Ben & Jerry’s, the iconic ice cream brand known for its social activism, filed a lawsuit on Wednesday against its parent company, Unilever, accusing the consumer goods giant of censorship and threats.

The lawsuit claims Unilever attempted to dismantle Ben & Jerry’s independent board to silence its support for Palestinian refugees amidst the ongoing war in Gaza.

This legal move underscores the growing rift between the two companies, which has deepened since Ben & Jerry’s 2021 decision to halt sales in Israeli-occupied West Bank territories, citing inconsistency with its values.

The lawsuit asserts that Unilever tried to stifle Ben & Jerry’s efforts to express solidarity with Palestinian refugees, support US student protests against civilian casualties in Gaza, and call for an end to US military aid to Israel.

“Unilever has silenced each of these efforts,” the lawsuit reads.

Unilever, for its part, stated that it would “strongly defend” itself against the accusations, dismissing the claims made by Ben & Jerry’s social mission board.

Support Israel but not all its policies: Ben and Jerry’s founders

In 2021, Ben & Jerry’s announced it would stop selling ice cream in Israeli-occupied territories, igniting significant backlash.

The move led to financial repercussions for Unilever, including the divestment of shares by US pension funds and shareholder lawsuits.

The company, co-founded by Bennett Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, has voiced its views on topics such as environmental sustainability, economic inequality, and peace initiatives.

The founders, both “proud” Jews, stated in a 2021 New York Times article that their support for Israel does not preclude opposition to certain policies, paralleling their criticism of US policies.

A history of activism and conflict

Ben & Jerry’s has a longstanding reputation for taking bold stances on political and social issues, dating back to the 1980s.

The company’s first significant foray into political issues began with advocating for reduced US military spending and opposing the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Over the decades, the brand has taken positions on numerous issues, including climate change, marriage equality, racial justice, and criminal justice reform.

In 2013, Ben & Jerry’s publicly backed same-sex marriage, launching a special flavor, “Apple Pie,” to signal its support.

Similarly, following George Floyd’s murder in 2020 and the subsequent Black Lives Matter protests, Ben & Jerry’s released a powerful statement titled We Must Dismantle White Supremacy.

This statement urged the US Congress to pass HR 40, aimed at studying the effects of slavery and discrimination.

More recently, shortly after the results of the US presidential election were announced, the ice cream maker released a detailed statement titled ‘The 2024 Election Is Over, But The Work Isn’t,’ reiterating its support for causes such as access to abortion, stronger gun laws, and ending arms sales to Israel, among others.”

“Ben & Jerry’s will continue to unapologetically support the advocates who champion the above agenda regardless of who sits in the Oval Office,” it said.

(Unit sales of the leading ice cream brands in the United States in 2023, Source: Statista)

Using ice cream flavor as a means to take a stand

Ben & Jerry’s has consistently used creative ways to amplify its messages, including special edition flavors with political undertones.

In 1988, the company launched Rainforest Crunch to support Amazonian nut cooperatives.

The Peace Pop, also introduced in 1988, promoted 1% for Peace, a nonprofit founded by Ben & Jerry’s owners promoting international peace efforts.

Other notable flavors include Yes Pecan!, a nod to Barack Obama’s campaign, and Pecan Resist, which protested President Trump’s policies around racial and gender equity, climate change, LGBTQ rights, and refugee and immigrant rights.

The “Change Is Brewing” flavor, launched in partnership with Black-owned businesses, supported US Representative Cori Bush’s police reform bill.

The company’s liberal stance on the Iraq War in the early 2000s led to a counter-response from some conservatives, who formed Star Spangled Ice Cream- and marketed the company as a conservative alternative to Ben & Jerry’s.

This new entrant featured flavors like “Smaller Governmint” and “Navy Battle Chip,” playing on conservative ideas.

A culture of corporate activism

The company’s commitment to social justice extends to its leadership structure.

Ben & Jerry’s head of global activism strategy, Christopher Miller, described in a 2021 Harvard Business Review interview how the activism team collaborates closely with marketing to ensure that advocacy aligns with the brand’s voice.

The company’s activism efforts are managed by a dedicated team that increases its activity during significant social or political moments.

Ben & Jerry’s approach contrasts with the often cautious corporate responses seen from many other brands.

While most companies aim to avoid controversy, Ben & Jerry’s has cultivated credibility in activism through its unwavering commitment over the years.

“We believe business is among the most powerful entities in society. We believe that companies have a responsibility to use their power and influence to advance the wider common good. Over the years, we’ve also come to believe that there is a spiritual aspect to business, just as there is to the lives of individuals. As you give, you receive,” the founders said in the NYT article.

Bouquets and brickbats

Ben & Jerry’s activism has not been without consequences.

The company’s 2021 move related to halting sales in West Bank led to financial repercussions for Unilever, including the divestment of shares by US pension funds and shareholder lawsuits.

In 30 US states, regulations prohibit pension funds from investing in companies that refuse to conduct business with Israel.

Texas’s comptroller of public accounts, responsible for managing billions in public pension fund assets, took steps to blacklist Ben & Jerry’s if it was found to violate these laws.

Besides, the president of Israel called the move “a new kind of terrorism” that would have “serious consequences” for the company. 

Also, while many consumers appreciate the company’s commitment to progressive values, others view its actions as overly political or divisive.

It has also led to calls for boycotts and sparked debates about the role of corporations in social and political issues.

For some critics, Ben & Jerry’s involvement in international politics undermines the neutrality of business, while others argue that companies should use their platform to advocate for social change.

“In many cases, skepticism about corporate activism, of its performative nature and limited impact, is justified. But sometimes that kind of activism is all we have,” said Nesrine Malik, a Guardian columnist in a 2021 column.

“Ben & Jerry’s almost certainly conducted a rational cost-benefit analysis and found that such a move may harm the company, but not annihilate it,” she said.

The post The many flavors of Ben & Jerry’s corporate activism appeared first on Invezz

The eurozone economy is grappling with a growing set of challenges, from declining industrial output to rising global trade tensions.

Industrial production is contracting, growth forecasts are being downgraded, and the region’s largest economy is struggling to keep pace with global competitors.

Add to this the spectre of US trade protectionism, and the stakes for Europe’s economic future couldn’t be higher.

Despite record-low unemployment and easing inflation, the road to recovery remains uncertain.

Should Europeans worry about falling behind the rest of the world?

What is causing the industrial slump?

According to Eurostat, eurozone industrial production fell by 2.0% in September, marking one of the sharpest monthly declines in recent years.

The contraction was felt across key sectors, with capital goods and energy production suffering the largest losses.

Compared to a year earlier, industrial output is down 2.8%, emphasizing the depth of the recession in the sector.

High energy costs have been a persistent burden, particularly for energy-intensive industries.

Geopolitical tensions, including the war in Ukraine, have disrupted supply chains and kept prices elevated.

Meanwhile, weak demand from China has compounded these problems, especially for the eurozone’s struggling automotive sector, which has seen global sales falter.

The structural issues in the industrial sector highlight a larger problem: the eurozone’s heavy reliance on external demand.

As global economic conditions weaken, the region’s dependence on exports leaves it exposed to external shocks.

How is Germany driving the downturn?

Germany, the eurozone’s economic engine, is at the heart of its industrial decline.

In September, German industrial production contracted by 2.7%, the steepest fall among major eurozone economies.

Forecasts for Germany’s economic growth are bleak, with a predicted contraction of 0.1% in 2024 and only 0.7% growth in 2025.

Several factors contribute to this underperformance.

Germany’s manufacturing sector, particularly its automotive and machinery industries, faces stiff competition from foreign rivals.

Labour shortages in the construction sector further exacerbate the country’s economic woes.

Additionally, geopolitical uncertainty has weighed heavily on investor confidence, stalling critical industrial projects.

Political instability is another challenge.

Following the resignation of coalition partners, Chancellor Olaf Scholz has called early elections for February 2025.

This political turmoil adds uncertainty at a time when Germany’s economy desperately needs clear and decisive leadership.

Is inflation under control?

After peaking at 9.2% in 2022, eurozone inflation is expected to decline to 2.4% in 2025 and reach the European Central Bank’s target of 2.0% by the fourth quarter of that year.

Falling energy and food prices have been the primary drivers of this disinflationary trend.

While this offers some relief to households and businesses, it hasn’t translated into a robust recovery in consumer spending.

Despite record-low unemployment at 5.9%, households are saving more than expected, reflecting a relatively pessimistic behaviour due to economic uncertainty. 

This restrained spending has slowed the eurozone’s consumption-driven growth, which has traditionally been a key driver of its GDP.

What are the risks of a trade war?

The eurozone’s open economy makes it highly sensitive to global trade policies, and the prospect of US tariffs keeps growing.

President-elect Donald Trump has pledged to impose 10% tariffs on imports, including those from the EU. 

With €850 billion ($898 billion) worth of goods traded annually between the two economies, the impact could be severe.

Germany, whose economy heavily relies on exports, is particularly vulnerable.

The Bundesbank estimates that these tariffs could shave 1.0% off Germany’s GDP, compounding its existing struggles.

EU officials have warned that a rise in protectionist policies could disrupt global trade and further weaken the eurozone’s already fragile recovery.

Are there any bright spots?

Not all eurozone countries are facing the same level of difficulty. Spain stands out as a success story, with GDP expected to grow by 3.0% in 2024 and 2.3% in 2025.

Strong tourism and government-led investment initiatives have driven its robust performance.

Italy and France are also seeing modest improvements.

Italy’s growth is forecasted to increase from 0.7% in 2024 to 1.0% in 2025, while France continues to struggle with fiscal challenges but remains on a path of gradual recovery.

Lower inflation and improving credit conditions are expected to support investment growth across the region, offering a glimmer of hope.

What does the future hold for Europe?

The eurozone’s recovery depends on addressing its structural vulnerabilities.

High energy costs, weak industrial demand, and geopolitical tensions remain significant challenges. 

The region’s reliance on global trade makes it particularly exposed to shifts in US trade policy, especially with proposed tariffs threatening key export sectors.
Structural reforms are needed to boost competitiveness, reduce energy costs, and foster domestic demand.

While lower inflation and improving investment conditions provide reasons for optimism, the eurozone’s path to sustained growth will depend on its ability to adapt to both internal and external pressures.

The post Why is the eurozone falling behind in the global economy scorecard? appeared first on Invezz

Oil prices were slightly higher on Monday as tensions between Russia and Ukraine escalated over the weekend. 

According to reports, Russia launched its biggest air strike on Ukraine in almost three months on Sunday, damaging the latter’s power system. 

The escalation comes at a time when oil prices have been falling due to concerns over poor demand and a potential oversupply in 2025. 

At the time of writing, the price of Brent crude on Intercontinental Exchange was $71.14 per barrel, up 0.1%.

The West Texas Intermediate crude oil was $66.98 per barrel, also up 0.1% from the previous close. 

The rise in prices have been limited as China’s oil imports have continued to fall, while processing of crude has also declined last month. 

China is the top importer of crude oil in the world. 

Russia-Ukraine tensions

Reuters reported that the US has changed its stance, and the Joe Biden administration has allowed Ukraine to use US-made weapons against Russia. 

According to two US officials and a source familiar with the decision quoted by Reuters, the Biden administration has allowed Ukraine to use US-based weapons to strike deep into Russia.

The Kremlin had earlier warned that it would see the move to loosen limits on Ukraine’s use of US weapons as a significant escalation. 

So far, the war between Russia and Ukraine has not resulted in any loss of crude oil from Russia.

Russia is one of the top exporters of oil even with heavy sanctions from the western countries. 

However, analysts believe that if Ukraine decides to attack oil facilities in Russia, supply will be at major risk. 

IG markets analyst Tony Sycamore told Reuters:

Biden allowing Ukraine to strike Russian forces around Kursk with long-range missiles might see a geopolitical bid come back into oil as it is an escalation of tensions there, in response to North Korean troops entering the fray.

However, the gloomy outlook on demand and lingering threats of an oversupply mean that prices may not rise sharply. 

Gloomy demand outlook

Last week, both the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and the International Energy Agency scaled down their forecasts for growth in global oil demand. 

While OPEC’s predictions are a bit too optimistic, the cartel still revised down its forecasts for the fourth consecutive month. 

OPEC expects demand to grow by 1.8 million barrels per day in 2024 and a further 1.5 million barrels per day next year.

Both projections had been cut by a bit over 100,000 barrels per day from its previous estimates. 

In the case of IEA, the agency expects growth in global oil demand below the 1-million-barrels-per-day mark for both 2024 and 2025.

This was significantly lower than OPEC’s estimates. 

Moreover, IEA believes that the oil market is staring at a significant oversupply next year. Most of these oversupply concerns are because of poor demand. 

The IEA said non-OPEC oil supply, especially from the US and Brazil are expected to rise by 1.5 million barrels per day in 2025.

This will be more than enough to offset the expected growth in oil demand, it said. 

Moreover, the oversupply “is likely to be considerable if OPEC+ gradually scales back its voluntary production cuts of 2.2 million barrels per day in the coming year, as currently planned,” Carsten Fritsch, commodity analyst at Commerzbank AG, said. 

Prices likely to remain lower

With the current market balance, even if there are slight disruptions in supply from Russia, oil prices are likely to remain subdued. 

The expected supply increase next year is likely to offset any disruptions in the market. 

Moreover, OPEC+ is scheduled to unwind some of their voluntary production cuts and increase production by 180,000 barrels per day from January 1. 

Though the cartel had extended these cuts since June, falling market share of the OPEC countries, including Saudi Arabia had prompted the Kingdom to think about abandoning its desire for much higher oil prices. 

Barbara Lambrecht, analyst at Commerzbank, said in a report:

If the heavyweight Saudi Arabia is no longer willing to give up market share in favour of higher prices, and the cartel consequently adheres to the planned expansion of production, there is a risk of a massive oversupply next year, which is likely to cause prices to fall significantly.

Meanwhile, the uncertainty around the US Federal Reserve’s rate-cut cycle could also weigh on oil prices. 

As inflation remained sticky in the US, with a resilient labour market, Fed officials last week indicated that the central bank would have to be “careful” with further easing. 

Since September, the US Fed has cut interest rates by 75 basis points over the course of two meetings.

The market expects the central bank to cut rates by a further 25 bps in December.

Elevated rates increase borrowing costs, while limiting liquidity in the economy.

This is bearish for crude oil and other commodities. 

The post No respite in sight for weak oil prices even with heightened geopolitical tensions appeared first on Invezz