Currently, many firms actively seek to reduce their environmental impact for both practical and moral reasons. L’Oreal Group is one such company that acknowledges the adverse effects on nature its operations have. Its goals include preventing the negative effects on climate change, natural resources, water quality and accessibility, biodiversity, and animal tests stemming from the firm’s actions (“L’Oréal group: For the planet,” n.d.). This long-term task goes outside of the company’s responsibility, as L’Oreal also intends to lead others to follow its example via massive donations to regenerate damaged ecosystems across the globe (“L’Oréal group: For the planet,” n.d.). Although there are risks involved in this process, the company reveals apparent benefits of such a direction, stating that it has managed to increase its production volume while decreasing emissions (“L’Oréal group: For the planet,” n.d.). In the short term, such actions will require drastic expenditures to switch one’s the production and logistics to sustainable options, yet L’Oreal was able to remain profitable despite the significant changes to its original workflow.
Businesses that produce less pollution appear more appealing to customers. Moreover, there are apparent long-term benefits, such as decreased energy consumption and waste output. Aside from these factors, economic incentives are existing for companies who seek to pursue sustainability. In the United States, pollution emissions are used in calculating additional taxes and fees for many industries(“Economic incentives,” n.d.). Moreover, the government has set several subsidies and tax cuts for companies that actively reduce their environmental impact (“Economic incentives,” n.d.). Therefore, L’Oreal probably selected its current direction not only due to ethical concerns but also due to financial incentives that appear as a worthwhile investment.
References
Economic incentives. (n.d.). US EPA. Web.
L’Oréal group : For the planet. (n.d.). L’Oréal. Web.