Over $8 billion was earned in 2015 from the sustainability efforts of 153 survey respondents. Signaling a new way of defining the source of business value, these notable gains were uncovered in a new Pure Strategies’ study. Taking inspiration from sustainability’s positive performance, companies should position their programs to generate the greatest business benefits and to measure and celebrate the gains.

Nestlé and Unilever are helping set the standard for sustainable agriculture, according to a survey of over 150 global sustainability heads conducted by Pure Strategies. The responses identified these firms as the leaders and revealed that farm-level engagement is a top priority across industries such as apparel, home and personal care, and life sciences.

CDP and CSR reporting season has barely passed before over-worked sustainability managers must turn their attention to customer sustainability surveys. While these can be resource-intensive, they also present opportunities to further your sustainability initiatives internally, elevate your brand’s standing with key customers, and stand out in the marketplace. Before survey season hits, you should start gathering relevant information and, more importantly, devise a plan to improve your performance.

Does your business embrace the disruptive forces of a low-carbon world as Ford and Ben & Jerry’s are? Over the next 10 years, climate change will drive industrial disruption at rates that previously seemed unimaginable. In response, policy makers must come to terms with the need to keep the mean global temperature rise to 1.5°C.

Sustainability is being driven by large forces at play. Consider that we have a global population of more than 7 billion people who all want to live like we do here in the U.S. That puts incredible strain on our natural resources. Add to that the fact that the climate is warming at an unprecedented rate. These global forces present an ethical challenge for us all, but they also present a business opportunity. The businesses that get out ahead and help to solve these issues will prosper. Taking it down a notch, there are three reasons for small businesses to consider sustainability in their business practices: productivity, risk reduction and growth.

Radio Flyer and Beautycounter stand among leading companies taking proactive steps to manage chemicals in their products and supply chains. These and just over twenty other firms benchmarked their programs and performance in the newly launched Chemical Footprint Project.

In a world where chemical regulations and market demands for safer chemicals are on the rise, how can investors know which firms are most at risk from these emerging trends and which are best positioned to capture new markets with safer products? How can institutional purchasers know which suppliers are taking the systematic steps necessary to identify and reduce chemicals of high concern in products and supply chains? And how can companies demonstrate to purchasers and investors their leadership in chemicals management when they lack an objective, third-party metric that recognizes their efforts?

At the corporate level, pricing carbon allows companies to redirect funds toward sustainability investments, such as renewables, energy efficiency and energy storage, which can drive further cost savings in the long run. To get a better understanding of pricing carbon in the corporate world, we spoke with Tim Greiner, co-founder and managing director at sustainability consulting firm Pure Strategies.

The Guardian featured Pure Strategies’ report, Advancing on the Path to Product Sustainability, in an examination of the financial benefits of sustainability. Our research found the top business value gained was employee engagement, with 33% of survey respondents realizing $5m or more.

A critical step in developing an effective restricted chemicals list is considering what will be used instead, because replacements may be just as much of a concern as the original substance. Many companies include additional materials that are similar to a primary chemical of concern and carefully evaluate alternatives in order to avoid a regrettable substitution. However, companies may determine that a material does not have a safer or effective alternative and should not be replaced yet.