Context

It was in 2021, around the time of COP26, that I first appreciated the full extent to which businesses are funding their own projects to meet their own net-zero targets (many of which are more ambitious that those of governments).

You’re perhaps rolling your eyes cynically at this point of reading. “Of course they’d say that! Hasn’t she ever heard of green-washing?” All I can tell you is that the companies I work with are deadly serious, genuinely committed, and investing huge sums of money.

Partly, it’s because consumers are demanding change (although I’m not entirely convinced that consumers are genuinely willing to pay more for green alternatives). But I think it’s mostly because companies are made up of individuals with friends and families, children and grandchildren - they care for their futures just like anyone else.

Examples of what businesses are doing

We generally see several responses from businesses, often at the same time.

First, they want to keep selling the same products or services, but greener. That generally involves reducing or eliminating carbon emissions, making packaging fully recyclable, minimising travel, and making sure that raw materials are sustainably sourced. That costs money – many companies are committed to billions and billions of dollars of expenditure. I don’t blame businesses for wanting to reduce their costs through claiming government grants.

Secondly, supply chains are becoming more vulnerable. Having one factory or warehouse is risky if build in regions prone to forest fires or floods. Companies are building resilience and redundancy into supply chains, and their mantra is now “just in case” rather than “just in time”.

Thirdly, some companies are discovering new, green products and services. Banks offer green finance, lawyers insert sustainability clauses into legal agreements, architects design self-cooling buildings that don’t need aircon, academics discover new processes to turn seaweed into biofuel.

Actions for government

It’s critical that governments co-ordinate internationally to introduce policies that support the green transition.

Sometimes it’s as simple as aligning. Deforestation is a great example – the US, the EU and the UK all have deforestation legislation aiming at the same end goal, but all getting there in slightly different ways. That makes it more complicated and expensive than it needs to be, particularly for small businesses.

Sometimes it’s more political. The US’s Inflation Reduction Act includes incentives to encourage US firms to bring green investment onshore. The problem is that sometimes the US isn’t the best place to put green investments. I’d like to see the Global North recognise that different countries have different strengths, and we should play to them not undermine them. The continent of Africa has all the right ingredients to lead the world in carbon capture powered by solar energy generation, with the right investment and support from the developed world.

Finally, businesses love a target. Given them a target, and they’ll hit it whether the target is inventing the brilliant new green technology or achieving net-zero. But hitting targets is expensive and requires long-term investment. Investment demands stability. It’s particularly important that companies are allowed to retain ownership and control over their intellectual property so that they can recoup their investment.

I believe that forced technology transfer isn’t the answer; all it will do is stop companies from trying. I’d prefer forced cost manufacturing in the developing world – that way the developing world gets access to new technologies at cost, and an upskilled workforce, but companies are still allowed to make profits from the Global North.

Africa isn’t going to get a traditional industrial revolution. It may, as a cost-effective supply base for clean energy, get something better. The Global North owes Africa for the carbon its emitted in the past and the environmental damage being done disproportionately to the poorest countries – let’s make that count.