In a resort town at the tip of the Sinai peninsula, world leaders are gathering this week to determine how, exactly, they will meet the climate goals they set last year in Glasgow.
The meeting is officially titled Conference of Parties 27, or COP27. It is a convoluted name that refers to all the entities that are “parties” to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. This is the 27th time they have met.
At the opening ceremony on Sunday, UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned of rapidly approaching “tipping points that will make climate chaos irreversible.”
Highlighting the failure of the global community to curb global greenhouse gas emissions, he told thousands of state leaders, diplomats and officials: “We are on the highway to climate hell with our feet on the accelerator.”
But governments are not the only entities present in Sharm El-Sheikh this week. Nor are they the only point of leverage for climate action. Brands also descended on the Egyptian city during the week—and not everyone was happy about it.
The brand zone
Delegations carry out the work of multilateral negotiations inside the convention center. This is called the Blue Zone.
There is also a sideshow across the street in the Green Zone. There businesses, non-governmental organizations, academics and artists are invited to host their own booths or events. Groups meet and promote their own climate messages in a new lotus flower-shaped event center.
This is where some of the event’s leading brand advocates will announce their sustainability initiatives. Vodafone, Microsoft, Boston Consulting Group, GM, Infinity Power, Egyptair, Bloomberg, Afreximbank and Orascom Construction are “key partners,” according to the COP website. IBM and Siemens are “partners,” while Siemens Energy, Egyptian real estate firm Sodic, Coca-Cola, Cisco, Google, Mashreq, Adsero and Hassan Allam Holding are listed as “supporters.”
COP27 organizers did not respond to Adweek’s request for clarification on what the various categories mean. The organizers also declined to say how much each brand paid for their sponsorship slot.
Deals and steals
Last year at COP26 in Glasgow, businesses worked with official negotiators to develop their own plans to address climate change. The agreed goal of curbing emissions has come down to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees celsius—a target that will no longer be reached, according to reports.
More than a dozen deals have been struck with private sector players to finance low-emission energy and climate technology solutions. Other agreements have pledged to improve climate and sustainability related to financial disclosure and to stop deforestation, to name a few.
This year, observers told Adweek that they hope to see more pacts emerge from the talks in addition to clear and transparent updates from the alliances made last year.
A major focus of this year’s COP, however, has to do with who will pay for the loss and damage that climate change inflicts on poorer and more vulnerable countries.
This marks the first time that an African country has hosted the talks. African leaders and activists hope this means more focus on supporting the continent as it continues to deal with deadly droughts, rising sea levels, coastal erosion and food insecurity- all of which are exacerbated by climate change.
‘doing shit’
So, what should brands do in the midst of all this?
They should pay attention. But they may not need to do much in the way of advertising, according to some observers.
Despite the stated intention among brands, the priorities of how they show their approach to combating climate change are more desirable, according to Selina Donald, founder and chief advisor of the sustainability consultancy that The Bulb.
“I don’t see how a large amount of money can be spent on building an exhibition to show what brands are doing in terms of sustainability,” said Donald. “The COP should just be about the conference room with the governments and key speakers and that’s it.”
However, Donald is working with Microsoft on the brand’s COP27 presence. He advised the software giant on how to keep its emissions low and what materials to use for its Green Zone booth. The booth has a device bar and a small meeting area, according to the brand, which is made using Forest Stewardship Council-certified plywood and recycled vinyl flooring.
The goal, a Microsoft spokesperson said via email, is to “help people and organizations better understand the transformative potential for technology to help solve today’s many complex climate challenges. ”
On Monday, the brand announced that it will expand its AI for Good Research Labs in Kenya and Egypt in an effort to improve climate data on the continent.
That type of activity represents a growing awareness among brands that they must make tangible efforts to mitigate the effects of climate change. On a practical level, brands appear to recognize some of the devastating effects uncontrolled global warming can have on business.
“The good news is that more and more leaders—especially in Europe—are considering sustainability and climate change as the No.
“With rising energy costs, companies are realizing that this is affecting their business models now and they need to act on it now,” Husson continued. “I see a trend where companies stop considering the environment as only E in an institutional ESG approach, but as a real opportunity to reinvent themselves and create a new competitive advantage.”
Coca-Cola was kicked out
The central risk for brand involvement in a climate event is, of course, allegations of hypocrisy.
Coca-Cola’s sponsorship has come under intense opposition from activists, including a petition to kick the brand out of the COP. Led by sustainability consultant and environmental activist Georgia Elliot-Smith, the petition garnered nearly 240,000 signatures ahead of the talks. Last week, the US-based environmental groups Beyond Plastics and Just-Zero also issued an official call for the COP to reject Coca-Cola as a sponsor.
“COP27 must focus on solutions for combating the catastrophic climate crisis,” Judith Enck, president of Beyond Plastics and former EPA regional administrator, said in a statement. “How can a major plastic polluter be in a position to preside over an important climate conference? It is long past time that our country’s policy makers commit to holding corporations that responsible for the impact of their products and policies on our climate and environment.
In an annual ranking of the brands that contribute the most to global plastic pollution, Coca-Cola is ranked No. 1 in the last four years.
Coca-Cola did not respond to Adweek’s request for comment for this story. While it has been promised to make all packaging reusable, recyclable or compostable by 2025, an October report by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation shows that the goal is unlikely to be met. The report tracks progress towards a “global commitment” to address plastic pollution and has been signed by 500 companies including Coca-Cola. It also shows that the total use of plastic has increased by 5% since 2018.
“I’m absolutely disappointed that the world’s biggest plastic polluter is allowed to sponsor the talks,” Belinda Noble, founder of the climate-focused communications network Comms Declare, told Adweek.
“[It’s as if] The UN knows nothing that plastic production can lock in high greenhouse gas emissions even as the overall demand for oil and gas decreases,” he said. “Certainly any COP sponsor should be a beacon to other companies on how to do things right.”
