To say it straight away: for me, the goal of sustainability and the major challenges associated with it, such as climate protection, are non-negotiable cornerstones of a modern economy.

As a family business owner and mother, it is very important to me that the next generation can live as good as we do today. A healthy planet is an integral part of this.

For me, sustainability is therefore an obligation.

But while the question of whether we want to protect our climate has been answered, the question of the right path remains unanswered.

But we are increasingly realising that time is pressing to finally act. In my view, this makes it all the more important that we remain honest with ourselves. Climate protection and sustainability cannot simply be decided or imposed from above.

We must therefore recognise this: Without a strong economic foundation, we will fail. These are my three theses.

The sometimes acrimonious budget debates of recent weeks have impressively demonstrated this: Climate protection and sustainability cost money. In times when more and more funds were available, this did not seem to be a problem. Now we are almost stunned to realise that when money is lacking, it becomes a problem.

This doesn't just affect public budgets. It applies all the more to private individuals and companies. If I want to implement a climate protection measure in my family business ROWE and I don't have the money for it - then I can't do it. If people don't have the money for an expensive new heating system, they will stick with their old oil boiler with all its disadvantages. At this point, it doesn't help to rely on subsidies or other funding instruments. The latest debates have shown that, firstly, these cannot be relied on.

Money has to be earned. Climate protection can therefore only work if we do not harm our economy in the process - on the contrary, if we ensure economic growth.

At the same time, the following is essential: Sustainability must remain affordable. Even if we succeed in having a strong economy on the one hand, we will fail if the corresponding measures become increasingly expensive. This not only jeopardises their feasibility, but also their support among the population.

We are already experiencing this. The price increases of recent months and the prospect of mobility, energy and heating becoming ever more expensive have contributed significantly to the success of right-wing populist and even extremist forces in this country.

I am a democratic person through and through. It is therefore clear to me that we can only successfully protect the climate if the measures are supported by the majority. To achieve this, they must remain affordable for ordinary incomes - and for companies.

My third thesis is written entirely from the perspective of the entrepreneur. In my view, it is the most powerful instrument for more climate protection.

All bans and restrictions are only half as powerful as intrinsic motivation. And what is a stronger incentive in this area than the prospect of a better return on investment?

If both companies and the general public see climate protection measures as an opportunity to benefit directly and personally, then they will implement them with the greatest vigour. Even if the financial perspective is expanded to include sustainability aspects as part of CSRD, i.e. reporting on ESG measures, I think it is obvious that companies will first invest in projects where they see an immediate effect. 

For us companies, this means that if we see opportunities to earn money or save costs with sustainable products and services, we will do so. And in doing so, we automatically help the climate at the same time.

That is why we at ROWE are not only developing innovative new sustainable products - we have also invested heavily in increasing efficiency. Because that saves energy and a lot of money in the long term. So both sides benefit.