Search Results

Blog | Wednesday May 7, 2025

Omnibus: The Costs of Looking Away from Sustainability Impacts in Uncertain Times

Preview

People

Nicci Hong

Preview

Nicci supports BSR member companies across industries in respecting human rights across their organizations. Her primary areas of expertise include human rights in Southeast Asia and forced labor issues in global value chains.

Prior to joining BSR, Nicci worked as an associate and independent contractor, providing advisory services on addressing labor rights violations and the implementation of business and human rights standards.

Nicci graduated magna cum laude with a Master's in Management and a concentration in Corporate Social Responsibility from Louvain School of Management in Belgium. Nicci also holds a B.A. in Global Political Economy from Waseda University in Japan, and her degree focused on poverty and socioeconomics.

Blog | Tuesday May 6, 2025

The EU AI Act: Where Do We Stand in 2025?

Preview

The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) is the most significant piece of legislation in the world regulating artificial intelligence. In 2024, we published a two-part series on the AI Act looking at what it means for businesses and recommendations to help companies start preparing. Twelve months on, this new blog post looks at the status of the AI Act—both in terms of provisions that have come into force and those yet to do so—as well as potential changes to the AI Act in the future. 

What is the status of the EU AI Act? 

The EU AI Act officially entered into force in August 2024; however, the provisions did not immediately apply. Instead, the legislation took a staggered approach, with different requirements coming into force at different times over a three-year period. 

The first provisions to come into effect, on February 2, 2025, prohibited certain AI practices. Most concerned more hypothetical uses of AI, rather than ones that were widespread within the EU, such as the use of AI with manipulative or deceptive techniques aimed at changing people’s behavior to cause harm, or the use of AI to predict the likelihood of a person committing a criminal offense. Many others focused on AI that might be used by government actors, including law enforcement agencies, rather than by the private sector.  

A provision that is more relevant for companies prohibits the use of AI systems to determine or predict people's emotions in workplace settings, with exceptions for safety reasons, where commercially available software that can do this already exists. In February 2025, the EU Commission published guidelines on these prohibited AI practices. These provide further clarity on all prohibited AI practices, including workplace emotional detection or prediction (e.g., clarifying that “emotions” does not include gestures, facial expressions, or whether a person might be in pain or tired). Companies using any sort of technology or software that determines or predicts people’s emotions should have stopped this already, or risk fines of up to €35 million or 7 percent of global annual turnover of the preceding year, whichever is higher. 

None of the remaining provisions are yet in force, and the next set of requirements to come into force will not do so until August 2, 2025. First, EU member states will at that point need to designate the independent organizations (“notified bodies”) responsible for assessing the conformity of high-risk AI systems before they can be placed in the EU market. 

Second, there will be new rules for General-Purpose AI (GPAI) models, namely models (like large language models) that can be adapted to a wide range of tasks. Providers will need to keep up-to-date technical documentation, provide information and documentation to downstream providers integrating models into their own AI systems, establish a policy to respect EU copyright law (particularly regarding training data), and publish a detailed summary of the content used for training. Additional, more stringent obligations will apply to GPAI models identified as having systemic risks, defined as including “actual or reasonably foreseeable negative effects on...fundamental rights.” These include requirements for model evaluation (e.g., identifying and mitigating systemic risks), assessing and mitigating possible systemic risks, ensuring adequate cybersecurity protection, and reporting serious incidents.

Third, the EU will establish an AI Office and European Artificial Intelligence Board to oversee the enforcement of the legislation, and each member state will designate a national authority with the competence to enforce the legislation at the national level.

After this, the third wave of requirements will come into force on August 2, 2026. These cover a broad range of areas, including measures to promote innovation (such as regulatory sandboxes, where innovators can test new products or services in a controlled environment under the supervision of regulators) and the establishment of an EU database of high-risk AI systems. Two requirements in particular will be important to companies. 

First, there will be new requirements on transparency aimed at ensuring that individuals are aware when they are interacting with AI. These include informing people interacting with AI systems (e.g., chatbots) that they are doing so, labeling synthetic content generated by AI (such as text, images, video or audio) as well as deepfakes, and ensuring that individuals subjected to emotional recognition or biometric categorizations are informed. These requirements will be particularly relevant for companies using emotional recognition or biometric categorizations outside of the workplace (such as in stores) or creating content using generative AI. 

Second, the AI Office and member states will encourage and facilitate the development of codes of conduct for AI systems that are not high risk. While voluntary, these will aim to encourage the adoption of similar measures that would be taken for high-risk systems, including the ethical development and use of AI, and assessing and minimizing the environmental impact of AI systems. Companies looking to position themselves as leaders when it comes to responsible AI may want to ensure compliance with these voluntary codes of conduct.  

The final requirements will come into force on August 2, 2027. These relate solely to high-risk AI systems, which include biometrics and the use of AI in critical infrastructure, education and vocational training, employment, essential private and public services, law enforcement, and the administration of justice. For these, there will be a range of requirements relating to their development, including establishing risk management systems, maintaining technical documentation, and ensuring accuracy and robustness, as well as human oversight. There are also rules relating to placing these systems in the EU market, putting them into service, and using them, such as establishing quality management systems, keeping documentation, cooperating with national authorities, and complying with conformity assessments. Part two of our series last year highlighted the many ways that the requirements for high-risk AI systems necessitated a human rights-based approach, with many of the requirements explicitly incorporating consideration of potential risks to human rights posed by the system. 

Might anything change? 

The EU has shown itself willing to modify even recently adopted regulations when faced with pressure by EU member states and other stakeholders. Notably, a range of sustainability-focused regulations are likely to be amended, limiting their applicability, scope and requirements, through the Omnibus Simplification Package. 

In recent months, there have been similar calls for the EU’s AI Act to be amended to reduce its requirements. The new U.S. administration has been critical of much of the EU’s regulation of technology given the impacts they have on U.S.-based technology companies. While the EU has not made any formal statements on whether amendments to the AI Act are planned, the EU Commission has indicated that there will be a public consultation on challenges in the Act’s implementation process, a “fitness check” on legislation in the area of digital policy, and a “simplification digital package” by the end of 2025. Depending on the outcome of the consultation and the “fitness check,” it is possible that amendments could be made to the AI Act, either removing requirements or the scope of companies who need to comply or extending existing deadlines to give more companies to prepare. 

For more information on the AI Act or to discuss its implications for your business, please contact our Tech and Human Rights team. 

Blog | Wednesday April 30, 2025

A Message from Aron Cramer, BSR President and CEO

Preview

Video Transcript

The world is experiencing a staggering degree of change and uncertainty right now.

Some have said that this is not no longer an era of change, it's a change of eras.

No organization amidst all of this change has all the tools that they need in their toolbox and I'm convinced that BSR is most helpful for companies when we not only bring to bear what our amazing team of almost 200 people bring, but also work within the broader ecosystem so we can bring together complimentary resources and perspectives, and networks to help companies make progress at a time of great headwinds.

Business leaders succeed when they have a sense of vision. And a vision forward, not just for 2025, but for well beyond, has to be about companies that take their impacts on society very seriously, has to take seriously the challenges that they will face if our environment does not deliver the kinds of natural resources that we need to use and need to use wisely, and ignores the intersection of business and society. Put more positively, these are all things that create massive opportunities for innovation, massive opportunities for strategic advantage, and massive opportunities to ensure resilience at a time when the change is so intense, resilience is not just a buzzword, it is an absolutely essential value that companies really need.

The best way through the current environment, which indeed is challenging, is together.

The best way through the current environment, which indeed is challenging, is together. And so, we look forward to working with you, to hearing from you, to devise solutions, figure out new collaborations, and make sense of this world together, because that has always been the way that BSR has been the most valuable and I believe it is exactly the right model for us to work towards together in this moment.

Blog | Wednesday April 30, 2025

Board Oversight Amid Uncertainty: Doubling Down on Strategic Sustainability

Preview

Blog | Thursday April 24, 2025

Climate and Nature Integration 101: In Conversation with Helen Crowley

Preview

Lara Birkes, Managing Director of BSR's Climate and Nature team, connected with Dr. Helen Crowley, BSR Advisor and Global Business and Biodiversity Expert, to explore why integrating climate, nature, and people is no longer optional—and how systems thinking, organizations shifts, and even nature itself can help businesses navigate complexity, build resilience, and scale impact. 

Why is an integrated approach to climate and nature important? Why does it matter, and why does it seem particularly relevant now? 

We are facing interconnected challenges—economic, societal, and environmental—that require an integrated, systems thinking approach. Historically, siloed approaches were easier, but today’s complex systems demand holistic solutions. An integrated approach is not only relevant because of the global environment, but also because it shows how single actions can deliver multiple benefits. By considering climate, nature, business, and people, we can achieve greater cost effectiveness and efficiency. 

Do you know why these disciplines have evolved separately? Could you share some context? 

The climate community took hold with clear climate science and solutions such as renewables about five years ago. However, in 2019-2020, there were discussions about how to get nature in the decision-making process. Environmental science was relatively new and had a more traditional, NGO-driven focus, whereas the climate community had already gained momentum. Over time, reports like the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and World Economic Forum emphasized the critical role of nature, helping bring it into the broader conversation. 

Today, there is growing recognition that the entire economy depends on nature, and the focus is shifting toward integrating nature with climate action. The separation between these areas existed due to campaigning approaches and organizational structures, but now there's a push to bring them together, as it makes sense for efficiency and carries multiple benefits. 

What does integration look like from an operational and tactical perspective? What about from a product development and R&D perspective? 

Even under less than ideal circumstances, integrating nature and climate strategies is possible. 

Many companies already have separate climate, nature, or water strategies, and that’s fine. What’s important is to integrate approaches, actions, and tactics moving forward, to deliver multiple outcomes.  

If you were starting from scratch, I’d recommend developing an integrated strategy focused on building resilience and addressing both impacts and dependencies on nature and climate. Tactically, it’s key to identify where technological solutions are important, useful, and can deliver benefits. Tactics for nature-related outcomes that can also address climate issues are a crucial part of this as well. Building on existing efforts and consistently applying a nature lens to climate work will indeed make the integration smoother over time. If you're doing types of disclosure for climate-related financial risk, you can do it for nature-related risk. I know it may seem overwhelming, but build on what you have and regularly reflect: am I applying a nature lens to my climate work, or vice versa? It’s likely easier than it seems. 

The key is connecting the dots and understanding how to bring these efforts together, rather than feeling overwhelmed by the challenge. While many companies have climate strategies and targets in place, there is also a growing curiosity around nature. How do we assess what's already in place?  

I think it's fun to play around with interconnectedness. If I'm looking at deforestation, how is that tangibly addressing my climate goals? How is that tangibly addressing my nature goals, or building natural resilience or natural infrastructure? Whatever it is, however you frame it, I think you’ll find that when you start making those logical lines between the different points, it becomes clear. Embrace the complexity! 

What are the challenges and opportunities of de-siloing climate, nature, human rights, and just transition work? 

Let’s talk about the system we’re part of. For example, we hear that we’ve received US$120 billion for nature financing. We need at least US$200 billion, with an additional US$500 billion to US$1 trillion annually to counteract the negative pressures on nature.  

Yet US$7 trillion goes annually into activities that degrade nature, within a global economy of, let’s say, US$100 trillion—an economy entirely dependent on nature. This highlights a key issue: companies are under-resourced to address the complex interrelations of climate, nature, and people. There are more powerful case studies, data, and reflections emerging. We want to help build a resilient business that thrives and adapts to what is ahead. But to deliver on that, we need more resources. It’s not an intellectual challenge—we know what to do. The real challenge is securing the resources needed. This is not just about identifying what to do, but about reframing sustainability as a key part of our business growth strategy—an opportunity to push forward despite resource limitations. 

How much of this needs to be linked to a broader internal narrative, one that helps shift thinking beyond quarterly earnings and challenges the short-term mindset reinforced by our current global economic models, so that we can strike a better balance between short-term business demands and the long-term perspective required to address Earth system challenges? 

Great question. We know the system needs transforming, but it can’t happen overnight. So inside companies, it’s about taking logical steps, meeting short-term demands while embedding them in a longer-term strategy. Sometimes, that means using short-term wins as a "Trojan horse" to build momentum for deeper change. And that’s where narrative matters just as much as data: people want purpose-driven companies. Scenario planning helps too. For example, asking, "What does our business look like in a 1.5°C or 2°C world?" helps shape that longer-term perspective. 

I can imagine this may feel daunting, as if now we need to try to change the global economic paradigm—but there’s something refreshing about knowing we can start integrating these longer-term messages now, while also seeing tangible short-term action. 

As a biologist, I think there's no downside to focusing on nature. Unlike climate, which can feel overwhelming, nature is inspiring and positive. It's been around 3.8 billion years, and it has figured out a lot. Understanding nature allows for strong narratives and excitement within organizations. 

There is a growing optimism around nature, which integrates well with climate work and brings a refreshing shift in perspective.

What organizational or institutional changes do you think need to be implemented to better align climate, nature, human rights and just transition work within companies?  

Companies likely have various strategies for integration. One interesting approach has been the multiple capitals model, which uses a balance sheet to account for not just financial value, but also natural, social, and other forms of capital. There's a growing resurgence in this, especially around capital accounting. 

One of the best ways to integrate climate, nature, and people is to get into the field, whether it's a cotton field, grazing system, or mining operation. Understanding how it all works in practice allows you to build a science-based narrative. You can then focus on integrating a just transition, ensuring stakeholders are not an afterthought, and ensuring that ecosystem services are restored. Collaborating with local communities, especially indigenous peoples who steward 80 percent of the world's biodiversity, makes the whole process tangible and impactful. When making a decision, it’s important to consider whose perspectives and value systems are being included in the equation. 

The social license to operate is making a comeback, and it’s no longer just tied to mining. It’s about understanding your company’s role within the broader society and the social contract you have—not just with consumers, but with the community. It’s not just about how a company treats its employees, but also how it benefits those more broadly. When addressing nature and climate, businesses can clearly demonstrate their contribution to a broader societal value and building a sort of societal resilience. 

Shifting vantages for a moment. We both share an admiration and love for biomimicry, or learning from nature. If we were to learn from nature as practitioners of this work within companies, how would we approach integration? What can nature teach us at this important point of evolution for our work?  

Nature has been around 3.8 billion years, evolving and changing. Biomimicry describes life's principles, highlighting how nature’s resilience and power are achieved. When we talk about nature-based solutions, it’s not just a trendy term in the corporate world. It’s about harnessing nature's complexity to solve challenges it’s been addressed for millennia. By being locally attuned, building resilience, working within boundaries, and leveraging interdependencies, businesses can tap into the same strategies that have made nature so successful. Essentially, life's principles are not only key to nature’s success, but also to the success of companies seeking sustainability and resilience. 

People

Dr. Helen Crowley

Preview

Blog | Tuesday April 22, 2025

Earth Day: Centering Health Equity in Climate Action

Preview

Climate change presents an urgent and growing risk to companies, communities, and public health. By 2050, it is projected to result in US$12.5 trillion in economic losses and an additional US$1.1 trillion in healthcare costs. This Earth Day, as companies work on building long-term resilience in the face of climate change, it's important to consider the health of people as well as the planet.

In a recent webinar, BSR Collaborative Initiative Centering Health Equity in Climate Action (CHEC) brought its members together to share insights and real-world experiences on integrating health equity in climate action, answering five key questions on the topic below.

1. What is the climate, health, equity nexus and why does it matter?

The effects of climate change, such as rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and increasing greenhouse gas levels, lead to negative health impacts on people, including heat-related illnesses, injuries, cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses, and mental health issues.

However, climate change does not impact all people’s health equally. Vulnerable community members live in areas often hit hardest by extreme weather, do not have adequate resources to rebuild after climate disasters, and experience chronic illnesses and other health complications due to a lack of medical care, as well as social and economic inequities.

For example, as global temperatures rise, heatwaves are becoming more frequent and severe. This is leading to more heat exhaustion and heat stroke, particularly among the more vulnerable populations, such as elderly people, young children, outdoor workers, and people with preexisting conditions.

Businesses have the ability and responsibility to act and need to think about incorporating climate solutions in a way that uplifts the most vulnerable and protects public health, especially given the impacts on their workforce and long-term resilience.

2. How does the climate, health, equity nexus impact businesses?

Companies can no longer afford to overlook the factors that influence employee well-being, health, and resilience. Disparities in health outcomes, access to care, and exposure to environmental risks are already reshaping the conditions in which businesses operate.

Healthy employees are essential for business continuity, and employees depend on healthy communities and functioning health systems. Climate change is threatening all three. When climate-related health impacts affect the broader workforce community, business resilience is at risk.

These impacts disproportionately affect under-resourced communities that already face significant health disparities. The intersection of climate, health, and equity reveals that these are not separate challenges—they are interconnected systemic risks.

This also presents an opportunity. Businesses that take the lead in aligning climate action with health and equity outcomes are better positioned to withstand disruption, earn stakeholder trust, and build a more resilient operating environment.

3. What are some of the most pressing climate and health issues facing communities today?

Extreme heat, poor air quality, unprecedented storms, and vector-borne illnesses can all affect communities. Extreme heat causes dehydration, heat stroke, aggravated cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses, mental health distress, chronic disease complications, and workplace injuries. This in turn can lead to employee absenteeism, decreased productivity, and increased healthcare and disability costs.

Extreme events, such as wildfires, can result in health crises after the fires, e.g., people suffering from persistent coughs and the unknown long-term effects of pollution from burning plastic.

These examples illustrate the types of challenges that employees and their communities are experiencing. However, the specific health impacts on employees and communities vary based on local environmental conditions and the nature of climate-related changes in each region.

4. How can businesses integrate health equity in their existing climate action?

To address health equity, business can look for opportunities within existing and new climate solutions. For example, a business can implement an emissions reduction initiative as a part of its decarbonization strategy. Emissions reduction initiatives often have positive health benefits, such as reducing heat and pollution, promoting physical and mental health, and decreasing respiratory diseases in communities historically affected by industrial pollution.  Businesses can work with community organizations to identify how these health benefits can be shared equally among communities.

Companies can also consider the health impact opportunities with their respective industries. For example, travel company leaders can think critically about how tourism can support, rather than degrade, local ecosystems and economies. Construction companies can team up with building supply manufacturers to consider how to design and build healthier spaces.

Collaboration is key, and businesses need to partner with academic and community partners to find out how their climate and health initiatives can be the most impactful, and to find the people who can best implement activities quickly. 

5. What practical steps can businesses take to incorporate health equity in their climate action strategies? 

CHEC recently published a toolkit to help companies on their climate and health equity journeys. The resource demonstrates how climate change negatively impacts the health of vulnerable communities and, in turn, affects businesses, with real-life examples from CHEC members who have successfully integrated health equity into their existing sustainability initiatives.

The following four practical steps are expanded upon in the toolkit: 

1. Understand the business’ climate and health equity impacts: Begin by assessing where climate impacts from your business may have public health impacts along your value chain. It’s especially important to consider where inequitable effects on vulnerable populations may occur.
2. Start with the most impacted in your value chain: Identify the populations most affected by climate and health equity impacts within your value chain, as these are the groups for which your business holds the greatest responsibility. 
3. Measure, manage, and monitor: What gets measured gets managed. Begin by collecting data on your climate and health equity impacts and commit to ongoing measurement, management, and monitoring. With data insights, set goals based on clear insights and align them with your company’s sustainability targets.
4. Embed climate and health equity throughout your organization: Lasting change is only possible when initiatives are aligned to a business’ objectives, mission, and vision. All parties should be on board: from the board and executives to department leads and their teams.

Download the toolkit to learn more. For more information on the climate, nature, and health intersection and how BSR can support you, please contact the Climate and Nature team.  

People

Dian Grobler

Preview

As Director of People and Culture, Dian leads BSR’s global human resources (HR) strategy, including talent acquisition, learning and development, and diversity, equity, and inclusion. He partners with senior leadership to foster an inclusive culture, ensuring employees thrive and advance BSR’s mission for a just and sustainable world. Dian also strategically manages workforce initiatives to ensure the organization consistently attracts, develops, and retains skilled professionals aligned with BSR’s long-term objectives. 

​Dian is a seasoned HR leader with extensive experience in multinational consulting and technology organizations. Specializing in the fields of people management, HR, and leadership development, he has successfully led ambitious people and culture projects across Europe, the Middle East, and Africa; North America; and the Asia-Pacific region. Dian believes strongly that people management is integral to creating high-performing teams and providing service excellence to member companies. 

Dian holds a B.A. degree in Human Resources, a B.A. Honors degree in Industrial Psychology, and a B.Psych degree in Psychometrics at the University of the Free State. Dian was awarded the HP Langenhoven and PPS prizes for outstanding academic merit for Industrial Psychology and Psychometrics respectively. Dian also holds a M.B.A. degree from the University of Cape Town Graduate School of Business. 

Reports | Tuesday April 15, 2025

Building Financial Resilience of Women Workers in the Shea Industry

Preview

Women involved in shea collection and production face numerous challenges that limit their economic opportunities and stability—many have limited access to resources and training to enhance productivity and income, all the while having to balance unpaid work and household care. Earnings from collecting and processing shea nuts are seasonal, which can pose a challenge for financial stability. Therefore, financial resilience is key for empowering women workers in this industry.

With the support of the Estée Lauder Companies Charitable Foundation, BSR developed, piloted, and scaled a bespoke financial resilience training program to reach and empower women in shea cooperatives in Ghana. The program reached approximately 8,000 women shea nut collectors and processors and resulted in positive changes both for these women and their communities.

Notable changes include improved income management and savings, additional access to income generation opportunities, increased self-confidence, and shifts in community and family attitudes, factors that can contribute to an improvement in women’s living standards. The program demonstrates the value of investing in women workers, which not only contributes to improving their livelihoods but also builds increased supply chain resilience for buyers and partners, as demonstrated in the learnings report and toolkit presentation published here.

Following the implementation of this program, BSR launched a toolkit for organizations interested in replicating the trainings. We strongly encourage buyers, suppliers, and NGOs operating in the shea sector to use these resources to amplify financial resilience of women workers. The toolkit includes:

• Learnings Report - Read this report to learn more about the program’s background, successes, and impacts
• Toolkit Presentation - This resource walks you through how to replicate the financial resilience program, including a description of all the resources needed, as well as how and when to use them.
• Training Resources (ZIP file, 140MB) - This folder contains all of the resources you will need to coordinate and deliver the trainings from end-to-end, including the implementation guide, the financial resilience curriculum, the kick-off deck, the assessment surveys, and the radio episodes.
• Social Media Guide -  This resource provides guidance on communicating about the program outcomes and impacts on social media platforms.