With retail sales increasing 3.5 percent in 2017, compared to a gross domestic product growth rate of 2.3 percent the same year, the retail sector is showing signs of healthy growth thus the so-called ‘retail apocalypse’ is a myth, according to a new study from Deloitte. The study, “The great retail bifurcation: Why the retail “apocalypse” is really a renaissance,” found that the retail sector is healthy and shows strong signs of growth. Rather than a battle of online against brick-and mortar, Deloitte found that retail is changing in line with consumer income bifurcation, with both high-end and price-conscious retailers seeing revenues soar, growing 81 percent and 37 percent, respectively, while those in the middle realized a mere 2 percent increase in sales over the past five years.
“Despite the popular narrative, the ‘retail apocalypse’ is far from reality,” said Kasey Lobaugh, principal, Deloitte Consulting LLP and the report’s lead author. “Brick-and-mortar retail is not on or near its deathbed. In fact, we’re seeing retailers open new stores at an astounding pace, and physical retail is growing alongside digital. Rather than witnessing the demise of retail, our study shows a dramatic change in line with the impact of consumer bifurcation along economic lines. While specific retailers may see an apocalypse, others see opportunity.”
Based on a survey of more than 2,000 consumers and an analysis of a large collection of US-based publicly traded retailers, the study examines a growing disparity between consumer income cohorts and highlights the impact of this economic bifurcation on retailers.
Consumer income bifurcation defies traditional economic metrics
While strong economic indicators paint a promising portrait on the surface, the study looked deeper and found massive gaps in consumers’ discretionary spending power. Incremental income generated since the recession has disproportionately gone to high-income households, with virtually all income growth between 2007 and 2015 going to the top 20 percent.
Deloitte found that the household economic health correlates to consumer spending behavior. Key economic findings from the study include:
- Economic well-being: Just one-in-five surveyed consumers (20 percent) are better off in 2017 than they were in 2007 in terms of disposable income, with little to spend on discretionary retail categories. Overall, four in five consumers (80 percent) have fewer funds for traditional retail segments such as apparel. Alongside this trend, high-income consumers are 10 percent more likely to report spending more over the last year.
- Rising costs: Faced with stagnant levels of income, lower-earning consumers have seen the costs of nondiscretionary items skyrocket: health care expenditures have risen 62 percent, education 41 percent, food 17 percent and housing 12 percent, according to Deloitte’s analysis of reports from Bureau of Labor Statistics.
- New expenses: Modern consumer essentials like mobile phones and data plans now take up an increased portion of discretionary spending, stealing share from traditional retail categories. Low-income consumers feel the brunt of the impact, spending 3.6 percent of their income on digital devices and data, compared to just 0.71 percent for high earners.
“Households have diverged along economic lines and now people’s respective income levels are steering their behaviors and dictating the success of retail segments,” said Robert Stephens, senior manager, Deloitte Consulting LLP and co-author of the study. “More affluent shoppers have fueled high-end retail as their income and net worth have grown, while lower-earning consumers, faced with growing expenses and dramatically less disposable income, have turned toward price-conscious stores. Retailers that try to court all consumers will likely be challenged as income bifurcation leaves different shoppers with differing motivations.”
Retail isn’t dying, and premier and low-price are thriving
In line with consumer bifurcation by income level, Deloitte found the retail market is also bifurcating along economically-driven divides. Through an analysis of publicly traded retailers, Deloitte defined three retail cohorts: premier retailers that deliver value via premier product and experience offerings; price-based retailers that deliver value by selling at the lowest possible prices and clearly communicating that proposition to customers and balanced retailers that deliver value via a balance of price and/or promotion.
Examined side by side, these three groups offer differing narratives that align with income-driven changes in consumer behavior:
- More stores are opening than closing: From 2015 to 2017, price-based retailers gained 2.5 stores for every store balanced retailers closed.
- Revenues have grown: Premier retailers have seen 40x more revenue growth than that of balanced retailers over the last five years, with revenues soaring 81 percent versus a mere 2 percent increase for balanced retailers. Price-based retailers, meanwhile, have seen their revenues steadily increase 37 percent over the same period.
- Sales climb overall: Premium (8 percent) and price-based (7 percent) retailers’ sales rose in the past year, while sales of balanced retailers declined by 2 percent.
Income bifurcation Impacts consumers’ category, channel and spend decisions
Income bifurcation has triggered differences in consumer shopping behavior between economic groups. Beyond their actual spending levels, these two groups also differ in how and where they make purchases:
- Preferred formats: Low-income consumers are 44 percent more likely to shop at discount retailers than other groups. These consumers are also more likely than others to shop at supermarkets, convenience stores and department stores.
- Channel choices: The majority (58 percent) of low-income consumers are choosing to shop in store, while 52 percent of high-income consumers prefer to shop online. High-income consumers were also 42 percent more likely to report an increased propensity to shop online over the prior three months.
- Shopping around: In-store spending fragmentation – or the number of retailers a consumer regularly shops – is 17 percent higher amongst high-income consumers. Fragmentation is even more exaggerated online, as affluent consumers are 40 percent more fragmented for online retailers than consumers in the lowest income cohort.
The millennial money myth
While millennials are often lumped together and portrayed as the source of disruption, Deloitte found that for the most part, millennial behavior (by income group) is virtually indistinguishable from other generations. Low-income millennials track closely with all other generations when it comes to whether they have spent in stores recently (79 percent and 81 percent, respectively), and in the middle-income cohort, there’s no difference between millennials and other generations, with 81 percent of each group having made purchases in-store.
However, high-income millennials, who make up less than one-fifth (19 percent) of the total millennial generation and just 6 percent of the population overall, skew perceptions of Gen Y as a whole. High-income millennials are 24 percent less likely than all non-millennial shoppers to shop in a store, and may be the source of the idea that millennials are the end of brick-and-mortar retail. When averaged together, the high-income shopper’s behaviors skew the averages for the entire millennial group.
Commitment to ESG Reporting is Driving Change within Global Corporations
New case studies from the World Economic Forum show how comprehensive environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) reporting has started to drive corporate transformation around the world, particularly in sustainability efforts and company culture.
Based on case studies from companies reporting on the Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics, the white paper found examples of specific strategy and operations changes as a result. These include initiatives such as new approaches to water management in real estate and implementing biodiversity strategies and targets.
The case studies also indicate that despite some progress, companies are still struggling with competing and disparate ESG frameworks around the world. As regulators begin to roll out mandatory ESG reporting across regions, alignment will be key to ensuring that the clarity and efficacy of ESG reporting continues to improve globally.
We’re happy that support continues to grow for this set of metrics even in the face of geopolitical challenges, the lingering global pandemic and economic disruptions of the past two years,” said Emily Bayley, Head of Private Sector Engagement, ESG, World Economic Forum. “As this growth continues and jurisdictions transition from voluntary to mandatory sustainability reporting standards, we hope these learnings can provide valuable insights for companies that are just getting started on sustainability reporting and those that have been doing it for years.”
ESG-Driven Corporate Impacts
The Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics Initiative case studies engaged a global set of companies to gather how, and if, their ESG reporting has informed corporate transformation both internally and externally.
Examples of these transformations include:
Stakeholders told Ecopetrol their report was too long – the Forum’s core metrics helped the company focus on reporting topics that are most material and will generate value.
The metrics go beyond ESG to capture commercial metrics on employment, economic contribution, investment and tax. This delivers “an annual dashboard of comparable data on both sustainability and prosperity that will provide us with a snapshot of how healthy our company is”.
The core metric on water consumption and withdrawal in water-stressed areas led the company to encourage its teams and clients to agree water management plans and targets. It may even influence where the company rents office space in the future.
Accurate reporting on the environmental and social impacts of its operations. For example, the metric on resource circularity points customers towards the most impactful products on the market and drives the company’s innovation agenda to design more sustainable solutions.
Reporting on the Forum’s metrics has increased the value of transparency within the company, leading to conversations and progress on difficult issues.
The metric on land use and ecological sensitivity contributed to Schneider’s new approach to biodiversity, as it adapted its reporting and asked all sites to set specific biodiversity action plans.
ESG Regulatory Landscape
While progress has been made on the creation and implementation of meaningful and effective ESG disclosures globally, concerns remain about the disparate nature of the competing and complex ESG reporting mechanisms that exist today.
There are also concerns that as reporting becomes mandated there could be less transparency because people will not want to disclose more than they have to. As mandated ESG reporting becomes more widespread, both regulators and internal advocates should ensure corporations understand the full value of transparency on sustainability and other ESG issues.
Addressing this issue is particularly important as regulators in different regions begin to roll out their mandatory reporting requirements. Focus on a common set of comprehensive and material metrics will be important for both the efficacy and feasibility of ESG reporting in the coming months. As much as possible, the European Union, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation should align their metrics to ensure companies are able to implement effective ESG reporting globally.
Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics Initiative
The World Economic Forum and the coalition of companies adopting the Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics, engaged with the preparatory working group and are continuing the dialogue with the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) technical teams under the IFRS Foundation as they go through the standard-setting process. The metrics are expected to form part of the ISSB “exposure draft” next year on cross-thematic disclosures and metrics.
Announced at the World Economic Forum Sustainable Development Impact Meetings 2022, these case studies build on the earlier report to showcase progress on the commitment made by companies at the Annual Meeting in 2020. Since then, 186 global companies, with a combined market capitalization of over $6.5 trillion, have adopted the Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics. Of these, 126 companies have disclosed against the metrics in their mainstream reports for either one or two years.
Trade in 25 Technologies Can Help Climate Action
Based on 30 interviews with industry and academia, the Accelerating Decarbonization through Trade in Climate Goods and Services report highlights technologies with high, immediate emissions-cutting potential, in five categories – refrigerants, energy supply, buildings, transport and carbon capture and storage (CCS). The list of technologies can guide trade ministers looking to support climate action.
“Climate change is a global concern,” says Sean Doherty, Head of International Trade at the World Economic Forum. “Our response must draw upon the innovation and capacities of the whole world, not be held back by protectionism.”
Trade collaboration on climate has been limited to date with trade and climate practitioners working in separate silos. New efforts are emerging now, however, to address the linkages between these two areas.
“There is no time to waste to limit global warming to 1.5°C,” adds Jean-Pascal Tricoire, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Schneider Electric. “We need to decarbonize three times more, three times faster. The good news is that we have the technologies to do it. Solutions are not limited to renewable energy. It actually starts with energy efficiency, electrification and digitization. If deployed at full potential, we can eliminate 70% of what we’re emitting today.”
The report also highlights non-tariff barriers that affect trade in climate technologies. Regulatory cooperation around product testing or labelling requirements, for example, could reduce friction in getting emissions-cutting goods to market. Interviewees also noted that climate action is held back by trade barriers to the services needed to operate climate technologies. The report suggests a way to identify these climate services for priority trade cooperation.
“Our transition to a low-carbon economy will hinge on the deployment of a number of key technologies that are both mature and widely available, as detailed in this important report on the nexus of decarbonization and international trade, including energy efficiency, electric vehicles, green hydrogen, smart buildings and more,” says Björn Rosengren, Chief Executive Officer of ABB. “ABB’s contributions to this new report from the Alliance of CEO Climate Leaders underscore our support for removing and reducing barriers to trade in climate goods and services to speed the drawdown of global emissions.”
More efforts are needed to engage developing countries in trade efforts on climate. Over 750 million people worldwide lack reliable electricity access, mainly in sub-Saharan Africa. Developing economy industries must decarbonize and leapfrog the latest technologies to remain competitive in global value chains moving towards net zero. Some developing economies will need support in creating a climate-friendly trade and technology strategy. Global and local industries can help policymakers understand the criss-crossing of value chains that drive economic activity and how to align these flows to the climate agenda.
“Climate change knows no borders and encouraging better trade between countries can ensure the transfer of valuable knowledge, new technologies and skills to improve energy efficiency in homes around the world,” says Hakan Bulgurlu, Chief Executive Officer of Arcelik. “It is critical to our ultimate goal of achieving net-zero targets.”
To support an increased understanding of trade, value chains and climate action, the Climate Trade Zero community will host dialogues and support countries with actionable analysis.
East Asia and Pacific Sustaining Growth, Restraining Inflation, but Facing Risks Ahead
Growth in most of developing East Asia and the Pacific rebounded in 2022 from the effects of COVID-19, while China has lost momentum because of continued measures to contain the virus, a World Bank report said on Monday.
Looking ahead, economic performance across the region could be compromised by slowing global demand, rising debt, and a reliance on short-term economic fixes to cushion against food and fuel price increases.
Growth in developing East Asia and the Pacific outside of China is forecast to accelerate to 5.3% in 2022 from 2.6% in 2021, according to the World Bank’s East Asia and Pacific October 2022 Economic Update. China, which previously led recovery in the region, is projected to grow by 2.8% in 2022, a sharp deceleration from 8.1% in 2021. For the region as a whole, growth is projected to slow to 3.2% this year from 7.2% in 2021, before accelerating to 4.6% next year, the report says.
“Economic recovery is under way in most countries of East Asia and the Pacific,” said World Bank East Asia and Pacific Vice President Manuela V. Ferro. “As they prepare for slowing global growth, countries should address domestic policy distortions that are an impediment to longer term development.”
Growth in much of East Asia and the Pacific has been driven by recovery in domestic demand, enabled by a relaxation of COVID-related restrictions, and growth in exports. China, which constitutes around 86% of the region’s output, uses targeted public health measures to contain outbreaks of the virus, inhibiting economic activity.
The global economic slowdown is beginning to dampen demand for the region’s exports of commodities and manufactured goods. Rising inflation abroad has provoked interest rate increases, which in turn have caused capital outflows and currency depreciations in some East Asia and Pacific countries. These developments have increased the burden of servicing debt and shrunk fiscal space, hurting countries that entered the pandemic with a high debt burden.
As countries of the region seek to shield households and firms from higher food and energy prices, current policy measures provide much-needed relief, but add to existing policy distortions. Controls on food prices and energy subsidies benefit the wealthy and draw government spending away from infrastructure, health and education. Lingering regulatory forbearance, aimed to ease lending through the pandemic, can trap resources in failing firms and divert capital from the most dynamic sectors or businesses.
“Policymakers face a tough tradeoff between tackling inflation and supporting economic recovery,” said World Bank East Asia and Pacific Chief Economist Aaditya Mattoo. “Controls and subsidies muddy price signals and hurt productivity. Better policies for food, fuel, and finance would spur growth and insure against inflation.”
Natural gas markets expected to remain tight into 2023 as Russia further reduces supplies to Europe
Russia’s continued curtailment of natural gas flows to Europe has pushed international prices to painful new highs, disrupted trade flows...
Mozambique Readies For Developing Mphanda Nkuwa Hydroelectric Project
Mozambique is ramping up efforts toward establishing a sustainable energy supply to drive its economy especially the industrialization programme. As...
A Matter of Ethics: Should Artificial Intelligence be Deployed in Warfare?
The thriving technological advancements have driven the Fourth Industrial Revolution nowadays. Indeed, the rapid growth of big data, quantum computing,...
HL7 FHIR, the Future of Health Information Exchange?
Health Level 7 International is an association that calls itself a non profit organization, ANSI-accredited standards developing organization devoted to...
Women’s Plight During Natural Calamities: A Case Study of Recent Floods in Pakistan
Recently, at the United Nations general assembly, the Prime minister of Pakistan’s speech started with the challenge of climate change,...
Between the Greater Russia and the MAD
With ‘The Greater Historical Russia’, the impossible that the dream appears to be, and the Russian defeat at Liman and...
China’s economic slowdown and its implications for the rest of Asia
China’s economy has slowed down considerably since the past year. The key reasons for China’s slow growth are its stringent...
International Law4 days ago
Do we still live in a multipolar world?
Americas3 days ago
The latest Kissinger: Leadership and the eavesdropping on history
Eastern Europe4 days ago
Latvia is inundated with NATO
Russia4 days ago
Russia’s Great Game: Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson are now Part of the Russian Federation
Intelligence3 days ago
Ethnic War a Newfangled Pakistani Forward-policy for Afghanistan
South Asia3 days ago
The South Asian Triangle
Defense3 days ago
Urgency of Reviewing India-Pakistan’s CBMs & Risk Reduction Measures
Economy3 days ago
China-ASEAN Comprehensive Strategic Partnership: A Shared Future for Pursuing Regional Economy Integration