back to home

 

Business and Human Rights: a resource website

 

  General business & human rights: 2001  

See also other materials on "General business & human rights"

2001:

Firms mull anti-poverty role:...Long-term investors in emerging markets increasingly find that they have a role to play in times of war, refugee crises or humanitarian disasters. (BBC News, 6 Dec. 2001)

forthcoming conference: Corporate Citizenship: Meeting the Challenges (Centre for Social Markets: 4-5 December 2001, Calcutta, India)

"Greening Business from the Inside" - Solution or Smokescreen? We recently received a letter from Claude Fussler, Director of Stakeholder Relations at the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, challenging our analysis of his organisation's activities. We enclose it here, together with our response to Mr Fussler. (Corporate Europe Observer, Dec. 2001)

Corporations Behaving Badly: The Ten Worst Corporations of 2001 [Abbott Laboratories, Argenbright Security, Bayer, Coca Cola, Enron, ExxonMobil, Philip Morris, Sara Lee, Southern Co. and Wal-Mart] (Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman, Multinational Monitor, Dec. 2001)

Corporate Social Responsibility - an Investment not a Cost, says Commissioner: Having a well developed sense of social responsibility should be regarded as an investment for companies and not simply as a cost, said European Employment and Social Affairs Commissioner, Anna Diamantopoulou (EuropaWorld, 30 Nov. 2001)

Making companies behave:...where the bottom line is still profit, and the short-term flexibility often needed to achieve it, can the goal of sustainability become integral to business behaviour? ( David Lascelles, at openDemocracy website, 29 Nov. 2001)

Human Rights and Global Civilisation: 2nd Annual BP Lecture by Mary Robinson, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights [includes several paragraphs about business/human rights near the end of the lecture, in the section entitled: "Broadening the human rights coalition"] (Mary Robinson, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, 29 Nov. 2001)

Business as a Global Force for Good: Report Looks at Best Practices in International Corporate Community Involvement - A new study shows that companies that develop a well-engineered international community involvement strategy, and are open and transparent in communicating what they do, not only make a positive social impact, but can head off potential misunderstandings of their motives. (Center for Corporate Citizenship at Boston College, and ProbusBNW Limited, 26 Nov. 2001)

Multinational firms above the law, say rights activists [Indonesia]: Multinational companies have the potential of abusing the basic rights of local people in their operational areas, mostly in the developing countries, amid the absence of a mechanism to hold them accountable. In a public discussion held by the National Commission on Human Rights on the issue, rights activists pointed out that the companies' private status had given them impunity to avoid accountability...In the discussion, the activists called for a mechanism to make the multinational corporations be accountable for any human rights violations. Ifdhal [Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy executive director Ifdhal Kasim] suggested broadening the scope of human rights laws to cover the corporations. (Tertiani ZB Simanjuntak, Jakarta Post, 23 Nov. 2001)

Crisis of conscience: Corporations are finding social responsibility boosts the planet and the bottom line - For many years, CSR was an elective rather than part of the core curriculum at business schools. Within corporations, it was often merely a synonym for philanthropy...But that is changing in response to growing protests against globalization, and rising awareness of environmental threats and social and economic disparities around the world. (Peter Sinton, San Francisco Chronicle, 22 Nov. 2001)

Privatizing Human Rights: the Roles of Government, Civil Society and Corporations - remarks to the Business for Social Responsibility Conference (Lorne W. Craner, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, 8 Nov. 2001)

Directing the Faithful Call for Corporate Social Responsibility - An interview with Sister Patricia Wolf, executive director of ICCR [Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility], reveals how ICCR has remained a driving force in the corporate social responsibility movement and what might be in store for ICCR in the future. (Mark Thomsen, SocialFunds.com, 8 Nov. 2001) 

Wanted - global authority to tame big business: British charity Christian Aid last week urged delegations heading for next week's World Trade Organisation conference in Qatar to consider the need for a new global regulator to bring corporations under legally binding control. (Reuters, 5 Nov. 2001)

new book: Commercial Law and Human Rights (edited by Stephen Bottomley [The Australian National University] and David Kinley [Monash University, Australia], Nov. 2001)

new book: Everybody's Business: Managing risks and opportunities in today's global society - Issues which until now have been 'soft' for business, such as environment, diversity and human rights - are now hard; hard to ignore, hard to manage and very hard to control if they go wrong (David Grayson & Adrian Hodges, Nov. 2001)

The Corporate State and the Public Interest (editorial, Multinational Monitor, Nov. 2001)

CSR Investment Is Not A Choice: Was Milton Friedman right in his assertion that the business of business is simply to keep within the law and to maximise profits? Or, does the power of corporations bring with it social responsibilities; what many argue are the trappings of power? Toby Kent draws upon a specific case of Del Monte in Kenya [DMKL]...animosity between DMKL’s management, staff and neighbouring communities grew to such an extent that by 2000 the unions, local NGOs and representatives of the Catholic church combined to organise a boycott of Del Monte’s products in Italy, one of the company’s key export markets. (Toby Kent, independent consultant, in Ethical Corporation Magazine, 30 Oct. 2001)

Sustainability and Profitability: Conflict or Convergence? Report on the Inaugural U.S. Senior Executives' Seminar, 29th October to 2nd November 2001 [includes summary of presentation on "Global Business and Human Rights" by Michael Posner, Executive Director of Lawyers Committee for Human Rights] (HRH The Prince of Wales's Business & the Environment Programme, developed and run by the University of Cambridge Programme for Industry, 29 Oct.-2 Nov. 2001)

The Business Case for Business Ethics: Ethics in business and corporate social responsibility are fast moving up the corporate agenda. (Sue Adkins, a Director of Business in the Community, Ethical Corporation Magazine, 26 Oct. 2001)

Real Ethics: It's time to think about ethical business in a new way. It shouldn't be a duty, an imposition, an add-on...Too often, today, the motivation to be ethical is external. Companies tackle social responsibility after a recent disaster, or to prevent a future disaster, or to conform to government regulations. (Robert Jones, Consultant Director of Wolff Olins, Ethical Corporation Magazine, 26 Oct. 2001)

Nobody's laughing now: We spoke to Richard Aylard and Jordana Friedman, Directors at Burson Marstellar’s Corporate Responsibility unit, who have a large number of corporate clients concerned about ethical business issues. We asked them about the thinking on both sides of the Atlantic on CSR and corporate advantage..."The first issues of a CSR nature that, to my mind, really captured and galvanized the public in the US were environmental issues in the early 90s and also, perhaps even more so, issues around human rights and labor rights that were affecting textile and shoe manufacturing firms and the retailers of those products in the US." (Ethical Corporation Magazine, 25 Oct. 2001)

Big investors press for social responsibility [UK]: Britain's biggest investors are to put greater pressure on companies to sign up to the principles of corporate social responsibility, under tough new guidelines published yesterday by the Association of British Insurers. The move by the ABI, whose members control one quarter of the UK stock market, represents a significant shift by investors, who have traditionally seen social responsibility as a "distraction". Douglas Alexander, minister for corporate social responsibility, who addressed yesterday's ABI conference, signalled that the government might make a new operating and financial review - giving details on a company's approach to social and environmental issues - mandatory for the "most economically significant" companies...New research published by the ABI, shows that there are risks to shareholder value from human rights abuses, poor treatment of workers, suppliers and customers. (Simon Targett, Financial Times, 24 Oct. 2001)

Saving big business from extinction: Business Books - The Chrysalis Economy / The Civil Corporation / Everybody's Business: Roger Cowe is persuaded by the argument that sustainable development requires companies to rethink their values (Roger Cowe, Financial Times, 24 Oct. 2001)

Socially Responsible Investment (Sri) - ABI Leads the Way with New Guidelines: The ABI (Association of British Insurers) today issued new investment guidelines to improve disclosure by Britain’s companies of their approach to corporate social responsibility. The guidelines respond to the widespread and growing interest in corporate social responsibility amongst the public and investors...The ABI also publishes today "Investing in Social Responsibility: Risks and Opportunities" by Roger Cowe. This is major new research which shows clearly the business case for Corporate Social Responsibility. Companies which take their social responsibilities seriously are successful companies...A company can put its business at risk if it fails to respond appropriately to social, ethical and environmental matters. The ABI guidelines call on companies to confirm in their annual report that they have assessed these risks and are managing them in such a way as to preserve or even enhance the value of the business. (Association of British Insurers, 23 Oct. 2001)

Responsible business in the global economy: A Financial Times Guide (Financial Times / Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum / supported by UBS, Oct. 2001)

[below are separate links to most of the articles in this Financial Times publication (in html format); alternatively click here to go to an html page where you can download the full report in PDF format]

Firms 'need forcing' to do the right thing: An Observer survey shows people don't believe companies will be socially responsible on their own. -...The research reveals high levels of scepticism among leaders from the voluntary sector, education, local government and media about companies' claims to be improving their environmental performance and benefiting communities. The panel of activists and leaders in key social sectors come across as firm believers in CSR [corporate social responsibility] but do not think the corporate world can be trusted with a voluntary approach, especially in the face of a recession. Their clear call for legislation comes as the [UK] Government is considering how to preserve its business-friendly stance and head off the anti-corporate sentiment fuelled by globalisation protests. (Roger Cowe, Observer [UK], 14 Oct. 2001)

Globalisation and its critics: Globalisation is a great force for good. But neither governments nor businesses, Clive Crook argues, can be trusted to make the case - ...globalisation, far from being the greatest cause of poverty, is its only feasible cure...Multinational businesses, for their part, with their enlightened mission statements, progressive stakeholder strategies, flower-motif logos and 57-point pledges of “corporate social responsibility”, implicitly say that they have a case to answer: capitalism without responsibility is bad. That sounds all right; the trouble is, when they start talking about how they will no longer put profits first, people (rightly) think they are lying. (Clive Crook, The Economist, 27 Sep. 2001) 

Corporations struggle to answer global protests: Branded villains by anti-globalization protesters, many of the world's largest companies are casting around for a fitting response. But they are finding it tough...Executives tackled the topic at a recent meeting of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) in Malaysia..."We think that the violence is totally crazy, however, we think that the protests are not all irrational," said Al Fry, a World Business Council program manager. "Although there's a wide spectrum of protests, and sometimes internal conflicts within these movements, there are some serious and genuine concerns." Shaun Stewart, international and government affairs advisor at mining giant Rio Tinto, said no company appeared to have built a workable strategy response. [article refers to Shell, BP, ExxonMobil] (Patrick Chalmers, Reuters, 25 Sep. 2001)

Sustainability and Profitability: Conflict or Convergence? Report on the 5th European Senior Executives' Seminar, 17th to 21st September 2001 [includes summary of presentation on "Health and Poverty: The social challenge of sustainable development" by Sophia Tickell, Senior Policy Advisor, Oxfam] (HRH The Prince of Wales's Business & the Environment Programme, developed and run by the University of Cambridge Programme for Industry, 17-21 Sep. 2001)

Good Environmental Practices Can Lead To Sustainable Profits: There is growing evidence of a positive link between corporate sustainable development practices and share price performance, according to a report released today by The Conference Board of Canada - Sustainable Development, Value Creation and the Capital Markets. Sustainable development refers to a company's efforts to minimize the "environmental footprint" of its operations while contributing to the economic and social development of the communities in which it operates. (Conference Board of Canada, 12 Sep. 2001)

Inquiry into Corporate Behaviour in the Americas final report: Another World is Possible: Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Corporate Conduct in the Americas (Commission of Inquiry into Corporate Conduct in the Americas, 6 Sep. 2001)

Swiss business and human rights: Confrontations and partnerships with NGOs [refers to Nestlé, Novartis, UBS, Credit Suisse, ABB, Coop, Migros, Switcher, Veillon] (Antoine Mach, study commissioned by Antenna International, Sep. 2001) note: scroll down on the linked page - this report appears under the "Documents" sub-heading for downloading in English or French

Cooperation between the United Nations and all relevant partners, in particular the private sector (United Nations [drafted by Jane Nelson, a public policy specialist with the Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum], 28 Aug. 2001)

Companies With Strong Ethics Enjoy Positive Financial Returns: A company's overall performance is closely tied to its commitment to developing an ethical corporate culture. That's one of the findings of a new report from the Conference Board of Canada. "Organizations that make a public ethical commitment which is supported by senior management regularly outperform those that don't," said Mary Choquette, a project manager with the Board. "Similarly, publicity about unethical corporate behaviour lowers stock prices for a minimum of six months." (Conference Board of Canada, 13 Aug. 2001)

An acid test for better conduct in business: An ISO standard may make improved behaviour measurable [proposal by U.S. Ethics Officer Association to create an International Standards Organisation standard for global business conduct] (Alison Maitland, Financial Times, 13 Aug. 2001)

What's Wrong With Corporations? Corporations aren't allowed to be nice. Company directors are legally obliged to act in the best interests of their shareholders' investments - i.e. to make them as much money as possible. Genuine efforts to sacrifice profits in favour of human rights and environmental protection are off-limits. Even if a company's directors took the long view that environmental sustainablity is ultimately essential for economic sustainability, their share price would drop and they would probably be swallowed up by competitors. This is why corporate social and environmental initiatives can't really get beyond the marketing and greenwash stage. (Corporate Watch, 6 Aug. 2001)

A Public Role for the Private Sector: Industry Self-Regulation in a Global Economy: Over the past decade, a growing number of corporations have adopted policies of industry self-regulation such as corporate codes of conduct, social and environmental standards, and auditing and monitoring systems. A Public Role for the Private Sector is the first book to explore this self-regulation phenomenon on an international level across three different policy issues—environment, labor, and information privacy. (Virginia Haufler, Aug. 2001)

Categories of Corporate Complicity in Human Rights Abuses - Based on a background paper for the Global Compact dialogue on "The role of the private sector in zones of conflict", New York, 21-22 March 2001 (Andrew Clapham and Scott Jerbi, Aug. 2001)

G-8: Commentary Calls For "Bigger Stage" For World's New Actors - Global institutions such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization are failing to address the challenges of the new century, Klaus Schwab, founder and chair of the World Economic Forum, wrote in Newsweek yesterday. Schwab said there is a need for a shift in global focus from the Group of Eight industrialized countries to the Group of 20, which includes Brazil, China, India, Mexico, South Africa, Turkey and other developing countries....Schwab writes that "true participatory management, involving governments, business and civil society -- the stakeholders in the global agenda -- is essential to shape a peaceful and prosperous future." (UN Wire, 31 July 2001)

More than 300 firms sign up for UN Global Compact: Though it so far has little to show for its efforts, participating firms are to post their techniques for dealing with the many labor, human rights and environmental challenges spawned by globalization on the program's Web site in October.  Doyle [U.N. Assistant Secretary-General Michael Doyle] acknowledged the program's form was in part dictated by a recognition that the corporate world was unwilling to accept binding global standards on corporate governance.  But environmental and human rights groups that have been participating in the program from the start said they were nonetheless underwhelmed by the Global Compact's achievements to date.  "Viewing the program solely as a learning experience represents a wasted opportunity in assuring corporate responsibility," said Arvind Ganesan, the Washington-based director of business and human rights programs for Human Rights Watch. "The progress we expected on moving beyond just a learning forum hasn't occurred yet."  Ganesan of Human Rights Watch said that since the program had issued guidelines on how businesses should behave, it should at least try to assure the guidelines were being applied, for example by procuring goods only from responsible companies.  (Irwin Arieff, Reuters, 27 July 2001)

High Time for UN to Break 'Partnership' with the ICC [International Chamber of Commerce]: The ICC has a long history of vigorously lobbying to weaken international environmental treaties and these efforts have continued even after the group has pledged support for the Global Compact principles. For instance, rather than "supporting a precautionary approach to environmental challenges," Principle 7, and rather than undertaking "initiatives to promote greater environmental responsibility," Principle 8, the ICC promotes a narrow corporate agenda, dominated by the commercial interests of some of the world's most environmentally irresponsible corporations - an agenda that often effectively undermines a precautionary approach and basic environmental responsibility. (Corporate Europe Observatory, 25 July 2001)

Campaigners learn lesson of gaining business advantage: Vanessa Houlder on how activists are forging collaborative relationships with global companies (Vanessa Houlder,  Financial Times; 24 July 2001)

European Commission initiatives, 18 July 2001:

Benchmarking Corporate Environmental and Social Reporting: Recent survey examines the environmental and social reporting practices of the 100 largest global firms. With increasing shareowner interest in the environmental and social performance of their companies, more and more firms are trying to meet demand with increased reporting. While international cooperative efforts such as the Global Reporting Initiative are working to standardize such disclosure, companies can find themselves in uncharted territory in the meantime. A recent survey, "The State of Global Environmental and Social Reporting: The 2001 Benchmark Survey," was conducted to help companies gauge their progress on reporting and identify areas that need improvement. (Mark Thomsen, SocialFunds.com, 12 July 2001)

Minister pins hopes on fair trade: Patricia Hewitt, the [UK] industry secretary, yesterday bluntly told globalisation protesters that their demands would block the world's poor from pathways out of poverty. (Patrick Wintour, Guardian [UK], 10 July 2001)

When disaster strikes: What happens when a brand becomes tainted? The oil spills were bad enough, but Shell's reputation went belly up after it was implicated in human rights violations in Nigeria. John Vidal on how it went about revamping its image (John Vidal, Guardian [UK], 9 July 2001)

The Observer [UK] Business and Society supplement, 8 July 2001:

Book review: Taming the corporation - Anne Simpson says a new book identifies a central obstacle to improving corporate governance but does not offer a full solution - review of The New Global Investors: How Shareowners Can Unlock Sustainable Prosperity Worldwide by Robert A.G. Monks (Anne Simpson, senior specialist in corporate governance at the World Bank and a director of Pensions Investment Research Consultants, in Financial TImes, 4 July 2001) 

Reluctant Missionaries: Can't shut down Big Oil? Then browbeat companies like Shell and ExxonMobil into preaching the gospel of human rights and democracy to their developing-world hosts. As appealing as this strategy seems to global do-gooders, it won't work. Not only are oil companies unsuited for the job of turning the world's most difficult neighborhoods into thriving market democracies, they're increasingly adept at passing the buck of reform to others (Marina Ottaway, Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Co-Director of its Democracy and Rule of Law Project, in Foreign Policy, July-Aug. 2001)

The NGO-Industrial Complex: A new global activism is shaming the world's top companies into enacting codes of conduct and opening their Third World factories for inspection. But before you run a victory lap in your new sweatshop-free sneakers, ask yourself: Do these voluntary arrangements truly help workers and the environment, or do they merely weaken local governments while adding more green to the corporate bottom line? (Gary Gereffi [Professor of sociology and Director of the Markets and Management Studies Program at Duke University], Ronie Garcia-Johnson [Assistant Professor of environmental policy at Duke University], Erika Sasser [Visiting Assistant Professor at the Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences at Duke University], in Foreign Policy, July-Aug. 2001)

New index highlights worldwide corruption crisis, says Transparency International: The Corruption Perceptions Index 2001 ranks 91 countries....TI's chairman said: "HIV AIDS is killing millions of Africans, and in many of the countries where AIDS is at its deadliest the problem is compounded by the fact that corruption levels are seen to be very high. While it is imperative that richer countries provide the fruits of medical research at an affordable price to address this human tragedy, it is also essential that corrupt governments do not steal from their own people. This is now an urgent priority if lives are to be saved."...Speaking in Washington DC, TI Vice Chairman Frank Vogl noted: "Corruption in the most prosperous countries in the world has many manifestations, and Transparency International is increasing its efforts to stimulate actions to secure greater transparency in politics, business and banking." (Transparency International, 27 June 2001) 

Companies reject disclosure pleas: ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE: Nearly half the country's largest companies have rejected repeated requests by the government to disclose information about their environmental and social performance, according to a report published today [UK] (Vanessa Houlder, Financial Times, 25 June 2001)

Corporate Codes of Conduct Deemed Insufficient: Companies worldwide have signed on to voluntary codes of conduct in a bid to mitigate globalisation's harmful aspects. Activists and executives agree the firms are falling short but disagree on the reasons and remedies. (Danielle Knight, Inter Press Service, 13 June 2001) 

First Global Dimensions Seminar: Human Rights and Corporate Responsibility (New York, 1 June 2001)

Globalization is no excuse for states to shirk their human rights responsibilities (Amnesty International, 30 May 2001)

Amnesty takes aim at corporate giants (editorial, Bangkok Post, 28 May 2001)

Analysts remain sceptical about environmental and social factors: Sustainable development survey shows 'wide degree of uncertainty' - But the survey suggests there has been a step in the right direction, according to BiE [Business in the Environment]. When asked directly about the importance of environment factors in evaluating companies, a third of analysts said that environmental policy was "fairly or very" important, compared with only a fifth of analysts in 1994. The figure for social policy has increased by an even wider margin since 1994, from 12 to 34 per cent. (Vanessa Houlder, Financial Times, 25 May 2001)

Advocates to Meet in Dallas: They push to hold business accountable (Carolyn Barta, The Dallas Morning News, 22 May 2001) 

Getting Boards to Address the Triple Bottom Line: New report proposes a set of principles and actions to assist corporate boards in addressing the triple bottom line of economic, social and environmental performance  (Mark Thomsen, SocialFunds.com, 15 May 2001)

Business and Global Corporate Citizenship: Best Practice for the Future - "Business and Human Rights: The Way Forward": Statement by Dr. B.G. Ramcharan, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights (delivered to Wilton Park Conference, Montreux, Switzerland, 2 May 2001)

Outside Perspective: Michael Posner [Executive Director, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights] on The Role of Business in Promoting Human Rights (in Ford Motor Company's 2000 Corporate Citizenship Report, May 2001)

Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility: Selected Sources of Information - Bibliography and Websites (Renato Alva Pino, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, May 2001)

Pope Says Ethics Needed to Rein in Globalization (Jane Barrett, Reuters, 27 Apr. 2001)

Focus on shareholder value alone is not enough (Sir Geoffrey Chandler, letter to The Times [UK], 24 Apr. 2001)

Inquiry into Corporate Behavior in the Americas - Executive Summary: On April 19th, 2001, the United Steelworkers hosted a special inquiry into corporate conduct in the Americas, as part of the Peoples’ Summit in Quebec City. Four Commissioners were invited to participate in the inquiry by six organizations representing working people throughout the western hemisphere. (United Steelworkers Humanity Fund [Canada], 19 Apr. 2001)

Corporate rule: Democracy is in hock to an idea of economic and technical progress that ignores people's true concerns (Zac Goldsmith, Editor, The Ecologist Magazine [UK], in Guardian [UK], 18 Apr. 2001)

Business has to fight its corner: Irritants have a right to be heard (Guardian [UK], 17 Apr. 2001)

Why we must stay silent no longer: Noreena Hertz...argues that governments' surrender to big business is the deadliest threat facing democracy today (Noreena Hertz, Associate Director, Centre for International Business and Management at the Judge Institute of Management Studies, University of Cambridge, in The Observer [UK], 8 Apr. 2001)

Companies and Human Rights - Recent Developments [commentary by Sir Geoffrey Chandler on the Draft United Nations Human Rights Guidelines for Companies] (Sir Geoffrey Chandler, 5 Apr. 2001)

NGOs addressing Commission on Human Rights decry effects of globalization, transnational corporations (United Nations press release, 4 Apr. 2001)

Sustainability and Profitability: Conflict or Convergence? Report on the 8th UK Senior Executives' Seminar, 2nd to 6th April 2001 [includes summary of presentation on "Global Business, Human Rights and Governance" by Sir Geoffrey Chandler, Chair of Amnesty International UK Business Group] (HRH The Prince of Wales's Business & the Environment Programme, developed and run by the University of Cambridge Programme for Industry, 2-6 Apr. 2001)

Integrative Study on Issues Relating to Corporate Responsibility and the Role of Economic Agendas in Civil Conflict (Human Security and the International Diamond Trade in Africa program, Apr. 2001)

Transnational Corporations Today: Too much power, too little accountability - We have chosen to focus our Inquiry on four companies - Alcan, Dana, Noranda and Cominco/Teck (United Steelworkers Humanity Fund [Canada], Apr. 2001)

Enslaved to Fashion: Corporations, Consumers, and the Campaign for Worker Rights in the Global Economy - A review of Levi's Children: Coming to Terms with Human Rights in the Global Marketplace by Karl Schoenberger (George DeMartino, Human Rights & Human Welfare, Apr. 2001)

Governance and Responsibility - the relationship between companies and NGOs. A Progress Report. (Sir John Browne, Group Chief Executive, BP, 29 Mar. 2001) 

Making sense of standards: The increased influence of companies in the post-Communist world and growing concern about their impact on the political, social and physical environment in which they operate have led to a proliferation of initiatives seeking to provide guidelines and standards for corporate behaviour.  These constitute the main focus of this Newsletter. (Sir Geoffrey Chandler, in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001) 

Voluntarism v regulation – the great debate: Peter Frankental, manager of the Business Group of Amnesty International UK, asks Nicholas Howen, international human rights lawyer and former head of Amnesty International’s legal office, to set out the main arguments for developing binding human rights obligations on companies (Peter Frankental and Nicholas Howen, in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001)

Beyond voluntarism: David Petrasek, research director at the International Council on Human Rights Policy (ICHRP), reports on the prospects for developing international legal accountability for companies in relation to human rights. (David Petrasek, in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001)

UN [United Nations] guidelines for companies: David Weissbrodt (assisted by Christopher Avery and Muria Kruger) explains the rationale - In August 1999 the UN Working Group on the Methods and Activities of Transnational Corporations asked Professor David Weissbrodt to prepare a set of human rights guidelines for companies. (David Weissbrodt [member of the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights], Christopher Avery and Muria Kruger, in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001) [For links to the latest draft of the guidelines, see the section of this website entitled "UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights"]

Role of UN Global Compact: In the last edition of ‘Human Rights and Business Matters’, we published a letter from Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, welcoming the Global Compact but pointing to the need for effective enforcement mechanisms. Roth argued that ‘To guard against the Compact becoming a forum for hypocrisy, the UN should also develop a mechanism for monitoring and evaluating corporate compliance. In the absence of such a mechanism, there is a troubling possibility that the guidelines could be misinterpreted, misapplied, or ignored. That would result in corporations being given what they might claim is a “UN Seal of Approval” without having taken meaningful steps to implement the Compact’s standards’. Roth also encouraged the UN to apply the Compact’s guidelines to its own procurement and contracting activities. Below is the UN’s response to these concerns. (letter from John G. Ruggie, Assistant Secretary General, United Nations, to Kenneth Roth, Executive Director, Human Rights Watch, in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001) [Note: To access this article, scroll down from the above-mentioned "UN guidelines for companies" article...it is underneath]

New drill for oil companies: It is not every day that seven giant oil and mining companies, nine human rights NGOs and corporate responsibility groups, and the American and British governments come together to ‘recognize that security and respect for human rights can and should be consistent.’ But that is exactly what happened on December 20, 2000 when the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights were announced... (Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001)

Voluntary principles on security and human rights for the extractive sector: Bennett Freeman outlines the process of finding common ground and sets out the principles (Bennett Freeman [former Deputy Assistant Secretary - Democracy, Human Rights and Labour - U.S. State Department], in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001)

Independent verification – myth or reality?

Articles about Nike in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001:

Do reporting standards matter? John Elkington, chair of international consultancy, Sustainability, and Oliver Dudok van Heel, senior advisor, examine the arguments for improved reporting standards. (John Elkington and Oliver Dudok van Heel, in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001)

FTSE goes ethical: Craig Mackenzie, director of governance and socially responsible investment at Friends, Ivory and Sime reports on a new initiative. FTSE, the UK’s leading stockmarket index company, is launching a new index, FTSE4Good. The new index will contain companies who do more than most to take account of social responsibility and sustainable development in their businesses. (Craig Mackenzie, in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001)

The City and human rights activists – unlikely bedfellows? Rachel Crossley, senior analyst at Friends Ivory & Sime, focuses on the role of shareholder activism (Rachel Crossley, in Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001) [Note: To access this article, scroll down from the "Campaign Update" article...it is underneath]

Campaign Update: ‘Protecting your future – and theirs?’ Some encouraging progress has been made since Amnesty International UK launched an Individual Action in July 2000 targeting Pension Fund Trustees and Fund Managers. (Human Rights & Business Matters, newsletter of Amnesty International UK Business Group, spring/summer 2001)

Towards a common understanding of business complicity in human rights abuses: Background paper for the Global Compact dialogue on The role of the private sector in zones of conflict (Andrew Clapham and Scott Jerbi, 12 Mar. 2001)

A buoyant market for ethics: Co-ordinated mass market action by consumers increasingly compels corporations to rethink policies (Peter Singer, Center for Human Values, Princeton University, in Financial Times, 11 Mar. 2001)

Howard Rubenstein on Corporate Responsibility (Pranay Gupte, Forum Daily News, 8 Mar. 2001)

Canadian NGO policy views on corporate responsibility and corporate accountability: An Overview Paper Prepared for an NGO-Government Meeting, May 2001 (Moira Hutchinson, Mar. 2001)

Persuading Companies to Become Socially Involved (Conference Board, 20 Feb. 2001)

Campaign Seeks to Shine Light on US Corporations Overseas (Danielle Knight, Inter Press Service, 13 Feb. 2001)

Manifesto: Principled Profits - Guidelines for responsible business behaviour: During the Spring of 2001, the Dutch government and parliament will discuss the public responsibility of Dutch companies. This manifesto addresses the issue of responsible business behaviour by Dutch companies outside the Netherlands. It reflects the views of non-governmental organisations promoting sustainable development and defending worker rights and human rights. (signed by approximately 80 Dutch non-governmental organisations, Feb. 2001)

Sustaining the Single Global Economic Space (John G. Ruggie, UN Chronicle, Feb. 2001)

Changing corporate roles and responsibilities: Business and Human Rights (Oxford Analytica, in association with Time/Fortune and International Business Leaders Forum, Feb. 2001)

Taking on Corporate Power: Campaigns That Have Made a Difference (Multinational Monitor, Jan./Feb. 2001)

Are Human Rights Universal? The Rise of Cultural Exceptionalism (Thomas Frank, Foreign Affairs, Jan./Feb. 2001)

28 January Statement by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan [about globalisation, business and human rights, and the UN Global Compact]: Address to the World Economic Forum, Davos, Switzerland (United Nations, 28 Jan. 2001)

Companies still far from internalizing responsibility (Frank Vogl, Forum News Daily [World Economic Forum, Davos], 28 Jan. 2001)

It's Government by and for U.S. Corporations and Their Values (William Pfaff, International Herald Tribune, 18 Jan. 2001)

Why Human Rights Should Matter to the Business World (Pierre Sane, Secretary-General of Amnesty International, Earth Times News, 8 Jan. 2001)

Is shareholder value the only consideration for companies (Robert E. Sullivan, Earth Times News Service, 2 Jan. 2001)

Deciding Whether to do Business in States with Bad Governments (Margaret Jungk, Danish Centre for Human Rights/Confederation of Danish Industries/Industrialization Fund for Developing Countries, 2001)