrient runoff, combined sewer overflows, and ageing infrastructure are pushing ecosystems to the brink, and public confidence is wearing thin. If we’re serious about restoring our rivers, we have to look beyond what’s being done to how decisions are made.

Today, much of our water quality monitoring is designed to check boxes, not drive outcomes. The data collected is often fragmented, stored in incompatible formats, and confined within institutional boundaries. This leaves many organisations working in the dark, repeating efforts, missing early warnings, or making critical choices based on incomplete information. The lack of integration limits what’s possible, not just in the UK, but across Europe.

The Netherlands has the lowest ecological water quality in the EU, with the majority of its rivers, lakes, and coastal waters failing to achieve ‘good’ status. In comparison, even in the UK, where water quality is also a concern, only 14% of rivers meet the ‘good’ ecological standard. To build a better future for waterways, we need to move from reactive, piecemeal interventions to systemic, evidence-led action. And that begins with a clearer, shared view of what’s happening in our catchments—upstream and downstream—in real time.

The problem with legacy approaches

Across Europe, current monitoring regimes are largely built around compliance—confirming whether pollutant levels exceed regulatory thresholds, typically through spot sampling or periodic lab tests.  While these methods have their place, they’re slow, expensive, and rarely offer the resolution or frequency needed to detect changes as they happen.

Moreover, the burden of compliance is uneven. Larger utilities may have dedicated teams and resources to navigate regulatory frameworks, but smaller stakeholders, such as farmers, developers, and local authorities, are often left trying to interpret complex requirements with little support. The result is a system that feels more like bureaucracy than a pathway to better water quality.

And when monitoring data does exist, it’s often inaccessible to those who need it. Landowners, planners, environmental groups, and even regulators themselves may be working with different datasets, or none at all, making coordinated responses difficult and trust even harder to build.

A shift toward shared intelligence

What’s needed is a new model: one where water quality isn’t monitored in isolation but understood as part of a dynamic, interconnected system. Rivers don’t respect administrative boundaries, and neither should our data.

In the UK, the Catchment Systems Thinking Cooperative (CaSTCo), a cross-sector initiative involving over 50 organisations, recently submitted a unified framework, ‘Call for Evidence’, to the UK’s Independent Water Commission, calling for precisely this shift. Its recommendations—national data standards, integrated platforms, and citizen science inclusion—are already shaping how we think about catchment-scale insight.

One approach gaining traction is what’s known as Catchment Monitoring-as-a-Service (CMaaS). These platforms consolidate real-time sensor data from multiple sources, overlay it with regulatory information, and make it available in a format that’s easy to interpret, share, and act on.

When powered by AI, CMaaS platforms can go further still. They can identify patterns, flag emerging risks, and even suggest targeted interventions before problems escalate. This kind of foresight is what turns data into decision-making power, and compliance into resilience.

Why local decision-makers matter more than ever

As governments loosen environmental regulations worldwide, we’re seeing new local and community players tasked with monitoring, often without the tools to do it effectively. This decentralisation risks increasing fragmentation, but it also opens the door to a more distributed, transparent model of oversight.

Take housing. In some areas, developments have stalled because planners can’t prove they’ll have a net-zero impact on local rivers. With shared, real-time monitoring platforms, authorities gain the insight they need to quantify environmental impact, ensure natural resources are protected, and allow sustainable construction to move forward. Data becomes the enabler, not the barrier, to progress.

Technology enables transparency, but can’t replace it

IoT sensors, machine learning algorithms, and edge computing are already changing how we monitor everything from nitrate concentrations to stormwater overflow events. These tools offer unprecedented granularity and frequency, revealing conditions hour-by-hour instead of month-by-month.

However, technology alone isn’t the solution. Without transparency and collaboration, even the most sophisticated monitoring systems risk becoming yet another silo. That’s why platforms must be open, interoperable, and designed with governance in mind. Data must not only be accurate, but it must also be trusted.

That trust comes from shared standards, independent validation, and public visibility. Imagine a world where communities could check the health of their local rivers in real time. Where developers could see the cumulative impact of a new housing project. Where regulators could spot noncompliance before it damages ecosystems. That’s the promise of modern catchment monitoring.

From reaction to prediction

Whether in the UK or across Europe, we face a choice: continue with outdated, reactive methods, or embrace transparency, technology, and shared responsibility.

To get there, we need to treat data not as a byproduct of regulation, but as the foundation for effective governance. We need to build systems where intelligence flows across institutional lines, where monitoring supports real-time decisions, and where accountability is enabled, not avoided, by technology.

This is not just a technical challenge. It’s a cultural one. But it’s one we’re ready for. The tools exist. The partnerships are forming. And the appetite for smarter, more collaborative water management is growing fast.

If we want thriving rivers, restored public trust, and resilient communities, the answer isn’t just to monitor more, it’s to monitor smarter.

About the Author

Rob Passmore CEO and Co-founder of Additive.earth, where he leads the development and scaling of ventures that address critical environmental challenges. With 30 years’ experience in digital transformation, environmental strategy, and nature-based solutions, Rob’s work brings together advanced technology, strategic partnerships, and innovative funding models to deliver measurable impact.

The post Solving Europe’s Water Challenge: Why Smarter Monitoring Is Key to Thriving Rivers appeared first on The European Business Review.

Indeed, Nutri-Score has over many years been shedding its golden shine. A traffic-light grading scheme that ranks food products from A (green) to E (red), it was promoted as a tool to help consumers make healthier choices at a glance. But in practice, the system has done more to confuse than to clarify. And countries are backing away. Companies are rethinking. And consumers—whose trust and understanding were supposed to anchor the model—have remained ambivalent at best.

Nestlé’s withdrawal is significant not just because of the brand’s size, but because of its timing and location. The company will stop using Nutri-Score on Switzerland-exclusive products beginning in mid-2025, with a full phase-out planned by the end of 2026. That decision follows a noticeable drop in both political and commercial support for Nutri-Score in the country, leading a Nestlé spokesperson to grumble that the firm’s brands are the “only ones” to carry the label.

Crumbling front

Importantly, Nestlé’s move, after Danone did the same earlier, also reflects a broader truth: Nutri-Score no longer commands consensus in Europe, and the silent unraveling of its legitimacy is well underway. Originally developed in France and introduced on a voluntary basis in Belgium, Germany, and Spain, Nutri-Score as the hailed answer to front-of-package labels failed to materialise.

Italy has been vocal in its opposition, calling Nutri-Score discriminatory against traditional food products like olive oil and Parmigiano Reggiano. Eastern European countries have raised concerns about the data reliability underpinning Nutri-Score’s algorithm. Meanwhile, Switzerland, never a full convert, has seen growing resistance from retailers and political actors who view the system as both reductive and incompatible with national food culture.

It’s telling that Nestlé’s exit applies only to Swiss-market brands. This is not a blanket rejection, but a clear calculation: Nutri-Score no longer adds value in Switzerland. And where it no longer adds value, it no longer makes commercial sense.

The consumer doesn’t buy it

At the heart of the problem is a contradiction that Nutri-Score never resolved: its attempt to simplify nutritional science into a single, colour-coded grade strips away too much context. Products that are naturally calorie-dense, like nuts, olive oil, or certain cheeses, are penalised, even when consumed in moderation as part of a balanced diet.

The effect is that the label doesn’t always align with common sense, or with what people already know about food. The system’s opacity about how scores are calculated hasn’t helped. Informed consumers remain sceptical. Less informed consumers don’t trust what they can’t understand. And no amount of colour-coding can fix a credibility problem once it’s set in.

Surveys in several countries have shown that consumer recognition of Nutri-Score does not translate into behavioural change. The labels are noticed, but not necessarily trusted, nor acted upon. Where uptake was expected to be intuitive and widespread, it has instead been tepid and uneven.

One-size-fits-none model

One of Nutri-Score’s most persistent flaws is its rigidity. It doesn’t account for local diets, cultural patterns, or how foods are consumed in context. This may be tolerable in theory, but becomes problematic when regulatory pressure pushes for adoption across markets with very different culinary foundations.

A rating system that penalises olive oil but gives a green light to fibre-enriched, artificially sweetened snacks is unlikely to gain traction in Mediterranean countries. Nor should it. Food is not a pharmaceutical input. It carries cultural, economic, and social meaning. To impose a pan-European labelling model that overlooks this complexity is not public health policy, it’s nutritional central planning.

This was never about avoiding regulation. Clear, evidence-based nutritional guidance is important. But guidance that alienates the public or stigmatises traditional diets is not helpful. And a system that claims scientific grounding but cannot tolerate contextual nuance quickly loses both authority and utility.

Nestlé has made it clear that it will continue to provide full nutritional information on packaging in Switzerland, even without Nutri-Score. That is an important point. The retreat from Nutri-Score does not signal a retreat from transparency. On the contrary, it reflects a growing consensus that effective consumer information must be both detailed and intelligible, just not reduced to a single-letter rating.

It’s time to rethink what food labelling is for. If the goal is public health, then simplicity must not come at the cost of accuracy. If the goal is trust, then systems must respect local identities and dietary norms. And if the goal is to empower consumers, then we must recognise that information alone isn’t power but clarity is.

Nestlé’s decision may look cautious on the surface. But in a policy field where inertia is often the norm, choosing to let go of a failed model is an act of leadership. Europe should take note.

The post Europe is Quietly Turning the Page on Nutri-Score appeared first on The European Business Review.

Climate change, geopolitical instability, and widening social divides are reshaping the global landscape. As traditional business models falter, a critical question emerges: can finance become part of the solution?

Beyond Buzzwords: What Sustainable Investment Demands

Sustainable investment is often associated with ESG metrics and corporate pledges. But real progress means moving past checkbox compliance. Many bold, viable ideas never receive funding, while high-emission industries continue to thrive under legacy systems.

The current moment demands harder questions:

• What truly qualifies as “sustainable” in today’s global markets?
• Which voices influence what gets funded, and what doesn’t?
• Are investors positioned to drive systemic change, or just surface-level reform?

The investment landscape is changing. And in 2025, Zurich will become a focal point for this transformation.

A Timely Venue for Tough Conversations

Switzerland’s reputation for neutrality and its global financial relevance make Zurich an apt location for the XII Global Edition of CC Forum, scheduled from 29 September to 2 October 2025. The timing is notable; the forum overlaps with the Zurich Film Festival, creating a unique environment where finance, art, and global discourse can intersect.

The context here plays a gigantic part. The event takes place at a time when environmental, economic, and humanitarian challenges have converged. There’s a shared understanding that “business as usual” no longer applies.

CC Forum: A Platform for Action

Founded and led by Max Studennikoff, CC Forum has built a reputation for connecting diverse stakeholders to tackle sustainability through investment. Past forums in cities like London, Monaco, and Dubai have hosted figures such as Ban Ki-moon, Jane Goodall, and Prince Albert II of Monaco. This time, Zurich will host 400–500 global delegates, including:

• Family offices and venture capitalists
• Private equity leaders and angel investors
• Royal family members, diplomats, and cultural icons
• Founders of climate tech startups and social enterprises

The format will have high-level plenary sessions, focused roundtables, startup pitches, and private networking opportunities. CC Forum truly converts dialogue into funding decisions.

Ahead of the main event, a private investors’ meet-up on 10 July will create a space for early-stage connections, partnerships, and project briefings. For Swiss entrepreneurs, it’s a rare chance to present to an international audience and forge global alliances.

Each session ties into the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). And rather than vague pledges, the aim is to identify practical steps through funding that can actually move the needle.

Capital and Responsibility

Capital needs to be aligned with long-term resilience, with a focus on:

• Renewable energy innovation
• Climate tech scaling strategies
• Global healthcare and education funding
• Social inclusion and philanthropic impact

Sustainability isn’t a side project. It’s very telling of what good leadership looks like in 2025. Business leaders cannot afford to ignore the pressing challenges of climate change, resource depletion, and social inequality. The old model of “business as usual” is breaking down.

Private capital needs to drive renewable energy innovation, and emerging technologies will define the next decade. Investments should help bridge social gaps in healthcare, education, and inclusion.

The Role of Leadership in a Changing World

What does leadership look like in 2025? Increasingly, it looks like investors who prioritize longevity over speed, impact over image. It looks like entrepreneurs who place social good at the heart of their business model.

The rise of new entrepreneurial values like environmental awareness, social equity, and ethical accountability signals a shift in what the market rewards.

CC Forum offers a unique lens on this shift. While staying nonpartisan, it aims to convene the people and projects that are shaping a different kind of capitalism.

Conclusion

Zurich 2025 will be a part of a broader, global movement to reframe the role of finance in shaping society.

As Max Studennikoff noted in a recent statement, “The ultimate mission of this, our CC Forum, is to contribute to cracking down on the fundamental issues of human development, point blank.”

In that spirit, CC Forum’s Zurich edition becomes a signal: that ideas, capital, and conviction must now align if we’re to confront the century’s defining challenges.

The photo in the article is provided by the company(s) mentioned in the article and used with permission.

The post Rethinking Sustainable Investment with CC Forum: Why 2025 is Calling for Rapid Action appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Professor Bernd Vogel

As the world of work continues to evolve, leaders face growing pressure to balance or prioritise people over short-term profit. Professor Bernd Vogel explores what it means to lead with a human focus – why today’s choices around wellbeing, flexibility, and purpose will shape organisational performance and the legacy leaders leave behind.

Leadership is always about choices: how to respond, where to invest, what to stand for personally and when representing the business. Lately, those choices have been under intense public scrutiny. From major corporations enforcing return-to-office mandates to CEOs stepping back from diversity and sustainability, a familiar pattern is emerging: business priorities are being redrawn, and not everyone is convinced it’s for the better.

There’s no denying that economic pressure is real. But there’s also a sense that some leaders are retreating into old economic models, where productivity is king and people are an afterthought. These strategies often produce short-term results. But what will they cost us in the long run?

Leadership encompasses far more than day-to-day management. It shapes how an organisation relates to the people inside it, and what kind of value an organisation brings to the world around it, now and in the long term, and just as importantly, when individual executives have left the business.

Rethinking what people want from work 

Over the last decade, people’s relationship with work has fundamentally changed. Financial security still matters, of course. But for many, especially younger workers, remuneration alone isn’t enough. They express demand for roles that align with their values, offer space to grow and support their wellbeing in meaningful ways.

This shift isn’t just anecdotal. Across sectors, organisations that genuinely invest in their people tend to attract more committed, high-performing employees. And those employees are more likely to stay, even in a competitive market. According to Gartner, employees in human-centric work environments are 3.8 times more likely to be high performing.

Changing how leaders think about the employer-employee relationship requires more than perks or wellbeing programmes tacked onto ‘business as usual’. Evolution needs to be rooted in trust and mutual benefit. Less transactional. More purposeful.

The trouble with nostalgia

In uncertain times, there’s a temptation to fall back on familiar models. Return-to-office policies. Top-down decision-making. Efficiency above all else. What worked in one era, however, may fall flat in the next. Many of the assumptions behind traditional leadership have simply stopped working. The idea that loyalty is earned through job security, or that people will follow if you give them a plan, no longer rings true.

Take flexibility as an example. While some leaders still view remote work as a compromise, for many employees, it has become a baseline expectation. The same principle applies to wellbeing, development, and inclusion, which are no longer ‘nice to have’ extras but essential parts of the deal.

Failing to recognise this shift creates risks. Disengagement is growing, particularly among younger employees. Many feel that the social contract at work has broken down, and when that happens, performance, retention, and trust all take a hit.

What lasting leadership looks like 

It would be easy to view this as a problem to manage, but there’s another way to look at it. One that sees leadership not as a fixed role, but as something that evolves with people. Something that requires listening, learning, and, at times, letting go of what used to work. In our study on work and leadership, we talk instead of ‘Episodic Loyalty’ to explain the link between people and organisations: a strong bond, mutual commitment and trust, with the option to exit and to rejoin graciously.

To build organisations that are not only successful, but sustainable – in the human sense –means thinking beyond productivity targets and towards cultures where people can grow, feel connected, and bring their full selves to work. It also means leaders are willing to ask different questions. It’s not about how we get more out of our people but what would it look like to build something they want to be part of.

As we move into Industry 5.0, where technology accelerates the pace of change, human skills like empathy, resilience, and adaptability become essential. These qualities hold everything together.

Moving from systems to relationships

Many traditional leadership frameworks focus on structures: job titles, reporting lines, and performance indicators. But culture, the real and felt experience of work, isn’t built through systems alone. It takes shape through relationships effective leadership comes down to how you connect within those relationships. Whether you build trust or erode it. Whether you make space for difference or fall back on sameness. Whether you lead through values or through fear of falling behind. Those leaders who evolve their approach to create a culture and workplace that people want to be part of will be the ones who shape lasting and positive legacies.

The legacy question

Sooner or later, every leader will hand the reins over to someone else. We often think this refers solely to the top. Make no mistake, first-line or middle, and senior managers also have this in mind, and if not, they had better start. The impact of what they leave behind will be measured not just in terms of business metrics, but in how they made people feel, what kind of culture they helped create and sustain, and what they stood for when it mattered.

As leaders navigate through challenging times, how will the decisions they make now impact their businesses in the years ahead? Did we double down on old models, or did we use this time to rethink what kind of working world we want to build? Managers must embrace the fact that they continue to lead even when they are no longer with a business, and that is a great opportunity.

The leaders who will be remembered with positivity and admiration will be those who saw this moment as a chance to reset. To move from profit to a people-first approach, not because it sounds good, but because it works. For people. For performance. And for the kind of legacy that truly lasts.

About the Author

Professor Bernd Vogel is a Professor in Leadership at Henley Business School. He is also Research Division Lead in Leadership, Organisations, Behaviour and Reputation, Founding Director of Henley Centre for Leadership and Henley Centre for Leadership Africa and an executive coach.

Having worked for over 20 years with global companies, business schools and universities, he bridges academia and practice to guide people and organisations in leadership learning journeys.

The post Profit Over People: What will Define the Future Legacy of Today’s Leaders? appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. Anna Rostomyan and Dr. Monika Klein

Art is just art. Or is it? Can art go beyond a form of self-expression into influencing our identity, behavior, fashion choice, and social issues? In this article, Dr. Monika Klein and Dr. Anna Rostomyan explore how public art does all these and more.

In the heart of Rome, a couple strolls arm in arm, their stylish attire reflecting the elegance of the centuries-old architecture surrounding them. Meanwhile, in Paris, artists sketch the iconic Eiffel Tower, while fashionable locals sip espresso in nearby cafes. What about Berlin with its stark architecture, nonchalance, and techno scene? The quintessence of European cities provokes this profound question: How does art in our public spaces shape not only our environment but also our essence as individuals and communities, how does it affect our emotions?

From the controversial new Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw or the Humboldt Forum in Berlin sparking heated debates about aesthetics, to the symbolic power of toppling monuments such as the Christopher Columbus statue in Baltimore, Maryland, which are no longer in line with social values; public art is both a mirror and a catalyst for change. This article delves into the complex relationship between public art and human behavior, examining how the canvas of our communities can act as a self-fulfilling prophecy, influencing everything from our fashion choices to our cultural identity and social norms.

Understanding emotions is essential for analyzing the motivations, values, and behaviors of not only artists but also individuals affected by art in public spaces.

We firmly believe that public art is all about emotions since it shows overtly on the visual layer, the artists’ internally experienced emotions and feelings, aspirations and intentions, beliefs and desires, inspirations and motivations being directed toward shaping similar emotions in the public eye. Its integration into community spaces shapes the way people experience the outward world. We can truly relate to this statement since the world has become an open-air museum for artists, where they can display their experienced emotions related to various aspects of human life such as culture, politics, education, etc. Moreover, the displayed emotions of the artists also have the ultimate power to generate similar emotions in the viewers and shape viewpoints concerning different issues of importance like leadership and justice, gender equality, Black Lives Matter and some other critical sensitive issues of great relevance, as well as stimulate creativity and positive mood in the strollers. Also, sometimes through public art, artists address topics of significance and great sensitivity that are somewhat easier for them to address anonymously through their creative street creations. Besides, public art creations can be created under the influence of very strong emotions, both negative (such as anger, annoyance, hatred, rage, etc.) and positive (such as delight, glee, euphoria, amusement, joy, etc.). So, understanding emotions is essential for analyzing the motivations, values, and behaviors of not only artists but also individuals affected by art in public spaces. Recognizing these emotional responses can provide insights into how people relate to their environment, as well as show its potential to influence their worldview.

Street art is regarded as one of the largest art movements, which has achieved huge popularity and is still rapidly growing as an art form. Street artworks mainly appear in urban areas and public locations such as exterior walls of buildings, highway overpasses and bridges, and remarkably define the outlook of many neighborhoods and cities all around the world. The fact is that it is much easier to address topics and issues of high importance through street art without the fear of rejection or prosecution, where creators and artists regard the world as their landscape to create on and have the intention of influencing the public emotions.

Changes in landscapes, such as those caused by new architecture– mostly ones in which art and culture institutions exist, or art installation and street art can lead to feelings of powerlessness among inhabitants. This sense of helplessness can negatively affect their emotional connection to the landscape, highlighting the importance of emotional well-being in environmental contexts. There are two types of emotional responses:

• Resilient Responses: These responses reflect a willingness to adapt and integrate changes into one’s perception of the landscape. Individuals exhibiting these responses tend to maintain a positive outlook despite alterations in their environment.
• Non-Resilient Responses: In contrast, these responses are characterized by feelings of frustration and despair. Individuals experiencing these emotions struggle to cope with the changes, which can hinder their ability to adapt.

The ’60s and ’70s marked the birth of graffiti and street art culture when people started to freely exhibit their protest and creativity through street art across the Globe. On the one hand, just from their very beginning, graffiti and street art have been conceived with great resistance from the wider public. On the other hand, the stylistic developments within graffiti, and the first explorations of the public space by conceptual artists, led people from outside graffiti and street art to also notice the artistic potential of the movements and acknowledge the creativity of the artists. Truly, by means of graffiti and street art, artists get the ultimate chance to express their very own emotions freely on the roads and reach a wider public. Of course, because of very many underlying reasons, some of them tend to remain anonymous, but there are also others who gain recognition through their street art creations, for instance, Jean-Michel Basquiat, Lady Pink, and Invader, just to name a few. Moreover, if we look back at human art history, we can state that some of the famous artists started out their journey as artists by wall art as is the example of Ivan Aivazovsky, who in his earlier youth liked to paint on walls with coal and his murals later became very widely recognized. Aivazovsky was a celebrated painter of seascapes, the most famous among them being “The Ninth Wave”. Aivazovsky’s early works as well as those after his visit to his ancestral homeland in 1868 incorporated Armenian motifs and themes. It follows from this that if such renowned artists who started out with mural paintings can become widely recognized and esteemed, we should be resilient to public art and let artists freely express themselves knowing that some of them might have great potential, which can sprout through merely starting from street art. Moreover, aesthetic experiences can arise from the appreciation of human artifacts, such as artworks (e.g., poetry, sculpture, music, visual arts, etc.) or aesthetic natural objects like sunsets, which comes to suggest that the art consumers (including public art and street art) will experience pleasure while being faced with artworks in public spaces.

Public art can shape perceptions by altering how people view their environment and community.

Art in public spaces can have a significant impact on people’s behaviors and potentially influence their future through a mechanism like a self-fulfilling prophecy. This phenomenon can manifest in various ways. Public art can shape perceptions by altering how people view their environment and community. Positive, uplifting art may foster a sense of pride and optimism, potentially leading to more positive behaviors and outcomes. It can also influence expectations by depicting certain behaviors or societal norms, setting standards for how people should act in public spaces. For example, murals promoting environmental consciousness might encourage more eco-friendly behaviors. Public art plays a role in creating identity, helping to define the character of a neighborhood or city. People may align their behaviors with this identity, fulfilling the “prophecy” depicted in the art. It can also inspire action, with thought-provoking or activist art motivating people to engage with social issues, leading to community engagement and changes in individual and collective behavior. The presence of art in public spaces can affect mood and well-being, influencing people’s emotional states and potentially impacting their daily interactions and long-term outlook. Exposure to beautiful or meaningful art may reduce stress and increase overall well-being. Public art can change how people utilize spaces, transforming previously avoided areas into popular gathering spots. It fosters community connections by creating shared experiences and topics of conversation, strengthening community bonds, which may lead to more positive social outcomes. Depending on its content, public art can either challenge or reinforce existing stereotypes, influencing how people perceive themselves and others, and potentially affecting their future interactions and opportunities. There’s also an economic impact to consider, as areas rich in public art may see increased tourism and economic activity, leading to job creation and improved local services that directly impact residents’ futures. Finally, public art can serve an educational purpose, especially when depicting historical events or cultural information, increasing knowledge and awareness that can influence future decisions and behaviors. In essence, public art has the potential to act as a form of self-fulfilling prophecy by shaping the environment in which people live, work, and interact. By influencing perceptions, expectations, and behaviors, it can contribute to creating the future it depicts or suggests. However, it’s important to note that the impact of public art is not deterministic – it interacts with many other social, economic, and personal factors to influence outcomes. The power of public art lies in its ability to spark dialogue, inspire reflection, and offer new perspectives, which can indeed play a role in shaping individual and collective futures.

Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche once described art as the highest form of self-expression. It truly resonates with us, since through art in general (be it real art, digital art, street art, public art, etc.) people, namely artists, gain the ultimate chance of imparting their internally experienced emotions and feelings, as well as having an impact on the audience and even shaping their worldview. Moreover, by using street art, the creators also gain the chance to heal from trauma, which can also be the case in creating masterpieces in general, as in the case of Van Gogh who used to express his emotions and feelings through his art. Artworks are generally cultural artifacts that transmit information from generation to generation.

Art offers a glimpse of something that may be difficult to perceive and access in our everyday lives, namely the feeling of aspiration toward the beautiful and a sense of hope for the better.

Furthermore, art offers a glimpse of something that may be difficult to perceive and access in our everyday lives, namely the feeling of aspiration toward the beautiful and a sense of hope for the better. Also, public art can generally influence the emotions of those who experience it by means of evoking such positive emotions as joy, interest, contentment, amusement and love. Neuroimaging studies highlighted that immediate emotional responses to artwork and low-intensity enduring changes in affective states (cf. Scherer, 2005, for the distinction of emotional response and affective state) are associated with the recruitment of brain circuitry involved in the emotion regulation system, namely pleasure and reward. As we know, the brain is wired in such a way that it interprets the stimuli coming from the outside world generally as threats or rewards. Thus, for instance, images rated as beautiful elicit activity in reward-related areas creating the state of a beneficial situation for the human being’s survival, eliciting impulses in the medial orbitofrontal cortex, and are associated with higher reward value than those rated as ugly, which can be considered to be unbeneficial for the organism’s survival chances (Kawabata and Zeki, 2004). Furthermore, by means of using psychophysiological measures, studies find visits to art museums decrease stress levels resulting in the reduction of cortisol levels, which could promote the general health and well-being of humans (Clow and Fredhoi, 2006; Mastandrea et al., 2018). On the other hand, various theories of emotion have been influential in describing the paradoxical enjoyment of negative emotions in art (Juslin, 2013; Menninghaus et al., 2017). Several authors suggested that the psychological distance of the perceiver from what is depicted in the artwork, which comes from the individual’s awareness that the represented object or event is a cultural artifact, reduces the emotional impact of the eliciting object or event and allows the appraisal of the aesthetic qualities of the artwork. This “psychological distance” account underpins the difference between art-specific emotions and utilitarian emotions (Frijda, 1988; Scherer, 2005). Moreover, our research has shown that the transmitted emotions of the artist are interpreted on the side of the viewer based on the latter’s formerly shaped emotional background knowledge stored in the amygdala, that is his/her past emotional experiences that also largely influence the interpretation processes, as well as have an impact on the generation of resultant positive/negative emotions and feelings in the viewer (Rostomyan, 2012).

Through this paper, we would also like to address how public art, particularly sculptures, can act as self-fulfilling proficiencies through various mechanisms. Here are the key points that support this idea, derived from the provided contexts:

• Cultural Trail and Legacy: Public sculptures are seen as cultural trails that connect the past with the future. This notion implies that when communities invest in public art, they are not only enhancing their current environment but also creating a legacy that future generations will appreciate. This self-fulfilling aspect arises from the belief that art contributes to cultural identity and continuity over time.
• Social Acceptance and Engagement: The success of public sculptures is closely tied to their socio-cultural acceptability. When sculptures resonate with the community, they foster a sense of belonging and pride among residents. This engagement can lead to increased support for future art initiatives, creating a cycle where successful art projects encourage more artistic endeavors, thus fulfilling the community’s artistic aspirations.
• Dynamic Interaction with the Public: The interaction between sculptures and the public is dynamic, as sculptures can influence how people perceive and navigate public spaces. This interaction can enhance the overall experience of the public space, leading to a greater appreciation for art. As people engage with these sculptures, they may develop a deeper understanding of art’s role in their environment, reinforcing the idea that art can fulfill its purpose of enriching public life.
• Trauma Healing: Artists can heal through art by means of transmitting their internally experienced emotions and feelings. Moreover, those who witness the creation process or just witness and experience art pieces in public also gain the possibility of partly experiencing those experienced emotions of the artists as well, which may or may not also resonate with their previously experienced trauma and help them heal from PTSD. For instance, the World Health Organization recognizes how art can reduce the impact of trauma as “a tool for community building and post-disaster development”.

In fact, trauma-informed public art requires the expertise of multiple disciplines, including psychology, neuroscience, cognitive science, and healthcare, as well as social work and community engagement, planning and urban design, and of course the aspect of creative arts. Though these aforementioned sectors may otherwise work in isolation, it is highly imperative that artists conduct transdisciplinary research on the topic they would like to address, so as to have deeper insights into the issue being elaborated on and vitalized through public art; thus, to gain different viewpoints from various perspectives taking into account that their work will eventually influence the masses; thus, their works should encompass vital areas apparent in different disciplines for the precision of trauma-related aspects.

In summary, public art acts as a self-fulfilling proficiency by creating cultural legacies, fostering community engagement, facilitating dynamic interactions, and benefiting from institutional support. These elements work together to ensure that art continues to thrive and fulfill its intended roles within society. We have also discussed the high vitality of emotions in public art, both on the part of the creators and the audience. We also touched upon the area of trauma healing through art that can again be experienced by both of the parties involved in public art consumption. In addition, art creation and consumption can greatly increase our stress resilience levels which can be beneficial for our emotional and psychological well-being, and be resultantly beneficial to our survival in this journey called life, making this world a better place to experience and our ride through it greatly enjoyable and worthwhile. So, let us embrace art in all its forms, welcoming its potential of evoking emotions in us, serving as a means of touching upon sensitive issues and making us think about them and simply enjoying beautiful roads and neighborhoods.

About the Authors

Dr. Anna Rostomyan, an assistant professor and certified EI coach, specializes in the linguistic-cognitive analysis of emotions and their impacts on life and business. With 7 books, 50 publications, and readers across 100 nationalities, her research highlights the role of emotional intelligence in achieving better business outcomes.

Dr. Monika Klein, an award-winning movie producer and design expert, specializes in creative sector economics, regional development, and business models. With over 80 works, she excels in design thinking, service design, and user-focused solutions. Renowned for leading teams to success, she inspires impactful projects across diverse creative and social spheres.

References

1. Clow, A. and Fredhoi, C. (2006). Normalisation of Salivary Cortisol Levels and Self-Report Stress by a Brief Lunchtime Visit to an Art Gallery by London City Workers. Holistic Healthcare 3, 29–32. http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/3472/

2. Fancourt, D. and Finn, S. (2019). What Is the Evidence on the Role of the Arts in Improving Health and Well-Being? A scoping review, World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen.

3. Frijda, N. H. (1988). The Laws of Emotion. Psychol. 43, 349–358. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.43.5.349

4. Juslin, P. N. (2013). From Everyday Emotions to Aesthetic Emotions: Towards a Unified Theory of Musical Emotions. Life Rev. 10, 235–266. doi: 10.1016/j.plrev.2013.05.008

5. Kawabata, H. and Zeki, S. (2004). Neural Correlates of Beauty. J. 91, 1699–1705. doi: 10.1152/jn.00696.2003

6. Maraja Riechers., Werner Henkel., Moritz Engbers., Joern Fischer. (2019). Stories of Favourite Places in Public Spaces: Emotional Responses to Landscape Change. Sustainability, doi: 10.3390/SU11143851

7. Mastandrea S., Fagioli S. and Biasi V. (2019). Art and Psychological Well-Being: Linking the Brain to the Aesthetic Emotion. Psychol. 10:739. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00739

8. Menninghaus, W., Wagner, V., Hanich, J., Wassiliwizky, E., Jacobsen, T., and Koelsch, S. (2017). The Distancing-Embracing Model of the Enjoyment of Negative Emotions in Art Reception. Brain Sci. 40:e347. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X17000309

9. Nietzsche, F. (1872). The Birth of Tragedy. London: Penguin UK

10. Reddy, Eloise (2023). The Public Art of Healing: Facilitating Trauma-Informed Design in the Built Environment. Medium. March 20, accessed on 29.11.2024, available at: https://medium.com/@eloisereddy/the-public-art-of-healing-834634cfbb3e

11. Rostomyan, Anna (2012). The Vitality of Emotional Background Knowledge at Court. Polemos, vol. 6, no.2, 2012, Berlin: DeGruyter. pp. 281-292. https://doi.org/10.1515/pol-2012-0017

12. Scherer, K. R. (2005). What Are Emotions? And How Can They Be Measured? Sci. Inf. 44, 695–729. doi: 10.1177/0539018405058216

The post The Canvas of Community: How Public Art Shapes Emotions and Fulfills Its Own Prophecy appeared first on The European Business Review.

This shift is no longer optional. Regulators are tightening ESG disclosure requirements, investors are rethinking how they evaluate performance, and users expect financial technologies to contribute meaningfully to social and environmental goals. In Europe, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), which came into effect in 2025, requires thousands of companies to disclose environmental and social data — making fintech a cornerstone of trust and standardized reporting, according to the European Commission.

Financial platforms are evolving into bridges that connect business, society, and government. Artificial intelligence and big data are unlocking new frontiers for transparency and accountability, while national digital initiatives are embedding sustainability into their core design. Yet, the industry faces new challenges — from the risk of greenwashing to the delicate balance between innovation and responsibility.

We explore this future with Olesya Dobryakhina, PhD — an expert at the intersection of academia and industry, who develops methodologies for digitalization and innovation risk management in megaprojects, and applies them in fintech by leading major national platforms.

Which innovations in financial technology are already helping companies become more transparent and responsible?

A new generation of financial technologies is reshaping how businesses demonstrate accountability and sustainability. Among the most impactful innovations are ESG analytics, which allow companies to quantify environmental and social risks; blockchain-based supply chain tracking, ensuring traceability and authenticity; and “green” ratings that benchmark corporate sustainability performance. Platforms such as Refinitiv ESG provide investors with access to over 500 sustainability metrics for thousands of companies worldwide, helping them objectively assess non-financial risks.

Another rapidly growing area is transaction-level carbon footprint tracking, enabling both companies and consumers to understand the real impact of their financial activities. For example, the Doconomy app calculates the carbon footprint of each purchase, while GreenFi links users’ spending to verified environmental initiatives such as tree planting.

Major financial platforms are now embedding these tools directly into their ecosystems, creating integrated sustainability layers that combine financial data with environmental insights, offering investors visibility into how sustainable specific portfolios or products truly are. Traditional banks, too, are re-evaluating their asset structures through the ESG lens. An example is Mastercard’s collaboration with fintech startups that offers users the ability to analyze the carbon footprint of their spending. Moreover, banks such as HSBC and BNP Paribas are reviewing their asset portfolios in light of ESG criteria, reducing their investments in carbon-intensive industries.

The result is a financial landscape that is becoming not only more transparent, but also more accountable, data-driven, and aligned with long-term value creation and public trust.

How can artificial intelligence and big data enhance trust in financial services and strengthen their social value?

Artificial intelligence and big data are redefining what fairness and accountability mean in finance. Modern AI systems are increasingly capable of detecting risks with greater precision — and, crucially, identifying bias in lending decisions. By eliminating discriminatory patterns, they help make access to finance more inclusive and equitable. For instance, when Lloyds Banking Group implemented an AI-based mortgage assessment system, it uncovered hidden bias in loan rejections among minority ethnic customers and revised its approval criteria — making the process fairer and more transparent.

At the same time, AI-driven security tools are transforming the fight against fraud and financial crime, safeguarding both institutions and consumers. Beyond risk management, these technologies are also becoming vital instruments for ESG compliance: AI can automatically track adherence to sustainability standards, while big data enables real-time validation of “green” initiatives.

The result is a new model of trust, where technology strengthens not just efficiency but also ethics, transparency, and social value across the financial ecosystem.

What are the specifics of embedding sustainability principles into national digital platforms that serve tens of millions of users?

Integrating responsible innovation into large-scale digital ecosystems has become primarily a matter of governance and strategy, rather than design. At such scale, decisions about data ethics, infrastructure, and accountability frameworks determine how technology serves society. When platforms reach tens of millions of users, their scale and diversity demand not only flexibility, accountability, and a clear set of guiding principles, but also transparent oversight mechanisms that ensure these principles are applied consistently.

Sustainability must be built into the logic of data management, algorithmic transparency, and user experience — ensuring that ethical and environmental priorities are part of everyday interactions, not just policy declarations.

Equally important is the human dimension of digital inclusion. Universal, accessible interfaces must consider differences in age, income, and digital literacy. National platforms that achieve this will not only streamline financial interactions but also help citizens make informed, sustainable financial choices — turning digital participation into a driver of long-term resilience.

Which business models do you consider most viable in the long term — balancing both profitability and social impact?

The most sustainable business models are those based on the “shared value” approach, where profit generation and social benefit reinforce one another. As Michael Porter and Mark Kramer argued in their work on shared value, companies that address societal challenges through their core operations don’t just improve reputation — they create new markets, reduce systemic risks, and build durable competitiveness.

In fintech, this translates into platforms that combine financial innovation with measurable social outcomes: microfinance ecosystems that empower small entrepreneurs, digital banks promoting financial inclusion, and investment platforms financing clean technologies. Such companies deliver strong financial performance while building user trust and attracting capital that values accountability and transparency.

In today’s market, where ESG compliance is becoming the new baseline, the shared value approach is not philanthropy — it is strategy. The companies that embrace this principle today will shape the financial landscape of tomorrow.

What barriers most often hinder the integration of new standards into large-scale digital projects?

One of the key obstacles remains technological legacy — outdated IT systems that are difficult to adapt to new requirements of sustainability and transparency. Added to this is a lack of in-house ESG expertise, fragmented standards, and fears that implementing new practices will drive up costs — all of which explain why even large-scale digital projects often progress slowly in this area.

Yet the deeper issue lies in how sustainability is perceived — as external pressure rather than a strategic resource. As long as ESG is seen merely as a compliance exercise for regulators, rather than an integral part of the business model, companies miss the opportunity to turn it into a long-term advantage.

Sustainability should not be treated as an afterthought or an add-on — it must be embedded in the product architecture and user experience. When ESG principles become part of a platform’s underlying logic rather than a reporting requirement, digital transformation ceases to be a cost and becomes a source of efficiency, trust, and competitive strength.

What role do regulators play in this process: do they create pressure, or do they stimulate innovation?

Regulators today play a dual and increasingly strategic role, making them one of the key driving forces behind the transformation of the financial industry. On one hand, they act as catalysts for innovation, creating regulatory sandboxes where fintech companies can safely test new products and sustainable finance models.  These initiatives allow markets to evolve faster, helping businesses experiment with new ideas without the fear of breaching compliance rules.

On the other hand, regulators are the architects of trust frameworks — setting standards for reporting, ESG disclosure, and risk management that make the market more transparent and fair for all participants.

True effectiveness emerges at the intersection of these two roles. When supervision is combined with partnership and control is balanced by support, regulators cease to be a barrier and become a driver of innovation. This balance ultimately defines how fast sustainability moves from a slogan to an operational norm across the financial sector.

What risks are associated with “green” fintech — and how will the industry evolve once sustainability becomes a built-in norm?

As green fintech continues to grow, new systemic risks emerge alongside its opportunities. The most significant among them are data reliability, greenwashing, and digital inequality. In the race to appear sustainable, some companies rely on unverified or inconsistent ESG data, blurring the line between genuine impact and marketing. Without transparent verification mechanisms, green finance risks losing trust before it fully establishes a sustainable ecosystem.

At the same time, digital inequality threatens to divide users: those with access to technology benefit from sustainable financial tools, while others remain excluded from the system. True sustainability must therefore be inclusive — embedded within the architecture of national digital infrastructures, not added as an afterthought.

To address these challenges, many countries are developing national trust frameworks: unified ESG data verification standards, sustainable digital identity systems, and transparent validation platforms for environmental and social indicators.

Fintech is now entering an era of evidence-based sustainability. The priority is no longer to claim ESG alignment but to demonstrate it through verifiable data and measurable results. In this new environment, credibility becomes currency — and companies that can prove their commitments will earn trust and capital, while those that cannot will fade from relevance.

The post How Embedding ESG and Sustainability Shapes the Future of Fintech appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Jiayi Huang and Xiangming Chen

From a battery maker to the world´s leading electric vehicle producer, BYD’s spectacular rise is an eventful journey fueled by dedication, tenacity, and consistent research and development. This analysis of the giant EV auto manufacturer´s success will help growth-oriented companies fine tune their strategy in the age of transition toward green mobility.

The Chinese EV company BYD, headquartered in the high-tech megacity of Shenzhen bordering Hong Kong, has ascended to the pole position in global green mobility. BYD not only overtook Tesla in selling more EVs in 2024 but also beat Tesla by having developed a more advanced charging system that can charge its latest cars in just five minutes to go 400 km (250 miles), relative to Tesla’s Superchargers, which take 15 minutes to add 320 km (200 miles). In addition, BYD offers its proprietary “God’s Eye” driver-assistance system on cars that cost just below $10,000. How did BYD rise so spectacularly to its current position from a budding battery maker in 1994? While much Western media reports on BYD’s rapid growth, we take an in-depth look into the company’s eventful journey and the real sources of its success over the past three decades.

After persistent investment in R&D for nearly 20 years, BYD achieved breakthroughs in key technologies of electric vehicles and took off in the global passenger vehicle market.

Since its founding in 1994, BYD has leveraged three transformative opportunities to develop its core technologies and expand its businesses around the world. The first opportunity was China’s integration into global supply chains after China intensified market reforms in the 1990s. Between 1994 and 2002, BYD developed a cost-effective system to manufacture batteries for top mobile phone companies such as Motorola. The second opportunity that BYD leveraged was the historic growth of China’s automotive market in the 21st century. BYD built a vertically integrated system to mass-produce internal combustion engine (ICE) and new energy vehicles. The third opportunity was the electrification of the global automotive industry in recent years. After persistent investment in R&D for nearly 20 years, BYD achieved breakthroughs in key technologies of electric vehicles and took off in the global passenger vehicle market. BYD’s founding and current president, Wang Chuanfu, acutely identified the three opportunities when they arose.

From 0 To 1: How BYD Established A Firm Footing In The Automotive Industry* 

BYD’s rise to a top battery supplier

Wang Chuanfu formally founded BYD by registering it in Shenzhen in February 1995 to leverage opportunities in the battery industry. Wang saw enormous potential in the battery market given the increasing demand for electronic products. Wang was a battery expert when he founded BYD. He moved from Beijing to Shenzhen in 1993 when he was assigned to manage a state-owned enterprise that produced nickel batteries. He discovered that the state-owned enterprise could not keep pace with market changes, so he created his own company. As China’s first special economic zone (SEZ), Shenzhen was a pioneer in China’s market reforms and opening to the world. Financial incentives like lower taxes provided by the Shenzhen government, coupled with bordering Hong Kong, created a favorable environment for entrepreneurially-minded people like Wang to pursue their economic opportunities. Wang obtained financial support from his old friends and several companies to found BYD. BYD started with a team of around 20 employees. BYD exemplified a wave of entrepreneurial start-ups around that time, a number of which later turned into highly successful global companies such as Huawei and Tencent (Chen and Ogan 2017).

BYD created cost-effective ways to produce high-quality nickel and lithium-ion batteries. Whereas its Japanese counterparts used automated processes to make nickel batteries, BYD leveraged abundant labor in China to develop a much cheaper method of production. Wang arranged labor and fixtures in an efficient way that achieved robotic functions. After making breakthroughs in nickel batteries, Wang began studying lithium-ion batteries which were more sophisticated and had a bigger market than nickel batteries. BYD soon became the first Chinese company to mass-produce lithium-ion batteries. Wang decided to target the biggest clients in the battery market so that BYD could learn about the highest standards for quality management. Many multinational companies began outsourcing to China around 2000 allowing BYD to become a supplier to Motorola and Nokia in 2001 and 2002 when BYD also underwent an initial public offering on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, culminating its achievement as a company focused on producing batteries.

BYD’s great success as a battery maker, more than anything else, stems from Wang Chuanfu being a battery chemist at heart. BYD’s competitors quickly stopped trying to compete with Wang’s battery, which was far superior, and instead used BYD as their supplier. By driving BYD to improve its battery technology, Wang achieved great success in making BYD’s batteries better and cheaper than any competitor (Ogan and Chen 2016). Starting out as a battery manufacturer laid the most logical and sustainable foundation for BYD to enter and thrive in the automotive industry.

BYD’s entry into the automotive industry

After the early success in battery manufacturing, Wang Chuanfu made a bold decision to enter the automotive industry. Wang aimed to enter an industry that was bigger than the consumer battery industry and had connections with batteries. He saw the enormous potential of the Chinese automotive market. In the early 2000s, the Chinese government was reforming the automotive market and encouraging families to buy cars. Most people in China used motorcycles or bicycles for everyday transportation. Wang predicted that a historic number of Chinese people would buy cars over the next decade and that the automotive industry would be more energy-efficient and cleaner, creating opportunities for battery manufacturers. He was confident that BYD could produce high-quality cars at low costs after mastering the core technologies, just like its past experiences in battery manufacturing. BYD obtained the license to produce cars by purchasing the Qinchuan Automobile Company in 2003.

Qinchuan did not have full mastery of automobile technologies so Wang led his team to invent new cars. Although Wang was the most interested in electric vehicles, he understood that the technologies and market for electric vehicles were immature. Inventing ICE vehicles could be a transition and help BYD understand the automotive supply chain. BYD initially wanted to procure parts from external suppliers, but it was difficult to find suitable suppliers. Wang decided to pursue vertical integration. Vertical integration was time-consuming at first but enhanced the efficiency and reduced the costs of R&D in the long term. BYD’s current General Manager of the Branding and Public Relations Division, Li Yunfei, comments, “If you rely on external suppliers, they will not tell you their long-term plan for R&D. They usually provide you with the technologies that are the most profitable for them. Vertical integration helps BYD come up with comprehensive solutions to existing problems in automotive products.” BYD produced its first ICE vehicle model called F3 in 2005 and its first battery electric vehicle (BEV) model e6 in 2009. BYD launched F3DM (DM stands for dual modes) in 2008 and became the first company to sell plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) in the world.

BYD started developing electric commercial vehicles in 2008. Wang realized then that it would still take a very long time to electrify passenger vehicles; roadblocks include the lack of the charging infrastructure, consumer distrust in relevant technologies, and the high prices of electric vehicles. But Wang saw at least two benefits of electrifying commercial vehicles. First, electrifying commercial vehicles could act as a buffer zone that educates consumers about electric vehicles. Second, electrifying taxis and buses could significantly reduce air pollution because they accounted for over one-third of air pollution from vehicles. The latter has stayed with Wang as a top consideration in BYD’s relentless pursuit of building more and better EVs as a worthy contribution to the climate cause.

Since 2013 BYD’s electric buses have entered major overseas markets such as the UK, the US, Japan, and India. By 2015, BYD K9 electric buses and e6 electric taxis have spread to over 190 cities in 43 countries and regions. BYD’s buses succeeded in different climates and regulatory contexts. For example, BYD delivered electric double-decker buses to London in the 2010s. In fact, Wang walked side by side with President Xi Jinping of China during the latter’s official visit to the UK in October 2015 when London bought more zero-emission electric buses from BYD (Chen and Ogan 2017). This purchase by a top global city with an iconic bus system went a long way to elevate BYD’s brand and global reputation. It also motivated BYD to solve the technological challenges in transforming the K9 model into a double-decker bus, such as a higher center of gravity and limited space for batteries.

Wang has the deepest understanding of the cutting-edge technologies at BYD. He knows how and when the current bottlenecks will be solved. Solving those bottlenecks will completely transform the customer experience.

BYD established a firm footing in the automotive market and managed to maintain its strategic focus on R&D for electric vehicles despite abrupt changes in market conditions. BYD sold around 400,000 to 500,000 vehicles every year in the 2010s. BYD’s revenue declined in 2012 and 2019, coinciding with fluctuations in the Chinese automotive market. The two troughs pushed BYD to increase the efficiency of its management system. In a system of vertical integration, some BYD factories lacked the motivation to reduce the costs and raise the quality of their products because they were guaranteed that their products could be sold to other factories in BYD. BYD thus made significant changes to its procurement system. It used external suppliers as benchmarks and closed some underperforming factories. Some factories started competing with external suppliers in bidding processes.

The year 2019 turned out to be a very difficult one in BYD’s history. Its net profit for shareholders was only 1.6 billion RMB that year, but Wang Chuanfu still invested 8.4 billion RMB in R&D. Li Yunfei comments, “Wang has the deepest understanding of the cutting-edge technologies at BYD. He knows how and when the current bottlenecks will be solved. Solving those bottlenecks will completely transform the customer experience. His technological expertise has helped BYD to develop a long-term vision and strategy. He is like a prophet and a time traveler. He can maintain his strategic focus and avoid being distracted by fluctuations in external conditions. We firmly believe that our future is bright. We will be lucky if market tailwinds arrive sooner. We are prepared to withstand the difficulties if market tailwinds arrive later.”

Back in 2008, Wang described his three green dreams. The first dream was to develop affordable technologies to use solar energy. The second dream was to help humans store energy. The third dream was to build electric vehicles to reduce air pollution. BYD has invested in R&D for solar cells and energy storage power plants since the 2000s. The three dreams have motivated Wang to expand BYD’s presence in other green industries besides electric vehicles at a global level.

BYD’s Take-Off In The Global Automotive Market

BYD released the revolutionary Blade Battery in March 2020, leading an unprecedented wave of breakthroughs. The Blade Battery is a lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery for electric vehicles and looks like a blade (Figure 1). The Blade Battery has higher energy density than traditional battery packs and increases the range of electric vehicles, which paved the way for upgrading the Dual Mode (DM) technology platform of hybrid vehicles. The earlier versions of the DM platforms primarily relied on fuel. The DM 4.0 platform, released in June 2020, primarily relied on electricity. BYD released the e-Platform 3.0 for battery electric vehicles in 2021, which Wang Chuanfu called the most essential step from electrifying vehicles to increasing their intelligence. The e-Platform 3.0 was a brand-new platform specifically designed for electric vehicles and integrated the most critical technologies of electric vehicles.

Powered by technological breakthroughs, BYD quickly diversified its vehicle models to meet different demands from consumers. BYD currently has four brands and five sales networks in China. The four brands are BYD, DENZA, FANGCHENGBAO and YANGWANG. The bestselling brand is BYD, which has two sales networks (Dynasty and Ocean). BYD stands for “Build Your Dreams”, symbolizing BYD’s green dreams. In China, vehicle models of the Dynasty network are named after Chinese dynasties (Qin, Han, Tang, Song, Yuan, etc.).  The Ocean network looks more youthful than the Dynasty network. DENZA offers a new luxury travel experience. FANGCHENGBAO, meaning “formula leopard” in Chinese, is a professional personalized brand. YANGWANG is a high-end brand. This quartet of brands has provided BYD with a broader and more diversified portfolio of assets.

Wang drives BYD

As BYD’s founder but going beyond a conventional founder’s role, Wang Chuanfu has played a pivotal role in shaping and sustaining both the technological core and cultural meanings of the BYD brands. Li Yunfei recalls, “Not everyone in the marketing team is an engineer, but our marketing is driven by a thorough understanding of our technologies. We have launched some pioneer technologies. Many consumers found engineering concepts very boring, so it was challenging to quickly impress our consumers with the strengths of our technologies. Wang was willing to work with the marketing team in the planning stage of marketing campaigns. He was like a professor giving lectures to students. He translated sophisticated technological concepts into plain words. After his lectures, Wang would double check whether we fully understood. He also has great admiration for traditional Chinese culture, which is reflected in the names of our Dynasty models and the logo of our high-end YANGWANG brand. When we started to design YANGWANG’s logo, Wang told us to borrow from the oracle bone script used in ancient China. While some of us proposed using the oracle bone script of ‘electricity’, other proposals went beyond the oracle bone script. Wang ultimately chose our proposal.” Given its thorough understanding of technologies and consumer demands, it was no surprise that BYD’s sales and revenue took off in 2022. Its revenue jumped from 216.1 billion RMB in 2021 to 424.1 billion RMB in 2022, pushing BYD onto the Fortune Global 500 list. Its revenue further rose to 777.1 billion RMB in 2024 (Figure 2). BYD produced its one-millionth new energy vehicle in May 2021 and its ten-millionth new energy vehicle in November 2024. By February 2025, BYD’s passenger vehicles reached 90 countries and regions (Table 1).

Wang’s personal influence is key to BYD’s brisk overseas expansion through a growing and more internationally informed team of senior executives. BYD sold 4.25 million passenger vehicles in 2024, and over 417,000 of those were sold in overseas markets. Since its first overseas office opened in the Netherlands in 1998, BYD has established over 40 branch offices overseas. BYD opened a factory in Thailand last year and is currently completing factories in Brazil and Hungary. Its overseas branches have gained extensive knowledge of local markets by selling batteries and commercial vehicles. Li Yunfei comments, “Many senior executives of our overseas branches have been working in BYD for over 20 years. They are familiar with foreign culture and BYD’s internal organization. They have laid a solid foundation for BYD’s overseas expansion. In addition, we have incorporated overseas talents into our teams.” Regarding Europe, Li adds, “We want to give European consumers more choices, which will benefit them. We have a high respect for automotive brands in Europe and been learning from the European brands. Market competition can motivate everyone to make progress.”

Wang Chuanfu has continued to prioritize innovation through R&D. In 2024, BYD invested 54.2 billion RMB in R&D expenditure, which increased by 35.7% year on year. In March 2025, BYD’s global workforce reached one million, and over 120,000 of those work on R&D. Li Yunfei comments, “A wise leader is essential to a company’s development. A few years ago, my team was planning to build a powerful public image of Wang Chuanfu like other companies but he asked us to stop as soon as he learned about our plan. He said that we should focus on communicating our technologies and products to the public instead of building individual heroism. People that have interacted with Wang have been impressed by his low-key manner. Over 80% of Wang’s meetings focus on technologies and lead to plans for the medium and long terms.”

From a corporate innovator to a global leader

Continued innovation has become the core DNA of BYD, leading to a series of technological breakthroughs in recent years (Figure 3). While recent, these innovations reflect BYD’s persistent and cumulative investments in R&D over the three decades of its rapid growth. BYD’s passion for innovation has been fueled by the larger environment of Shenzhen as its home city that strongly favors corporate innovation and has nurtured several innovative companies like Huawei and DJI in a dense technological ecosystem. Beyond Shenzhen itself, BYD has benefited from competing against many domestic and international automakers in China’s highly competitive EV market irrespective of government subsidies. It is no surprise that these competitive and innovation-conducive local and national environments have fostered BYD’s cumulative success as a leading corporate innovator.

As BYD has innovated from its home base, it has leveraged its innovative capacity in elevating the BYD brand globally and extending its market footprint across nearly 100 countries. Having spanned all segments of the global EV market, BYD has moved up and forward into one of the world’s leading automotive companies, and more importantly, as a pace-setter in green mobility. At a time when geopolitical turmoil has disrupted the global agenda on climate change and energy transition, BYD has proven as a robust and innovative corporate and national leader in pursuing that agenda.

About the Authors

Jiayi Huang is a senior specialist at BYD’s headquarters in Shenzhen. She researches on international political economy and works on overseas public relations for BYD. She holds a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Pennsylvania, a master’s degree in economics from Duke University, and a bachelor’s degree in economics and mathematics from Trinity College in Connecticut.

Xiangming Chen is Paul E. Raether Distinguished Professor of Global Urban Studies and Sociology at Trinity College in Connecticut and an Associate Fellow at the Center for Advanced Security, Strategic and Integration Studies (CASSIS) at the University of Bonn, Germany. He has published extensively on urbanization and globalization with a focus on China and Asia as well as a frequent contributor on “China in the World” to The European Financial Review and The World Financial Review. He has also conducted policy research for the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, UNCTAD, and OECD.

Footnote

• The first two sections draw heavily from the Chinese book The Soul of Engineers, which BYD recognizes as its official history. This article including its illustrations also draws from other material and information compiled by BYD unless otherwise noted. The interview with Li Yunfei was conducted in March 2025 specifically for this article.

References

• Xiangming Chen and Taylor Lynch Ogan (2017). China’s Emerging Silicon Valley: How and Why Has Shenzhen Become a Global Innovation Center. The European Financial Review, December/January p. 55-62.

• Taylor Lynch Ogan and Xiangming Chen (2016) The Rise of Shenzhen and BYD—How a Chinese Corporate Pioneer is Leading Greener and More Sustainable Transportation and Urban Development. The European Financial Review, Feb/March p. 32-39.

• Shuo Qin and Yuejia Xiong (2024) The Soul of Engineers: BYD’s Rise During 1994-2024 (in Chinese). (Beijing: The CITIC Publisher).

The post BYD’s Rapid Ascent to the Global EV Leader appeared first on The European Business Review.

The Rise of Eco-Friendly Technology

Eco-friendly technology refers to innovations designed to minimize environmental impact. This includes energy-efficient hardware, renewable energy sources, and optimized software solutions that reduce waste and enhance efficiency. Technology is playing a key role in promoting greener operations, from cloud computing and virtualization to smarter data centers.

One major contributor to the growing environmental strain is the energy consumption of IT infrastructure. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), data centers accounted for approximately 1% of global electricity consumption in 2020—a figure expected to rise as digital transformation continues. To counter this, companies are increasingly adopting sustainable practices such as:

• Server virtualization: By running multiple virtual machines on a single physical server, businesses reduce the need for additional hardware, lowering power usage and waste.
• Energy-efficient data centers: Organizations are upgrading their infrastructure with energy-efficient cooling systems, advanced power management, and renewable energy integration.
• Cloud-based solutions: Migrating to cloud services reduces the need for on-premises infrastructure, minimizing energy consumption.

Leveraging Virtualization and Cloud Services for Sustainability

Virtualization is one of the most impactful ways businesses optimize their resources. Companies can significantly reduce power consumption and cooling requirements by using fewer physical machines and maximizing server capacity. Virtual Private Servers (VPS) offer a sustainable alternative to traditional hosting by enabling multiple users to share a single server’s resources, thereby reducing overall hardware usage.

When considering VPS solutions, selecting a provider committed to eco-friendly practices is essential. For example, some of the best Linux VPS providers prioritize energy efficiency by using modern, low-power hardware and running data centers on renewable energy. These providers also offer scalable infrastructure, allowing businesses to optimize resource allocation and avoid over-provisioning, which reduces unnecessary energy consumption.

Green Software Development Practices

Beyond hardware and infrastructure, software development also plays a key role in eco-friendly tech. Optimizing code efficiency, reducing unnecessary processes, and adopting lightweight frameworks can lower the energy demand of applications. Companies are increasingly turning to serverless architecture and microservices to improve resource utilization.

Furthermore, AI-powered resource management tools help automate and optimize energy consumption in real time. For instance, predictive analytics can dynamically adjust server capacity during off-peak hours, conserving power.

The Benefits of Sustainable Tech Operations

Implementing eco-friendly technology benefits the environment and offers tangible business advantages. Sustainable operations lead to reduced energy costs, improved system efficiency, and compliance with green regulations. Moreover, companies adopting green tech practices enhance their brand reputation, appealing to environmentally conscious consumers and investors.

As the demand for digital services continues to grow, prioritizing eco-friendly technology is no longer optional—it is essential for long-term business viability and environmental stewardship. By embracing sustainable solutions such as VPS hosting, energy-efficient infrastructure, and resource-optimized software, companies can make a meaningful impact while future-proofing their operations.

The post Eco-Friendly Tech: Optimizing Resources for Sustainable Operations appeared first on The European Business Review.

The Evolution of Solar Plant Monitoring

Traditional solar plant monitoring has historically been a labor-intensive and time-consuming process. Technicians would manually inspect thousands of panels, often taking weeks to complete comprehensive assessments of large installations. This approach frequently resulted in delayed detection of issues, reduced energy generation, and significant maintenance costs.

“When solar installations began booming across Eastern Europe, many facility owners discovered that manual inspection methods couldn’t keep pace with the scale of modern solar farms,” notes industry expert Denys Syntiuk – CEO of Drone Inspect LLC (Ukraine) and Cognitivision LLC (USA), who has worked in renewable energy for over a decade.

The limitations of conventional monitoring approaches have driven innovation in the sector, with several companies now developing integrated solutions that leverage advanced technologies.

Combining AI and Drones: A Technological Breakthrough

The integration of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and aerial drone technology represents a significant leap forward in solar plant diagnostics. These systems can transform lengthy inspection processes into efficient automated procedures that yield results within hours rather than weeks.

Modern monitoring solutions typically employ specialized drones equipped with thermal imaging cameras that can rapidly survey large solar installations. These drones capture thermal images of solar panels, which are then analyzed by AI algorithms trained to recognize various types of defects and anomalies.

“The combination of aerial thermography with artificial intelligence has fundamentally changed what’s possible in solar diagnostics,” explains Denys Syntiuk. “What used to take 20 technicians several weeks can now be accomplished by a single drone operator in a day, with far greater accuracy.”

How Modern Monitoring Systems Work

Today’s advanced monitoring technologies follow a systematic workflow designed to maximize efficiency and accuracy:

Data Collection: Drones equipped with thermal imaging cameras fly over solar installations, capturing comprehensive imagery of all panels.

1. Digital Mapping: The collected data is processed to create detailed digital maps of the entire installation.
2. AI Analysis: Machine learning algorithms analyze the thermal patterns of each panel, identifying anomalies that might indicate issues such as:
   • Faulty diodes
   • Hot spots
   • Cell degradation
   • Connection problems
   • Shading issues
3. Reporting and Recommendations: The system generates detailed reports highlighting problem areas and recommended maintenance actions.
4. Performance Forecasting: Advanced systems can also predict future performance based on current conditions and historical data.

The most sophisticated solutions on the market today offer integrated operations and maintenance platforms that help facility managers track issues, schedule repairs, and monitor overall system performance.

Benefits of AI-Powered Solar Monitoring

The adoption of AI and drone-based monitoring solutions offers numerous advantages for solar installation owners and operators:

1. Proactive Maintenance: Rather than reacting to problems after they’ve caused significant generation losses, operators can identify and address issues before they escalate.
2. Cost Reduction: Early detection of defects prevents costly equipment damage and generation losses, while also reducing labor costs associated with manual inspections.
3. Improved Accuracy: AI algorithms can detect subtle anomalies invisible to the human eye, ensuring no problems go unnoticed.
4. Operational Efficiency: Scheduled maintenance based on accurate diagnostics is more cost-effective than emergency repairs.
5. Data-Driven Decision Making: Comprehensive digital records provide valuable insights for long-term asset management and investment planning.

Global Adoption and Market Trends

Advanced monitoring solutions are gaining traction across major solar markets worldwide. Countries with substantial solar capacity including Ukraine, Poland, Romania, Turkey, Israel, and the United States have seen rapid adoption of these technologies. Major energy companies are increasingly incorporating AI-based monitoring into their standard operations and maintenance procedures.

“The industry is clearly moving toward digitalization and automation,” notes an energy analyst from a leading consultancy. “Companies that fail to adopt these technologies risk falling behind in terms of operational efficiency and profitability.”

Future Directions in Solar Monitoring

The solar monitoring sector continues to evolve rapidly, with several promising developments on the horizon:

1. Predictive Analytics: Next-generation systems aim to predict potential failures before they occur, based on early warning signs invisible to conventional monitoring.
2. Virtual Assistants: AI-powered tools that can guide technical personnel through complex maintenance procedures.
3. Integration with Smart Grids: Seamless connection with broader energy management systems to optimize overall grid performance.
4. Expanded Geographic Coverage: As solar capacity grows globally, monitoring solutions are adapting to different environments, from desert installations to floating solar arrays.

Conclusion

The convergence of artificial intelligence, drone technology, and thermal imaging represents a significant advancement in solar plant monitoring and maintenance. These technologies are helping the renewable energy sector overcome operational challenges while improving reliability and efficiency.

As solar continues to expand its role in global energy systems, sophisticated monitoring solutions will become increasingly vital to ensuring these investments deliver their full potential. By embracing these innovations, the industry is taking important steps toward a more sustainable and efficient energy future.

The post Advancing Solar Energy: How AI and Drone Technology Are Revolutionizing Solar Plant Monitoring appeared first on The European Business Review.