Perhaps I have been wrong in looking to the government to act on the problem of Bisphenol A. There are signs that the marketplace will ultimately be where action is taken. This week, Mountain Equipment, a large Canadian retailer of hiking and camping supplies, announced that it is pulling all water bottles made from BPA from its shelves.
And according to today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, In the past two years, more than two dozen shareholder resolutions have taken publicly held corporations to task for their use of potentially toxic chemicals, according to the Investor Environmental Health Network, a nonprofit for money managers and shareholder groups that use investments to pressure corporations on chemical issues.
Whole Foods Market reacted to the pressure by removing baby bottles containing Bisphenol A from its shelves. Wal-mart has been urging suppliers to inform them of the chemicals used in their products.
According to the Sentinel: Though the chemical resolutions have received little media attention, activist shareholders are convinced that will soon change.
"Have you seen the number of recalls lately?" said Lauren Compere, director of shareholder advocacy at Boston Common Asset Management. "We're saying, 'Deal with this proactively, it's a form of risk management . . . We're talking about risk to your reputation.'"
...Last year almost 45% of Hasbro shareholders backed a resolution that noted the toy giant "sells many toys made out of or packaged in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic, a substance which has come under scrutiny due to health and environmental concerns." It called on the company to review its policies regarding "social, environmental and economic sustainability," including the PVC issue.
Liroff explained that the softly worded bureaucratic language in the resolutions is required by law. Even with that, he said, corporations are getting the message, noting that the Hasbro vote was the largest one ever cast favoring a chemical resolution. Generally, winning 10% of the vote on a resolution opposed by management is viewed as a victory.
Wayne Charness, a Hasbro spokesman, said the company responded by posting an expanded and "more robust" corporate social responsibility statement on its Web site.
...RiskMetrics Group, a consulting firm that advises large institutional investors such as pension and mutual funds, frequently recommends that its clients support resolutions that would remove potentially dangerous chemicals from products. Last month it expanded its policy so that it will now also typically advise investors in retail operations to favor the motions.
Jim Letsky, RiskMetrics director of governance research and policy, said a company can damage its reputation or face lawsuits if it sells products that are later found to contain toxic chemicals.
"It's not a matter of being altruistic," Letsky said. "It's a matter of being smart in the long term."
As consumers, we can put pressure on retailers too by not buying products laced with bisphenol A, phthalates, styrene, or PVC. Only buy packaged food and drink in glass, paper or plastics labelled 1, 2, 4 and 5. Avoid plastics numbered 3, 6 or 7. Buy stainless steel bottles for drinking water on-the-go such as Klean Kanteen instead of nalgene drinking bottles. Complain to the store if a product you purchase is over-packaged with non-recyclable materials.
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Manufacturers and Retailers Selling Bisphenol A Products React to Consumer and Shareholder Pressure
Posted by Denise at 8:13 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Well, this is certainly welcome news! Anything that removes Bisphenol A and other toxins from our surroundings is a positive development.
Of course, I'm sure that some would point to this as proof that the market will right any of its wrongs without the meddling of government agencies; but to that I say "not so fast." First of all, with proper testing and industry regulation, many of these toxins would never have become such a problem to begin with. Second, it is only after these problems have accumulated for decades that shareholders saw a potential threat to the bottom line and took action. As modern medicine advocates remind us, preventive measures do far more than retroactive attempts to treat problems: "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Finally, without effective regulation, what is to prevent companies under shareholder pressure from simply switching to other equally toxic substitutes?
So although I find this promising-- and a welcome development-- I'm not about to give up on the idea of reviving government regulation also...
Post a Comment