The number of calculation methods for sustainability has skyrocketed over the past 20 years. With the increase in quantitative sustainability information, dilemmas also grow. According to Nienke Keen of Milgro, measuring is not always automatically knowing. She calls attention to the moral choices behind the numbers.
Nowadays, there is a measurement methodology available for every ecological or social theme, some more developed than others. This is, of course, good news if you adhere to the well-known principle of 'measuring is knowing.' A principle that also touches the core of Milgro. We operate from the conviction that having insight into ecological effects automatically brings with it a responsibility.
However, with the increasing amount of data and sustainability information, the complexity of our global sustainability challenge becomes apparent. Moreover, outcomes can create dilemmas or lead to illogical or even immoral decisions.
We operate from the conviction that having insight into ecological effects automatically brings with it a responsibility.
Consider the waste processor with a goal to reduce its CO2 emissions. In striving to meet this goal, it might resort to landfilling waste because it results in lower emissions compared to the emissions associated with reusing and recycling materials.
Take the electronics company that aims to improve its products and thus extend their lifespan. This is a step towards circularity, but the CO2 emissions per product increase. How should the company deal with this?
Or consider the company that wants to comply with the CSRD reporting obligation. It wants to invest in a good management system and effective reporting tools on the one hand, and push forward with innovation on the other. How do you ensure the right level of detail for making the right strategic choices? And how do you ensure that the means do not become the end?
These dilemmas carry a significant risk: delaying the greening of our planet. And that is precisely what we must collectively avoid. The urgency to make our economy future-proof, nature-inclusive, and fair is high and demands action and integrity.
In our work, we often see organizations struggling with the complexity and interconnectedness of all transitions and the abundance of data, resulting in dilemmas and stagnation. We also encounter calculating organizations. “Our company operates well within environmental standards.” But is this sufficient and truly sustainable?
It is important to realize: not everything is measurable. Each KPI represents only a part of the total sustainability challenge. We must navigate through the various transitions. Efficient use of resources sometimes requires different choices than reducing greenhouse gases. Attention to circularity sometimes conflicts with the goal of CO2 reduction.
We must accept that reality is always more complex than any measurement system. This complex reality demands integrity in actions. This must be well secured within organizations. Fortunately, society, especially the younger generation, increasingly demands companies act honestly and with integrity.
The environmentally conscious younger generation, who are now protesting against companies harming the environment, are not opposed to a KPI that is just missed or achieved. These young people ask a broader question: will we be on the right side of history? This goes beyond the numbers. It concerns the moral choices behind all calculations.
So is the call to stop calculating? Not at all. You must continue to calculate. And do it thoroughly and diligently. But while doing this in-depth work, you must also regularly zoom out. To assess whether you are not fixating on the numbers. Whether you really need the numbers to take action. Whether you sufficiently account for the complexity of all transitions in their entirety. And whether you continue to act with integrity.
