尊敬的用戶您好，這是來自FT中文網的溫馨提示：如您對更多FT中文網的內容感興趣，請在蘋果應用商店或谷歌應用市場搜尋「FT中文網」，下載FT中文網的官方應用。
Is corporate sustainability as we know it finally over? Are traditional green business strategies failing to the point that they are doing more harm than good?
我們所熟知的企業可持續發展是否終於結束了？傳統的綠色企業戰略是否已經失敗到弊大於利的地步？
Perhaps not entirely. But the growing number of sustainable business leaders calling for a rethink of these measures suggests a tipping point is at hand.
也許不完全如此。但是越來越多的可持續發展企業領袖呼籲重新思考這些措施，這表明轉折點就在眼前。
For those of us who have never thought it likely that businesses and the markets that shape them would be enough to fix the gathering menace of climate change, this realisation is overdue.
對於我們這些從不認爲企業和塑造企業的市場足以解決日益加劇的氣候變化威脅的人來說，這種認識早該到來了。
But it’s not trivial. There may not be enough time to upend capitalism but there is plenty of time for companies to push for markets to be reformed in ways that drive faster climate action.
但這並非小事一樁。對於企業來說，也許沒有足夠的時間來顛覆資本主義，但有足夠的時間來推動市場改革，以加快氣候行動的步伐。
So it has been a relief to see a rising recognition that the status quo is not working.
因此，看到越來越多人認識到現狀是行不通的，這讓人鬆了一口氣。
Or as Lindsay Hooper and Paul Gilding from the venerable Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership put it in a paper this month, “it is time we questioned the founding ideas and dominant approaches in the corporate sustainability movement”.
正如劍橋可持續發展領導力研究所(Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership)的林賽•胡珀(Lindsay Hooper)和保羅•吉爾丁(Paul Gilding)在本月的一篇論文中所說，「是時候質疑企業可持續發展運動的創辦理念和主導方法了」。
The Cambridge university-based institute is a prominent voice in corporate greenery, thanks in part to the backing it has had for most of its 36-year history from its royal conservationist patron, King Charles III.
這家總部位於劍橋大學的研究所在企業綠色環保領域享有盛譽，部分原因是它在36年的歷史中大部分時間都得到了其皇家環保主義贊助人查爾斯三世國王的支援。
But as Hooper and Gilding point out, despite years of green corporate pledges, and mushrooming clean tech investments, “the sustainability crisis is deepening”.
但是，正如胡珀和吉爾丁所指出的，儘管企業多年來一直在進行綠色承諾，清潔技術投資也如雨後春筍般湧現，但「可持續發展危機仍在加深」。
Worse, businesses and their sustainability advisers may be adding to the problem by giving a false impression of progress that is delaying “required radical changes to markets and the policies that frame them”.
更糟糕的是，企業及其可持續發展顧問可能透過給人們一種錯誤的進展印象來加劇問題，從而延誤了對市場和相關政策所需的根本性變革。
The pair say companies should go beyond setting targets for cutting their own carbon footprints and start lobbying for sweeping, long-term rules that reshape entire markets.
兩人表示，企業不應只為減少自身碳足跡設定目標，而應開始遊說制定全面、長期的規則，以重塑整個市場。
For a start, this approach should lower the competitive risks that green business pioneers often face.
首先，這種方法可以降低綠色企業先驅經常面臨的競爭風險。
Another big advantage has been laid bare this year by the slew of green corporate U-turns, from Shell’s weakening of climate targets to Volvo’s delayed deadline for selling only fully electric cars.
今年，從殼牌(Shell)削弱氣候目標到沃爾沃(Volvo)推遲只銷售全電動汽車的最後期限，一系列綠色企業的「大轉彎」，揭示了另一個重要優勢。
Such backtracking underlines the fact that sustainability measures are still often seen as discretionary moves, taken by personally committed leaders and easily undone when times are tough.
這種倒退突顯了這樣一個事實，可持續發展措施往往仍被視爲由領導者個人決定的隨意之舉，在形勢嚴峻時很容易前功盡棄。
As another sustainability veteran, John Elkington, wrote last month: “We must become less dependent on the goodwill and good citizenship of individual business leaders, both of which can be fragile foundations for sustained commitment.”
另一位可持續發展方面的資深人士約翰•埃爾金頓(John Elkington)上個月寫道：「我們必須減少對個別企業領導人的善意和良好公民意識的依賴，這兩者都可能成爲持續承諾的脆弱基礎。」
Elkington knows of what he speaks. He coined corporate sustainability ideas such as “triple bottom line” reporting to measure social and environmental, as well as financial, performance. But as he wrote last month, sustainability can no longer be only about transforming businesses. “Increasingly, too, it must be about transforming markets.”
埃爾金頓深諳其道。他提出了「三重底線」報告等企業可持續發展理念，以衡量社會和環境以及財務業績。但正如他上個月所寫的那樣，可持續發展不能再僅僅是企業的轉型。「可持續發展還必須越來越多地涉及市場轉型。」
A more strident case for the perils of relying on green-minded leaders has come from Jonathon Porritt, a sustainability campaigner who has spent years advising large companies, including Unilever.
可持續發展活動家喬納森•波里特(Jonathon Porritt)多年來一直爲包括聯合利華(Unilever)在內的大公司提供諮詢，他提出了一個更爲尖銳的案例，說明依賴具有環保意識的領導者的危險。
The consumer goods giant has dismayed green activists by rolling back targets on measures such as plastic use and recycling following last year’s appointment of a new CEO, Hein Schumacher.
這家消費品巨擘在去年任命新首席執行長海因•舒馬赫(Hein Schumacher)後，取消了塑膠使用和回收等措施的目標，這讓環保活動家感到沮喪。
His approach marks a sharp break with that of former Unilever bosses like Paul Polman, who memorably told investors who didn’t approve of his sustainability efforts “don’t put your money in our company”.
他的做法與聯合利華前老闆保羅•波爾曼(Paul Polman)的做法截然不同，後者曾令人難忘地告訴那些不贊成他的可持續發展努力的投資者「不要把錢投到我們公司」。
For Porritt, “Unilever’s fall from grace reveals the deep flaws in that whole concept of corporate sustainability as a primary driver of more sustainable ways of creating and distributing wealth.”
對於波里特來說，「聯合利華的失去人心，揭示了企業可持續發展作爲更可持續的財富創造和分配方式的主要驅動力這一整體概念的深刻缺陷。」
So will much change? Maybe. Talk of the need for greater regulation was in the air at last week’s New York Climate Week, as it would be.
那麼，會有什麼變化嗎？也許會。在上週的紐約氣候週上，關於需要加強監管的言論不絕於耳，這也是正常的。
Jes Munk Hansen, chief executive of the Danish insulation maker, Rockwool, told one event that regulators could slash the sizeable carbon emissions from buildings by setting tougher standards.
丹麥隔熱材料製造商Rockwool公司的首席執行長傑斯•蒙克•漢森(Jes Munk Hansen)在一次活動中表示，監管機構可以透過制定更嚴格的標準來減少建築物產生的大量碳排放。
Government rules had helped to drive the shift away from incandescent light bulbs to more energy efficient lights, said Hansen, a former executive at the Osram lighting group.
曾任歐司朗照明集團高階主管的漢森說，政府的規定有助於推動人們從白熾燈泡轉向更節能的燈泡。
As he told me later, “It would help the green transition greatly if building regulators used more tools such as higher energy efficiency standards.”
正如他後來告訴我的那樣：「如果建築監管機構使用更多的工具，如更高的能效標準，將大大有助於綠色轉型。」
He is right. Regulators and governments could do more and some firms are pushing them to do so. But these companies are still in a minority. A lot more must join them if corporate sustainability is ever going to create a more sustainable world.
他說得沒錯。監管機構和政府可以做得更多，一些公司正在推動它們這樣做。但這些公司仍然是少數。如果企業的可持續發展要創造一個更加可持續的世界，就必須有更多的企業加入進來。