Five years out from its 2030 deadline to meet ambitious sustainability targets, Bayer has overhauled its Sustainability Council, adding five new outside experts and parting ways with four members.

Created in 2020 and composed entirely of external individuals, the council advises management on climate, agriculture and health. An independent, non-governing body, it does not have formal decision-making power but meets several times a year with Bayer’s top executives to provide input and scrutiny.

The pharmaceutical and agriculture giant said the shake-up will help internal teams work more directly with outside specialists and “engage even more in specific projects” in the final stretch toward its goals.

“Our approach of working with such renowned experts as part of a Sustainability Council is quite unique in the industry,” said Matthias Berninger, Bayer’s executive vice president and head of public affairs, sustainability and safety. “We strongly believe that the diverse backgrounds and expertise from the different Council members provide tremendous value to help us achieve our ambitious sustainability targets, but also to continuously challenge us to see whether there is even more we can do to address climate change and the implications thereof.”

Sustainability is the strategy 

Bayer has tied its business strategy to sustainability. In 2020, it adopted the mission “Health for all, hunger for none,” pledging to support 100 million smallholder farmers, 100 million women in low- and middle-income countries with modern contraception and 100 million people in underserved communities through self-care by 2030.

It also committed to reduce its own greenhouse‑gas emissions (Scopes 1 and 2) by 42 percent by 2030, to cut its value‑chain emissions (Scope 3) by 25 percent by 2029 and to enable farmers to reduce the greenhouse‑gas footprint of crop production by 30 percent, also by 2030.

Who’s at the table — and why

The revamped line-up brings experience from sustainable agriculture, public health, circular economics and corporate stewardship. The new faces include:

• Facundo Etchebehere, co-founder of NGO Ambition Loop and former head of Danone’s sustainability strategy
• Lisa Lange, an expert in circular economics and stewardship at Federated Hermes Limited
• Philipp Roesler, a physician and a former German vice-chancellor
• H.E. Toyin Saraki, founder of the Wellbeing Foundation Africa and advocate for maternal health
• Cori Wittman Stitt, a fifth-generation farmer and regenerative agriculture specialist

Although they’re uncommon in the pharmaceutical industry, similar expert advisory bodies have been adopted in other sectors. For example, Nestlé convenes a Creating Shared Value Council and Unilever has a Sustainability Advisory Council. Bayer positions its council as distinct because of its integration into its core business strategy.

Etchebehere sees his role as helping Bayer “contact allies, see opportunities and accelerate important transitions, all with the goal of feeding the world within the limits of the planet,” he said in an interview. 

For Wittman Stitt, the link between regenerative farming and corporate sustainability is personal. “On our farm, everything we do is evaluated through the lens of environmental sustainability — through the regeneration of soils and natural resources while producing increasingly healthy, nutrient‑dense food,” she said. “And I see parallels in the conversations and lenses being used at Bayer.”

That perspective is important because agriculture accounts for around a third of global greenhouse‑gas emissions, and Bayer is a major supplier of seeds and crop‑protection products. 

‘Genuine conversation’

To meet its target of cutting the greenhouse‑gas footprint of crop production for its customers by 30 percent, the company will need to work closely with farmers.  

Outside advisors can be a box-checking exercise for companies, Wittman Stitt acknowledged. “But that doesn’t seem to be the case at Bayer. There is genuine conversation, genuine curiosity, genuine requests for that honest, critical, constructive feedback. Not just to be a ‘yes’ council but to really pressure-test targets and ask if these things we’re doing pass the litmus test of these broader targets.”

“I’m confident it’s taken seriously,” said Roesler, who is also a former managing director at the World Economic Forum. “We had more than an hour talk with the CEO, and you could really see it’s not an add‑on like a charity or foundation. It’s a part of the business strategy at Bayer.”

The will may be there, but turning it into timely action is another challenge. “I’m worried that changes due to climate change in agriculture are happening way faster than technological solutions,” Roesler said. “We have to speed up all the processes and have a short line between those who are on the ground facing challenges and urgently need help and those who are trying to provide help.”

Contradictory signals

Meeting the 2030 targets will be daunting. The company must cut emissions across thousands of suppliers, invest $628.65 million in energy efficiency at its own plants, roll out digital tools and regenerative practices to farmers and expand access to contraception and self‑care in low- and middle-income countries.

The Science Based Targets initiative recently validated Bayer’s climate pathway, which aligns with keeping global warming well below 2 degrees Celsius. Bayer has also received an “A” rating from Carbon Disclosure Project for its climate and water management commitments. 

But the company’s carbon footprint remains vast: annual Scope 1 and 2 emissions were nearly 3 million metric tons at the last count, with Scope 3 just under 8 million. More than 70 percent of Scope 3 comes from purchased goods and services, and changing supplier behavior is notoriously difficult.

The company has launched a “Scope 3 Accelerator Program” to engage suppliers on renewable energy and efficiency, but the effects remain to be seen.

On the agricultural side, enabling farmers to cut emissions by 30 percent will require scaling regenerative practices, digital tools and climate-resilient crops. Yet these initiatives have drawn criticism. In 2023, for example, Spanish farmers accused Bayer of “a textbook example of greenwashing” after it promoted the weedkiller glyphosate under the banner of regenerative agriculture, Sustainable Views reported.

This April, Bayer reaffirmed its climate commitments but blocked shareholders from voting on its Climate Transition and Transformation Plan, citing “concerns around timing” amid an international ESG backlash, according to Responsible Investor. Bayer’s largest bloc of investors — representing 32 percent of stock — is in North America.

Coffee, not chocolate

Regardless whether Bayer hits every target, its Sustainability Council offers one model for embedding sustainability into corporate governance: independent yet integrated, drawing on expertise in areas from regenerative farming to global finance, and with direct access to the leaders in the company. 

“You can only have impact if sustainability is part of your business model, not just a nice to have when you have enough profit,” Roesler said. “It’s the coffee, not the chocolate topping. Every company should integrate sustainability into its core business.”

“The long‑term success of a company is only possible with a clear sustainability strategy,” Etchebehere said. “As a member of the Sustainability Council, I will work to integrate a proper conversation into the business, which means empowering the solutions but acknowledging what is wrong and what needs to change.”

The post Bayer revamps Sustainability Council, looking to deliver on its ambitious targets appeared first on Trellis.

Tennis legend Venus Williams turned heads at this year’s U.S. Open, carrying a high-fluff shearling tennis racket case by small Venice Beach brand ERL. She flashed more sheep-forward fashion while playing with John McEnroe in a black Merino wool dress by Brooklyn designer Luar.

For more than 10,000 years, wool was an OG outdoor fiber. Like Merino sheep, people benefit from wool’s temperature-regulating properties in extreme cold and heat. Athletes like its moisture-deflecting, odor-resistant properties.

In a few short decades, though, stretchy synthetic blends became the materials to beat in sports. Pro leagues play in highly engineered polyester, nylon, spandex and elastane. Lightweight, fast-drying and highly specialized blends endure friction, torque and frequent washings. Adidas, Nike, Puma and Under Armour are continuing their commitments to synthetics for uniforms, but also investing in recycling systems and startups to slim the virgin petro-fibers from their climate footprints.

And with those synthetics making up two-thirds of all fashions, many younger adults have little experience with wool, thinking of the itch factor of rougher fibers rather than pliable, cushiony Merino.

A ‘breakout’ for wool?

But now, sustainability experts see the pendulum swinging back.

“Anything that one of the Williams sisters is promoting could be a breakout moment in tennis products,” said Cynthia Power, a former Eileen Fisher director who co-hosts the Untangling Circularity podcast.

Wool makes up just less than 1 percent of the global fiber mix, according to the International Wool Textile Organization (IWTO). That was about a million metric tons’ worth in 2023, based on a count by the Textile Exchange.

However, the demand for natural textiles will nudge the annual wool market from $43.9 billion in 2025 to $52.6 billion by 2030, with annual growth just under 4 percent, according to Mordor Intelligence.

And while brand giants are not yet championing wool, numerous small companies are using the material, casting it as free of the chemical and carbon burdens of oil-based fibers. The list of these makers includes Mons Royale, Ibex, Devold, Woolx, Woolly, Wool&, Ryker, Röjk Superwear, Ridge Merino and Duckworth.

“We’re excited to see Merino on a global stage,” said VF Corporation’s Alicia Chin, director of sustainability and social impact for emerging brands. VF, the parent of The North Face and Vans, snapped up wool labels Icebreaker in 2018 and Smartwool in 2011. Chin predicted that wool will reach the mainstream as companies further enhance its quick-dry time, moisture-wicking and cooling properties.

Smartwool, launched by ski instructors in 1994, helped to popularize fine Merino. The label’s formula blends in recycled polyester and Tencel fiber. VF does not break out sales of sub-brands or fibers, but Smartwool took in $31 million in 2024, according to ECDB analytics.

Since 1965, Woolmark of Australia has represented wool producers. To elevate the fiber, it has collaborated with a wide spectrum of designers. Among the examples of wool in high-sweat settings:

• Running: Optim technology, by Woolmark with Nanshan Group, stretches 100-percent fine Merino fibers before spinning, for a super-dense, windbreaking and water-resistant outerwear fabric. In 2023, a Woolmark-sponsored ultramarathon in Korea clad runners in Optim jackets made by The North Face. Wool also appears in shoes: Circle Sportswear’s Supernatural Runner, the Salomon PULSAR PRG KNIT and numerous Allbirds.
• Sailing: The Luna Rossa Prada Pirelli sailing team wore wool at the Americas’s Cup last year.
• Golf: The TaylorMade label, which partners with Tiger Woods, has marketed Merino apparel in South Korea.
• Swimming: Several companies are making wool swimsuits, with ads showing Olympic swimmers.

“Wool truly is an ideal fiber” for sports and recreation, said Nica Rabinowitz, who manages brand engagement and supply chain efforts at the nonprofit Fibershed. “A lot of these synthetic fibers are trying to recreate what wool does, but are not able to do it as well and likely never will.”

Wool’s edge

Merino base layers outperformed synthetics for regulating body temperatures in hiking, cycling and golf, according to a study by North Carolina State University (which was funded by Woolmark).

Source: Devold

“Wool already has a meaningful share in base layers and multi-sport, next-to-skin applications,” said John Roberts, the managing director of Woolmark in London. He foresees wool helping brands to phase out PFAS forever chemicals and combat microplastics.

Engineering wool to create outerwear without toxic water-proof coatings also aligns with regulatory pressure, Roberts added. Anti-PFAS laws are already on the books in New York and California, and spreading throughout Europe. As evidence builds about the health harms and prevalence of microfiber pollution, plastic textiles pose future risks to brands and retailers.

The sustainability question

Australia, China and New Zealand are wool production hotspots, and industrial transparency is scant. However, sustainability-driven brands emphasize their vetting of smallholder suppliers. Smartwool, for one, sources 85 percent from ZQRX-approved “regenerative” farms in New Zealand. Wool meeting the Responsible Wool Standard (RWS) for animal and land welfare practices, grew in market share slightly in 2023, to 4.8 percent over 4.2 percent a year earlier.

The sustainability picture for wool is complicated. Not least, sheep require ample land for grazing and emit a lot of methane.

Wool boosters complain, however, that lifecycle analyses unfairly depict polyester and its ilk as less impactful. They point out orange-to-apples equations of the emissions of petrochemical fiber production against those from wool, which remain within the natural carbon cycle.

“One challenge is that natural fibers are often assessed on the wrong terms using models that don’t account for their ability to regenerate land or to biodegrade,” said Roberts of Woolmark. “Regenerative grazing sheep, for example, can improve biodiversity, store carbon and build soil health, so the farm itself becomes part of the circular system.”

The recycling rate for wool is only 6 percent, but that’s much higher than for other fibers. Only 1 percent of fabrics overall were recycled from waste textiles. And although 12.5 percent of polyester comes from recycled sources, most derives from things like plastic bottles or fishing nets rather than fashion waste.

Recycling 100 percent wool often results more in stuffing than sweaters. (The word “shoddy” originally described rags recycled from wool 200 years ago.) Blended fibers are generally impossible to recycle to their original integrity, and wool blends are no exception.

However, when wool waste naturally biodegrades, it can fix nitrogen and feed the soil, according to Rabinowitz of Fibershed. “Because it is so great for soil health it is a wonderful renewable resource.”

Source: Devold

Can wool scale in athletic wear?

There’s a bottom-line reason why polyester fleece, which Patagonia brought to market in 1979, has eclipsed the sheep-based original.

“Synthetics for the most part can be 20 percent less expensive,” said Tsui Pappas of the consultancy Pappas Creative in New York. “There is pressure from the C-suite at every brand to have higher margins.”

But apparel businesses can and should adjust cost or margins to prioritize natural fibers, according to Pappas, the former director of sustainability at Alice + Olivia. She points to the food industry: Consumer messaging about the value of organic produce eventually led to its mass adoption, and prices dropped when demand scaled.

And with enough development and support, biobased synthetics could address plastic shedding and lack of compostability in fabric blends. Advanced knitting technologies for wool, as well as blends with algae and other next-gen fibers, may also elevate sustainability and performance.

“We will continue our commitment to wool because we see its strengths: tech, versatility and legacy,” said Raul Lopez, founder of the Luar label, in a statement. “It’s why Venus chose wool for her U.S. Open kit.”

The post Why Venus Williams wore wool at the U.S. Open appeared first on Trellis.

The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has been urged not to exclude nature-based solutions from its net-zero standard. The plea comes from more than 40 experts who fear the organization will overly favor engineered solutions, such as direct air capture.

At the heart of the group’s argument, made in an open letter published last week, is opposition to the idea that because fossil carbon emissions originate from long-term geological stores, they should only be counterbalanced by removals that can be sequestered for a thousand or more years. The SBTi’s Corporate Net Zero Standard is undergoing revisions and the current draft suggests using this “like-for-like” principle to help determine which carbon credits companies can use.

“It’s just a fundamentally flawed concept,” said Joe Fargione, North America science director for The Nature Conservancy, who signed the letter along with 12 colleagues from the organization. 

‘False binary’

The signatories’ objections to like-for-like include the “false binary” that defines permanent storage as “either 1,000 years or failure.” They argue instead for a focus on “durability,” which encompasses how long the carbon is likely to remain stored and the mechanisms used to deal with potential reversals. 

In this view, credits from storage mechanisms with relatively high risk of reversal — such as forests, which can release carbon back to the atmosphere in the event of fire — can be used in net-zero frameworks provided adequate insurance mechanisms are in place. These include holding back some credits from sale so that they can be used to compensate for potential future losses.

The letter also warns of the opportunity cost of excluding nature-based solutions. That’s partly an issue of scale: The authors peg the removals potential of these solutions as 11 gigatons of carbon dioxide a year over the next decade, around a fifth of current annual total global emissions. In addition, investing in nature helps safeguard existing forests, which, if lost, could release enormous amounts of carbon.

All about the claim

One expert often seen as an advocate of like-for-like is Robert Höglund, head of climate strategy and carbon dioxide removal at Milkywire, a Swedish company that helps businesses meet climate and nature commitments. He told Trellis that he agrees with many of the arguments in the letter. “There’s a big miscommunication around when permanent carbon removal is supposed to be used,” he said.

Höglund argued for a focus on how the credits associated with climate solutions are used. In an emissions trading scheme, for instance, companies can purchase credits instead of reducing emissions. The SBTi also allows companies to use credits to offset hard-to-abate emissions that remain at the end of a journey to net zero. In these situations, said Höglund, permanent removal is required because the credits are a substitute for emissions reductions.

Many other companies, however, want to use credits to compliment ongoing reduction efforts. In this case, credits purchases are akin to a tax that companies pay because of their ongoing emissions. “If it’s just a tax you pay on your way to zero? Then I don’t see it has to be permanent,” said Höglund “Then you should look at just what’s most cost-effective.”

Consultation on the current draft of the SBTi’s net-zero standard closed last month. The organization will next pilot the standard with a small number of companies, with a view to finalizing the document next year.

The post Don’t exclude nature from carbon credit rules, a group of experts tell the SBTi appeared first on Trellis.

Chief Sustainability Officer Jaycee Pribulsky has chosen to leave Nike, ending nearly nine years of leadership there, which included directing external engagement and leading global manufacturing and sourcing.

She is departing the Beaverton, Oregon, brand to return east for an undisclosed new role. Via LinkedIn on Sept. 9, Pribulsky announced the “bittersweet decision to leave the company for an incredible opportunity back in New York.” Her post attracted more than 90 positive comments from acquaintances and former colleagues across her career spanning high-profile public and private institutions, including the White House under President Bill Clinton.

“It has been an amazing run working with awesome teammates,” she wrote. “And I just want to say thank you. Nike is about the people and the teams. And there are too many to list here. I’ll be cheering you on!”

Without a successor named, it’s unclear who will continue to lead perhaps the giant apparel brand’s “move to zero” effort to center carbon, waste, water and circularity toward net zero. That strategy replaced the original “moonshot” focus set by former CSO Hannah Jones in 2017.

Her Nike roles

Pribulsky brought deep supply chain leadership experience when she assumed Nike’s top sustainability job in February 2024. That was three months after an epic sustainability shakeup at the end of 2023, when Nike shed nearly one-third of its sustainability staff.

The CSO slot had been vacated by Noel Kinder after some five and a half years. (In May, he joined Lululemon as senior vice president of sustainability.)

Nike has experienced a high amount of turnover of late. In October 2024, the company hired Elliott Hill to replace CEO John Donahoe. Chief Innovation Officer John Hoke retired after three decades this past spring, around the same time that Noah Murphy-Reinhertz became senior director of sustainable product design. Several months ago, Alice Hartley became Nike’s new circularity director.

When she came to the CSO desk, Pribulsky had been vice president of global footwear sourcing and manufacturing for more than three years.

As vice president of sustainable manufacturing and sourcing before that, she was responsible for carrying forward more than two decades of work to prevent the sweatshop conditions that had been exposed by activists and addressed by co-founder Phil Knight in the 1990s. From 2018 to 2020, Pribulsky was responsible for environmental, social and governance efforts in 500 contract factories employing almost 1 million workers in 40 nations.

Before Nike

Pribulsky’s career after graduating from American University began in public service, with three years at the now-shuttered U.S. Agency for International Development. She then joined the Clinton White House for three years, first as a scheduler for First Lady Hillary Clinton and later as a special assistant to the president.

After completing an MBA at Columbia University, Pribulsky worked at nonprofit Seedco before moving through corporate community affairs and relations roles in the early aughts. At United Technologies, she created its first corporate responsibility reporting strategy. At Citigroup, she focused on community relations in emerging markets. As vice president of global citizenship leading corporate social responsibility at Waggener Edstrom, her clients included Microsoft and Chevron.

Pribulsky then stayed for six years at the consulting firm Context Group, becoming managing director and head of its America practice. The firm assisted numerous corporate giants including Cisco, International Paper and PepsiCo.

Before departing New York to join Nike in 2017, Pribulsky briefly led communications and outreach at the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures.

“Look for the spaces where there’s work to be done, but no one’s raising their hand,” Pribulsky told her alma mater, Columbia Business School, this spring. “Maybe it’s not their job or they don’t want to do it, but if done it can make an impact.”

The post Nike CSO leaves role after 19 months appeared first on Trellis.

The opinions expressed here by Trellis expert contributors are their own, not those of Trellis.​

Despite their talent, a brand wouldn’t charge a sustainability team with launching a new business or product line — so why would it charge a team with implementing a resale program? 

Unfortunately, there’s a common misperception that sustainability teams should lead resale programs because it’s a sustainability initiative, and that the existence of a resale program makes the brand more sustainable, so additional resourcing is not required. 

This results in many resale programs stagnating after launch. Instead, leaders need to allocate resources and support to financially scale successful resale programs to achieve sustainability benefits and align the program’s trajectory with being a driver of new business, customer loyalty, customer acquisition and supply chain resilience. This requires the skills and expertise of teams who are accountable for brand growth and profitability. These teams need to work in conjunction with sustainability teams who can help develop the program guardrails to avoid problematic greenwashing. 

Integrating resale into business and innovation 

Integrating resale into a brand’s core business and brand is paramount to accelerating program growth. Executive approval to enlist a cross-functional team usually is the start, and given competition for increasingly limited resources, it’s critical that brand leadership understands the potential opportunities and value resale can provide:

• Supply chain resilience: Create an alternative revenue stream that is less impacted by natural disasters and tariffs.
• Market share: Compete for more price-sensitive customers without sacrificing quality, by simply selling the same items again at a lower price. 
• Consumer engagement: Interact with existing customers and attract new customers to a brand. 
• Merchandising: Create the ultimate sale with great prices and exciting treasure-hunting opportunities. 

Additionally, the role of resale as an innovation driver is often overlooked. Jen Yue, SVP of Tapestry & Coach Strategy, illustrates this with Coach’s experience with its circularity programming. “Coach (Re)Loved was the spark that ignited Coachtopia,” a distinct sub-brand designed to operate independently from Coach to “rapidly prototype new products, processes and ideas.” Launched in 2023, Coachtopia doubled its business and reached profitability within a year, ranking as the sixth most-innovative apparel company by Fast Company this year.

Ready, set, go … where?

Once a cross-functional team has been established to lead resale, specific targets, especially revenue and sales, are needed to hold teams accountable. These metrics are nearly impossible to benchmark across peer and competitor resale programs because brands don’t disclose this information. 

This results in most brands hesitating to set financial goals for resale programs because they have no idea what a competitive or reasonable goal would be. H&M recently set a precedent by announcing in its 2024 sustainability report, that sales of secondhand goods had doubled in 2024 to 0.6 percent of total sales, from 0.3 percent in 2022. H&M should be applauded for this transparency. More disclosure of resale revenue goals and progress would help brands gauge their own progress and ideally spark beneficial competition.

But without comparable benchmarks to draw from, brands can use the following approaches to developing resale revenue goals: 

• Product and category track records: By evaluating the path to profitability of new product and category launches, brands can set realistic financial growth goals and timelines for resale programs. 
• Industry benchmarks: Use industry-specific reports such as ThredUp’s annual report for secondhand apparel to understand growth rates over time to build a program forecast.
• Impact forecasting: Use secondhand product footprints and the resale program’s displacement rate to forecast the environmental savings of a resale program under different growth scenarios, helping to inform program financial goals. 

Building a P&L that generates insights

Although a profit-and-loss statement is the most direct way to track the progress of a resale program, there can be unforeseen challenges. In the early years, the lines are often blurry about what should be considered a true cost of the program and it can be unclear and difficult to assign operating costs and expenses. For example, the resale program may not yet have a dedicated team, and instead many people are contributing a portion of their time to getting the program off the ground; or it might use existing systems and warehouse space in a piggy-back approach. 

In general, at the beginning of a resale program, take a simple “apples to apples” accounting approach with clear-cut expenses and sales attributed to it — keeping in mind that the value of the P&L is that it generates insights and learnings about where a program is failing and succeeding so that teams can iterate and adjust.

A challenge specific to resale P&Ls is how to account for the incremental spend of gift cards issued to sellers in the trade-in/buy-back process. The value issued on the gift card is the cost of product acquisition and will be accounted for in the cost of goods sold. When a seller uses the gift card, they may spend beyond the value of the card. 

Adding this revenue to the resale P&L will definitely make the program look financially stronger and more attractive; however, this can be greenwashing the P&L. This is because these gift cards usually can only be used to purchase new items, which perpetuates the linear business model because revenue is being derived from the sale of new items, despite the gift card originating in a circular business model. If the gift card can be used to buy secondhand items, then those transactions can be captured in the resale program sales. 

Expanding the understanding resale value

Along with traditional accounting tools, teams can set up KPIs that measure the additional business values of the program. For example, brands that measure the percentage of resale transactions coming from new customers report this number in the range of 10 to 25 percent. With this data, a business team can compare the cost of acquiring customers through its resale program versus other approaches to customer acquisition. Gaining these insights help build a holistic understanding of the challenges and opportunities of a resale program. 

With a robust understanding of the benefits and challenges of a retailer’s resale program, a committed cross-functional team and a north star to point to, brands are well-equipped to develop successful programs — and expand beyond resale with other circular business models that help build a more responsible business and a more sustainable, circular economy.

The post How to set financial goals for a resale program appeared first on Trellis.