 Welcome to this session, where we are going to discuss what are the responses of the funds for the sustainability or how initially they have responded to this sustainability. So, in the last session, we are trying to see what are the drivers, what are the factors, whatever the changes which make sustainability imperative or which make sustainability important from the business point of view. Now, if you remember the last discussion what we are having, we are mostly focusing on four clusters and because of those four clusters, typically the sustainability looks important or sustainability is important and summarize that further. In this slide, we are looking at what are the driver and what are the facilitators for this change. So, mostly this is being summarized as three big trends. One, there is declining resources that we have already established through environmental issues, through the resource depletion, resource degradation and also through the concept of limit. Then second, radical transparency and why there is radical transparency because the civil society there is a power of the civil society, power of the numbers, those who are actively involved were actively engaged in this issue. Second, the magic of low cost communication. So, here if you look at at some point of time we have to, we have to book a truncle to make a call to the other city or the other town. Now, everything is just at the fingertips and also there are different modes to connect with the others. So, somehow this communication has become very low, when we discuss this as a cost perspective, this has become very low cost communication. Third, there is a culture of connectivity and because of these three reasons, this transparency has become very radical, the change in the transparency has become very radical. Then there is an increasing expectation of the stakeholder, this also we are discussing when we are discussing about that why sustainability is important or why sustainability is imperative. So, there is an increasing expectation the investors calling customers rising, regulator acting, employee engaging. Now, what is important over here is that all these drivers whatever making these changes whether the businesses or in specific sense the firm or the company whether they consider this as a threat or whether they consider this as a opportunity that we will check based on their responses. Now, how company typically they respond to environmental concern. So, this has been given by Levi and Matthew in 1996. Interestingly, if you look at few of the company, few of the firms, the way they respond to the environmental concern is through actions such as publishing an environmental report. So, in they do a Earth Day celebration, they do the internal recycling activity and they publish this as a part of their environmental action. Some of the company what they do is that they endorse the proclamation which talks which is having the environmental concern like which meant it there are some proclamation which meant it that company sell product that minimize the adverse environmental impact. And few of the company or many of the company they endorse the business character of the sustainable development. And what is this business character which entered the companies to modify their operation to prevent serious or the irreversible environmental degradation. So, mostly if you look at here these 3 points there are no clarity what are the action being taken to raise the real action those have been taken to respond to the environmental concern. But these are few of the examples what how the company they have responded to the environmental concern. Now, the second point what is more important for the company is that suppose they respond to the environmental concern. How much profit they are going to get out of this or what is the benefit they are going to get out of this. And when few questions were asked to the company that if you are integrating the sustainability into the product how much you are willing to raise your product cost. And the response is that the willingness to raise the product cost is very insignificant because they do not want to take a risk by increasing the product cost because they have in they have they have responded to the sustainability concern. And companies will take measure to reduce pollution as long as they do not have do not involve much effort or cost. So, one way they do not want to raise the product cost because they feel that this is part of the risk associated with this. And second also they will take a measure to reduce the pollution if it is not involving additional effort or additional cost. Then the firm would engage in environmental friendly behavior if they perceive that such behavior would lead to favorably publicity with the potential or higher market share. So, if I summarize all these three points the company's willingness to take sustainability initiatives or to reduce pollution as long as they do not have to increase the product cost significantly as long as that is not giving them a incurring they may cost or additional effort or as long as whatever actions or whatever the effort they are taking this that should give us them some financial benefit or some intangible benefit in the form of the potential let us say reputation or potential market share. Now, possibly this is one part of it, but over a period of time you will say that there is a changing role of corporation. So, we have talked about changing role of the market system, we have talked about how there is a increasing role of the stakeholders, but also there is a changing role of corporation with respect to this sustainability agenda. And what is the changing role this there is a transition from push from the government to undertake the sustainability initiative through the product in their company. Now, company itself saying that this is important for them and they should respond to this. The executives, the firms, the company they respond to the climate change and sustainability and they feel that this is part of their top priority agenda. And why they consider this as a top priority agenda? Because there is an increase in the footprint, valuation, there is a valuation of the clean technology company or there is a valuation of the clean technology in the market, media attention is very high and there is a active engagement from the political and pressure group. So, here there is a importance of the impact what the companies they are doing, there is a valuation if they are doing something good, there is a media attention and there is also engagement from the political and pressure group and that is the reason this becomes as a part of their top priority agenda for the corporation. And the role has changed rather than the regulator or the government pushing them that this is what important and this is what you should pursue the company on their own they feel that this is important. Now, why should they act to be very possibly to be the very first answer to this is that there should be some benefit either tangible or intangible. So, for gaining positive publicity then mitigation of the some of the financial risk what climate change poses to their business and there is a fact which is given by the city group report that minimizing temperature rise would minimize the global GDP loss to the tune of 15 trillion dollar in the coming decade. So, if you are putting something for reducing this that is also reducing our loss associated with this changes and that is shaping the entire the what we are saying the low carbon economy and low carbon is economy is nothing but when we are making a transition from the unsustainable to the sustainable economy. And what is shaping the low carbon economy because we feel that there is a lowering we need to lower the risk there is a protection against price rise and by doing this will be able to say million and boosting brand that is exist in the market. Now, how the perception of risk are being taken by the company or being taken by the firms. Whatever the risk posed by the changes around those are all well documented there are evidence to view, but you will find that this is being well documented that what kind of risk are going to be there for the business. So, there are different group of firms different group of company they respond differently to this. Few they are willing to keep aside the risk for the short term profit. They feel that yes even if there is there are risk associated with this, but at this point the agenda is there are some short term profit. So, possibly after gaining this short term profit I will see what are the risk associated with this. So, there are a group of firms which who feels that for the time being it is easy to keep the risk aside and look for the short term profit. But there are also a bigger group of firms who recognize that there is a considerable risk to their bottom line. They recognize and understand whatever the first hand threat of the disruption mostly the physical risk that climate change will cause to the supply chain market and operations. So, even a few firms they feel or many firms they feel that yes for the short term profit let us ignore the risk associated with that, but there are also significant group of firm significant group of company if you will find through their communication through their action they recognize that there is a considerable risk associated with the bottom line. And mostly in term of the physical risk what the disruption is there is a threat of disruption which will affect their supply chain market and operations. And lastly there are because of all these changes there is also going to be change in the regulation and this regulatory changes that could impact the bottom line. So, one there is a physical risk, second there are regulatory challenge those are going to affect the bottom line of the businesses or bottom line of the firms. And based on that these are the factors which will lead that lead to the fact that why they should respond or why there should be action associated with this. First is the internal factor that we are discussing in the previous case also supply chain disruption, company culture and are the most important issue which needs the adaptation. External factor like extreme weather event, rising temperature, rising sea level apart from other external factor which comes from the other stakeholders. And regulatory changes together with stakeholder and shareholder pressure will have bearing on the private sector engagement. And as company look to incorporate climate change in their day to day business. So, mostly all the factor which leads to these changes leads to these responses lead to these actions either they are internal or they are external. So, external mostly we look at the events which we do not have the control over it and also the stakeholder and the shareholder pressure. Now it is not all about risk, the entire crux of the thing is that whatever the risk over there when we are taking a response to this or when we are taking an action to this, this can be converted into opportunity. And if you look at this is being reported that the value of the low carbon economy that was in 2011-12 is 5.5 trillion dollar. And at that point of time it is growing over 3 percent clip every year. So, look at what would be the size of the low carbon economy. And so, it is not only going to be free, it is not going to be incurred cost to the company. But over a period of time all this risk whenever being addressed properly this is leading to the opportunity. Now few more facts that how this can be converted into opportunity. Making the energy greener could increase the global GDP by 98 trillion US dollar by 2050. So, thus look at the size of the increase in GDP if you are just mean if you are just transiting from the current source of energy to the greener energy. Now boosting the investment in the renewable energy will increase the job to 42 million globally in next 30 years creating the employment opportunity with the healthcare saving 8 times and the cost of investment. 6 million job could be created by embracing the circular economy where huge goods are reused, recycled and upcycled at a greater value. And 1.2 million jobs that is 40 percent jobs on the earth depend on a healthy and stable environment. So, if I summarize this if you are if you are addressing the risk properly it is going to give us the opportunity. Those opportunity sometimes it is tangible where we can get the information we can get the data points sometimes it would be intangible that is in term of the reputation increase reputation and increase bra. And this is also being internalized by the firms that sustainability is going to be the next source of competitive advantage. And how it is going to be the next source of competitive advantage that is through the available environmental friendly technology and also the series of development what we have done in the field in a series of development of innovation what we have done in this space. Then managing sustainability is not all about risk. In one way it is mitigating the risk at the beginning but capitalize that opportunity at a later point of time which gives us the tangible benefit. And what are the intangible benefit there is corporate reputation and brand enhancing this corporate reputation and brand. Then increasing the recruitment because you are considered to be the better company good company the engagement of the stakeholders and also the employer will return because this gives us gives a good workplace for the employer. Now, what the company they should do or how can they get the profit what they do. Few examples like they have to transit to the low carbon economy. Now, we know that the low carbon economy is that where we use the inputs which is giving us which is giving us the less carbon as the outcome. We have already started in our energy in transport sector heavy industry in the other sector. Few of the sector they have responded to the regulation or few of them they have internalized the fact that this is going to the future if they are doing it now they have the first mover advantage or they are at a over a long period of time they are going to get a long term profit out of this. Then optimization of the carbon efficiency of the existing asset and product that is carbon efficiency in infrastructure, carbon efficiency in across the supply chain and finished goods in the final product. So, like if you take the example of supply chain how do you optimize the carbon efficiency. When you are sourcing starting from the sourcing of raw material how do you optimize in the logistic in the production process and finally at the end product disposal we need to see how we can how we can optimize our carbon efficiency. And how do we optimize there are two we optimize one we improve the energy efficiency or we think we see that what are the alternative source of well which is less carbon intensive like improving the energy efficiency is one and second shift to the less carbon intensive source that is nuclear wind solar and geothermal. And the last one is that what the company they typically do and also they get a profit out of it is that development of the new low carbon solution. The typical example is your second generation biofuel and the last scale supply biomass to the power plant. Now, if you summarize the company's responses to this sustainable agenda or sustainability. Now, the responses have been so at some point of time companies they responded to the digital economy. Some point of time when the changes happened they responded to the emerging economy and now they are responding to the climate and sustainable economy. So, they are move they are the transition they are doing from regulation to the sustainable growth. It is not only reacting to the regulation rather they are planning that whatever the growth they are going to achieve how that growth has to be sustainable. Because the principle of economic growth and environmental quality reinforce each other in the long run that we have seen in our previous class when we are looking at the link between environment and economy and this is beautifully explained through the environmental CouchNet curve. And over a period of time the mindset of the corporate has also changed to improve internal system and also just responding to the compliance, responding to the regulation reluctant compliance to moving towards that what we can do beyond compliance to achieve the sustainability and also the products towards safe. So, this will say again that how over a period of time the company they have responded to this concern this environmental concern when we discuss about the corporate strategy. But at this moment the transition or the change in the mindset of the corporate has happened from the reluctant compliance to the beyond compliance and the products towards safe. Now, they have adopted new tools and technology which will assess their impact and performance. So, they have adopted new tools and technology which will give them the their assessment that how much impact they are creating and also what is the corporate performance, their corporate environmental performance they are achieving by doing these changes. They have developed the innovation, they have adopted this innovation to create greater efficiency to eliminate waste to find new source of clean energy in managing companies value chain and consequently the larger economy. They are committing serious amount of management talent resources capital to address the climate change. Then there are initiative to manage the footprint they invest in energy efficiency, renewable energy, incentive based and time bound, abatement goal. There are new carrier and business opportunities. So, you will find there are a lot of sustainability startup in our startup space. They offer you the carbon clean technology, they offer you the carbon clean solution, they offer you the consultancy that how the company they should address their sustainability issues. So, there is a entire space which takes over by the sustainability startup either in term of the providing product, in term of providing technology or providing the consulting and there is a new carrier opportunity all together which is we call as a carbon management which has a spread over the manufacturing sector and taking it to finance and consulting. Then also the company they are participating in awareness about the environmental concern, they are participating in the even the mandatory disclosure and also the voluntary disclosure and many more voluntary initiative like if you look at the sustainability report or business responsibility report is only for the top 100 company, but you will find that many companies are publishing this, they are giving it the energy, water, whatever the consumption they are putting it in their annual report and also they are doing lot of voluntary initiative for this outreach awareness for the sustainability among the different stakeholders. These are the example of the few initial responses by the lead companies. There are many more many more examples, these are few of the initial responses like 3M 3P which is the most popular thing since last 30-35 years they are successfully running that is pollution, prevention, peace. Then Apple they measure and report their life cycle carbon footprint for each one of its product. So, the innovation what they have done is that Dave that is the recycle thing robot designed to recover the rarer material such as earth's magnet and tungsten from the old phone and as well as the percentage of the steel used so that that can be reused. Then they have done also in the innovation in the materials their decision to shift from the two Unibody Aluminium MacBook Pro laptops. Similarly, UPS they tracks incentive page employee on the basic matrix such as GHG emission per 1000 kg of package deliver based on that they give the incentive to the employee and also they focus on the environmental friendly packaging. Similarly, Walmart they use 100 percent renewable energy sources, rustic supplier that had manufacturing or distribution practices that added the carbon emission which create from the create pressure for the supplier to take this sustainability initiative. Then Pepsi America invest they invest in the high energy efficient and low carbon footprint and they have platinum lead certified buildings. Then Nike has focused on reducing waste and minimizing the footprint. Adidas has created a greener supply chain and targeted specific issues like dyeing and eliminating plastic bag. Similarly, few more unilever and organic palm oil and overall waste in the resource footprint. Nestle in areas such as product life cycle, climate, water efficiency and waste, IKEA and H&M they taken the step to address local level condition with supplier with emerging market. Pepsi and Coca-Cola have both ambitious agenda such as increase focus on water stewardship, setting targets on water replenishment. Then Biogen and Novo Nordics have both worked towards energy efficiency, waste reduction and other ecological measures. They have also focused on social impact by partner initiative in the area of health and safety. Similarly, the example of banks which advance the local community with good sustainability practices and by embedding the sustainability in their business process and culture and the automobile BMW and Toyota have made stride on energy efficiency and policy reduction and Tesla the everyone knows about Tesla with their electric cars through their overall footprint. And in this session what we have tried to summarize that how firms they have responded to the sustainability. Although they consider this as a risk associated with that all these changes all these drivers there are risk associated with that but many company they have taken the risk and in the process of mitigating the risk they have converted this to the opportunity which gives the tangible and intangible benefits. Thank you.