Eco-Bollocks Corporate Social Responsibility? by Anna Gurney

Some people laugh in the face of the sad, misguided daydreamer who puts the word “corporate” less than an ocean away from the words “social responsibility”. But, based on the premise that the revolution will not come because most people are too busy buying car insurance, I decided to look into the phenomenon of multinational companies caring about the environment.

The obvious way to stop doing environmental damage is to identify the things you have been doing badly and sort them out. For example: Aguas de Barcelona have diverted rivers towards industrial estates during their rampant and determined privatisation of Latin American water. Repsol, in their quest for “eco-friendly” biofuel, are responsible for increasing the rate of deforestation. Inditex might want to do something about the contamination from pesticides used in cotton production, and all supermarkets need to address the problem of biodiversity, which is being diminished as they sell food produced by transgenic-loving multinationals. Admit your mistakes and show us how you are going to improve.

Well, that’s how I understand being responsible, but, according to The Economist, 31% of businesses define CSR as “a way to maximise profits and pay attention to the interests of shareholders”. Alberto Andreu from the CSR department at Telefónica sees it as a “tool for risk management”, which basically means they voluntarily sign up to the UN Global Compact (showing commitment to environmental principles), employ a team of people to produce glossy documents about the good they aim to do, and thus avoid unsavoury media coverage. These defensive strategies help no one in the long term, and Inditex must have time-warped back to the eighties if they think building workshops in Venezuala is seen as anything other than patronising. “Ahhh pobres...we, your former colonisers, will guide you to development”.

G8 leaders love to think that multinational companies are not the cause of poor countries’ problems but are, through CSR, the solution to them. At the World Economic Forum, in February, Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary General of the UN, argued that the Global Compact has been a successful framework, with progress in the areas of climate change and water use. The glaring messages from the CEOs who spoke, however, were 1) everything they do – good or bad – is driven solely by profits and 2) voluntary participation in CSR frameworks is the future. Albert Sales, professor at Pompeu Fabra University, points out that the real need is not self-regulation but an international commitment to obey the law. Who is demanding global regulation for multinationals? Nobody – because nobody dares.

I’m an optimist and I can manage to find something good in all this. Firstly, the existence of CSR shows general acceptance that responsibility is expected. The window has been opened – just a crack, but enough for some organisations to get their claws in, and there is no doubt that the growth of CSR has been influenced by NGOs (e.g. the Nike boycott in the ’90s). Secondly, although it seems that 99% of CSR is focused on creating confusion and drowning out core problems like pollution by highlighting progress in, for example, “using renewable power for our new stores” (that’s Inditex again), there is that 1% where attitudes are changing and practices are improving.

I wonder, then, can ordinary people here in Barcelona help open the window so we can see the greenwash for what it is and demand genuinely responsible behaviour?

To be continued...