CSR And Innovation

Don’t make these common mistakes in techno-economic assessments (and avoid misleading conclusions.) TEA is a powerful tool to assess the feasibility of emerging technologies. But even small mistakes can lead to misleading conclusions and poor decisions. Here are 5 key mistakes I’ve seen repeatedly—and how to fix them: 1. Overestimating Technology Performance Challenge: Assuming ideal or lab-scale performance when scaling up. Real-world conditions often bring inefficiencies. Fix: Use conservative assumptions, validate with experimental data, and conduct sensitivity analysis. 2. Ignoring Uncertainty Problem: Treating input values (e.g., costs, energy efficiency) as fixed leads to rigid, unreliable results. Fix: Perform sensitivity and scenario analyses to identify critical variables and explore best/worst cases. 3. Using Outdated or Poor-Quality Data The Problem: Relying on old data or inconsistent sources reduces the credibility of your TEA. Fix: Source data from updated literature, validated models, or credible industry benchmarks, and clearly document assumptions. If data is missing for new technologies, use proxy technologies and check uncertainties. 4. Oversimplifying Economic Analysis Problem: Focusing only on capital costs (CAPEX) while ignoring operating costs (OPEX), maintenance, or financing impacts. Or focusing on single metrics, like NPV. Fix: Include all cost components—CAPEX, OPEX, and life-cycle costs—and calculate key metrics like NPV, IRR, and payback period. 5. Neglecting Policy and Market Factors Problem: Ignoring factors like carbon pricing, subsidies, or fluctuating raw material costs can skew results. Fix: Integrate policy scenarios, market trends, and potential incentives to build a more realistic TEA. Techno-economic analysis is only as good as its assumptions and methods. Avoiding these mistakes will help you deliver insights that are credible, actionable, and valuable for decision-making. We’re going to discuss all these challenges with TEA and more during my workshop in Q1 2025. What challenges have you faced when conducting TEA? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments! #Research #ChemicalEngineering #Economics #Energy #PhD #Scientist #Professor

Regenerative Business Design 🌎 As businesses face increasing pressures from environmental degradation, social inequality, and economic volatility, there is a growing focus on designing operations that not only minimize harm but actively restore and regenerate systems. Regenerative business design provides a clear framework for aligning business practices with ecological resilience, social equity, and economic collaboration, creating opportunities for organizations to positively impact people and the planet. The Regenerative Mindset Wheel outlines the key principles that support this transformation. It focuses on three interconnected areas: ecological health, which ensures alignment with natural systems and ecosystem dynamics; social health, which addresses social systems, equity, and collaboration; and economic health, which emphasizes innovative, regenerative models for shared prosperity. At the center of this wheel are adaptive mindsets, systems thinking, and strategic design—essential tools for navigating complex challenges. To translate this mindset into action, the Regenerative Business Design Framework provides a six-step approach for businesses to create meaningful impact. It begins with intent, where organizations define their goals and scope the systems they aim to regenerate. The second step, ecosystem mapping, involves identifying stakeholders and understanding current dynamics to uncover leverage points for intervention. Assessment then evaluates the ecological, social, and economic health of the system, forming the foundation for strategic action. The framework moves into the design and transition phase, where businesses co-create solutions, pilot programs, and refine approaches for regenerative impact. These solutions are then scaled through ecosystem evolution, fostering new partnerships and building shared value at a larger scale. Finally, monitoring and measurement track progress and outcomes, ensuring that regenerative initiatives deliver measurable benefits and provide lessons for continuous improvement. Businesses have a critical role to play in addressing global challenges by shifting from extractive practices to regenerative models. Source: Global Institute for Regenerative Futures #sustainability #sustainable #business #esg #climatechange #regenerative #regeneration

What drives your business forward: profit or impact? This question often surfaces when navigating entrepreneurship. In a world fixated on scaling quickly and chasing revenue, there’s something I’ve learned: without a deeper purpose, success can feel hollow. The businesses that resonate with me most are the ones that bridge the gap between profitability and purpose. They create something greater than numbers - they build movements. Take the agriculture and dairy industry, for instance. It’s not just about products; it’s about people, communities, and livelihoods. Driving change in this space isn’t just about having sharp business acumen - it requires empathy and a vision for something bigger. One example that stands out to me is Srikumar Misra and Rashima Misra, the dynamic duo behind Milk Mantra. I’ve been following their entrepreneurial journey since my college days. From that moment on, the Milk Mantra story has been an enduring source of inspiration for me. They didn’t follow the usual startup formula. Instead, they launched their venture in Odisha, an area often overlooked in the world of innovation. What they’ve achieved is remarkable. With Milk Mantra, they’ve done more than build a thriving business: - They modernized dairy supply chains through technology. - Empowered thousands of farmers with fairer deals, improving lives. - Created opportunities that elevated Odisha’s reputation as a hub of innovation. Their brand, Milky Moo, became a household favorite. And their impact? Undeniable. Fast Company even recognized Milk Mantra as one of the most innovative companies in Asia Pacific. But Sri didn’t stop there. Today, he’s leading aarnâ protocol, where AI and DeFi intersect, reshaping how investors grow and manage digital assets. His journey reminds me of what makes entrepreneurship magical. It’s not just about solving problems - it’s about reimagining what’s possible and building a better future. If you’re working on something that blends purpose with profit, don’t stop. The world needs more builders like you. What’s your take: Can purpose and profit go hand in hand?

Are we measuring the wrong things in drug innovation? Some of the most valuable therapies might never show up on our innovation radar. The typical view in US #biopharma has long equated “innovation” with patents, new drug approvals, and R&D spend. They're easy to count and look good in investor decks. However, these metrics often reward volume more than total value. They don't tell us whether a therapy meaningfully improves patient lives, strengthens public health, or delivers returns beyond the financial metrics. A new six-dimensional framework published in The Incidental Economist offers another option. Drawing from over 600 interdisciplinary studies, the authors propose a more rigorous definition of #innovation: - Scientific and Technological Advances: Captures innovation and productivity using metrics such as new molecules, new drug applications, and patents. Emerging indicators, such as AI-enabled R&D and digital biomarkers, offer forward-looking insights. - Clinical Outcomes: Highlights therapeutic impact through metrics such as safety, efficacy, and patient-reported outcomes, emphasizing real-world patient benefits and delays in disease progression. - Operational Efficiency: Measures efficiency in development and production using trial success rates, R&D timelines, supply chain resilience, and adaptive trial designs. - Economic and Societal Impact: Evaluates economic returns and societal benefits through cost-effectiveness analyses, budget impacts, and productivity improvements. - Policy and Regulatory Effectiveness: Assesses how regulatory frameworks support innovation through approval speed, breakthrough designations, and surrogate endpoint integration. - Public Health and Accessibility: Examines broader health impacts, including reduced disease incidence, healthcare access improvements, and equitable geographic distribution, ensuring innovations meet widespread public health needs. This doesn't have to just be academic. It could change what gets funded, approved, and reimbursed. Some examples mentioned in the article: -An Alzheimer's therapy might look risky on paper, but when viewed through long-term productivity gains and reduced caregiver burden, it becomes a more attractive, high-risk/high-reward bet. -A platform technology (e.g., mRNA) may not boost new molecule counts today, but could enable faster, more precise drug development in the future. -A one-time gene therapy with high upfront cost could prove more valuable than chronic treatments when lifetime adherence and hospitalizations are factored in (if payers can afford the upfront investment). Of course, expanding how we define innovation introduces trade-offs. Complexity increases. Metrics will compete against each other. The question is whether the upside of greater alignment with ALL stakeholders is worth the operational complexity and potential reductions in value for some individual stakeholders. Would you be in favor of evaluating innovation more holistically?

The tropical rainforests of the world have been a cradle of biodiversity and a wellspring of human ingenuity. For Peter Houlihan, tropical ecologist and executive vice president of biodiversity and conservation at the XPRIZE Foundation, these ecosystems represent a lifelong fascination and a source of boundless potential. Over the years, he has ventured deep into jungles, hauling equipment to study elusive insect species. Yet, as he recently watched a drone deploy a canopy raft equipped with a light trap, he saw a decade of painstaking effort condensed into just 15 minutes. “It hit home in a game-changing way,” he reflected in a recent conversation with Abhishyant Kidangoor for Mongabay News. Houlihan’s realization encapsulates the vision behind the XPRIZE Rainforest competition, a $10 million initiative to revolutionize biodiversity monitoring. Over five years, a diverse assembly of ecologists, engineers, Indigenous leaders, and technologists collaborated to design tools capable of rapidly and comprehensively assessing ecosystems. The competition culminated in the Amazon rainforest earlier this year, where Limelight Rainforest, a multidisciplinary team from the United States, claimed the top prize. The showcased innovations were groundbreaking: drones carrying environmental DNA (eDNA) sensors, AI-powered light traps capable of real-time species identification, and canopy rafts for unobtrusive monitoring. Houlihan, an entomologist by training, was struck by the advancements. “On day one of the finals, the first team detected jaguars using eDNA,” he shared, marveling at a feat that would traditionally take months of fieldwork. Such tools, he believes, can scale biodiversity monitoring to encompass entire landscapes, offering “a living and breathing understanding of the biodiversity across an entire forest.” The competition also set a new benchmark for inclusivity. Indigenous peoples played a central role, ensuring the solutions honored traditional knowledge and fostered equitable collaboration. Houlihan recounted how an Indigenous team member identified a water source by spotting specific palm species, blending ancestral wisdom with modern technology to guide the effort. With the competition complete, its impact phase aims to scale these innovations. Pilot projects in the Amazon, Southeast Asia, and the Congo Basin are already underway, aligning with the UN’s 30x30 biodiversity goals. These tools, Houlihan suggests, could accelerate the creation of protected areas and transform conservation science. Looking forward, Houlihan envisions even broader initiatives, from restoring coral reefs to intercepting wildlife trafficking. “We are living, breathing members of this planet,” he observed. “With the right incentives, we are going to figure this out.” The interview: https://lnkd.in/gHqNWtAz 📹 Kapok tree in the Amazon

🌟 Reflections from The Purpose Agenda 2024 🌟 Last week, I had the privilege of attending The Purpose Agenda by raiSE SG. It was a refreshing experience discussing ideas around impact driven organisations and how to help these organisation get further ahead with their missing for doing good. Here are three key insights that I walked away with: 1️⃣ Impact Capital: Business First, Impact Second Impact capital is not philanthropy—it operates with business at its core and impact as a vital, yet secondary, objective. Investors still prioritize returns on capital and require impact-driven startups to meet that base expectation. This reality isn’t inherently negative; it underscores the importance of aligning financial viability with social or environmental goals. To secure this type of funding, impact startups must be able to demonstrate a strong business case—scalable models, clear ROI, and measurable outcomes—where the impact is a natural extension of their success, not just a lofty mission statement. 2️⃣ Distribution as the True Game-Changer Distribution is the lifeblood of any successful impact startup. While capital is essential, it’s not always the silver bullet. Getting products and services to underserved markets—whether in remote regions or among communities with limited tech access—requires strategic partnerships. This is where organizations like raiSE SG shine, helping startups navigate their go-to-market journey with precision and speed. By forging collaborations with governments, strategic family offices, NGOs, and even grassroots movements, impact startups can overcome the barriers to reaching their customers. These partnerships often unlock the channels needed to scale sustainably and solve real-world problems effectively. 3️⃣ Profitability: The Non-Negotiable North Star Profitability might not be the buzzword in impact circles, but it’s the critical foundation. Without a clear path to self-sustainability, even the most noble of missions are at risk of faltering. Impact startups must shift their mindset—profitability is not the antithesis of impact; it’s what ensures longevity. It provides the freedom to scale, iterate, and continue driving meaningful change without relying on continuous lifelines from investors or donors. Impact-driven founders must build with resilience, not just idealism, embracing a business-first mentality to fuel their social missions. Special thanks to my fellow panelists Kevin Quah, Diana Reeves and Alfie Othman for the lively moderation. Congratulations to the team at raiSE for a well put together and thought provoking event Wei Shan Koh, Subashini Balakrishnan, Cassandra Chow

If you're an impact startup looking to set up in the UAE, here’s something you should know. I work with many impact-driven entrepreneurs eager to launch or expand in the UAE. But one mistake I see far too often? They try to do it all on their own, overlooking the power of incubators. The UAE has government-backed incubators designed to accelerate startup growth—offering everything from market access and mentorship to investor connections. If you're building a purpose-driven venture, these can be game-changers. Here are four incubators worth exploring: Hub71 (Abu Dhabi) 🔹 Focus: Tech and innovation startups 🔹 Why it matters: A dynamic ecosystem, Hub71 connects startups with investors, corporates, and government entities, providing equity-free incentives, mentorship, and access to global networks. The Authority of Social Contribution - Ma'an (Abu Dhabi) 🔹 Focus: Social impact ventures 🔹 Why it matters: Established by the Authority of Social Contribution – Ma’an supports mission-driven startups tackling social, cultural, and environmental challenges, helping turn ideas into sustainable businesses. in5 Dubai (Dubai) 🔹 Focus: Tech, media, science and design startups 🔹 Why it matters: Backed by TECOM Group, in5 operates innovation hubs in Dubai Internet City, Dubai Production City, Dubai Science Park and Dubai Design District, offering startups access to creative spaces, mentorship, and networking opportunities. Sharjah Entrepreneurship Center (Sheraa) (Sharjah) 🔹 Focus: Early-stage startups across industries 🔹 Why it matters: Supported by the Sharjah government, Sheraa helps startups access investors, mentorship, and workshops—nurturing a vibrant entrepreneurial ecosystem. The Bottom Line: If you're serious about growing your impact startup in the UAE, don’t overlook these incubators. They can fast-track your success and open doors that would take years to unlock on your own. If you found this useful, share it with someone who needs to see it! #ImpactStartups #UAE #Sustainability #Entrepreneurship #Innovation #PurposeDriven #MENAStartups #BusinessForGood

The question I get asked the most from corporations and brands is, “What can we do?” Whether you manage a business or are an employee championing better practices within your organization, here are 5 tangible ways your company can benefit the ocean and reduce harmful impacts today. 1️⃣ Source Materials Responsibly Do you have data on your tier one, two, and three suppliers? Are you accounting for supply chain emissions, waste management, and energy consumption from raw materials, to order fulfillment, and end of life? These are all an important part of running a sustainable business. If you’re not, commission a lifecycle assessment to ensure your business: • Enlists the best suppliers  • Appeals to conscious consumers • Adheres to emerging regulatory requirements  • Implements more efficient and cost effective operations 2️⃣ Improve Wastewater Management Discharging untreated industrial wastewater can disrupt the delicate balance of bodies of water by introducing excess nutrients. This can cause algae blooms—a rapid increase of algae in a body of water—that can harm human health. It can also deplete oxygen and kill fish, impacting food availability and jobs along coasts. Consider innovative wastewater management techniques and tech that provide added benefits, like producing energy in the form of biogas and reducing maintenance costs. For example, Aquacycl provides wastewater treatment as a service for challenging industrial streams, using a patented system to handle wastewater with a high biological oxygen demand (BOD). Each reactor contains naturally existing microbes that produce direct electricity as they remove high concentrations of organic pollutants. 3️⃣ Provide Sustainable 401K Planning Investment advisors like GreenPortfolio help employees prioritize wealth and planetary health. HR teams can include this as a benefit and offer a higher matching percentage if employees: • Divest from fossil-fueled funds or • Invest in emerging ocean health indexes tracked by ETFs like IQ Clean O Oceans, Newday Ocean Health, and KraneShares Rockefeller Ocean Engagement. 4️⃣ Offer Corporate Volunteerism Add Sustainable Ocean Alliance and other ocean nonprofits to employee volunteer programs, allowing team members to benefit the ocean by: • Performing pro bono work • Providing skills-based volunteering  • Participating in dedicated, paid volunteer days 5️⃣ Champion Corporate Philanthropy Match employee donations to ocean nonprofits dollar for dollar all year round, not just on Giving Tuesday. Donate technology to support marine science research and higher education institutions. Sponsor ocean pavilions and side events at major climate and biodiversity conferences. Partner with accelerators and incubators to offer mentorship, resources, and financing. If you made it this far, let me know if you’d implement any of these strategies at your company. Photo: Laurent Ballesta

The debate around impact investing has taken on an overly simplistic form. On one side are those who dismiss it as marketing, philanthropy, or inherently unprofitable investing. On the other are those willing to accept lower returns in the name of doing good. Both perspectives miss the point. The root of the problem lies in how impact has been implemented: as an additional layer, detached from the underlying economic logic of businesses. There is, however, a deeper conceptual flaw. The notion that a structural trade-off exists between risk-adjusted returns and socio-environmental impact is both misguided and dangerous. Once this trade-off is accepted, impact is pushed into a niche, and niches do not transform systems. Meaningful transformation requires scale, and scale in today’s world is driven by mainstream capital. That capital will only move toward impact if it offers competitive returns. This calls for a more sophisticated approach, as well as genuine innovation. Impact cannot be treated as intention. It must be understood as value engineering. Companies that integrate environmental and social variables into their core operations are not simply “better behaved.” They tend to be more resilient, more efficient, and often superior capital allocators. Reducing emissions, for instance, is not solely a climate agenda. It is also an agenda of productivity, cost reduction, and risk mitigation. Likewise, more sustainable supply chains are less exposed to disruption and therefore structurally stronger from a business perspective. When properly executed, impact does not compete with returns. It enhances the risk-return profile. More importantly, this is how capital can simultaneously generate financial returns and drive meaningful change. Markets still approach this with skepticism, when in practice it should be the baseline. At its core, what we call “impact” is simply the correct incorporation of externalities into economic decision-making. And once externalities are no longer ignored, what emerges is a more efficient system.

Are AI impact assessments just a compliance checkbox? In the latest #Openbox episode with Gemma Galdon Clavell, PhD, we explored why they often fall short—and what needs to change. Some key insights include: 1. Flawed Impact Assessments: Current AI impact assessments are often flawed and superficial, largely serving as narrative exercises without technical depth. There is a lack of engagement with engineers or access to technical specifications, leading to a compliance facade rather than meaningful regulation or risk mitigation. 2. Need for Technical Impact Assessments: Effective impact assessments should be technical exercises, thoroughly examining data, system behavior, and the effect on various populations. Moving from narrative assessments to audits and technical oversight is critical to ensure safe AI systems. 3. AI Bias and Minority Exclusion: AI systems often amplify majority patterns, neglecting minority patterns, leading to structural discrimination. Even with balanced datasets, AI tends to prioritize the majority, especially in critical areas like lending, hiring, and healthcare. This dynamic must be addressed in high-risk systems. 4. Global North vs. Global South Challenges: The AI industry’s focus on frameworks from the Global North often fails to account for cultural nuances and regional needs in the Global South. Additionally, AI struggles with linguistic and population diversity even within the Global North. 5. Limitations of Red Teaming: While red teaming is valuable, it is not a catch-all solution for AI safety. Its effectiveness depends on the expertise of the team and lacks methodological consistency. Red teaming should be one part of a broader framework, including audits and continuous oversight, to ensure system safety. Link to the podcast: https://shorturl.at/79Ifw #AIEthics #AIRegulation #AIGovernance #ResponsibleAI