Are Ad Agencies, PR Firms and Lobbyists Destroying the Climate? | Solitaire Townsend | TED Countdown

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Helen Chang

Now, when you think of the industries most responsible for climate change,

談到最該為氣候變遷負責的產業時，

you probably summon up an image of an oil rig, right?

浮現腦海的影像 可能是座油井，對吧？

Maybe even a coal mine

也許甚至是煤礦，或巨型農場，

or a megafarm,

perhaps heavy engineering.

或者是重型機具。

But there’s one industry that’s never mentioned in that list

但那份名單中卻始終 沒有提到一個產業，

even though every other industry depends upon it.

而且所有其他產業都得仰賴它。

I’m talking about an economic sector that makes ...

我所說的這個經濟部門， 它製造的是……

nothing.

什麼都沒有。

It has no stock,

它沒有存貨，

no warehouses,

沒有倉庫，沒有工廠。

no factories.

It’s entirely powered by brains,

它的運作完全只需要大腦、

by spreadsheets

試算表，以及 PowerPoint。

and by PowerPoint.

Who is this mystery industry?

這個神秘的產業是什麼？

The professional services of advertising and PR firms,

專業服務，包括廣告及公關公司、

the big management consultancies,

大型管理顧問公司、

the corporate lawyers and lobbyists.

企業律師及掮客。

Together, this sector is worth over two trillion dollars a year.

這個部門的總體價值 超過每年兩兆美金。

Let’s call it the “X industry,”

咱們就稱它為「X 產業」，

where X is for influence.

X 代表的是影響。

Now, when it comes to climate change,

就氣候變遷來說，

each individual firm in this sector has the carbon footprint

這個部門中的每間公司

碳足跡可能都不會 比一般的幼稚園多。

probably no bigger than your average kindergarten.

But the brainprint of the X industry is felt everywhere.

但到處都能感受到 X 產業的「腦足跡」。

And that’s because these problem-solvers and storytellers act

那是因為這些解決 問題的人、說故事的人，

as the grease in the wheel of all other businesses on Earth.

扮演的是世上所有 企業的潤滑油角色。

And that gives the X industry an outsize influence

這一點就讓 X 產業能夠大大影響到

on the likelihood that we reach net-zero,

我們達成淨零排放的機率。

or they will be one of the primary architects of climate destruction.

或者是說，它們將會是 造成氣候毀滅的元兇之一。

Now, how?

怎麼會這樣？

Remember that oil rig we imagined a moment ago?

還記得剛剛提到的油井嗎？

Think about how it’s actually built.

想想看它是怎麼建起來的？

I’ve seen this firsthand.

我曾親眼見過。

It takes a village of X industry advisers to raise a rig.

要搭起一座油井， 需要一票 X 產業的顧問。

首先——

First --

often,

通常，

the oil exploration proposals are financially modeled

石油探勘提案的財務模型

by one of the big constultancies.

要由一間大型顧問公司來做。

Then the lobbying firms push through regulatory approval,

接著，遊說公司負責促成監管批准，

通常要數年，甚至數十年的時間

often years, if not decades, ahead of a single drop of oil being pumped.

才能開始鑽油。

Then the PR agencies,

接著是公關公司，

they come in and they work to get local communities onside.

他們來負責讓當地社區不要插手。

And the legal firms squash any legal objection.

而律師事務所會壓下任何法律異議。

Finally, the creative agencies craft influence campaigns

最後，創意公司會精心製作

有影響力的宣傳活動，

to help sell the image of the oil industry

協助銷售石油產業的形象，

and to sell the product itself.

以及銷售產品本身。

Oil companies know how to drill for oil,

石油公司知道如何鑽油，

but they’ve outsourced almost everything else

但它們會把幾乎所有 其他工作都外包出去，

to this army of publicists and consultants,

給這支由公關人員 及顧問組成的大軍，

to lawyers and to lobbyists.

給律師及掮客。

We all remember the Deepwater Horizon disaster of 2010,

大家都記得，

2010 年的墨西哥灣漏油事故，

when BP polluted the Gulf of Mexico

英國石油公司超過四百萬桶的石油

with over four million barrels of oil.

汙染了墨西哥灣。

各位可能不知道

What you might not know

is that BP admitted

英國石油公司承認

to spending three times as much on promotional advertising

在災後那一年，他們在推銷廣告上

in the year after the disaster than in the year before.

所花的錢是災前那一年的三倍。

可以說，

And arguably,

the X industry has done a better job of cleaning up BP’s image

X 產業在清理英國石油 公司的形象上做得很好，

than BP has yet done cleaning up the Gulf of Mexico.

比英國石油公司清理 墨西哥灣做得更好。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Thank you.

謝謝

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Oh, come on, come on.

喔，別這樣，別這樣。

Is it really fair for me to hold the X industry responsible

要求 X 產業應該為其客戶造成的

for the environmental impact of their clients?

環境衝擊負責，公平嗎？

There is no official way to do so just yet.

目前沒有任何正式管道 能讓它負起負責。

We recognize only three scopes of carbon emission.

我們只承認三種範圍內的碳排放。

Scopes one and two:

範圍一和二：

all the direct emissions from your fleets and your factories

你的交通工具及工廠，及你 購買的能源所造成的直接排放。

and the power that you purchase.

In the UK,

在英國，廣告協會

the advertising association has estimated

估計英國廣告業的價值雖然超過每年

that the entire carbon footprint of the UK ad industry,

worth over 20 billion dollars a year,

兩百億美金，但其總體碳足跡

is just 1.1 million tonnes.

只有一百一十萬公噸。

1.1 million tonnes.

一百一十萬公噸。

Now, scope three,

範圍三，

the third scope,

第三個範圍，

this is a bit harder.

這就比較難一點， 包括所有間接排放，

This is all the indirect emissions from how people use your products

來自大家如何使用你的產品 或來自你的供應鏈。

or from your supply chain.

And that’s a necessary headache for a lot of companies

很多想開始做控管的公司，

都免不了要為這類型的排放頭痛。

to start taking control over.

But technically, the X industry barely moves the dial here either.

但，嚴格來說，X 產業 在此也沒什麼改變。

That’s why I believe that the X industry needs a new scope X,

那就是為什麼我認為

X 產業需要一個新的 X 範圍，

a way to account for the emissions of influence.

設法將影響力造成的 排放也納入考量。

Now the --

現在——（掌聲）

(Applause)

The experts at the Purpose Disruptors network have made a start

「目標阻斷者」網路的專家

已經開始著手進行了。

at doing just that.

They looked at a single advertising campaign made for Audi.

他們研究了一個 為奧迪設計的廣告活動。

Now this campaign won one of the big effectiveness awards in advertising.

這個活動贏得了一個廣告實效大獎。

And the car company and their advertising agency claimed

這間汽車公司及其廣告代理商

聲稱光是這個活動

that this single campaign generated 1.78 billion dollars

就為奧迪增加了十七億八千萬

of incremental revenue for Audi.

美金的收入。

The ad campaign sold a lot of cars.

這個廣告活動賣出了很多車子。

And if their claim is correct,

如果他們所說屬實，

it also generated 5.1 million tonnes of additional carbon for Audi.

它也為奧迪產生了額外

五百一十萬公噸的碳。

So this is a one-to-five ratio

這個比例是一比五，

between the impact of an entire industry --

整個產業的影響——

the entire ad industry --

整個廣告產業——

versus one single advertising campaign.

比上單一個廣告活動的比例。

It is time for those of us, like me,

該是像我這樣的人，

who work in this industry,

在這個產業工作的人，

to take our responsibility seriously.

認真看待我們的責任的時候了。

And that starts with being honest about who pays our bills.

第一步，就是不要隱瞞誰是金主。

The X industry is famously murky about that.

X 產業在這方面是含糊出名的。

And so my firm in 2015 produced the first client disclosure report.

所以我的公司在 2015 年

產出了第一份客戶揭露報告。

It’s very simple.

報告很簡單。

We just disclosed our revenue by the client industries which we serve.

我們只是揭露出我們的收入，

且是根據我們服務的 客戶產業來分類呈現。

I’m so pleased to say that 170 other ad agencies,

我很高興能說，

另外一百七十間

廣告公司、顧問公司，及公關公司

consultancies and PR companies

have now promised to do the same.

現在也都承諾要這麼做。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

But our industry is dominated by a handful of really big consultancies

但支配我們這個產業的，

是少數幾間很大型的顧問公司

and advertising agencies,

和廣告公司，

而至今，它們當中都沒有

and not one of them have yet promised to join us.

任何一間承諾要加入我們。

And this really matters

這真的至關重要，

because the X industry is hiring up many of the most inventive,

因為 Ｘ 產業會僱用

人類當中許多最有 創造力、最有創意、

creative,

knowledgeable

and influential minds that humanity has.

知識最淵博，且最有影響力的人才。

And those are the exact same skills that we need

那些正是改變氣候變遷進程

to change the course of climate change.

所需要的技能。

Now we need all of that X industry talent to stop serving destruction

我們需要

X 產業中所有這些人才

別再為毀滅服務，

and start serving solutions.

並開始為解決方案服務。

And if you work in the X industry,

如果你在 X 產業中工作，

you’re probably beginning to feel a little bit uncomfortable right now.

你現在可能開始感到有點不舒服了。

Good.

很好。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

(Applause)

（掌聲）

我希望你捫心自問：

I want you to ask yourself:

Are you selling your talent to the right people?

你是否有把你的才華賣給對的人？

Are you serving the causes of climate change or the solutions to it?

你服務的是氣候變遷的 成因還是解決方案？

And are you using all that vaunted ability to influence your clients

你是否有利用所有那些 你吹噓的能力去影響你的客戶，

or just to influence their critics?

還是只是去影響他們得到的評價？

This must be the solutions decade,

這十年必須要是解決方案的十年。

and we’re nearly two years into our window

這十年已經過了快兩年， 而這十年的目標

to change our systems towards climate justice,

是要改變我們的體制， 邁向氣候正義，

towards clean energy,

邁向乾淨能源、循環系統、

circular systems,

sustainable and equitable lifestyles.

永續且公平的生活方式。

This solutions decade desperately requires really good-quality financial modeling.

這解決方案的十年

迫切需要高品質的財務模型。

It requires a really strong legal framework,

也需要很強大的法律架構，

great research.

很出色的研究。

且真的很需要公眾支持。

It really needs public support.

需要對的監管規則。

It needs the right regulatory rules.

And it needs creative storytelling,

還需要有創意的說故事方式，

and that’s what my X industry could deliver.

而那正是我的 X 產業能提供的。

This year, I changed my job title to “Chief Solutionist”.

今年，

我把我的職稱改為「解決長」。

I changed it to constantly remind myself of the job that needs doing.

我改它的目的是要時時提醒 我自己有哪些工作需要做。

Because as an X industry leader myself,

因為我自己身為 X 產業的領導者，

I can either serve the solutions every day,

我可以每天都為解決方案服務，

or by default,

或者，就照預設的，為毀滅服務。

I’m serving destruction.

There is no middle ground here.

這是沒有中間立場的。

There must be no carefully worded rationales.

不可以有任何謹慎措詞的理據。

And the X industry can no longer pretend it can remain neutral.

X 產業不能再假裝 它能夠保持中立了。

如果我們這麼做，

Now if we do that,

perhaps we could become a league of solutionists

也許我們能成為解決者聯盟，

and shift all of this creativity,

並轉移所有這些創意、

inventiveness,

創造力、知識，及影響力，

knowledge and influence

towards fixing climate change.

去處理氣候變遷。

And then this invisible

那麼，這種隱形的、

and intangible

無形的，

且非常有影響力的 X 產業

and incredibly influential X industry

can finally stop being part of the problem

終將能夠不再扮演問題的一部分，

and become part of the solution.

成為解決方案的一部分。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause and cheers)

（掌聲及歡呼聲）