Brunswick 


  • About Brunswick
  • Our expertise
  • Our people
  • Insights & Brunswick Review
  • Group companies
  • Careers
  • Alumni
  • Contact
  • Site map
  • Home

Insights & analysis

  • Feedback
  • Surveys
  • Talking Points
  • Reports
  • Brunswick Review Issue 6
  • Brunswick Review Issue 5
  • Brunswick Review Issue 4
  • Brunswick Review Issue 3
    • Contents
    • Features
      • Standing guard for standards
      • A calculated take on trust
      • Hearing China’s voices
      • Follow the leader
      • High Fidelity
      • Custodian of a Scandinavian icon
      • Analyzing the union
      • Blogging in Brussels
      • Mobilize everything
      • After the deal
      • The cultural world after the crunch
      • Anatomy of an announcement
      • Show then share
      • Socially responsible investing pays dividends
      • Greater than the sum of its parts
    • Research
      • Digital media and the investment community
      • Trust no one
    • Different take
      • Orchestral maneuvers
      • Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee
      • Devil in the detail
      • Figures of trust
      • Critical moment
  • Brunswick Review Issue 2
    • Contents
    • Chairman’s letter
    • Guest contributors
      • Climate change contributors
    • Brunswick feature writers
    • Climate perspectives
      • Introduction
      • Let's lower the curtain on the high-carbon era
      • The role of progressive states and provinces
      • China's new green
      • 20/20 vision
      • A sustainable global economy
      • Norway's route to low emissions
      • Building work
      • Time to pay up for the ecological crisis
      • A movie... not a snapshot
      • Chemical reaction
      • The long & the short of it
      • Investors as stewards
        • Dealing with the damage
      • No short cuts, please
      • Policy and the investor
      • Time to recognise forest carbon
      • The new climate for business
      • Time for a new manhattan project*
      • A fashionable future
    • Conversation & comment
      • Mark Thompson
      • Arianna Huffington
      • John Kennedy
      • Wu Xiaobo
      • Oliver Michalsky
      • Rise of the global commentariat
      • Should CEOs Twitter?
      • Mobilizing 15 million voices
      • On/off annual reporting
      • Careful, it's on the record!
    • Features
      • Why circulation is irrelevant
      • Restructuring: building the best comms model
      • A guide to guidance
        • Guidance at Unilever
      • Communicating to public & private stakeholders
      • The governance of not for profits
      • Effective board engagement with shareholders
      • What makes a great corporate affairs director?
      • Gimme shelter? Or pump up the volume?
      • Reflections of a Latin American leader
      • EU Financial Services Regulation – Moving beyond the crisis
        • An EU regulatory perspective
      • The new lobbyists
      • Tackling Beijing's M&A block
    • Research
      • Are analysts and investors engaging with new media?
    • Art profile
    • Different take
      • The ties that bind
        • Corporate tie etiquette
      • Poetry
      • Leading through literature
      • What we're editing
        • The new zero
        • International book award
    • The last laugh
  • Brunswick Review Issue 1
    • Contents
    • Chairman’s letter
    • Guest contributors
    • Brunswick feature writers
    • Q&A feature
      • Milestones
    • The big debate
      • Editor’s introduction
      • 01: Stephen Green
      • 02: Sir Win Bischoff
      • 03: Anthony Bolton
      • 04: Glenn Greenburg & Joshua Slocum
      • 05: David Faber
      • 06: John Duncan
    • Features
      • Playing happy families
      • Is there a bigger role for business in South African society?
      • One chair, many roles
      • Dubai, the reputational challenge
      • Unsolicited offers enter the mainstream
      • M&A communications in a downturn
      • A cross-cultural communications challenge
        • Media
      • The missing link
        • Checklist
      • Washington, DC 2009: The new order
      • Hard times for corporate responsibility?
        • Environmental reporting
      • When should companies apologize?
    • Research
      • But what shall we tell the staff?
      • Comply or communicate?
        • Overview of results
      • A growing role for business to forge the CR agenda
        • A diverse agenda
    • Art profile
    • Different take
      • Selling the Papacy
      • The dangers of corporate kissing
      • Diary of a talent hunt
      • Tough times, straight talking
      • What we have been reading
        • Life of a European Mandarin
        • Snowball: Warren Buffett and the business of life
    • The last laugh

Climate perspectives

Add to download library
Add to print basket
Email this page
  • Go to download library
  • Go to print basket

Brunswick
Review
Issue two
Winter 2009

The new climate for business

Written by:
  • Per-Anders Enkvist, McKinsey & Company

Climate scientists say that global greenhouse gas emissions need to be approximately five times lower by 2050 than they were in 2005. Given that global GDP is set to grow by a factor of four in the same period this means that emissions would need to be reduced by a factor of 20 for every dollar of global GDP generated.

To achieve this will require a revolution in how energy is generated and used in the global economy – of the same order of magnitude as the industrial revolution in the 19th century. Radically “de-carbonizing” products and processes will then likely become a major theme of industrial value creation for the next decades – the same way as replacing manual labor with machines was during the industrial revolution. 

But what should companies do in the short term? Many of the executives we talk to struggle to translate the long-term global outlook into concrete short-term actions for their companies. Some of them feel that there is so much uncertainty, and so many other priorities in the financial crisis, that they end up adopting a “wait-and-see” strategy or take only some minor initiatives, such as emphasizing how green they are in their marketing.

We believe a better ambition and strategy for companies in the relevant sectors is to get a few years ahead of their competitors in understanding what this major transition could mean for their industry. This will allow them aggressively to pursue the markets and trends that are already predictable enough to justify large investments, while placing careful bets on the longer-term and more uncertain ones. Even though working out this strategy is hard work, and could be seen as distracting in the middle of the recession, we believe the time is well spent. A discontinuity on the scale of climate change will create clear winners and losers in many industries.

Understanding the implications of possible regulatory outcomes from the COP15 negotiations in Copenhagen is one thing. But executives also need to address several other important strategy questions for their companies and industries: for example how the cost competitiveness of different assets could change, how asset valuations could be affected, how the expectations of major customers and media might change in the future, what new business models and technologies could emerge, and how the implications could differ between geographic markets. 

The companies that we see as being the most proactive on climate change typically act along three dimensions: 

First, they take control of their own carbon footprint, and put pressure on their suppliers to reduce their emissions. In doing so, many of these companies have found that there are also significant cost savings to be gained by reducing emissions. Improvements in energy efficiency alone often yield 15-25 per cent savings in energy costs with short payback times.

Second, they carefully explore the knock-on effect of the transition to a low-carbon economy on growth in different parts of their industry, and what new opportunities will appear. In a wide range of emission-related industries, from specialty chemicals to advanced materials and heavy equipment, we have seen that applying a climate change lens to growth has generated counter-intuitive insights, and led managers to re-prioritize customer segments, R&D investments, and structural moves.

Third, they engage with policymakers in creative ways to shape regulation. The shift to a low-carbon economy will to a large extent be driven by regulation, and getting this regulation right is in some cases of such importance to companies that it even dwarfs operational excellence and M&A as value-creation opportunities. Yet, too few management teams in high-emissions industries spend real time and effort on shaping policy outcomes. In fact, in many companies the issue is delegated to communication departments or external lobbyists.

Major discontinuities do not hit industries very often. We believe it is important for companies in energy and land-use related industries to recognize that climate change could well be a major discontinuity for their industries, and make sure that their attention and response to it are in proportion to its importance.

Per-Anders Enkvist is a Principal of McKinsey & Company based in Stockholm.



back to top
  • Brunswick offices:
  • Abu Dhabi
  • Beijing
  • Berlin
  • Brussels
  • Dallas
  • Dubai
  • Frankfurt
  • Hong Kong
  • Johannesburg
  • London
  • Milan
  • Munich
  • New York
  • Paris
  • Rome
  • San Francisco

  •  
  • Sao Paulo
  • Shanghai
  • Stockholm
  • Vienna
  • Washington DC
© Copyright of Brunswick Group LLP 2012
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Agreement
  • Accessibility
  • Site map