It's a little acknowledged fact that a great many of the Net Zero initiatives that are being deployed by companies all over the globe, have their origins in what we might term 'the 'embarrassment factor'.

For instance, did you know that in the pharmaceutical industry, a conference speech by one farsighted CEO, announcing what his company would be undertaking to combat climate change, ended with a challenge to other businesses in the sector? His message was a plain and straightforward: "This is what we're doing to help the world, What are you guys going to do about it?"

Word quickly got around and other CEO's, who had previously paid precious little attention to their company's role in preventing global warming, were forced to respond. Within days,  all of the major corporates in the sector had announced their own Net Zero initiatives.

This is what we might call positive peer pressure. 

We all know that the actions of individuals are greatly influenced by those around them, but the same can be true in the corporate world, particularly when issues of public good are concerned. It does not benefit any business to lag behind when public interest is at stake and buying decision may be impacted. In short, there is a need to be seen to be doing the right thing. And there is even more kudos associated with being one of the first to implement any action initiative that can orchestrate  or support beneficial societal change.

Over the past three decades, the corporate world has increasingly been called upon to evidence good corporate citizenship. And many businesses have taken great pride in their stance supporting sex equality, diversity, anti-bullying, mental health in the workplace, gay rights, and other pressing societal issues.

But how are these worthy initiatives defined and how is it decided who begins them?

Usually, they are obvious to all. The need becomes apparent because of the attention it attracts. Today, the abundance of contemporary media is a powerful influencing imperative. But it still takes a champion within a business to start the ball rolling.

Some corporate entities then become natural leaders that forge trails that others are compelled follow. They begin the cascade. Others may be brought to a rude awakening of what the general public expect of them and follow suit in order to avoid being left behind. Very few are foolhardy enough to buck the trend and unwisely isolate themselves through inaction. So eventually, whole movements for good can cascade through the corporate world, the speed at which they do so being directly proportionate to perception of their importance to all.

It may even be argued that ESG and DEI expectations in the marketplace have begun to impose an implicit mandate upon businesses. Corporates are expected to fulfil a broad role in the social context, one that might once have been the province of government.

But could there be anything more pressing than saving the planet we all call home? And if so, why has there been no concerted movement to try to bring about dietary change?