Upload
benmillster
View
452
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
This is a briefing document that I put together for Matter For All, and it was concerning several major UK companies and their disclosure of information surrounding their own use and development of emerging technology
Citation preview
1
Draft Research Report Disclosure of the use of Emerging Technology, from a cross section of companies, in publically available corporate documentation. Prepared for Matter
June 2010 B.J. Miller
2
Introduction
This report is a brief introduction into what some of the world’s leading companies have
reported with regards to their use and development of emerging technologies. The companies
used are as follows: BP, Shell, Tesco, Marks & Spencer, Unilever, Proctor and Gamble, L’Oreal,
Boots, Nestle, Premier Foods, Astra Zeneca and GlaxoSmithKline.
The companies chosen have been divided into pairs for comparison purposes.
Oil and Gas - BP and Shell
Food Retail – Tesco and Marks & Spencer
Chemical - Du Pont and BASF
Pharmaceutical – AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline
Cosmetics – Boots and L’Oreal
Food – Nestle and Premier Foods
Mixed – Proctor & Gamble and Unilever
By reading both the annual reports and in some cases sustainability reports it was intended to
reveal a surface level understanding of what these companies are reporting on emerging
technology and gain an insight into what they were not reporting. By not researching deeper
than these reports the intention was to ascertain what was available to the non-specialist in
emerging technology.
The information on the organisations was gathered by posing a short, standard set of questions
for each report.
The questions and rationale are given here:
Do they mention their own use of
emerging technology?
This question relates to the company’s own use of
emerging technology and the public
acknowledgement that they are using or developing
it. In the case of some companies, they may be using
it but not reporting on it. Depending upon the
industry and application this may be considered as
less than ideal.
Is their report particularly reader
friendly?
This question recognises that it is important for a
report to be accessible if a company is to
communicate and educate the reader on their uses
of emerging technology. If a company uses
information that is perhaps overly scientific or the
information they disclose is difficult to find within
the report, then it is unreasonable to expect the
reader to gain anything useful from reading the
report.
3
Do they mention contentious issues
concerning safety or the
environment relevant to the
reported emerging technology?
This question directly addresses the environmental
and social issues relevant to the use of emerging
technologies. This research accepts that the impact
of emerging technology may be vast. Yet, it appears,
in many cases, unlike for example climate change, it
is not being mentioned publicly. The question tests
how the reporter addresses the issue – ‘it is
important for companies to accept that some of it’s
operations involving emerging technology could
have extreme impacts, and that the public need to
be educated on this’
Do they discuss how they have
made an effort to engage with their
customers, NGO’s and other
stakeholders?
By addressing this it may indicate how much time
has been invested in educating the public and other
stakeholders regarding their development and
employment of emerging technology. If none of the
companies are trying to do this it becomes difficult
to understand how the public are supposed to
understand or even know about the levels of
emerging technology being used in industry today?
Is the level of information provided
on emerging technology sufficient?
This question was posed in order to summarise at
an integrated level the other questions. That is to
say – does the information provide a coherent or a
patchy message. It is important to recognise what
might constitute a sufficient amount of information
on emerging technologies for a company to present
effectively.
The sources used to answer these questions are the various company’s 2009 annual reports and
,if they exist, their 2009 sustainability reports (see Sources). In some cases, is not a 2009
sustainability report available or, as in the case with Marks and Spencer, they have already
released a 2010 report. Within these reports a combination of close reading and the use of key
words to help find the information required was employed. The use of key words will only be
used if the information required was particularly difficult to find.
4
The key words are as follows;
emerging technology,
bio technology,
synthetic chemistry,
synthetic biology,
GM (Genetically Modified)
Nanotechnology.
Once the information is collected each company is scored in a range of 1 to 5 against the
research questions. This is to differentiate between the companies and determine if it is
possible to see which companies are providing a useful amount of information and so indicating
good practice.
The score will be assessed as follows.
1/5 little or no mention of emerging technology
2/5 some mention of emerging technology but it is not necessarily shown clearly.
3/5 mention of emerging technology but perhaps in an extremely simplistic manner.
4/5 a good level of emerging technology talked about
5/5 all criteria met and expansive level of information provided. Not overly simplistic but
written with enough conviction that the reader can understand entirely what emerging
technology is being used.
This information gathered is then used to compare between companies of a similar industry and
the overall set of companies in the research.
This is summarised in the charts and tables that follow. The different groupings are colour coded
to facilitate the comparison.
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Do They Mention Their Own UseOf EmergingTechnology?
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Is Their Report Particularly Reader Friendly?
6
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Do They Mention Contentious Issues Concerning Safety and the Environment
7
8
Company
Do they Directly Do
they mention their
own use of emerging
technology?
Is what they are
reporting particularly
reader friendly?
Do they mention any
contentious issues
concerning safety, the
environment in terms of
their emerging
technology?
Do they discuss how they
have made an effort to
engage with their customers,
ngo’s and other
stakeholders?
Is the level of information
provided on emerging
technology sufficient?
BP +
There is a section on ‘r&t’
followed by a detailed section
on their ’10 flagship
technology programmes.’
+
I found that compared to
other reports, that BP’s
reporting of emerging
technology was extremely
reader friendly. As a lay
person I was quickly able to
gather what BP were
investing in and how the
technology was beneficial.
×
Despite mentioning the benefits
of this technology, there was little
on the really contentious issues
concerning some emerging
technologies. I did feel that the
level in which they appear to be
researching into these
technologies however does
suggest that they are at least
making an attempt to understand
the potential contentious issues.
+ +
If compared to Shell, and in fact
other companies, then what they
are reporting is sufficient. However
if we are to expect more
information from companies than
perhaps what BP has produce
should be seen as the bare
minimum.
Shell +
They do mention their own
use of emerging technologies,
however not in the same
detail as BP. It was more their
production of 3rd and 4th
generation biofuel than any
of their other projects which
on further investigation are
definitely being developed
×
I found Shell’s report in
general extremely difficult
to decipher as a lay person.
Unlike BP there did not
seem to be the same
attempt to make people
really aware of what they
were investing in and how
technology was going to be
put to use. I had to really
search through the report
to find anything on
emerging technologies at
all.
×
Although Shell discussed safety
and the environment, it was more
as a company as a whole. Their
sustainability report focused more
closely on how they were seeking
to better their own environmental
output
×
×
I felt that Shell were quite poor at
clearly bringing forward any
information on their use of
emerging technology. Reading this
directly after BP’s report I thought
it was amazing the level at which
the two companies differ in what
they report. All in all I felt much
more information could have been
provided.
9
Company Do they mention their
own use of emerging
technology?
Is their report
particularly reader
friendly?
Do they mention
contentious issues
concerning safety, the
environment in terms of
their emerging
technology?
Do they discuss how they have
made an effort to engage with
their customers, ngo’s and
stakeholders?
Is the level of information
provided on emerging
technology sufficient?
BASF Discuss in depth their use of
emerging technologies. In
particular their ‘growth
clusters,’ that are designed to
address ‘key areas such as
markets for the future and
mega trends.’1
The five growth clusters are:
bio technology, white
biotechnology, changing raw
materials, energy management
and nano technology.
4/5
The report was relatively
reader friendly. The
information is brought
forward effectively and in
the kind of detail that is both
easy to read and interesting
3/5
They discuss in both their annual
reports and their sustainability
reports the importance of using
emerging technologies
responsibly
‘Our Code of Conduct
Nanotechnology.’ This is their
own way of monitoring the use
of nanotechnology within their
company.
NanoCare project funded by the
German Federal Ministry of
Research and Education is using
research institutes and
universities to discover uses and
potential difficulties with the
development of nanotechnology
4/5
Dialogue Forum Nano is their own way
to hear and discuss the concerns of
consumer organizations. An example of
BASF trying to engage with their
stakeholders and Ngo’s.
4/5
The level of information provided is
impressive but is still lacking in
some areas.
Compared to DuPont there is more
discussion into what Is being
achieved at the moment rather
than the future.
3/5
10
DuPont DuPont’s report brings forward
in some detail the technologies
they intend to develop over the
next five years and how they
intend to maintain their
environmental and social safety
They mention the controversial
area of manipulating plant
genetics in a hope to create
‘food for the world.’2
Example of this is Pionneer ®
brand low lindenic soybeans.
Research into the use of soy
proteins in food and beverages.
They also discuss their use of
nanotechnology. This is being
used in the development of
communications.
Partnership with BP in the
development of next
generation Biofuels.
They claim to be developing
environmentally acceptable
herbicides that work by
inhibiting a key enzyme weeds
need to grow. Leave little
residue and degrade quickly in
plants.
4/5
DuPont take a different
approach to other
companies as their
sustainability report is more
a list of goals for the next
five years.
They do not have a
sustainability report for the
current moment in time but
there list of goals (‘2015
Sustainability Goals’)
It is only eight pages long but
despite its conciseness, it
addresses where they feel
they are effecting the
environment and how they
intend to address this. It
effectively does in eight
pages what some reports
take many pages to discuss.
2/5
Partnership with Environmental
Defence to develop a framework
for responsible development,
production, use and disposal of
nano-scale materials critical to
next generation communication
devices.
DuPont Safety Resources is a
world renowned consultancy
company.
2/5
1/5 Despite showing in some detail
what DuPont are hoping to have
developed by 2015 there is only
real discussion on how they hope
to develop new technology, not the
effects it may have on the
environment.
This is particularly important with
their discussion on the
development of certain herbicides
and the manipulation of plant
genetics.
However what they do report is
substantial in that they discuss in
detail the development of
innovative emerging technologies.
3/5
11
Company Do They Mention Their
Own Use of Emerging
Technology
Is Their Report
Particularly Reader
Friendly?
Do They Mention
Contentious issues
concerning safety, the
environment in terms of
their emerging
technology?
Do They Discuss how they have
attempted to engage with their
customers, ngo’s and other
stake holders?
Is the level of information
given on emerging
technologies sufficient?
Marks &
Spencer
Marks & Spencer’s 2010 ‘How
We Do Business’ report is a
concise, well structured report
highlighting their commitments
to the environment. However,
there is very little mentioned
on the use of emerging
technology or the potential
harm that using this
technology could have on the
environment if used in
agriculture.
All that is mentioned is their
aim to make all their food
pesticide free by 2012 and
there commitment not to use
GM products.
2/5
Their ‘How We Do Business’
report is very reader friendly.
They state clearly what it is
they aim to address in their
opening section.
2/5
The report focuses strongly on
the environment and how they
aim to reduce their own carbon
footprint and benefit the
environment in other ways.
There is, however, no mention of
how they intend to lower the
potential environmental cost of
using emerging technologies,
particularly nanofood.
This goes hand in hand with
safety for customers as
regulations surrounding the use
of nanofood are limited,the
potentials consumer dangers are
not addressed.
1/5
1/5 Compared Tesco’s, Marks &
Spencer’s annual report and
sustainability report are lacking in
some key details.
Their use of nanofood is not
addressed in the report, although it
is one of the more controversial
areas of the food industry at the
moment.
The report is missing some key
details however, compared to
Tesco’s it reads in a very similar
way and addresses mostly the
same things showing that despite
missing out information on their
use of emerging technologies,
there is a trend as other food
companies are also missing out this
information in their reports
2/5
12
Company Do They Mention Their Own
Use of Emerging Technology
Is Their Report Particularly
Reader Friendly?
Do They Mention Contentious
issues concerning safety, the
environment in terms of their
emerging technology?
Do They Discuss how they have
attempted to engage with their
customers, ngo’s and other stake
holders?
Is the level of information given on
emerging technologies sufficient?
Tesco Tesco’s sustainability report is
extremely similar to Marks &
Spencer’s as it is a similar
length and it highlights the
same issues. In particular
environmental issues and how
Tesco as a company hope to
address these issues.
The only key area of difference
in the reports is Tesco’s use of
Biofuel in their petrol stations.
An area Marks & Spencer do
not have market.
Like Marks & Spencer they do
mention their strict policy on
the use of GM crops in their
own products in the UK.
However they do state that in
some of their non-own brand
products GM foods may be
used.
They also state that due to the
mass usage of GM crops in the
US, they have no choice but to
use GM products in their own
brand foods.
2/5
Like Marks & Spencer they
address the key areas in their
opening section. They focus
strongly on the environment
and how they are trying to
cut down their Carbon
footprint.
The reader has to search
really hard to find any
information at all relating to
emerging technologies which
is the negative aspect of this
report.
2/5
This is again extremely similar to
what is being reported by Marks
& Spencer in terms of how they
are trying to cut down on their
own environmental impact.
However, while they discuss their
strict no GM food policy, they
openly state that they use it in
some products in the US. They
fail to expand on how much and
what effect this has on local
environments.
There is also the potential issue
of the non own brand products
they sell using GM products.
There is no discussion on how
many products or the effects
these products may have had.
No discussion on Nanofoods
which, like M&S is certainly
required
2/5
Like other companies, the only
reporting of any engagement with
customers, stakeholders and Ngo’s is
when they are discussing their carbon
footprint and how they intend to lower
it for the good of the environment.
There is no mention of emerging
technology within this however.
In terms of emerging technology,
the amount of information supplied
is not really sufficient.
Tesco are good at addressing their
own environmental impacts and
how they aim to lower them but at
the same time do not discuss how
the use of emerging technologies
such as GM crops and nanofoods
are being used and the effects this
potentially could have on the
environment.
2/5
13
Company Do they mention their
own use of emerging
technologies?
Is their report
particularly reader
friendly?
Do they mention
contentious issues
concerning safety and the
environment in terms of
their use of emerging
technology?
Do they discuss how they have
attempted to engage with
customers, ngo’s and other
stakeholders in terms of
emerging technologies?
Is the level of information
given on emerging
technologies sufficient?
Proctor
and
Gamble
In terms of their products,
there is some mention of their
use of emerging technologies
as a way to aid the
environment.
This can be seen through their
operations and through their
products.
In particular in the product
Ariel non-bio. Catalytic
detergency designed from
scratch by P&G.
They also discuss briefly eco-
designed buildings aimed at
lower emissions.
1/5
I found the report to be
relatively reader friendly
considering it is only 18
pages long, for what it was
attempting to report.
If the reader is looking for
anything on emerging
technologies however, then
the report is missing some
detail so it is extremely
difficult to really find any
evidence of them using it.
1/5
A lot of what they claim to be
developing is designed towards
environmental aspects. The
example being their
development of Ariel non-bio
which allows washing at lower
temperatures.
This is the only real mention of
emerging technologies in
reference to environment
1/5
They discuss the importance of the
stakeholders and customers opinions
when it comes to their products.
What is clear however is that what the
stakeholders and customers are most
concerned about is that which is the
most publicised. The environment.
Therefore any development they make
from customer views is based around
what the customer is aware of.
1/5
I do not believe that the level of
information here is particularly
sufficient.
Any information on emerging
technologies which is brought
forward is extremely lacking in any
detail, and is almost put in the
report consequently rather than
deliberately.
There is a lack of information
relating to what they are
researching, investing and using in
terms of emerging technologies.
1/5
14
Company Do they mention their
own use of emerging
technologies?
Is their report
particularly reader
friendly?
Do they mention
contentious issues
concerning safety and the
environment in terms of
their use of emerging
technology?
Do they discuss how they have
attempted to engage with
customers, ngo’s and other
stakeholders in terms of
emerging technologies?
Is the level of information
given on emerging
technologies sufficient?
Unilever To aid malnutrition Unilever
have used food fortification
methods to add needed
nutrients to products they sell
in areas where mal nutrition is
high.
New packaging has been
developed of 100%
environmentally friendly
materials.
Pyrolysis is being used in
developing countries. This is
using sachet waste in fuel. By
doing this it recovers 60% of
the embedded energy.
2/5
The report was quite reader
friendly. Everything it sets
out to address it does in a
relatively good level of
detail.
What was a problem, like
Proctor and Gamble, was the
lack of actual evidence
displaying their use of
emerging technology.
1/5
The only contentious issue they
discuss is how they intend to
research their effect on
biodiversity.
1/5
They only really discuss their
engagement with ngo’s and customers
in terms of the environmental issues
like deforestation.
Tesco and Unilever are part of an
intiative to create an industry wide set
of sustainable packaging principles as
part of the consumer goods forum.
Like Proctor and Gamble it is clear that
what they are discussing is as a result of
what is being most publicised.
3/5
The level of information produced
by Unilever is not particularly
sufficient.
Like Proctor and Gamble there is
not really a section dedicated to
emerging technologies, rather if
any is mentioned it is mixed in with
other information on
environmental issues.
2/5
15
Company Do they mention their
own use of emerging
technology?
Is the report
particularly reader
friendly?
Do they mention any
contentious issues
concerning the
environment and safety in
terms of their use of
emerging technology?
Do they discuss how they have
attempted to engage with
customers, ngo’s and other
stakeholders in terms of their
use of emerging technology?
Is the level of information
given on emerging
technologies sufficient?
L’Oreal L’Oreal provide
substantial information
concerning their own
use of emerging
technology however
there was no up to date
sustainability report so
all information has been
taken from their 2008
report.
Pg17 of their report
brings forward their on
going research into
reconstructed skin, with
their high technology
department in Japan and
their two laboratories in
France focused on
ecotoxicity.
They use bio plastics
(plastics derived from
renewable sources) in
their packaging and are
funding the bio plastics
chair in the Ecole des
L’Oreal’s report is
extremely reader
friendly. It brings
forward precisely the
right amount of
information
concerning their use of
emerging technologies
without confusing the
reader with to much
scientific information.
Their section on
Research and
Development
highlights clearly how
they are developing
and using
nanotechnology.
With this also it
becomes clear what
safety measures have
been put in place and
how they have pre-
empted any potential
safety concerns to the
With their use of
nanotechnology they
stress how they intend to
maintain safety when
using them.
They are a founding
member of the ‘Internal
Council on
Nanotechnology’ (ICON),
as well as the ‘European
NanoInteract Programme’
(OCED recognised)
Being part of these
organisations and the
research they have
collected on
nanotechnology has
meant they have safely
been able to test
nanomaterials in
conditions similar to the
natural environment.
Other contentious issues
surround the ingredients
They state in their report that
they have an open dialogue
with their stakeholders and
their customers.
They claim to be training
suppliers in terms of
reconstructed tissues with their
six stage safety plan.
Working group for the last
three years that openly discuss
potential toxicological risks.
In terms of nanotechnology
l’oreal directed more than 70
missions to inform public
authorities world wide of their
us of nanotechnologies in their
cosmetics.
They are also a committed
partner alongside ISO and
AFNOR, dedicated to drafting
international norms and
standards for what actually is
nano-products in different
The level of information
supplied by L’Oreal on their
use of emerging technology
is more than sufficient.
If we are to compare what
they report to other
companies it becomes clear
that L’Oreal have invested
more time and effort into
addressing their own use of
emerging technology and
the potential concerns that
people may have on the use
of it.
It is important to recognise
however, that as an
industry, cosmetics are
more likely to use bio-
chemistry and
nanotechnology in their
products so in some ways it
is not surprising that the
information L’Oreal provide
far surpasses anything
presented by the other
16
Mines in Paris for the
next 5 years.
Pg 41: Research and
Development. Bringing
together of cellular and
molecular biology
including gene map
science through non-
invasive technology.
Research using stem
cells: removing stem cell
of the epidermis to test
the effect of sun and
time on skin.
Nanotechnology:
Mention their use of
nanotechnology.
Titanium Dioxide
Nanopigments used in
their sun creams.
Green Chemistry-use of
more natural resources
in the making of
cosmetics
Strict policy on the use
of GM ingredients. Non
used in their products
5/5
environment through
strict safety codes
3/5
that go into some of their
products. In particular the
more volatile gases in
aerosols.
On top of this there is also
there commitment to the
protection of aquatic
ecosystems through their
safety measures. They
accept that the chemicals
they use could potentially
affect the biodiversity of
these ecosystems.
4/5
industrial sectors.
3/5
companies.
If we are to set a benchmark
by which all companies
should be reporting their
uses of emerging technology
and the potential
consequences of using this
technology, then L’Oreal
would certainly be it.
5/5
17
Company Do they mention their
own use of emerging
technology?
Is the report
particularly reader
friendly?
Do they mention any
contentious issues
concerning the
environment and safety in
terms of their use of
emerging technology?
Do they discuss how they have
attempted to engage with
customers, ngo’s and other
stakeholders in terms of their
use of emerging technology?
Is the level of information
given on emerging
technologies sufficient?
Boots June 2008-got grant
from ‘The Technology
Strategy Board’ to
develop processes that
could enable algae to be
grown utilising co2
emissions from the
energy centre in
Nottingham-algae used
as an alternative starting
point for petro-
chemicals sources of
ingredients that are
currently used in their
products
Eco-vans for distribution
using stop/start
technology.
Little else is mentioned
in terms of Emerging
Technology in their
report.
1/5
1/5 Boots discuss their own
impact on the
environment and how
they intend they have
been implementing
measures to lower things
such as their carbon
footprint
However they do not
mention how their use of
emerging technology and
their use of chemicals in
their cosmetics could
affect the environment.
1/5
There was very little
information on their
engagement with any ngo’sor
customers relating to emerging
technology.
Like most reports though, there
was some discussion relating to
their relationship with some
ngo’s and customers relating to
their products and their carbon
footprint.
1/5
There is a massive
difference between Boots
report and L’Oreal’s.
Simply, there is just not the
same level of detail from
Boots than there is from
L’Oreal.
Boots may not be in the
exact same industry as
L’Oreal but nevertheless
they sell their own
cosmetics as well as
medicines and food.
With this in mind it is
perhaps fair to suggest that
s their use of emerging
technology covers more
areas than just cosmetics’,
they should be reporting
their use of emerging
technology for at least one
of the area’s.
2/5
18
Company Do they mention their
own use of Emerging
Technology?
Is their report
particularly reader
friendly?
Do they mention any
contentious issues
concerning the
environment and safety in
terms of their use of
emerging technology?
Do they discuss how they have
attempted to engage with
customers, ngo’s and other
stakeholders in terms of their
use of emerging technology?
Is the level of information
given on emerging
technologies sufficient?
Nestle micronutrients…to help
mal-nutrition….products
enriched with things
such as iodine are being
distributed in areas that
need it.
Packaging-bioplastics.
Strategic partner of the
Ecole de Mines in Paris
There is a large section
focused closely on their
investment into
renewable energy. This
includes initiatives such
as their landfill gas
project in Solon, Ohio,
USA. Methane gas is
collected and used as an
energy source
This is an example of the
type of project Nestle
are investing into.
2/5
The report they have is
a ‘Creating Shared
Value Report.’
The report is relatively
reader friendly and has
clearly been designed
to be easily read by
anyone.
However, this simple
format often means
that Nestle do not go
into enough
description on the
initiatives they are
investing into.
This can be construed
as sparing the reader
the real knitty gritty
aspects of their
operations. However,
this often means they
state that they have
done something but
not described how.
2/5
Nestle are extremely
focused on addressing
how they intend to lower
their current
environmental impact.
There is very little mention
on how their use of
emerging technology
could potentially affect
the environment or cause
safety hazards.
This is perhaps due to the
fact most of their
emerging technology is
focused on being
renewable and
sustainable.
2/5
Any information focused on
engaging with customers is
focused strongly on discovering
what products people want
from Nestle, rather than what
their potential concerns with
the developing of these
products.
This is perhaps due to the
format of the report as it is far
more socially based than any of
the other companies’ reports.
2/5
Their ‘Creating Shared Value
Report,’ is perhaps different
to a regular sustainability
report in that it does not
address the same aspects
that other companies do in
their sustainability reports.
It is more focused on their
core values as a company
which they state as ‘water,
nutrition and rural
development.’
Their Research and
development department is
focused more closely on
how to create more
sustainable crops in areas
such as Africa through
stricter policy rather than
any real use of emerging
tech.
The example they give being
their new R&D facility in
Abidjan in the Cote D’Ivoire
which is focused on the
quality of locally sourced
19
products such as cocoa and
coffee and then adapting
these products to West
African Tastes.
There is no doubt that
Nestle, like other food
companies, are using
emerging technology such
as nanofoods, but they are
not reporting it. The title of
this report perhaps does not
necessitate this, but this
suggests a further question,
if not in this report, then
where are they going to
report their uses of
emerging technology?
3/5
20
Company Do they mention their
own use of Emerging
Technology?
Is their report
particularly reader
friendly?
Do they mention any
contentious issues
concerning the
environment and safety in
terms of their use of
emerging technology?
Do they discuss how they have
attempted to engage with
customers, ngo’s and other
stakeholders in terms of their
use of emerging technology?
Is the level of information
given on emerging
technologies sufficient?
Premier
Foods
Due to the shortness of
this report, there was no
real discussion about
their use of emerging
technology.
What was discussed
briefly was their effect
on the environment and
how they hoped to cut
down their carbon
footprint.
1/5
Premier foods did not
have a sustainability
report, so all the
information had to be
supplied by their 2009
Annual Report.
The section focused on
corporate social
responsibility was only
four pages long and
was slightly limited.
It was reader friendly
but lacking in detail.
1/5
From their report, it
appeared that there was
no mention of the
environmental impact of
any of their emerging
technology.
1/5
There is some discussion of
their engagement with ngo’s
and customers but only in
terms of what they are doing
involving the environment.
1/5
Due to Premier Foods not
having a social responsibility
report, what was available
was limited. Their annual
report touches on the
environment but does not
go into a lot of detail.
1/5
21
Company Do they mention their
own use of Emerging
Technology?
Is their report
particularly reader
friendly?
Do they mention any
contentious issues
concerning the
environment and safety in
terms of their use of
emerging technology?
Do they discuss how they have
attempted to engage with
customers, ngo’s and other
stakeholders in terms of their
use of emerging technology?
Is the level of information
given on emerging
technologies sufficient?
GSK They mention their use
of Stem Cell research: In
2008 they signed a five
year collaboration with
Harvard University
including $25 million
investment into research
at Harvard and other
surrounding hospitals.
The research is focused
on neuroscience, cancer,
heart disease and liver
disease.
They also mention their
use of cloning
technologies.
This technology to
replicate cells and
molecules for research.
There are also investing
heavily in genetic
research.
They are also using
transgenic animals.
GSK’s report is
extremely detailed and
they have a section
entitled emerging
technology.
As the emerging
technology they are
investing in is quite
controversial they have
reported there uses in
detail but have also
maintained an
appropriate level of
simplicity when
describing emerging
technology when other
companies have not.
4/5
They are a founding
member of ‘Stem Cells for
Safer Medicine.’
Investment for this is
coming from the
Department of Health,
Department for
Innovation, The Scottish
government, the Medical
Research Council
They also discuss their
position on their use of
cloning. They state that it
is not being used for
cloning animals or an
entire human.
With their genetic
research they state clearly
that they understand the
concerns of using such
technology. They aim to
clam these worries by
being completely
transparent in all they do
and all of their scientific
research involving
Their R&D department
prioritises research into new
medicines based on their socio-
economic and public health
benefits rather than on
commercial returns.
Their R&D department invests
heavily in creating medicines
for the developing world.
With this in mind, they
communicate with ngo’s and
other stakeholders by:
a)Establishing an open lab
focused on neglected tropical
diseases. b)Launch of new
collaborations to further share
intellectual properties to
accelerate the development of
new medicines for neglected
tropical diseases.
They also state that their
engagement with investors also
covers ethical issues
surrounding their clinical trials
and their use of controversial
emerging technology such as
Their use of emerging
technology is well
documented in their
Corporate Social
Responsibility report.
Not only do they report a lot
of information on what
emerging technology they
are using, they also report
where the technology is
being directed towards and
the social and
environmental implications
of using such technology.
The social and
environmental implications
of emerging technologies is
something that most
companies do not report on
so they are unique.
Compared to AstraZeneca
there is a clear difference in
the level of detail into what
they are investing into in
terms of Emerging
22
4/5 genetics.
They discuss their use of
animals in their research
and claim they are trying
to cut down their use of
them by replacing existing
research programmes
involving animals with non
animal alternatives.
3/5
stem cells.
4/5
Technology.
What they report, compared
to other companies is
sufficient. It is relatively
extensive and they supply a
large level of information
which is condensed
effectively.
4/5
AZ Stem cell research-
potential of stem cells to
differentiate into human
cells such as hepatocytes
(liver cells) and cardiac
myocytes (heart muscle
cells)
Possibility of treating
diseases by modulation
of stem cells within
target organs –
regenerative medicine.
Crestor Jupiter and
Brilinta Plato trials-
landmark clinical trials
With their investment in
emerging markets such
as Asia and brazil they
focus more on what is
needed rather than
creating anything new.
It becomes clear when
reading AstraZeneca’s
report that their
research is based on
demand rather than
potential innovation.
They are not simply
researching something,
unless there is a world
wide demand for it.
The example is stem
cells…with the
unlimited possibilities
of stem cell research,
they are looking into
regenerative medicine
based around the
heart, liver and other
areas such as diabetes.
2/5
Presence of trace amounts
of pharmaceuticals in the
environment
Trials on animals-they are
used but only when non-
animal trials are
unavailable.
3/5
Unlike GSK, AstraZeneca did not
bring forward the same level of
information regarding their
engagement outside the
company.
The only case where they
seemed to want to do this was
when they were discussing how
they had engaged with the
medical needs of the customer.
2/5
AstraZeneca’s report is very
detailed and has a lot of
information. What is
perhaps the main problem
however is that they are too
complex with some of their
descriptions of their
products.
They do have a lot of
information and compared
to many of the other
companies and considering
the environment in which
they function, there is not a
massive amount to report
on as what they are
developing is focused so
directly on set areas.
3/5
23
‘Meeting Patient needs
lies at the heart of what
we do.’ Example-H1N1
influenze…swine flu
vaccine.’
3/5
24
Conclusion
1) What companies are disclosing: For the most part each company registers at least one mention of an
emerging technology relevant to the organisation. However, in many cases the emerging technology
discussed is not necessarily identified as an emerging technology, rather it is being discussed in
passing, or as a comment about something different. There are some cases however where a company
has divulged large amounts of information into what they are investing in. This may describe what
they hope, through research and development, to achieve with emerging technologies. The best
examples of this can be seen with BP and BASF as they both discuss in detail their ventures, the
emerging technology market, and also how the use of this technology is being monitored in order to
address problems both socially and environmentally. These are the best example of what should,
arguably, be being presented by companies.
2) What companies are failing to disclose: With many companies it was clear that they did not think or
see the need to disclose their use of emerging technology. Most notable were the food companies.
Marks & Spencer, Tesco, and Nestle all failed to address their regular use of nanotechnology in their
regular products. Although mentioning their strict policy against the use of GM foods, they do not go
into any other detail other than merely mentioning it. They are not alone however as despite some
companies mentioning emerging technology, this is as far as they go. An example of this is DuPont,
they mention in some detail what they are developing; yet fail to really discuss what effects this
technology could have on the environment.
3) What should be seen as good practice? The reports reviewed varied considerably in detail. The one
which really stands out was L’Oreal’s 2008 Social Corporate Sustainability report. Other reports did not
really bring forward the same level of information and report in a way which was both reader friendly
and also at an acceptable level of complexity. On the other end of the scale there are the reports
published by Boots and Proctor & Gamble. These sustainability reports mentioned little or nothing
with regards to emerging technology. There may be the case that due to their industry, there is not the
same need to present, for general readership, the same amount of information as the use does not
have the same potential environmental and social implications. This raises the further question, what
should really be considered good practice between differing industries? For example, if Tesco’s report
is lacking information, can it really be compared to the likes of L’Oreal where Nano technology appears
to be a larger part of their product composition?
25
SOURCES
M&S: How we do business CSR 2010....
http://corporate.marksandspencer.com/documents/publications/2010/How_We_Do_Business_Report_2010
Tesco: Tesco CSR Report 2009... http://www.investis.com/plc/storage/tesco_cr_09.pdf
Basf: Basf annual integrated report 2009...
http://bericht.basf.com/2009/en/servicepages/downloads/files/BASF_Report_2009.pdf?cat=b
Proctor&Gamble: 2008 sustainability report...
http://www.pg.com/en_US/downloads/sustainability/reports/PG_2009_Sustainability_Overview.pdf
Nestle:2009 csv report...
http://www2.nestle.com/Common/NestleDocuments/Documents/Reports/CSV%20reports/Global%20report%
202009/Global_report_2009_GB.pdf
L’oreal: 2009 sustainable development report... http://www.sustainabledevelopment.loreal.com/
Dupont: 2015 sustainability goals...
http://www2.dupont.com/Sustainability/en_US/assets/downloads/FINAL_BROCHURE_9.28.06.pdf
Boots: 2009 csr report... http://www.allianceboots.com/CorporateSocialResponsibilityReport2008-
09/index.html
Premier Foods: 2009 annual report...
http://annualreport2009.premierfoods.co.uk/Doc/pdf/Annual_Report_2009.pdf
BP: 2009 Sustainability review ...
http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/STAGING/global_assets/e_s_assets/e_s_assets_2009/do
wnloads_pdfs/bp_sustainability_review_2009.pdf
Shell: Sustainability report 2009...
http://sustainabilityreport.shell.com/2009/servicepages/downloads/files/all_shell_sr09.pdf
GSK: CR REPORT 2009... http://www.gsk.com/investors/reps09/GSK-Report-2009-full.pdf
AZ: annual report 2009... http://www.astrazeneca-annualreports.com/2008/downloads/AZ_AR08_Full.pdf
Unilever: Unilever annual report 2009... http://annualreport09.unilever.com/