I have been working in corporate citizenship for two decades, so I have seen the good, the bad the ugly – and learned a lot on the way. Here’s my top ten list of observations to pass on based on McDonald’s own journey thus far:

1. Create a CSR strategic framework
Society was much simpler, from 1955, when McDonald’s was first established, to the late 1980s. We built the “trust bank” by being community leaders, giving back, and having programs that were fun and engaging for our customers.

Then came the late 1980s and 1990s. Society changed and the Internet became a force of nature. McDonald’s was under attack by activists who thought we created too much garbage, hurt the planet, and exemplified the perceived evils of globalization.

By 2000, we learned we couldn’t be reactive anymore. We needed to play offense and get strategic with our CSR efforts. We created several governance bodies and structured processes to help us identify, manage and progress on a variety of social and environmental issues in a strategic manner.

Currently, we have six areas of focus. We are a food business, so nutrition and sustainable supply chain are important. People fuel our business, so people and community are also priorities. Then there is our responsibility to the environment. And at the core of everything we do is a commitment to sound governance and ethics.

2. Sustainability isn’t an initiative
CSR is not a program, initiative or function, but a mindset that is incorporated into every aspect of business planning and operations. At McDonald’s, this comes quite naturally because our values are at the core of everything we do and from the beginning we’ve been committed to doing the right thing. Our founder, Ray Kroc, said, “If we treat our customers right, take care of our franchisees, and always do the right thing—then we will make money and profit.” To me, this statement is equitable to a definition of CSR. If you live and put your values into practice every day, you will end up being a sustainable organization.

3. CSR starts at the top
CSR has to be driven by the top boss and senior management. Otherwise, CSR is peripheral and subject to measures of convenience. Management needs to integrate, allocate the necessary resources, and have it placed in strategic plans. Jim Skinner is our current CEO. He has led a tremendous turnaround over the past seven years. And his leadership on CSR is strong and unwavering. He put CSR right into our business plan. We call it our Plan to Win. Smack dab in the middle it says, “We are going to be a socially responsible company.”

4. Aim for the Smart Zone
It is a real stereotype to think that being socially responsible is a high cost. If you control your own strategies, most CSR efforts bring forth efficiencies, measures that use less resources, or bring a connection or relevance to consumers.

So aim for the Smart Zone. Merely following the law and regulations will merely make you a follower. The sweet spot is staying ahead, but staying smart at the same time.

For example, we have our big suppliers report their environmental performance – the amount of energy, water, and waste produced per pound of product sold to us on an annual basis. We do this so that we can work with them on continuous improvement, but we also initiated this for cost saving reasons. Less energy, water and waste should equals lower cost of production – and we are seeing that in the results.

5. Anticipate and manage emerging issues
No one likes to manage a crisis, so the idea is to stay to ahead of the curve and identify the issue when it is just starting to emerge, in academic studies or from NGO initiatives. This is easier said than done. My experience in business tells me that most business leaders are focused on the here and now or the very near future. However, waiting is a mistake. When you do, you lose control and end up being pushed into a reactive position, and that is never a good thing in business.

6. Manage the open and transparent society
With the power of the Internet, there is now a very radical transparency. People can get information and use this publicly in a matter of seconds. Take this seriously and dedicate resources to providing good and accurate information to as many stakeholders as you can.

7. Manage your planet footprint
We see managing our footprint as a business necessity to ensure we will have the resources we need to be in business well into the future. Good science tells us that we are straining our natural resources. Some estimates say that it will take ten more Earths to supply the needs of the population in just 40 years. We only have one Earth, and we all need to remember that.

8. Get engaged; don’t operate in an island
Smart companies develop a sophisticated stakeholder engagement plan that includes experts, NGOs, customers, media and others who can provide expertise and credibility. At McDonald’s, we’ve worked with a range of outside stakeholders over the years – Environmental Defense Fund, Conservation International, Greenpeace and others – to develop policies and programs that can improve our social, environmental AND business performance.

9. Manage CSR globally
CSR is not the same in every country. What is important to the U.S. is different from Australia, China is different than Brazil. So CSR efforts need to be decentralized in a global enterprise. The values come from the top, but the strategies and tactics will vary in the various geographic operations.

10. Tell your story, but humbly
Lastly, and a lesson we are still learning at McDonald’s, is to tell your story, but do so in a humble way. People want to know two aspects of your business when it comes to telling your story:

The first is obvious: What are you doing? What programs and progress are you making to be a responsible company?

The second is not obvious, and most often ignored by companies. It is all about HOW you are trying to be a responsible and sustainable organization. How are you engaging with society? How are you overcoming barriers and challenges? How are you testing new ideas?

Communicate in equal doses, both the WHAT and the HOW.

Bob Langert is Vice President, Corporate Social Responsibility for McDonald's. His responsibilities with McDonald’s include social responsibility efforts, including McDonald’s social responsibility reporting; global environmental management systems and issues; global supply chain issues (e.g., sustainable agriculture, biotechnology, animal agricultural and animal welfare programs); issues management; and part of McDonald’s “Balanced, Active Lifestyles” team.

This article was first published on the web site of the Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship.

Dear EarthTalk: What specific issues and protections are covered by the Food Safety Modernization Act recently signed into law? -- P. Palmerino, New York, NY

Existing laws and oversight from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have done a decent job of keeping the vast majority of Americans safe from food borne illnesses, but several recent cases of contamination have put the spotlight on what more we can do to protect ourselves from unwittingly consuming harmful bacteria, parasites, viruses and toxins that could be lurking on our dinner plates.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports that, of the 48 million Americans afflicted with some sort of food borne illness every year, 128,000 are hospitalized and about 3,000 die. In response to this growing problem, in January 2011 Congress passed and President Obama signed into law the landmark Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), a comprehensive $1.4 billion bill that aims to stop outbreaks of food borne illnesses before they begin.

“This law makes everyone responsible and accountable at each step in today's global food supply chain,” reports FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. “This law represents a sea change for food safety in America, bringing a new focus on prevention, and I expect that in the coming years it will have a dramatic and positive effect on the safety of the food supply.”

FDA inspectors have monitored domestic producers of seafood, juice, meat, eggs and poultry for decades, but the new law expands their powers to evaluate hazards in all kinds of food and to impose stricter standards on imported foods. Processors are now required to proactively take measures to prevent contamination, and must have plans in place for corrective action when something does go wrong. Smaller producers are exempt from some of the more onerous and costly provisions of the new law, but are nevertheless still responsible for maintaining the strict health safety standards set forth in its provisions. The new law also increases the number and frequency of inspections at both high-risk and non-high risk facilities. And the FDA can now order recalls of tainted foods; before FSMA’s enactment, the agency could only negotiate with businesses to order voluntary recalls.

Given that some 15 percent of our food supply—including 60 percent of fresh fruits and 80 percent of seafood—is imported, the new law also requires importers to verify the safety of food from their foreign suppliers and authorizes the FDA to block foods from facilities or countries that refuse inspections.

FSMA also provides funds for training, equipment and facilities at food safety agencies across federal, state, local, territorial, tribal and even foreign jurisdictions to ensure that all parties are up to snuff on the ways and means of preventing and containing food borne illnesses.

“Really this is a major victory for every American who will sit down at the dinner table and have more confidence that their food is going to be safe,” says Erik Olson of the Pew Health Group, one the most vocal of hundreds of nonprofits in favor of strengthening our nation’s food safety net.

Photo courtesy of the FDA

EarthTalk® is written and edited by Roddy Scheer and Doug Moss and is a registered trademark of E - The Environmental Magazine (www.emagazine.com). Send questions to: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe; Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.

Walmart, the largest U.S. grocer, announced plans to offer healthier food and to push its suppliers to do the same.

The giant low-cost retailer said it would reformulate “thousands of everyday packaged foods” by 2015 by reducing sodium 25 percent and added sugars 10 percent, and by removing all remaining industrially-produced trans fats.

Customers will save about $1 billion per year on fresh fruits and vegetables “through a variety of sourcing, pricing, and transportation and logistics initiatives that will drive unnecessary costs out of the supply chain,” the company said, adding that the price premium on so-called “better-for-you” items, such as reduced sodium, sugar or fat products, will also be “dramatically” reduced.

“Our customers tell us they want a variety of food choices and need help feeding their families healthier foods. At Walmart, we are committed to doing both,” said Andrea Thomas, senior vice president of sustainability at Walmart. “We support consumer choice so this is not about telling people what they should eat. Our customers understand that products like cookies and ice cream are meant to be an indulgent treat. This effort is aimed at eliminating sodium, sugar and trans fat in products where they are not really needed.”

Walmart has been a lightning rod for criticism on many fronts, including labor rights and the negative impact its “big box” outlets have on local retailers.   In the last several years, the company has launched an aggressive initiative to force its suppliers to provide more environmentally sustainable products.

If only by virtue of the Walmart’s size – and its potential impact on other food suppliers - the healthy food initiative was generally praised by public interest groups.

Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, was quoted in a Walmart press release as saying:  “I applaud Walmart for moving the food industry in a healthier direction.   Walmart’s action should virtually eliminate artificial trans fat and significantly reduce salt in packaged foods and, most importantly, prevent thousands of fatal heart attacks and strokes each year.”

James D. Weill, president of Food Research and Action Center, a national anti-hunger organization, told the New York Times that Walmart seemed to have recognized “how much hunger and food insecurity there is in the country.”

“Our customers have always told us, ’We don’t understand why whole wheat macaroni and cheese costs more than regular macaroni and cheese,’ ” Mr. Dach said. “We’ve always said that we don’t think the Wal-Mart shopper should have to choose between a product that is healthier for them and what they can afford.”

The Wall Street Journal tied Walmart’s announcement to the company’s announced strategy of opening more stores in urban areas of the U.S.

The splashy announcement comes as Wal-Mart, fighting to reverse six consecutive quarters of negative sales at U.S. stores open at least a year, makes an aggressive push into big cities where it faces intense union opposition by arguing, among other things, that it can bring healthier foods to the urban masses.

One of the ways Wal-Mart pledged Thursday to improve the nutrition of Americans, in fact, was to build more stores in inner-city areas dubbed "food deserts" that are under-served by traditional grocery chains.

Walmart’s announcement was made in Washington, D.C., at an event attended by First Lady Michelle Obama, who has led a campaign against childhood obesity.   Mrs. Obama called the Walmart announcement "a huge victory for folks all across this country" and said it has the "potential to transform the marketplace."

According to a recent report by the consulting firm McKinsey & Co., “an obesity pandemic has put pressure on health care systems throughout the world.” The report found that the U.S. currently spends about $160 billion—twice what it did a decade ago- on obesity-related healthcare. “Yet these huge numbers represent only a fraction of the pandemic’s total economic burden on societies.” McKinsey said. “Obesity indirectly costs the United States at least $450 billion annually—almost three times the direct medical cost.”

Dear EarthTalk: As far as I know, genetically modified foods are not required to be labeled so. Why is this? Don’t we have a right to know what our food is made of? -- Rebecca Webster, via e-mail

Unbeknownst to most Americans, a majority of the processed foods available in grocery stores today are derived from genetically modified (GM) sources—whereby genes have been taken from one species and insert into another to obtain specific traits or characteristics. Given how new GM technology is—scientists first began tinkering with it in the 1970s but only recently began utilizing it on a wide scale across the food sector—the jury is still out as to whether such products can cause health or environmental problems.

In light of such uncertainties the European Union and dozens of other regions around the world, including Australia and Japan, now require food producers to label GM products clearly so consumers can decide for themselves whether or not to take the risk. Neither the U.S. nor Canada has any such requirements.

GM’s critics say that food companies have lobbied hard to ensure that U.S. regulators don’t require producers to distinguish GM from traditional foods: “…if a GM crop looks like its non-GM equivalent and grows like it, then it is assumed to be the same, and no safety testing is needed before people eat it,” reports the blog, Food Democracy. Corn, for example, may contain antibiotic-resistant genes or a built-in insecticide—but to the U.S. government “it looks and grows like maize, so it is safe to eat.”

The result, says Food Democracy, is widespread ignorance among consumers about what kinds of strange genes may have been inserted into the otherwise mundane foods they are purchasing and eating. “Keeping consumers in the dark has prevented them from making real choices about the food they eat,” says Food Democracy. “Without labels the principles of supply and demand are no longer in effect as consumers can’t send a message to farmers and manufacturers about what they do, and don’t, want to eat.”

According to a survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 53 percent of Americans would not eat GM foods if given the choice, while 87 percent believe GM foods should be labeled as such regardless. But since the federal government has no plans to require any such labeling, consumers must take matters into their own hands. To wit, the non-profit Institute for Responsible Technology recently released a free iPhone app called ShopNoGMO which provides consumers with a handy resource they can access right from the grocery aisle for identifying non-GM brand choices across 22 grocery categories.

In addition, leading natural food retailers launched the ‘Non-GMO Project’ in 2005 to develop an independent certification system to help consumers identify non-GM foods where they shop. Whole Foods, Seeds of Change, Nature’s Way and 400 other U.S. and Canadian firms now support the campaign, and today several thousand grocery products sport the easy-to-recognize “Non-GMO” seal. The project also has an ingredient database to help food producers find non-GM ingredients to use in their processed foods. Project leaders hope their work can help prevent new GM crops from gaining a foothold and build a strong non-GM food sector across the country, despite like of federal intervention.

SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk®, c/o E – The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk@emagazine.com. E is a nonprofit publication. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe; Request a Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.

Despite the economic recession, 59 percent of those responding said they plan to spend the same or more on products from socially responsible companies.

The second annual Corporate Social Responsibility Perceptions Survey was conducted by research-based consultancy Penn Schoen Berland in partnership with brand consulting firm Landor Associates and strategic communications firm Burson-Marsteller.  The results are based on 1,001 online interviews with the general public in the U.S. conducted in mid-February 2010.

The survey found that 75 percent of consumers say it is important for companies in each of the 14 industries tested to be socially responsible. Of those industries, Food, Consumer Goods and Retailers were perceived as performing best, while Financial Services, Healthcare and Media were perceived as performing worst.

Food giant General Mills was perceived to be the most responsible of 64 tested brands.

The survey found that more than half (55%) of consumers are unsure about the meaning of “corporate social responsibility.”  Of those who do know what “CSR” means, 20% percent said it involves “giving back to the community” while 19% say it is about “self-regulation and accountability.” Responsible environmental (16%) and employment (16%) practices were seen as the top ways to be socially responsible, the survey found.

Seventy-eight percent of employees are “unclear or unaware” of their employers’ CSR activities, according to the survey.  One third of workers said they would take a pay cut to work for a socially responsible firm.  About one half (49%) of 18-24 year old employees would take a pay cut to work at a socially responsible firm compared with 33% of 35-39 year olds and 25% of employees 65 years of age and older, the survey found.

Dear EarthTalk: I see a lot of “healthy snacks” being marketed for kids that list “natural flavors” but don’t identify them. Should I use these products? -- John Stein, Methuen, MA

Beloved food writer Michael Pollan recommends steering clear of foods that advertise their green attributes on their label. According to his line of reasoning, why give a child a fruit roll-up when you can give him or her a piece of fruit? Only processed foods need to advertise what’s natural about them, whereas an apple speaks for itself, providing wholesome nutrition without the need for marketing hype.

But most of us depend on the occasional packaged or processed food, so choosing between the lesser of two evils sometimes has to be the way to go. If a product lists natural ingredients on its label—anything from real fruits, vegetables and nuts to cereals, grains and other healthy foods you can recognize without a food dictionary on hand—it’s probably better than a food reliant on artificial flavors and sweeteners.

“One way for your kids to enjoy healthy snacks is to get them started on naturally sweet foods,” says Christine Steendahl of Kid Approved Meals, which sells menus and shopping lists to parents looking for guidance in meal preparation. “Since most kids crave sweets…naturally sweet foods such as fruits are perfect,” she says. Real bananas, oranges, apples, cherries, strawberries and other fruits are popular with most kids. “You can mix in yogurt or even make a fruit smoothie with some milk and a drop of chocolate or other natural flavors,” Steendahl suggests.

“One thing to recognize about children is that if they try enough types of natural and healthy snacks, they will find one that they enjoy,” says Steendahl. “The problem is that many times parents give up trying to find the snacks that their kids like and settle for popular junk foods instead.” She stresses the importance of teaching kids which snacks to eat and which to avoid early in life so that they can sidestep obesity problems altogether. Nuts and dry cereals, for example, are good alternatives to chips and other junk food.

According to California-based pediatrician and author William Sears, who markets his own line of healthy kids snacks called Lunchbox Essentials, parents should make sure that any snack foods they give their family members provide both fiber and protein, which give the feeling of fullness, and taste good as well. He adds that parents should learn to read labels so they can tell which products contain hydrogenated oils, artificial colors, preservatives and high-fructose corn syrup—all of which should be avoided.

As a last resort for especially finicky kids, parents can find packaged snacks that might look like junk food but are actually healthy and nutritious, including certain brands of fruit roll-ups and granola bars. Look in the snack aisle of your local natural foods market for such items, and don’t be afraid to ask store personnel for recommendations. It’s important to take your child’s nutrition seriously. Whether he or she ever realizes it, you are setting patterns that will enable them to live healthier and longer lives.

CONTACTS: Michael Pollan, www.michaelpollan.com; Kid Approved Meals, www.kidapprovedmeals.com; Dr. Sears’ Lunchbox Essentials, www.drsearshealthykids.com.

SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk®, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php. EarthTalk® is now a book! Details and order information at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalkbook.

Photo: Tree & J. Hensdill, courtesy Flickr