Home
| · Environmental Responsibility | · Sustainability |
| · Child Labor | · Human Rights |
Find out how companies stack up before you support them with your purchase.
 |
Procter & Gamble Company
| Headquarters | Cincinnati, Ohio, USA |
| CEO | A.G. Lafley President and CEO. |
| Total Revenue | $68 Billion US Dollars |
| Net Income | $10 Billion US Dollars |
| Reporting Cycle | Annual |
| Report Quality | G3 Draft |
| Assurance | None |
| [login to edit info] | |
Loading More Information...
Contents
Summary [login to edit summary]
Procter & Gamble has one of the largest and strongest portfolios of trusted brands, including Pampers, Tide, Ariel, Always, Pantene, Bounty, Folgers, Pringles, Charmin, Downy, Iams, Crest, Actonel and Olay.
As the worlds largest producer of consumer goods, Proctor and Gamble has the opportunity and responsibility to lead the way in terms of the sustainability of their operations. This is a mission that the company has taken very seriously and since 1990 they have published a fairly comprehensive sustainability report where they have outlined their goals for their reductions in environmental impact and social responsibility. In 2002, P&G set the goal to reduce their emissions from production by 35%, a very ambitious figure and one that is rare in the industry. In 2006, just four years later, P&G had successfully reached its target and declared that it would reduce emissions an additional 10% by 2012. P&G was able to accomplish this though its 30% reduction in green house gas emissions and keeping energy use constant through a period where revenues jumped 75% and the company acquired two new divisions. The company has also made strides in reducing the material they use in their products by focusing more on concentrated products, such as laundry detergent, which use less material to bring the same cleaning power. P&G’s committed to its sustainability is admirable but it still has significant areas for improvement. For example, from 2006 to 2007, the amount of material from production that was recycled dropped from 59% to 55% and the waste produced from these processes grew by 19%. These figures may not seem large, but given the amount of production they represent, these numbers can add up to a significant amount of waste. Overall, P&G’s efforts in reducing its environmental impact and setting such high, public standards for itself, show the level of commitment they have for creating sustainable practices. They should be looked to as an example in the consumer product industry.
Sector: Personal & Household Products
Related Companies
Discussions
View All Topics | New Discussion Topic
Latest News
- P&G’s Green Goals Criticized - Jan 25, 2008
- Recognizing the Importance of Water to Consumers: The Procter and Gamble Company - Jun 05, 2007
Environment
[login to edit summary]
Indicators
- Reducing Product/Service Impacts (6)
- Greenhouse Gases (15)
- Air Pollution (other than GHG) (1)
- Energy Use (4)
- Biodiversity (4)
- Material Use (3)
- Waste (8)
- Water Use (8)
- Hazardous Spills
- Environmental Compliance (1)
- Environmental Expenditures (1)
P&G has been meeting many of the environmental goals they have set for themselves. Currently, they have been able to surpass their emissions goal of a 35% reduction by 2012. Also, a number of their European factories have made equipment upgrades, and subsequently lowered their natural gas usage, lowered their CO2 emissions and increased their energy efficiency.
After surpassing these goals, P&G reported that improve the environmental profile of operations, by reducing CO2 emissions, energy and water consumption and disposed waste by a further 10 percent per unit of production. This would amount to a total reduction of 40 per cent over the decade 2002-2012.
For unknown reasons, when P&G recently participated in The Carbon Disclosure Project they failed to disclose a number of key figures including the MWh of electricity purchased and consumed by the company globally, as well as the percentage of purchased and consumed MWh of electricity from renewables. In addition, P&G has had some difficulty complying with environmental laws and regulations. They accumulated 80 fines in 2005 and 48 fines in 2006. The majority of these fines were regarding water and transport.
Society
[login to edit summary]
Indicators
P&G takes part in a number of diverse community initiatives in an effort to give back to the people affected by the company’s presence. Some of their initiatives include rebuilding and refurbishing schools in rural areas of Latin America, alerting women of the importance of cancer screenings in Hong Kong, and educating the public about prevention and transmission of the bird flu in bird flu threatened communities.
Unfortunately, P&G’s human rights practices are in question. According to China Labour Watch, employees classified as temporary workers in the Guangzhou P&G factory are forced to work 12 hour shifts six days a week, with just four days off per month. The workers in question do not receive any social insurance, which refers to the health, unemployment and pension insurance guaranteed under Chinese law.
Product Responsibility
[login to edit summary]
Indicators
P&G states that they go to great lengths to ensure the safety of their products, packages and operations for their employees, consumers and the environment. Before their products reach the market they ensure their customers that the products must pass strict safety evaluations. P&G’s records show that over 1,000 employees globally work to ensure safety and regulatory compliance of their products.
However, some parties argue that P&G is not doing everything in their power to ensure customer health and safety. Coop America states that P&G uses PVC packaging, a material dangerous to peoples health and the environment, for a large number of their products. Furthermore Greenpeace criticizes P&G for participating in significant lobbying and protests that have been responsible for “watering down” chemical laws.
Corporate Citizen
[login to edit summary]
Indicators
P&G seems to be making a positive economic impact on the communities it affects. The Company contributes roughly 1.8 billion dollars to both women and minority suppliers, which accounts to 8.5% of P&G’s spending. In their plant in China, factory workers are employed from the area and local professional school graduates often fill higher-level positions. When they deem it appropriate they will promote factory workers in the company to higher-level positions.
P&G has lobbied or made financial contributions to support initiatives that they feel are in the company’s best interest. According to Global Labor Strategies (GLS), P&G is lobbying against China’s Draft Labor Contract Law, which aims to secure minimal labour standards. P&G donated over $80,000 in an effort to fight a law, which would have required companies to label their GMO products. Also, Greenpeace criticized P&G for working to weaken laws governing harmful chemicals in household products.
Procter & Gamble Company
