RAN has made it - Disney is working with RAN on a new comprehensive paper policy!

We reported here earlier this year about RAN's campaign to ensure children's books are not printed on paper linked to Indonesian rainforest destruction, which eventually was focusing on Disney Publishing.

Until now RAN said Disney has offered only empty words that do nothing to ensure the company is not still purchasing paper driving rainforest destruction. Yet, it seems like things have changed and for the better!

Last week RAN sent an update over the email saying: "Disney executives flew to San Francisco the next week to meet with RAN’s forest team. We’ve been deep in negotiations with them ever since. "

This is great news! RAN, according to their email, is working with Disney on a comprehensive paper policy that will ensure Disney stops sourcing paper from the world’s endangered forests and instead increases use of responsible alternatives like recycled paper. Negotiations are still underway and the campaign will remain active until a strong final policy is announced.

RAN reports it is (cautiously) optimistic that "Disney will do the right thing and establish a precedent-setting policy that ends its ties to forest destroyers APP and APRIL while providing a positive model for other corporations to follow. This would be a major win for the world’s forests, forest communities and Disney."

Kudos to RAN on their achievement and we definitely hope these negotiations will succeed! We'll keep you posted once we'll have more updates.

In the meantime, check RAN's website to learn more about their campaign.

Photo credit: RAN

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Green Grades 2009 - which company earned top grade for paper policy and what was Amazon's score?

One of the most interesting reports was released few days ago by ForestEthics and Dogwood Alliance. The report, entitled "Green Grades 2009" looks at and grades the paper sourcing policies of 12 office retail, general retail and wholesale/distribution companies.

Among the evaluated companies you can find FedEx Office, Office Depot, Staples, Target, Costco and Amazon.com. The report evaluates the companies environmental performance in six crucial forest-related categories: Chain of Custody, Endangered Forests, Plantations and other controversial sources, responsible Forestry/FSC certification, recycling and education and
other leadership.

The companies were rated in accordance with their performance in these categories. The best scores were given in the office retail sector - FedEx Office got A- and Office Depot got B.

FedEx Office excelled especially in the categories of responsible Forestry/FSC certification and other leadership as the report details:

"The company was also the first with a solid preference for credibly-certified paper (i.e., FSC), and has just announced that most of the paper used in its copy centers will be from FSC sources in the US. FedEx Office has also done the most to encourage its suppliers and governments to manage their forests more sustainably."

Office Depot also got kudos from the report's authors:

"Office Depot does the best job of tracking its forest sources, has the most detailed paper policy, has been the most systematic about avoiding paper from Indonesian Endangered Forest logger Asia Pulp & Paper (APP), and does the best job of tracking its use of post-consumer recycled paper."

Two issues that got the authors attention were usage of the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), or other certification labels that according to the authors greenwash Endangered Forest logging and other controversial practices (examples for SFI users: OfficeMax, Xpedx), as well as sourcing paper from International Paper, which according to the report is involved with controversial Endangered Forest logging and has a role in converting forests to sterile tree plantations (examples for customers: Costco, WalMart/Sam's Club).

I was very interested in the scores of Amazon.com, which is the most related company among the companies evaluated to the book market. Unfortunately their scores were disastrous, or in other words their score was F. Here's what the authors had to say on Amazon.com:
"Amazon.com does not have a meaningful paper policy or other key paper- and forest-related sustainability measures, but appears to have no problem with buying and selling paper from Endangered Forests and other controversial sources in the Boreal, Southern US, and Indonesia. The giant online retailer ignored our survey, so questions remain about their paper sourcing practices."

Although I'm not sure how much paper Amazon purchases I have to say these results are disappointing and far from what one can expect from Amazon.com. I was especially disappointed from the fact they totally ignored the survey - that's not the way to treat stakeholders.

In all, though we get a mixed updates - some companies are better, some are worst - the bottom line is optimistic. The authors see the half full glass.

"Companies are using their purchasing power to benefit the environment. Most of the retailers are making large shifts away from controversial sources to Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)-certified paper. Several companies took steps to avoid using paper from endangered caribou habitat, and to encourage Canadian governments and forestry companies to better protect caribou in the Boreal Forest."

It looks like there's still a lot to be done, especially when it comes to wholesalers, distributors and retailers. Still, my hope is that this report will follow the example of Greenpeace's Guide to Greener Electronics which gave the companies evaluated in it a real incentive to better their practices. We promise to follow it closely and report as soon as the fourth report will be released.

Thanks again to ForestEthics and Dogwood Alliance for this ongoing effort and for providing us with this important information.

You can find the repot at

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: promoting sustainable reading!

Random House's CEO is apparently stepping down, but how about his green legacy?

The New York Times reported yesterday that Peter Olson, the CEO of Random House and one of the most powerful figures in American book publishing, will step down in the next few weeks, according to two executives at Bertelsmann, the German media conglomerate that owns the division.

Random House is the world’s largest trade book publisher and naturally it's a big story. This story has also a green side and a very important one - how Mr. Olson's expected departure will influence Random House's paper policy that was initiated in 2006 and enjoyed his full support?

In May 2006 Random House surprised the book industry when they announced that they will raise the proportion of recycled paper used by the company to at least 30% by 2010 from about 3% at the time of the announcement. The reduction in the usage of virgin paper is expected to result in saving of more than 550,000 trees annually once Random House hits the target of the 30% level in 2010.

On Bertelsmann's website you can learn how Mr. Olson felt about the new initiative: "Random House CEO Peter Olson pegs the financial commitment involved at several million dollars. “We believe that our new paper policy is the right step at the right time,” said Olson. “And we hope that other companies who buy large volumes of paper in the marketplace will take similar measures.” "

I can't know it for sure, but this quote as well as other indications makes me feel that Mr. Olson, who runs Random House since 1998, was very supportive of this move. Another indication for that is his involvement with Random House efforts to green up their business. I learned from the 'Book Industry Environmental Trends & Climate Impacts' report that he chairs the company's green committee. This committee, according to the report, has taken more steps to address the environmental impacts of the company's operations. The company's headquarters, for example, received LEED certification.

Random House, according to the report, succeeded to meet its intermediate 2007 target of 10% recycled paper content and is now working on meeting its 2008 goal - 15%.

From the article at the NYT, I understand that Mr. Olson is leaving his position due to lower profits of Random House (operating profit declined 4.9% in 2007) that influence Bertelsmann's financial results.

It is not clear yet who will replace Mr. Olson, but my concern is that the new CEO appointed by Bertelsmann might see the company's green initiative differently - an excess expense rather than an investment that will pay off eventually both financially and strategically.

At the same time it seems that so far Random House is implementing the recycled paper policy with no major costs, so I hope that it will be taken into consideration when the new CEO will look for ideas where she or he can cut the company's expenses and I'm sure they will.

All in all, I hope that even after Mr. Olson will leave the CEO position, his green legacy at Random House will stay there permanently.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: plant a tree for every book you read!