Organization-Level Support for Lab Sustainability: A Perspective From the Field

The following article is an opinion piece written by Levi Rogers. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Technology Networks.

As a sustainability professional working in the life sciences industry, I'm acutely aware of the significant environmental impact of our operations, particularly within laboratories. Many factors contribute to the life sciences’ outsized environmental impact — including the pervasive use of difficult-to-recycle, single-use products; energy-intensive laboratory operations and manufacturing processes; and the disposal of biological hazards and chemical byproducts. In fact, a 2019 comparative analysis of carbon footprint found that the pharmaceutical industry was around 55% more carbon intensive than the automotive industry — producing 48.55 metric tons of CO₂ per million dollars of revenue on average.

While individual actions are important, organizational-level commitment is crucial for true sustainability progress. This commitment begins with setting organization-level sustainability goals and establishing support systems to achieve them. These systems might include incorporating sustainability metrics into annual goals, creating means of employee engagement, committing to cross-industry collaboration and allocating funding for sustainability initiatives.

Value-driven goal setting

Developing and prioritizing sustainability goals can be challenging. An organization’s sustainability goals must demonstrate environmental and social responsibility to external stakeholders, align with organizational values and inspire employee engagement. Goals should be measurable, impactful and reflective of available resources and partnerships.

Organizations may be tempted to develop sustainability goals driven by or based on external expectations around environmental and social responsibility. This approach can simplify goal setting and assessments of sustainability efforts by stakeholders, as well as facilitate comparison across organizations, but it is not ideal for long-term success. For one thing, there is no single "gold standard" assessment for sustainability in the life sciences industry — instead there are many heterogeneous surveys and platforms attempting to track and verify progress.

Furthermore, the sustainability challenges we face are complex, and achieving them demands sustained energy and adaptability from organization staff. This level of engagement is difficult to earn if sustainability priorities are dictated from the top down or driven by external stakeholders. Conversely, giving a community of employees the agency to craft and realize sustainability goals forges an enduring culture of employee activism, and shifts the organization’s efforts from imposing sustainability goals to enabling and guiding sustainability efforts.

Therefore, to engage all of the stakeholders in a sustainability plan, I believe sustainability initiatives should be driven by genuine internal values and prioritized by their actual impact on climate-drivers. At New England Biolabs (NEB), for example, we're developing a sustainability strategy centered around a five-pillar framework selected based on NEB’s values, but also aligned with key environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors that customers and suppliers demand. These pillars include climate and energy, waste minimization and circularity, water stewardship, ecosystem stewardship and biodiversity, and supporting society.

It’s also important to be mindful of the strategy one takes when pursuing sustainability goals. For instance, in an effort to reduce our carbon footprint, our organization could almost immediately source 100% renewable electricity if we chose to go to market and purchase renewable energy certificates to cover our electricity usage. But, we have opted against this approach. Instead, we want to prioritize investing in new renewable energy projects that create clean energy generation. Although it will take us longer to achieve 100% renewable electricity, the approach helps drive real change, engages employees in driving that change, and aligns much more closely with NEB values.

Ultimately, the best sustainability strategies will be driven by internal values and aligned with external programs. Given the diversity and evolution of third-party sustainability assessments and customer expectations, we have found it helpful to consider how our goals can align with some of the more common data-driven programs, like the Science-Based Targets initiative.

However, we have also been careful not to let external or emerging programs drive our strategy. Seeking alignment with a limited number of highly trusted platforms helps to balance the need for credibility and comparison across organizations without risking disengagement among our employees who may not feel a strong connection to externally driven goals. This approach also allows us to pursue more unique programs, such as our B Corp certification, which is uncommon in life sciences, but is a strong representation of our environmental and social ethic that has been at the core of NEB since its founding. 

Prioritizing sustainability initiatives

Another factor to consider when managing a sustainability program is resource limitations — both of time and money. As a sustainability manager, I have to account for the time and resources it requires to respond to the near constant flow of ESG survey requests we receive. I certainly value the commitment to assessing and verifying sustainability performance to combat greenwashing, but I imagine many sustainability professionals would much rather focus on doing the actual work of implementing new sustainability solutions than on filling out forms.

It appears the industry is beginning to coalesce around a few assessment schemes, but there remain a significant number of independent surveys and a growing number of supplemental verification systems that seek specific information about a particular aspect of ESG performance. Until we collectively settle on a few high-quality assessment platforms, small sustainability teams, like those at NEB, will have to be mindful of how we respond. For now, we’ve begun compiling the most commonly requested questions and data points so we can respond to incoming requests more efficiently with fact sheets, hopefully providing our partners with the information they need while allowing our team to focus on innovation and high-impact projects.

We’ve also found that taking a data-driven approach to our sustainability initiatives is key to prioritization and making the most of the resources available to us, because it helps us to identify high-impact efforts and allocate resources most effectively. For example, on-site assessments of our environmental impact have shown us where we can make the most impact in reducing plastic waste, but at the same time, to meet near-term carbon footprint reduction targets, we know we need to prioritize resources for renewable energy and electrification projects. With the data at hand, we can strategically allocate resources to multiple projects over time and be effective in moving the needle toward our long-term targets.

In addition to high-level prioritization of sustainability efforts, data has proved vital for reporting on sustainability initiatives, assessing their impact, and optimizing their efficacy. For example, to assess NEB’s waste minimization and diversion efforts, a volunteer-based group at NEB, “NEBGreen”, conducts regular waste audits (literally going through trash and recycling) to identify areas for improvement. Recently, our waste audits identified a need to find a diversion solution for thin plastics, which make up a significant proportion of our waste profile. Our team is now looking to support a regional collection program to collect film plastic to create new durable goods.

Teamwork makes the dream work

As demonstrated by the above anecdote, collaboration and knowledge sharing are crucial for accelerating sustainability in the life sciences because the impact of partnerships expand beyond a single organization’s boundaries. Even when organizations are not directly partnering with each other to accomplish sustainability goals, there are opportunities to tap into the expertise of others and learn from their successes and failures. Sustainability reports can serve this educational purpose for fellow organizations — along with demonstrating progress to a company's stakeholders. Accordingly, organizations dedicated to sustainability can benefit from following the work of other organizations that are tackling sustainability issues in the life sciences.

Finally, cross-industry partnerships should extend to an organization’s vendor relationships. Proactively auditing and partnering with vendors will help to reinforce expectations of accountability and sustainable business practices and can encourage vendor partnership that is informed by their alignment with your organization’s sustainability goals.

Formalizing support of sustainability efforts

An organization’s sustainability practices should not be ideated in a silo and administered from the top down – a foundation of employee engagement is the most sustainable engine of change. In fact, my role as a sustainability manager at NEB is relatively new. For decades, the driving force for change within our organization was employee-driven to find better ways of doing things.

My role is to provide employees and employee groups, like NEBGreen, with the support and resources they need to implement their ideas, whether it's securing funding for new recycling programs or providing data to support their proposals. In addition, I serve as an obvious touchpoint for employees who are not part of the dedicated sustainability team but have identified sustainability opportunities. Recent employee-driven projects have included a new sustainable commuting program and a change to our landscape maintenance strategy to protect ground-nesting migratory birds.

Innovation from employees is essential to driving sustainable business practices, but organizations cannot expect this work to be done on a purely volunteer basis or after work hours. Instead, earmarked resources and formalized systems for engagement encourage employees to actively and consistently participate in sustainability efforts. This may include establishing employee groups, recognizing sustainability activities in performance reviews, and making funding available to support grassroots sustainability efforts.

Creating dedicated mechanisms for funding sustainability efforts is crucial, so that employees know that the organization will invest in their ideas, and so they know the boundaries of that investment. One method of funding sustainability efforts with unappreciated potential in the life sciences is a Green Revolving Fund. While these funds take many shapes, broadly, a Green Revolving Fund provides a dedicated funding pool for sustainability projects that improve environmental performance and save money over time. After a sustainability effort is funded, the annual cost-savings generated by the initiative are re-invested in the sustainability fund, until the initial investment is repaid. This revolving fund ensures a sustainable source of financing for initiatives like energy efficiency upgrades or waste reduction programs, allowing us to continuously invest in improvements that reduce operational impacts.

Ultimately, the key to successful lab sustainability lies in fostering a culture of shared responsibility, supported by organizational structures and resources that empower individuals to make a difference. By working together – internally and externally – organizations can model sustainability leadership within the life sciences industry and contribute to a more sustainable and equitable future on this planet.