The debate on sustainability issues is often biased. When we examine the attention given to different topics, there are some topics that seem more important than others. And with the idea of the climate emergency, which we are all already feeling daily as extreme weather events become more frequent, the environmental agenda ends up taking precedence over others. Nothing against.
However, it is important not to forget that the concept of sustainability is more comprehensive. In its environmental, social and governance concept, it is based on three pillars: environmental, social and governance. Good practices, on the one hand, do not justify bad practices, whether by action or omission, on the other hand. In other words, the fact that a company is implementing a consistent strategic plan to decarbonize its activity is not a safe pass for poor human capital policies, non-compliance with the law and lack of ethical behavior.
The social pillar should deserve special attention in companies, both in the usual topics such as gender balance or equality in pay policies, but also in a more sideways and no less important issue: the mental health of employees. During the pandemic and with the spread of the practice of remote work, the issue entered the agenda of company management. However, with the new normal, it has lost its preponderance.
We must not forget this, especially since the results are worrying. According to one survey, 92% of respondents believe that in their sector of activity, there is a need for more mental health support in the workplace. This lack of support has costs in production. World Health Organization data reveals that just 12 days of work are lost annually due to issues related to anxiety and depression.
A study by consultancy BCG, produced exclusively for members of MindAlliance Portugal/MindForward Alliance, shows additional data for several countries: Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Germany, Norway, the United States and Canada. In these countries, mental health problems have a high economic cost: between 3% and 5% of GDP.
Portugal does not look good in the picture, as the proportion of the population with mental health problems identified annually is higher than average (27% vs. average of 24%). The cost to the national economy as a result of poor mental health amounts to 3% of GDP. Furthermore, we are among the top 3 European countries with the highest prevalence rates of depression.
Given these data, it must be emphasized that this is everyone’s problem, especially the state and organizations. In the same study, Boston Consulting Group notes that companies are seeking to work in addition to existing public policies, especially those developed by health systems.
However, they can go further than that. From the beginning, they must work to reduce the negative burden surrounding this issue. In other words, an employee’s admission that he or she has mental health issues should not be stigmatized. The example of banker Antonio Horta Osorio reveals how these issues also reach the top of institutions. We must add to this that companies must promote access to mental health care. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, management must pay attention to organizational culture, to prevent it from being toxic. As with all health issues, prevention is the best path. In companies, this is also the most sustainable practice.
European Union IIThe European Union intends to strengthen restrictions on methane emissions that apply to the energy sector and oil and gas importers. This measure is considered necessary for the European Union to achieve the goal of reducing methane emissions by 30% by 2030. However, additional regulations still need to be approved to ensure that the tightening restrictions are implemented.
