Corporate Social Responsibility sounds good, but does it make a difference? As it is now, not much, sez Keith Slack, senior policy advisor of Oxfam America, in Policy Innovations.
Luckily, Keith doesn’t stop there; in that nice Oxfam fashion, he gives us some ideas how to make CSR work.
What’s wrong with CSR? The prob is that often, corporations don’t do shit, except very vaguely “engage in dialogue.” Then corporations will just continue its biz as usual — and get green creds for “listening” and “caring.”
This is the problem Keith points too — It’s much too easy for corporations to greenwash their image by participating in CSR initiatives that don’t require that they actually change business practices.
So — How to solve this. Keith’s sez we need to identify what corporations are most interested in — namely, profitability — and what corporations need to achieve profitability — namely, access to capital and access to markets. Then, we need to link access to capital and markets with good corporate practices.
How? To address the access to capital, “the focus should fall on the private banks that finance transnational corporations.”
Respect for human rights and environmental standards could be made a legally-binding part of the loan agreements between the banks and the corporations. In other words, capital will be cut off from a project if serious human rights or environmental violations are found to have occurred.
But would banks do this? Keith concedes that this plan requires a big bank or two, with great foresight, taking leadership on this issue. While there’s reason to hope that this may happen, I don’t really see a way for the average consumer like me to push major banks to think ahead.
But Keith’s second idea — affecting access to markets — sounds more definite, and more like something I could actually take part in making happen:
Large institutions, such as public utilities, universities, pension funds, and corporations that consume significant volumes of materials or are brand-sensitive could adopt legally binding contracts that discontinue materials or stock purchases from corporations that operate irresponsibly. In this way, such institutions could force corporations to compete with each other to provide the most responsibly produced products.
As you know, many universities in particular have changed their buying practices in response to student activism. Coke’s been kicked out of some campuses, and Nestle’s been kicked out of many. Many universities have had to change where they get their apparel made, due to student protests against sweatshops. Starbucks and Peets — both of whom don’t care much about fair trade — have made fair trade coffee part of their product line for universities, in order not to lose marketshare to more responsible coffee companies.
And you don’t have to be part of a university to get involved; the same sort of thing can happen with local government and workplace purchasing decisions. The key, however, seems to be to try and influence these larger institutions to then influence corporations, instead of just relying solely on one’s own individual purchasing power.
What institution around you are you, or do you plan to be, influencing? Pick one, and let’s get to it.
Tags: oxfam, csr
When you have 2 neurologists living in the same house, you start collecting brains.
Having a sis who’s a doc is super convenient, cuz you can call her at all hours and ask ’bout all sortsa unnecessary medical questions.
Sis: No. That would be considered a conflict of interest, because we’re related.
* Bath Pamper Kit
* Holiday, Illumination, and Peace on Earth
A series that runs every Tuesday, where I ask questions unrelated to the environment, fair trade, or local politics that I’ve been wondering about but haven’t been able to google the answers to. Any advice is appreciated.
That’s right — WorldChainging and 
A red 
If the kid’s really little, get the 
Get a 