Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube
Home Blog Page 8341

Joel Embiid’s big night lifts Sixers over Jazz

JOEL Embiid scored 40 points and grabbed 19 rebounds to lift the host Philadelphia 76ers past the Utah Jazz (131-123) in overtime on Wednesday.

It was the fifth game this season that Embiid posted at least 40 points and 10 rebounds in a game.

Tobias Harris scored 11 of his 22 points in overtime to go along with 10 rebounds and Ben Simmons added 17 points. Seth Curry contributed 14 and Dwight Howard and Shake Milton had 12 each.

The Sixers capitalized on a late 8-0 run in overtime to seal the victory.

Donovan Mitchell led the Jazz with 33 points and eight rebounds, but was ejected in the final minute of overtime after receiving his second technical foul.

Bojan Bogdanović and Mike Conley added 18 apiece and Joe Ingles had 16 for the Jazz, who hit 21 of 44 treys.

The Jazz built a 13-point lead midway through the second quarter before the Sixers responded with a 6-0 run to close within 46-39.

Embiid kept the Sixers close with 20 points, but the Sixers trailed 61-52 at halftime. It was the 18th time this season that Embiid scored at least 20 in any half.

Curry knocked down a trey, just the team’s second of the game, and Philadelphia closed within 72-69 with 7:20 to go in the third.

Mitchell completed a spectacular three-point play to extend the Utah advantage to 81-75. Mitchell was bumped by Embiid in midair, but somehow contorted his body to hit the shot.

Furkan Korkmaz keyed an early 11-3 run in the fourth and the Sixers went ahead 95-92.

Rudy Gobert (12 points, nine rebounds) threw down an alley-oop dunk with 6:26 left and the Jazz pulled ahead 103-99. Embiid dropped in a trey with 3:56 remaining to give the Sixers a 107-106 lead.

Mitchell responded with a 3-pointer and Utah led by two.

Gobert’s dunk with 2:17 to go extended the Jazz advantage to 114-109.

Embiid came back with a layup and two free throws to cut the deficit to 114-113 with 1:47 remaining.

Embiid’s trey with 5.9 seconds left tied the game at 118 and forced overtime. — Reuters

Barcelona reach Copa final with epic comeback win over Sevilla

BARCELONA — Barcelona pulled off a stirring comeback to overturn a two-goal deficit and reach the Copa del Rey final, beating Sevilla 3-0 after extra time in Wednesday’s semifinal second leg to go through 3-2 on aggregate.

Danish forward Martin Braithwaite grabbed the decisive goal with a scrappy diving header early in the extra period after Ousmane Dembélé had given Barça the lead in the 12th minute and Gerard Piqué had levelled the tie deep in added time, moments after Fernando had been sent off for Sevilla.

Sevilla, who won the first leg at home 2-0, deployed uncharacteristically negative tactics yet they wasted a glorious chance to make it 1-1 in the second half and effectively kill the tie when Lucas Ocampos squandered a penalty.

Barça will meet either Levante or Athletic Bilbao in the final in Seville on April 17, looking to lift the Copa del Rey for a record-extending 31st time.

Barca had won 2-0 at Sevilla on Saturday to go second in La Liga, leading their coach Ronald Koeman to declare his side had every chance of turning the tie around. But their preparations were overshadowed when former President Josep Maria Bartomeu was arrested on Monday and the club’s Camp Nou offices were raided in a probe related to allegations of improper management and business corruption.

The club will elect a new leader on Sunday and the three candidates, Joan Laporta, Victor Font and Toni Freixa, were all present in the Presidential box to witness the comeback.

Koeman described the night as his best since he took charge of the team last August and set his sights on lifting his first trophy as Barça coach after plenty of successes as a player under Johan Cruyff. — Reuters

Investigators probe ‘black box’ in car crashed by golfer Tiger Woods

THE Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department is examining data from the “black box” recorder of the car driven by Tiger Woods last week when the champion golfer lost control of the vehicle and seriously injured his leg and ankle in a one-car crash.

Investigators would not say what they were looking for, but in the days after the crash have been trying to determine what caused Woods, 45, to lose control of the gray Genesis sport utility vehicle.

“Traffic collision investigators are continuing the investigation into the cause of the collision involving Mr. Woods,” Deputy Trina Schrader said in a statement e-mailed to Reuters on Wednesday.

“On March 1, 2021, they executed a search warrant to retrieve data from the vehicles ‘black box.’ At this time, there is no additional information regarding the recovered data.”

Woods was negotiating a curved, downhill stretch of highway that authorities have said was notoriously dangerous when the luxury SUV veered across the opposite lanes, collided with a road sign and rolled several times.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva said last week that he did not anticipate filing any criminal charges in connection with the accident.

Sheriff’s deputies responding to the wreck found no indication that Woods had been under the influence of alcohol or drugs and said he was “lucid” following the accident.

“This remains an accident and an accident is not a crime,” Villanueva said at a news briefing. “They do happen, unfortunately.”

Woods, celebrated as one of golf’s all-time greats, had to be pried from the crumpled SUV through the shattered windshield.

Woods is the only modern professional to win all four major golf titles in succession, taking the US Open, British Open and PGA Championship in 2000 and the Masters title in 2001, a feat that became known as the “Tiger Slam.”

His 15 major titles stand second only to the record 18 won by Jack Nicklaus.

But he has suffered years of injuries and undergone multiple surgeries on his back and knees, limiting his ability to compete. — Reuters

Didal Women’s Asia Skater of the Year

TOP Philippine skateboarder Margielyn Didal was awarded Women’s Asia Skater of the Year this week in the 2020 Asia Skate Awards. The 21-year-old Cebu native beat out seven other finalists. In winning the award, the Asian Games and Southeast Asian Games gold medalist received $1,500. Ms. Didal also topped the Style for Miles and Fastest Feet in the East categories. Currently ranked 14th in the world, Ms. Didal is training in Cebu and hopes to qualify for the Tokyo Olympics later this year.

Local beach volleyball players credit stint in BVR for their growth

Jackie Estoquia and DM Demontaño have become household names in the country’s beach volleyball scene and they credit their stint in Beach Volleyball Republic (BVR) for their growth.

Hailing from Iloilo, the two players made it big in 2016 when they became regulars in the BVR on Tour, consistently churning out podium finishes in every leg.

“BVR is one of the popular beach volleyball leagues in the country. It paved the way for us players from the province to show what we can do in the sport, and against good players from Manila,” said Ms. Estoquia in Filipino as she shared the big role the league has played in her career. 

“The BVR really honed our skills, allowing us to play in the National Championship where you really have to play your best,” she added.

And their steady good showing in the league, Ms. Demontaño said, prepared them to compete in other local leagues and international tournaments. 

“Playing in BVR was one of the turning points of my beach volleyball career because it paved the way for local players like me to show our skills and play against the best players locally and internationally,” said Demontaño, who currently plays for Sta. Lucia along with Ms. Estoquia.

Misses Estoquia and Demontaño are just two of the many BVR players coming from the Visayas who are steadily making a name for themselves, the others being Negros Occidental products Alexa Polidario, Erjane Magdato and Jennifer Cosas.

BVR was formed in 2015 by former Ateneo players, led by Philippine National Volleyball Federation board member Charo Soriano.

It organizes beach volleyball tournaments in different parts of the country with the end view of growing the sport among Filipinos.

Just like most in the local sports scene, BVR was affected by the pandemic last year but is planning to make a comeback in 2021. – Michael Angelo S. Murillo

Jazz vs Sixers

Even with yesterday’s loss, the Jazz stayed at least three full games clear of the rest of the National Basketball Association heading into the All-Star break. That they were angling for victory despite the comfortable cushion and with the much-needed respite in the horizon would be an understatement. They didn’t simply want to bounce back from a relatively poor outing against the Pelicans. They wanted to get the better of the Sixers, their pace-setting counterparts in the East. And they could well have done so had they not fallen prey to both outstanding hoops and eminently avoidable mistakes.

Interestingly, the match likewise showcased the unique predilections of the opposing head coaches. Displaying utter confidence in the system that has put the Jazz at the top of league standings, Quin Snyder went with few adjustments in crunchtime. Meanwhile, Doc Rivers saw fit to feed Most Valuable Player candidate Joel Embiid in the post again and again under threat of two-time Defensive Player of the Year Rudy Gobert’s coverage. The irresistible force won over the immovable object, helping the Sixers erase a five-point deficit in the final 2:18 of regulation and setting up overtime via a stunning display of talent and presence of mind.

The extra period was much of the same, but, with Embiid gassed, Rivers instead turned to Tobias Harris on the left quartercourt. And, again, Snyder refused to send help as counter to the otherwise-predictable isolation plays. With Bojan Bogdanović on an island, scores came easy for the Sixers. Still, the Jazz’s real problem turned out to be on the other end; under pressure, the egalitarian offense became a stilted mess that resulted in forced one-on-one forays. Worse, the problems were compounded by the glaring inability of supposed leader Donovan Mitchell to keep his composure. Two technical fouls in the final minute of overtime — leading to freebie points and, more importantly, his ejection — did them in.

Significantly, Snyder and Rivers will meet again this weekend, but under lighter circumstances. Both see the All-Star break as a time to recover from the grind of the first half of the season. Prospectively, it should also prep the Jazz and Sixers for the final stretch given their intent to remain top seeds in their respective conferences. Their next meeting, if at all, will be in the Finals, and it’s anybody’s guess as to whether they’ll be exhibiting the same old, same old in light of their immediate past experience.

 

Anthony L. Cuaycong has been writing Courtside since BusinessWorld introduced a Sports section in 1994. He is a consultant on strategic planning, operations and Human Resources management, corporate communications, and business development.

Exit strategy for monetary policy

Before the end of 2020, columnist professor Tyler Cowen in Bloomberg Opinion wrote that “it is not likely that the next major macroeconomic problem will be inflation.” At least in the US, he argued that inflation “has come in the form of lower quality, not higher prices.” His illustrations were very interesting. While schools have not increased their tuition fees, students are challenged by on-line learning. Getting treatment in a hospital or eating in a restaurant is more often than not accompanied by fear and inconvenience.

We can relate to these American experiences. They are very real in the Philippines. However, there is another side to Cowen’s argument. Other economists like University of Michigan’s Justin Wolfers, writing for New York Times, claimed that “the cost of living has risen during the pandemic, especially for poorer Americans.” He wrote that the pandemic has made life more expensive than what the statistics suggests. His hypothesis was that real output, real wages and poverty are calculated using inflation measures that do not capture the real cost of living during a pandemic.

COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) has forced ordinary citizens to buy more essentials like groceries, pushing their prices up, while cutting down on airfare, gas, and clothing, pushing their prices down. On-line shopping with delivery charges and premium relative to over-the-counter purchases masks higher inflation because what the statistics reflect are those in the shops that are probably stable or with some discounts. Statistics may fail to capture the pandemic-induced more expensive on-line shopping.

Again, Filipinos can relate to these experiences. We also pay for the higher cost of this mode of transaction in this new normal.

The Economist (Dec. 10, 2020) has a somewhat similar take. Admitting that economists share the view that inflation is dead, The Economist wrote that “the premise of low inflation is baked into economic policies and financial markets.” This view explains why central banks could cut their policy rates to near zero or in real terms, negative. They are so emboldened as to expose themselves to enormous government debt through government securities purchases or outright loans to the government. The probability, even if small, of ending up “in an era of higher inflation” is something policy makers should worry about because sovereign indebtedness has swollen and central bank balance sheets have become awfully large.

In the same spirit, London School’s Charles Goodhart warned us last year (Inflation after the pandemic: Theory and practice, June 13, 2020, VOX EU) that eventually, the drop in the velocity of money “will revert back towards normality” and nobody can ever dismiss the impact of currently excessive monetary growth on inflation. While the output gap in many countries including the Philippines remains negative, we cannot ignore the potential dangers. To do this, in Goodhart’s colorful language is “the equivalent to an ostrich putting its head in the sand.”

Does the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) need to formulate an exit strategy of its current expansionary monetary policy?

We all know that to assist in the whole-of-government pandemic management and economic recovery efforts, the BSP brought down the cost of borrowing by reducing its policy rate by a cumulative 200 basis points to 2%. This action dropped its policy rate to lower than the 2.6% inflation in 2020 and 4% expected inflation in 2021 and 2.7% in 2022.

In addition, more liquidity was injected into the system in various ways. The required reserve ratio was dropped resulting in more than P200 billion additional money supply. The BSP also allowed alternative compliance with the required reserve through loans to small business, releasing more than P160 billion. The National Government (NG) also borrowed from the BSP some P540 billion or 3% of GDP. The most substantial infusion of liquidity came from the BSP’s purchases of government securities in the secondary market amounting to about a trillion pesos. The BSP, instead of crediting it to its own capital pursuant to its new Charter, remitted P20 billion to NG.

All in, nearly two trillion pesos should be mopped up, in full or in part, depending on both growth and inflation dynamics moving forward. This is not a small amount; it is around 11% of GDP.

Of course, in a pandemic, monetary policy has limited use. With an economic lockdown and restricted mobility, cheap and abundantly available credit is not sufficient to boost confidence and inspire business activities. Flattening the pandemic curve and available vaccines will. Expansionary fiscal policy is more appropriate as it can directly address the need to allocate funds to fight the pandemic through strong health protocols, secure the vaccines and achieve herd immunity.

Yet, P2 trillion and negative real policy rate failed to bring the Philippine economy back to life in 2020. While domestic liquidity was more than ample, bank lending actually declined because the banks remained risk averse and tightened their credit standards instead. Banks chose to be procyclical and they stand to see their bad loans swelling.

Economic scarring is here to stay. For a while.

Which makes monetary policy exit strategy indispensable.

It would be a huge challenge to navigate between the devil of future inflation and the deep blue sea of sustaining policy support to economic recovery at this precarious time.

While the BSP maintains that the risks to inflation in 2021 are broadly balanced, its inflation forecast for 2021 of 4% is already at the high tipping point of 2-4% target. Its recent uptick at 4.2% in January might be repeated in February unless the supply shocks are decisively addressed. Otherwise, we should anticipate second round effects to entrench higher inflation. Inflation expectations might sway beyond control. As the global economy bounces back, oil prices are expected to climb, even beyond $60 per barrel. Once the peso reverses its appreciating trend, more inflationary pressures could be generated. Most important, the excessive easing of the BSP last year could make inflation the next macroeconomic challenge.

This is the target of the exit strategy.

On the other hand, the economy remains in recession and therefore policy support cannot be withdrawn as yet. This posture is necessary because in all the broadsheets last Tuesday, President Duterte made a statement that “after the Philippines received its first supply of coronavirus vaccines, Filipinos may expect to return to normalcy by 2023.”

The President must be quoting The Economist Intelligence Unit which released the chart above citing the date when selected countries may be expected to inoculate at least 60% of their population to attain herd immunity. First among them would be Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan which are all expected to do it by the fourth quarter of 2021. The other ASEAN countries of Vietnam, Brunei, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia are expected to complete it ahead of the Philippines’ fourth quarter 2023. By all means, the Philippine government can choose to accelerate its own timetable and show it is capable of doing things right. With more than P82-billion budget for the vaccines, this is not impossible.

The BSP, by announcing its exit strategy to attain normalcy, could help avert some negative repercussions of the Palace’s statement. Foundation for Economic Freedom President Calixto Chikiamco was correct in saying that this pronouncement “will damage and delay the country’s economic recovery.” The chilling effect on consumption, lending, and investments cannot be underestimated.

An exit strategy will serve as a forward guidance on how the monetary authorities plan to establish normalcy in the conduct of interest rates and money supply. The BSP can cite the signs that would trigger the exit strategy. Key movements in prices and business activities as well as in actual and expected developments in money supply and credit should be defined. Financial stability risks cannot be ignored because excessive money injection could bring about mispricing of risks.

Phasing down of monetary support could be tricky. It would be good for the BSP to avoid painting itself in a corner and committing to a predetermined amount of phasing down. Conditions could change but having a framework for normalization inspires hopes for a quicker pace.

Going back to Goodhart, an exit strategy that is credible to civil society could provide the BSP the basis for withdrawing monetary support when it is necessary while avoiding political pressure. Central bank independence remains a precious commodity; its inflation is more welcomed than avoided.

 

Diwa C. Guinigundo is the former Deputy Governor for the Monetary and Economics Sector, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). He served the BSP for 41 years. In 2001–2003, he was Alternate Executive Director at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC. He is the senior pastor of the Fullness of Christ International Ministries in Mandaluyong.

Home to roost

The United States is in crisis, and it isn’t only because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that has killed half a million Americans. Neither is it due to the threat of the foreign terrorist networks that for decades has vexed every US administration. It is because of the very real danger of terrorism from home-grown extremist groups, of which the Jan. 6 attack on the US Congress could only be the beginning.

And yet it was only a scant 12 years ago when the dawn of a new era of peace, stability and security in the US and the rest of the world had seemed, to many men and women of goodwill, so imminent.

They thought the election of Barack Obama as the first black President of the United States in 2008 signaled the beginning of a more enlightened age. It wasn’t only because it seemed such a repudiation of the racism that afflicts American society and taints US foreign relations. It was also because, implicit during the Obama campaign for the Presidency had been the promise that his domestic and international policies would be entirely different from those of George W. Bush’s.

Obama met much of the expectations of his supporters during his two terms in office (2009-2013; 2013-2017). He reformed the US healthcare system; pulled the economy out of recession; prevented the collapse of the ailing US car industry; provided millions of displaced Americans employment and tax relief; protected women and lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders and queers (LGBTQs) from discrimination in the work place; and strengthened Federal protection of the environment, among many other initiatives.

Obama put a stop to the George W. Bush era use of torture during the interrogation of foreign terrorist suspects. He negotiated an agreement with Iran for it to end its nuclear weapons program, committed the US to global protocols to halt climate change, and normalized relations with Cuba. But he also authorized more drone attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan than Bush did, and, in violation of US and international law, ordered the summary execution by US troops of Al Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden in the latter’s Pakistan haven.

In a telling indication that, far from ending racism, his election had instead driven racists out of the woodwork and provided them ammunition with which to stoke each other’s hatred of people of color, during his eight years in office Obama had to contend with false claims that he is Kenyan and not American, and with virulent personal attacks on himself and his family. It was an indication of how deeply-embedded is racism in US society, and helps explain the indifference to, and even contempt for other cultures and peoples implicit in its relentless campaign to defend and expand its global hegemony.

The election of Donald Trump in 2016 and his subsequent policies indicated clearly enough that the new era identified with Barack Obama was as fragile as the possibility that either a woman or another colored individual could be President of the United States, and that to reverse its gains, a demagogue need only tap into the reservoir of hate and racist violence that had only been partly marginalized during the Obama watch.

Trump did precisely that during his four brief years in office. Although he only partly succeeded in dismantling Obama’s legacy, he made the use of State and White supremacist violence against immigrants, minorities, the media and his critics so much a part of his rhetoric and policies that many analysts and observers were predicting before it occurred that his supporters were likely to contest his loss in the 2020 presidential elections with rioting and other acts of violence that could escalate into civil war. The Jan. 6 “insurrection” was not as unexpected and as unthinkable as many thought it to be. Neither is the emergence of the threat to national security posed by domestic terrorist groups.

While Trump and Republican Party collusion have been blamed for both, neither is solely of their own making. The many decades of US violence abroad, and the constant, unremitting celebration of war and glorification of militarist values by the US media industry have more to do with it than Trump and his self-aggrandizing coterie: they merely tapped into the already existing culture of hate, chauvinism, and unreason.

US intervention throughout the globe over the past 120 years in the defense and furtherance of its economic, political, and military interests has not only imbued most Americans with the arrogant presumption that they know best what’s good for everyone else on earth. It has also legitimized the use of force as the main instrument of State policy.

Once justified in the case of its invasion and conquest of the Philippines as a mission to “civilize and Christianize” the natives, US intervention abroad has since contrived other excuses. They have since morphed into “regime change” and the supposed crusade to “bring freedom and democracy” to the benighted countries of the planet. But whether it is really for access to Iraqi oil, in the defense and expansion of the “right” of its predatory corporations to exploit the world’s resources, or for “full spectrum dominance” on land and sea, in the air and in space, US meddling in the internal affairs of other countries has ensconced in the belief systems of much of its populace the supposed legitimacy of overthrowing “unfriendly” governments and invading sovereign countries to secure access to their oil reserves, or such other resources as copper and bauxite.

At the same time, the giant conglomerates that manufacture the films, the television and radio programs, the songs as well as the news reports and analyses that carpet-bomb billions of people daily with entertainment and information unceasingly celebrate war, echoing through what they popularize the same glorification of violence as the first and last means of achieving an individual’s, a group’s, a government’s, or a nation’s ends no matter how preposterous or fraudulent they may be. They’re still fighting the Vietnam war on television, for example, depicting it as a crusade by their super heroic soldiers against a ruthless enemy.

Many analysts have noted the link between US violence abroad and domestic violence and warned that the use of force internationally would eventually be replicated in the homeland itself. The presence of retired and active military personnel in the Jan. 6 mob’s motley company who were all waving the flag of the defunct pro-slavery Confederacy and screaming the need, though phrased differently, for “regime change” in the US itself suggests that that is exactly what is happening.

The rioters were apparently part of the millions (78 million — 48% of the electorate — voted for Trump last Nov. 3) who believe that as unreasonable, as absurd, and as idiotic as their cause may be, it can still prosper through the use of intimidation and violence rather than debate and reason.

The US drive for “full spectrum dominance” is no less problematic and is equally based on faulty reasoning and false assumptions as the Jan. 6 mob’s proclaimed reasons for their actions. But it is succeeding largely through repression and fear — the US has connived with, and supported the most vicious dictatorships on earth in furtherance of its economic and strategic aims — and the use of force abroad. Virtually the same outrage now confronts its own citizens and government. What the empire has long let loose on the countries of the world has come home to roost.

 

Luis V. Teodoro is on Facebook and Twitter (@luisteodoro).

www.luisteodoro.com

Why sustainability is the new digital

EVEN IN A YEAR dominated by a global pandemic, the sustainability revolution has accelerated faster than expected, while also expanding to include a wider range of environmental and social issues.

With consumers and investors demanding significant change, profit pools shifting away from incumbents to insurgents, and even the most carbon-heavy companies making net-zero pledges, executives ignore this revolution at their peril. And make no mistake: this is a real revolution. With every industry — nearly every product and most of our habits under scrutiny — it would be downplaying it to call it anything else.

Like the digital revolution before it, the sustainability revolution promises to change everything. Yet, just as with digital, many companies are moving too slowly, taking an incremental approach to a challenge that demands a radical rethink.

Remember in the early 2000s, when companies realized they needed to go digital, they would hire a web developer? They soon learned that was a woefully inadequate response to the enormous task at hand: the need to reshape their organizations, their products, their entire industries to meet the demands and opportunities of a digital economy.

Something similar is happening today when the executive suite hires a sustainability expert to shepherd this transformation. It’s a start, but it barely begins the work needed to navigate the impending revolution.

The task is daunting and there’s no time to lose. We need to transform a global economy founded on the principles of unlimited access to resources and the primacy of shareholders to one that recognizes the limits and consequences of everything we extract, manufacture, consume and waste, and the impacts on the people involved in doing so.

RAPID DISRUPTION
Some companies are grasping this change faster than others, and consumers and investors are rewarding them. For example, Unilever’s Sustainable Living Brands portfolio is growing nearly twice as fast as other brands in its portfolio. In energy, even before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) economic slowdown, shares of lower carbon energy companies were outperforming those of the oil and gas majors.

These disruptions are spreading more quickly than most expected. Who could have envisioned that electric cars would disrupt the automotive industry so quickly, or that Burger King would sell its iconic Whopper alongside the plant-based Impossible Burger? Such evidence of sustainability disruption is everywhere (see the figure above).

Seeing this movement, most executives now support sustainability objectives, but they remain wary of the costs. For example, in many industry sectors they’re searching for ways to minimize plastic waste, but they find the cost of setting up collection and recycling systems or replacing current volumes with bio-based materials prohibitive. They know they must prepare for the day when the price of carbon balloons to $75 per ton or more, but they are also cautious about the cost of renewables and other low-carbon technologies.

However, if they want to lead, they need to think not just about the short-term costs associated with sustainability, but also the long-term benefits. Just as with digital, sustainability is shifting profit pools to open up multibillion-dollar industries. Plant-based meat could be a $140 billion business by the end of this decade, and the retail nutrition and wellness market could grow to $50 billion by 2025. The current market value of the plant-based beverage category (things like almond milk and coconut water) is $13 billion and growing at 12% per year.

Yet many companies fail to account adequately for such huge opportunities during their planning. Sustainability-linked consumer products now grow nearly six times faster than other brands, and 73% of global consumers say they would definitely or probably change their consumption habits to reduce their impact on the environment, according to a 2018 Nielsen study Sustainability-friendly projects and companies are attracting a lower cost of capital.

DECISIVE ACTION
Companies will need to reinvent themselves to capture these opportunities. All transitions are tough; this one’s even tougher. Bain’s global research found that only 12% of all corporate change efforts fully succeed, but the success rate for sustainability initiatives is substantially lower — a paltry 4%. So, what can companies do to improve their chances of success?

1. Make bold strategic choices

The scope of change is extensive, so leaders should adopt a “disrupt or be disrupted” mindset. Just as the emergence of innovative fintechs forced banks to shift their strategies, food companies need to get out ahead of their customers’ changing habits. Whether their concerns centered around health, carbon emissions, or animal welfare, the number of vegans increased by 600% in the US from 2014 to 2017. In Germany and Poland, one in 10 young adults followed a vegan diet in 2017, and the number is even higher in France.

2. Reinvent products

Sustainable innovation is creating new products that can be produced with fewer carbon emissions, less waste, and an emphasis on enhancing wellness. For instance, Unilever makes toothpaste tablets in reusable containers, and Procter & Gamble sells soap swatches that become cleaning products (hand soap, shampoo, laundry detergent) when you add water. These dry products are lighter, and so when transported emits less carbon. Even building materials companies are working hard on low-carbon steel and cement.

3. Rethink operations

Digital technologies transformed operations across industries; now sustainability requires the same. In an effort to understand which channels are more efficient, Walmart measured the greenhouse gas emissions and costs to fulfill a range of products ordered online vs. sold in stores. Shipping to homes was more efficient if customers were buying just a few things, but in-store purchases were more efficient if they had a longer shopping list or combined the trip with other errands. These insights helped Walmart identify ways to mitigate emissions by reducing split shipments and encouraging a shift to the most carbon-efficient channel when possible.

4. Form innovative partnerships

Sustainability issues are broad and complex — beyond the capacity of any single company to manage — so teaming up is essential. For example, about 40 companies across the plastic value chain (including energy, chemicals, and consumer goods companies) formed the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, which supports innovative solutions to minimize plastic waste and encourage recycling, especially in developing countries.

As the sustainability revolution expands, accelerates and disrupts, it is forcing companies to reassess themselves with an unwavering honesty in order to deliver a future that few imagined. Keeping the digital parallel in mind can help guide them to move quickly and boldly through the coming transformation.

This article first appeared on The Davos Agenda.

 

Orit Gadiesh is the Chairman of Bain & Company. Jenny Davis-Peccoud is a Partner and Head of Bain’s Global Sustainability & Corporate Responsibility. Gerry Mattios is an Expert Partner and Co-Director of Bain Global Sustainability Innovation Center in Singapore.

For judicial restraint

Names have a peculiar sort of power. By having the capacity to call someone or something, one somehow is able to define simultaneously the identity of and relationship to the one being named. And it is no accident that one of God’s first entrusted tasks to mankind was to name all living creatures as part of establishing dominion over them.

That’s perhaps one reason why the recent case of Alanis vs. Court of Appeals — a quite ordinary case of an individual trying to have official documentation changed to reflect his preferred name — struck a chord with media and the public.

Having failed to get his way at the lower courts, petitioner Alanis finally got what he wanted with the Supreme Court: to have his name legally changed to his mother’s surname.

The Civil Code (Article 314) does provide that “legitimate and legitimated children shall principally use the surname of the father.” In this case, the Supreme Court pointed out that “principally” does not mean “exclusively” and thus — considering the specific circumstances of this case (i.e., that the petitioner had been using his mother’s surname since he was a child, although his birth certificate had him using his father’s surname) — it allowed the change of name.

That should have been the end of it. The issue was straightforward and, as Manny Riguera, arguably the country’s best remedial law lecturer, in his Facebook post dated Feb. 26 dryly stated: “Alanis laid down no new doctrine of law.”

Unfortunately, certain passages within the decision have been strangely blown out of proportion by the chatterati, moving Professor Riguera to say: “a wrong reading of Alanis [is] being disseminated in media and which could mislead the public and even the members of the bench and the bar.”

Some such “wrong reading” seems to have been prompted by portions of the decision, such as one lamenting how “it is unfortunate that legislation from the past appears to be more progressive than current enactments.” Another talked about “the passive orientation of Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution” and thus the need for “the State to actively pursue affirmative ways and means to battle the patriarchy — that complex of political, cultural, and economic factors that ensure women’s disempowerment” (citing Racho vs. Tanaka, 2018).

Finally, the decision described how the “patriarchy becomes encoded in our culture when it is normalized. The more it pervades our culture, the more its chances to infect this and future generations.” Thus, the Court overturned the lower court’s decision as “the trial court’s reasoning further encoded patriarchy into our system” and “entrenches the patriarchy and with it, antiquated gender roles.”

With all due respect to the Supreme Court, the language used was unfortunate. For a couple of reasons. The first, as pointed out by Prof. Riguera, is that the “hoopla generated by Alanis vs. Court of Appeals serves as an occasion for us to revisit the difference between the ratio decidendi and obiter dicta. The former is the rationale for the decision and constitutes binding precedent.” On the other hand, obiter dicta comprise “incidental or tangential pronouncements of the court which are not necessary for the holding it reached.”

“The ratio decidendi in the Alanis case is that … there was indeed a proper and reasonable cause for the change of the surname. The pronouncements of the court on gender equality, while laudable, were merely asides or obiter as they were not necessary to the holding that it reached. It should be noted that gender equality was not even raised as an issue in the case.”

Judicial economy and prudence counsels against pronouncing on matters not raised, as logically any discussion on such would likely fall in the realm of speculation.

The other reason has to do with judicial restraint. As one of the country’s premier legal academics and San Beda Graduate School of Law Dean Fr. Ranhilio Aquino puts it (in his own column Feb. 28), issues such as the “patriarchy” or “gender equality” are “a matter of policy, and it is for the legislature to allow the discourse of the spouses in their homes, the spouses in the workplace, and the spouses in the presence of their children to permeate the halls of the legislature.”

The point is that the Supreme Court was correct to point out that “like all other government departments and agencies, must ensure the fundamental equality of women and men before the law.” And yet, by Constitutional mandate, it can only do so if the “text of a law allows” it.

Note that in the Constitution’s 21,700 words, never did the words “patriarchy,” “gender equality,” or “antiquated gender roles” appear therein. And despite the Court’s seeming call for laws to be “progressive,” the word “progressive” only appears in the context of taxation rates, civil service employment, and congressional districting.

Article II.14 talks specifically about the “fundamental equality before the law of women and men,” so it is interesting that while the Court encouraged everyone to appreciate the nuance of “principally” as opposed to “exclusively,” yet it seemed to have sidestepped the fact that “fundamental” does not mean “absolute” or “detailed.”

Finally, it must be pointed out that the Constitution actually does contain the words “sanctity of family life” and “the family as a basic autonomous social institution” (Art. II.12); “strengthen ethical and spiritual values” (Art. XIV.3.2); “Filipino national culture” (Article XIV.14); and “traditions” (Art. XVI. 2).

All told, perhaps certain laws may be antiquated, perhaps there is such a thing as a “patriarchy” or “antiquated gender roles.” There may be merit to all that. But it is not for the Court to say. Those matters are left to the discernment and judgment of the people’s elected representatives.

Courts do not make policy, it does not make law. Courts are there merely to interpret the law. And for courts to engage in policy issues is to tinker with the fine balance of the equal separation of powers that is the country’s true constitutional mechanism and guarantee against tyranny.

 

Jemy Gatdula is a Senior Fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence.

https://www.facebook.com/jigatdula/

Twitter @jemygatdula

Italian mafia targets Europe’s crisis recovery fund

CRIMINAL ENTERPRISES — like their legitimate counterparts — have suffered during the economic crisis caused by the pandemic. But the Italian mafia has already laid the foundation for a massive payday.

Last year, when countries were seized by lockdowns, the mafia started infiltrating cash-starved companies in a bid to siphon money from the European Union’s (EU) recovery fund and the 1.8 trillion euros ($2.2 trillion) that will, in part, start flowing to struggling firms later this year, according to Maurizio Vallone, Italy’s top investigator on organized crime.

Criminal groups including the N’drangheta in the southern Calabria region and Cosa Nostra in Sicily have sought to gain footholds in lawful businesses that will be first in line to get EU aid, such as those in environmental and digital sectors, said Mr. Vallone of the Antimafia Investigative Directorate, which groups investigators from the main police forces.

“The mafia has been choosing the companies that are best-placed to take part in recovery fund tenders, especially in the health and infrastructure sectors where a great deal of money will be spent,” Mr. Vallone told Bloomberg at his Rome office on Tuesday. “It will try to take everything. We have to make sure they don’t get even one euro.”

And Italy is a prime target for criminals since it’s poised to be the largest recipient of EU grant money.

The new government of Prime Minister Mario Draghi is drafting a spending plan for its 209 billion-euro share of the EU funds as it struggles to shake off the worst recession since World War II. Italian firms are particularly vulnerable since a scheme for state-guaranteed bank loans has been too complex and limited to be effective, said Mr. Vallone.

As a result, companies that have shaky credit-worthiness have benefited little from state help, he said.

Mafia gangs have seized on the opportunity, with regional and national lockdowns, to reach out to small and medium-sized companies desperate for liquidity in an economy that contracted 8.9% last year.

Mafiosi typically seek to muscle in on a firm’s share capital, fund struggling businesses through usury, or exploit them through a hidden partner, Mr. Vallone said. The number of suspicious financial operations reported by the Bank of Italy increased by 7% last year to 113,000. “That makes us strongly suspect that there is organized crime interest,” he said.

The European Anti-Fraud Office didn’t immediately return an email seeking comment.

NEW CHECKS
Mr. Vallone wants tighter anti-mafia checks on public works. Under the current system, police forces assess the winner of a tender before a project begins. Under a proposal Mr. Vallone said he will send to the interior ministry later this month, anti-mafia investigators would automatically monitor money transfers as well as sub-contractors and suppliers for the duration of the project.

“The recovery fund is the priority, but this procedure should apply to all public works contracts,” Mr. Vallone said.

Stricter rules are needed also because of pressure from Brussels. “The European Commission doesn’t wait for the biblical time-spans of traditional public tenders, it wants to give the money and see the results within a reasonable period,” said Mr. Vallone.

There may well be a downside to more anti-mafia checks however. Italy, plagued by red tape, already fails to spend much of the structural funds it receives from the EU. The country had used only 30.7% of allocated funds at the end of 2019, according to an EU report, compared to 66.2% for leader Finland, and an average for the bloc of 39.6%. More controls could risk stalling recovery money too.

In the Sicilian capital Palermo, many are facing a stark choice, according to Patrizia Di Dio, head of the local, 13,000-strong branch of the Confcommercio business lobby.

“When a businessman cannot any longer support even his own family, he’ll find organized crime ready for him with its doors wide open,” Ms. Di Dio said. “If the state wants to protect the legal economy, it should make loans more accessible, and it should suspend taxes. It’s crazy and hypocritical not to help you, and to threaten you with taxes at the same time.” — Bloomberg

Singapore regulator tells banks to monitor Myanmar fund flows after coup

SINGAPORE — Singapore’s central bank has told financial firms to be vigilant to any suspicious transactions or fund flows between the city-state and Myanmar, a circular seen by Reuters showed, citing concerns over the potential for financial crimes.

In the Feb 25th circular, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) reminded all chief executives of financial institutions (FIs) of the need for robust customer due diligence and appropriate risk mitigation measures in higher risk situations.

The move comes amid weeks of mass demonstrations in Myanmar after the military seized power.

The pro-democracy activists pledged on Thursday to hold more demonstrations in the Southeast Asian nation after the United Nations said 38 people had been killed in the most violent day of unrest since last month’s military coup.

Singapore’s position as one of the world’s leading financial centers and a trade hub makes it particularly vulnerable to money laundering due to large cross-border flows. Singapore has close ties with Myanmar and is one of its biggest investors.

In the circular, the MAS urged financial institutions to keep timely tabs on the fast developing situation in Myanmar, including unilateral sanctions imposed by other jurisdictions.

It said the situation in Myanmar could give rise to money laundering, terrorism financing and other financial crimes.

“Given the developments in Myanmar, FIs are reminded to take appropriate measures to manage any risks arising from their business activities and customer relationships, including reputational, legal and operational risks,” the MAS said.

The MAS said that financial institutions should file any suspicious transaction reports and inform it promptly, adding that such reports should be labeled “Myanmar 2021”.

In response to a Reuters query, the MAS confirmed that it had issued a circular on Feb. 25 relating to the developments in Myanmar.

The circular was issued two days after the central bank said in a media release that its regular surveillance of the banking system had not found significant funds from Myanmar companies and individuals in banks in Singapore.

Singapore police uses suspicious transaction reports and other financial information and analyzes them to detect money laundering, terrorism financing and other serious crimes, according to an advisory on its website. — Reuters

1...8,3408,3418,342...14,174Page 8,341 of 14,174
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube