Sign in  |  Register  |  Help

Most Read on APEsphere

Most Commented on APEsphere

Blogs we like

Resources

 
By Andrew Newton on 14 Oct, 2009 - 02:37 UTC

Often when someone fights against accountability, they make their opponent's case for them.


Take three recent instances:


Attempts by British oil trading firm Trafigura to gag the Guardian newspaper from reporting on a question posed by a MP in Parliament about the company's existing secret gagging order preventing the newspaper from reporting on Trafigura's dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. Had Trafigura succeeded in preventing reporting on the parliamentary question, it would have represented a stunning override of parliamentary privilege. The attempt was undermined effectively by people on twitter who took it upon themselves to make the question public.


Then there is the reaction of UK-listed and based Vedanta Resources to being told by the UK National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises that the company had failed to consult on or look out for the interests of local people regarding its plans to construct a bauxite mine in Orissa, India. According to India's Business Standard, Mukesh Kumar, chief operating officer of VAL's Lanjigarh project responded:


“We condemn the findings of the UK-based agency. Our bauxite mining project at Niyamgiri hills has been cleared by the Supreme Court, the highest judicial authority in India. It is inappropriate for the agency of any other country to comment on a project being developed in India”


Even where that company is rooted in and takes advantage of capital markets in that other country?


Then there are the mounting attempts by corporations to shift their tax residence elsewhere from their actual base of operations in order to avoid tax (prompting this response from the UK tax authority) .


As corporations take ever greater liberties with the reach of democratic accountability, they make the case for global or at least extra-territorial regulation.

It is certainly an ambitious exercise, looking at estimated carbon emissions, company environmental policies and reputation perceptions.


Newsweek defends its methodology on the customary point of criticism: how can you compare a utility, say, with a bank? They point out that over 50% of the score relates to the strength of green policies (which anyone can implement) and reputation, all of which evens out the score somewhat.


I would add that there is no problem comparing high emitting industries with low emitting industries and finding that there is a cluster of high emitters near the bottom of the ranking. That is how it should be. Dirty industries should appear as they are. This table is not a ranking of overall social utility but of environmental credentials. If a cluster of oil extraction companies appeared in the top 100 it would be more than suspect; it would be incredible.


A particular concern I had was whether indirect impacts were adequately taken into account. Financial services have small direct footprints, but are the ultimate dirty industry in that they choose to finance all the others. The analysis of green policies brings this factor into the equation but a lack of transparency about the carbon impact of their loan and investment portfolios reduces the quality of analysis. For me this is a more worrying weak spot than the ranking's validity in comparing companies across different sectors.


One last observation: it is great to see that Newsweek used the extensive experience of two firms whose founders I have had the pleasure to meet: Peter Kinder's KLD Analytics and Paul Scott's CorporateRegister.com. Great to see such high caliber teams involved in producing the detail of something this high profile. Well done both.

A meeting of participants in the Kimberley Process has begun in Namibia amid doubts that the initiative is stemming trade in conflict diamonds.

 

To justify their concerns, rights groupsincluding Global Witness point to abuses of the scheme in Zimbabwe, and Venezuela's two-year withdrawal from the process to address compliance problems.

 

According to AFP, "Under Kimberley, rough diamonds are sealed in tamper-resistant containers and required to have forgery-resistant, conflict-free certificates with unique serial numbers each time they cross an international border."

 

But in January a mission by Partnership Africa Canada (PAC) found that Venezuela was still exporting diamonds despite the country's suspension from the process, implicating other process member states in the illicit diamond trade.

ADVERTISEMENT

Renewables will never meet energy needs, the former chief executive of oil company Saudi Aram-co told the Royal Academy of Engineering last week.

 

Abdallah Jum’ah dismissed hopes that renewable energy sources will meet more than a tiny proportion of the world's energy needs as a pipe dream, while arguing that the world had more than enough oil reserves to fill the gap

 

I guess this isn't really news. It is a useful reminder that there are leaders in the Middle East, too, that have no interest in seeking a sustainable future.

Faced with energy shortages, the climate might be right for budding wind energy entrepreneurs.

 

Feed-in tariffs and a sense of urgency among energy-intensive businesses and the World Cup organisers could produce the momentum needed to get renewable energy off the ground in South Africa.

A report on last week's Business in the Community Conference suggests it is getting easier to see who is committed to responsible business.

 

If a company's responsible business focus is on "giving back" then it appears those initiatives have been the first to suffer as cash flows tighten. Those were hardly indicative of a truly responsible approach to business in the first place.

 

More disturbing are tales of banks completely stripping out their CSR teams. Either those teams had the wrong kind of skills needed for rebuilding trust in the sector (i.e. they were focused on the goodwash version of CSR rather than on instilling an ethical culture and appropriate corporate governance mechanisms) or financial firms have not realised the extent of the problems their sector faces.

ADVERTISEMENT

Starting in 2010, India will begin incorporating measures of natural resource depletion within their measure of national income.

 

According to the Economic Times, an official from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation stated that the calculation would incorporate:

 

"the cost of recovery of polluted resources, which has to be used as a deflator to real GDP. Our green GDP may be significantly lower than real GDP as economic growth is resource-intensive".

 

China tried to measure a green GDP in 2004, but abandoned it after it triggered infighting between government departments and the political establishment. Environmental degradation had lowered GDP into the red.

 

Fifteen years after the execution of Nigerian human rights campaigners including Ken Saro-Wiwa, the families have settled with Shell Oil for $19.5 million.

 

The families of those killed maintain that Shell was complicit in the punishment metered out to the campaigners by the government. They brought their legal action under the Alient Tort Claims Act.

 

In agreeing to the settlement Shell admits no wrongdoing, instead maintaining that the settlement is being made to aid the "process of reconciliation".

 

According to the Financial Times report. $5 million of the award will go into a trust fund to aid the people of the Ogoniland region of the Niger Delta, an area that has suffered the full brunt of Nigeria's "resource curse".

 

The plaintiff's lawyers commented that this settlement represented another building block in establishing the liability of multinational corporations for human rights abuses committed abroad.

 

While a settlement does little to establish a principle, perhaps the ruling by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York last week will at least make one step in the process easier next time: it held that Shell's Nigerian subsidiary - Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria - has sufficient US connections to be tried in a US court.

Legislators and environmentalists continue to press their concerns regarding the potential hazards of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing (fracing). This article has a brief and clear description of the process of fracing (pronounced fracking) for those of us who have been wondering what this is all about. Federal legislators would like get this practice regulated by the US Environmental Protection Agency.

 

Chris Tucker, a lobbyist for a group of energy producers and royalty owners asks, "Why is 60 years that fracing has been used, why now? Why is everyone pissed off now?" Everyone is 'pissed off now' because of the recent development of the Marcellus Shale for the production of natural gas. The Marcellus Shale lies beneath a large portion of the United States, including such states as Louisiana, New  York, Arkansas Wyoming and Pennsylvania, among others. The drilling activity on the Marcellus Shale has thus increased the use of fracing to access the wealth beneath the surface. Tucker goes on to answer his own question, "...once the Marcellus Shale came out and it was clear that this was huge, it all came to the forefront."

 

Legislators, environmentalists and others worry that the chemicals used in fracing, already shown to be harmful to humans and other species, could leach into anc contaminate the ground water supply.

Over $140bn (£85bn) was invested in solar, wind and other clean energy solutions, compared with $110bn for gas and coal electricity generation.

 

China,India and other developing nations claimed the prize for the biggest growth in renewables investment, according to the United Nations figures.

The pre-trial court hearing  has been delayed for the case brought in New York against Shell for alleged complicity in Nigerian human rights abuses.

 

Separately, however, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York permitted the plaintiff's appeal against a lower court decision to dismiss the suit against Shell's Nigerian subsidiary. This permits the plaintiffs to build a case against Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria, which will also need to show that New York can have jurisdiction.

 

The case is being brought under the Alien Tort Claims Act.

The APEsphere troop

Shell Sets the Context

Posted by christinearena to the Case in Point blog

Last week three Shell executives answered questions regarding the Wiwa v. Shell case and the company's ongoing troubles in Nigeria... >>

  • 0
  • on 01 Jul 2009

Stakeholder Engagement? Shell Says, "Well, OK."

Posted by christinearena to the Case in Point blog

After initially declining to engage with stakeholders, Royal Dutch Shell executives are now open to questions regarding the Wiwa v. Shell case. >>

  • 0
  • on 18 Jun 2009

Stakeholder Engagement? Shell Says: “No, Thanks.”

Posted by christinearena to the Case in Point blog

This week’s $15.5 million human rights settlement spurred a social media movement. But so far, the company’s not playing along. >>

  • 0
  • on 12 Jun 2009

News by Impact