When you type the words ‘energy transition*’ into a Google search, it brings up 7 million hits. Everyone – from energy companies, to transport, to shipping, to banks, construction and manufacturing, consulting firms, politicians, and even the United Nations – are jumping on the ‘transition train’.
But wading through torrents of claims, with varying levels of truth and often competing interests, it’s difficult to separate credible commitments from the (no pun intended) hot air. It could be having a detrimental effect on our collective ability to make real progress. If there was ever a need for a single verifying body, an identity we could all get behind, it’s now.
It’s time we took the energy transition to the next level – with a brand-led approach that drives real impact.
Lots of good intentions. Little alignment.
So, what’s the problem if lots of companies are talking about the energy transition? In theory, more discussion and awareness on the topic can only be a good thing, right? Companies have a duty to address modern crises, align their goals to help tackle global challenges, and lead as examples that can shift public behaviour.
The issue isn’t so much that companies are jumping onto a good idea. The intent is good. But what’s not so good is how disconnected we are globally, from company to company, in our approach. Effectiveness of carbon-lowering strategies, for instance, varies greatly. To reach individual targets, companies may invest in renewable generation, pay landowners to prevent deforestation, fund large scale reforestation projects or direct air capture with carbon storage. But, despite all best intentions, some of these offset programs have been shown to overestimate the amount of carbon they reduce.
With no single, set certifying entity, and individual companies pressing forth to meet net-zero goals, it’s clear we need a globally aligned approach. No one company should have a different take. In fact, they should be vehemently agreeing.
No one company should have a different take. In fact, they should be vehemently agreeing.
The risk of ‘greenwashing’
Even worse, when the phrase is banded around without foundations, it undermines the genuine efforts of those taking bolder steps to reduce emissions and address the climate crisis. The risk is that consumer confidence in the energy transition wanes, or even disappears all together.
People have already become more cynical of corporate sustainability claims as ‘greenwashing.’ Too many slick ad campaigns promoting companies as staunch environmentalists have provided smoke screens for environmentally unsustainable business practices.
Thankfully, the public have grown more savvy to this kind of messaging. And companies have responded by doing the honourable thing, toning down environmental slogans and ensuring their claims can always be backed up. The emergence of game changing technologies in AI, machine learning and satellite imaging are also helping to produce more accurate, long term offset estimates that provide a greater degree of confidence to the companies that apply them.
It’s great that industry is putting their money where their mouth is. But more can be done.
Branding the energy transition
The solution? The energy transition needs a governing body separate and above individual companies, an identity all of its own. Let’s create a proper brand for it.
The energy transition needs a governing body separate and above individual companies. Let’s create a proper brand for it.
A branded body for the energy transition could become the single refence point, for all companies which have a stake, to verify the validity of the claims they provide. It would provide a method of accreditation, a stamp of authenticity, that would add real value to those who earnt it.
Just like the trade guilds formed across Europe in the Middle Ages that brought together craftsmen and merchants under a formal association. These medieval guilds helped regulate industry, set standards for quality of goods, influenced local governments to improve policy and even provide training to ensure all practitioners upheld the guild’s principles.
Being part of a guild – for the hatters, the carpenters, the bakers, the blacksmiths, the weavers – became known as an emblem of trust, a promise to customers that what they bought was sold with integrity.
And there’s contemporary precedent too. There’s the International Air Transport Association (IATA) that sets technical standards and price controls for the world’s airlines. There’s the Hippocratic Oath upholding ethical standards across the medical profession. And many appellations of origin for wine and other luxury food items protecting the interests of regional producers and quality requirements.
What would it take to start something like this?
Well, for starters, it would need to be backed by institutions credible enough to restore people’s trust. Establishing a globally trusted body to oversee the energy transition must call for the involvement of well-established institutions that people associate with certain standards of integrity. It’s the only way to reassure people that this isn’t just another attempt to legitimise companies’ profit, without truly making much of a difference to reducing their impact on the environment.
Renowned universities, for instance, with their centuries of intellectual capital and public trust, are ideal candidates to spearhead this initiative. These institutions have the credibility and expertise necessary to ensure rigorous standards and unbiased oversight. People trust universities in a way they don’t trust companies or even governments. And when it comes to something as crucial as environmental change, it needs to be underpinned by something more enduring. Like the historical trade guilds, universities draw on a legacy of reliability and the scholarly authority of a thousand years of intelligence.
And when it comes to something as crucial as environmental change, it needs to be underpinned by something more enduring.
What’s in it for me?
The business-case? That’s simple. People care more about buying from businesses who can demonstrate genuine credentials when it comes to the energy transition.
A recent poll by climate consultancy Carbon Trust showed that 56% of people would be more loyal to a brand if they could see at a glance that it was taking real steps to reduce its carbon footprint. Despite the challenging economic climate, one in five people said they would choose carbon labelled products over non-labelled products, even if they cost more.
One in five people said they would choose carbon labelled products over non-labelled products, even if they cost more.
One thing’s for sure: the benefits of a strong branded approach to corporate sustainable credentials can no longer be underestimated.
Creating Sense™
When faced with the challenge of bringing genuine but disparate efforts together, brand is an incredibly helpful tool. It helps to create coherence and clarity amidst inevitably imperfect realities. And it builds bonds of trust that deeply speak to a generation obsessed with transparency.
Establishing a unified branded body separate from individual companies, one that verifies and accredits commitments, not only ensures transparency and accountability but also fosters customer loyalty and stakeholder engagement. As consumers increasingly prioritize environmentally responsible practices, businesses stand to benefit from demonstrating genuine commitment to the energy transition. Therefore, embracing a branded approach isn’t just about meeting corporate obligations; it’s a strategic move towards business transformation and upholding brand purpose and promise in a rapidly evolving landscape.
At SDA, we support organisations big and small by creating sense™ through their brand. If you like the way we think, and you too believe brands can be a force for good, get it touch.
