wayne visser | Wayne Visser

April 9, 2013April 9, 2013

CSR in Nigeria

A few thoughts and reflections

Blog by Wayne Visser

Interview questions by Heini Purho, Aalto University School of Business in Finland

What is the most effective way of helping the local communities in Nigeria (e.g. infrastructural development projects, social investments (offering education, employment, health services), minimizing the environmental effects, giving money to the Nigerian government)? Please state why.

The GMOUs (Global MOUs) that some multinationals have set up with communities are a good approach, and have seen some success. I would say the first strategy is to approach community development as a cross-sector partnership (with government, civil society and labour unions) rather than philanthropy, which only creates dependence and is open to corruption. The second strategy is to invest in improving governance, i.e. the capacity and efficiency of local and regional government. This can take the form of secondments of skilled staff into government for a period, or shared training. The third strategy is to engage actively with social entrepreneurs and to support them financially and in kind. This creates a possibility of scalable solutions to sustainable development challenges.

In your opinion, what are the most pressing challenges or issues in Nigeria at the moment that should be addressed by Shell’s CSR policies and how should they be addressed?

The three areas that continue to challenge Nigerian society are corruption, pollution (especially spills and gas flaring) and human rights (including conflict and kidnappings). It is not for me to say how these should be tackled, but there is extensive guidance by organisations like Transparency International, EITI, UNEP and the new Protect-Respect-Remedy framework on business and human rights by the UN (requiring human rights due diligence investigations by companies).

Do you think Shell effectively helps the local communities and what could be done differently or is missing?(e.g. the level of communication between Shell, the government and communities, addressing the real needs of communities)

Shell operates in a very difficult environment in Nigeria, with high levels of corruption, conflict and poverty. Despite extensive efforts since the Saro-Wiwa incident in 1995 by Shell, levels of mistrust remain high, partly because of the government’s active participation in the operation of Shell, partly because of a very poor environmental record and partly because of ongoing conflict with activists. Shell faces the additional challenge of organised crime (sabotage, staff kidnappings, etc.). There are no easy solutions to these problems. Shell can only continue to focus its efforts on transparency (publish what you pay) and anti-corruption efforts, environmental improvements (to reduce spillages & flaring), community relations (partnerships with credible civil society organisations), creating shared value (more of the profits must be invested in the community) and reducing dependence on government.

Related websites

[button size=”small” color=”blue” style=”tick” new_window=”false” link=”http://www.waynevisser.com/books/the-quest-for-sustainable-business”]Link[/button] The Quest for Sustainable Business (book)

[button size=”small” color=”blue” style=”tick” new_window=”false” link=”http://www.csrinternational.org”]Link[/button] CSR International (website)

Cite this blog

Visser, W. (2013) CSR in Nigeria: A few thoughts and reflections, Wayne Visser Blog Briefing, 9 April 2013.

Share this page

April 9, 2013April 9, 2013

Implementing CSR in SMEs

Interview with Wayne Visser

By MTÜ Vastutustundliku Ettevõtluse Foorum, Estonia

February 25, 2013

Can legal reforms rescue business back from greedy shareholders?

Article by Wayne Visser

An International Sustainable Business column for The Guardian

The notion of a social enterprise – a business that explicitly strives to create wider societal benefits, rather than focusing narrowly on shareholder returns – is not new. In the 1700s and 1800s, a charter of incorporation was only bestowed on those businesses that were socially useful – for example, water utilities or railroads.

As Joel Bakan, legal academic and author of The Corporation, explained to me: “The original notion of the corporation was that the sovereign would grant the status of corporation to a group of business people in order to acquit themselves of some responsibility to create something that was in the public good … the notion that this was simply about creating wealth for the owners of the company was alien.”

The 18th and 19th centuries also saw the birth of the co-operative and credit union movements, initially in Britain, France and Germany, and later spreading across the globe. Today, according to the International Co-operative Alliance, more than a billion people are members of co-operatives worldwide, with co-operatives providing 100m jobs (20% more than multinational enterprises).

The economic activity of the largest 300 co-operatives in the world equals that of the 10th largest national economy. In the US alone, there are more than 29,000 co-operatives, accounting for more than $3tn (£1.9tn) in assets, generating more than $500bn in revenue and $25bn in wages.

Despite these noble roots, and the existence of co-operatives as an institutional alternative, the modern corporation with its with short-term, shareholder-driven mission has come to dominate our global economic landscape. Multinationals especially are seen by a growing tide of critics as not only failing to act in the interests of the public good, but as being agents of wholesale value destruction in communities, economies and the environment.

Bakan goes so far as to argue that today’s companies are pathological in nature, in the sense that “the corporation has a legally defined mandate to relentlessly pursue – without exception – its own self-interest, regardless of the often harmful consequences it might cause to others.”

Partly in reaction to the growing power and impact of big business, we have seen the rise of another counter-movement over the past 40 years, focused on social and environmental entrepreneurs. Among early pioneers were the Ashoka Foundation (established in 1980), Fundes (1985) and the Social Venture Network (1987), with a new wave of momentum coming from high profile cash injections by the Schwabb Foundation (1998) and Skoll Foundation (1999) and books like The Power of Unreasonable People by John Elkington and Pamela Hartigan.

Within the big corporates over the same period, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development programmes have gained ground, moving through defensive, charitable, promotional and strategic stages, as I have described elsewhere. However, in the face of growing pressure to prioritise their fiduciary duty towards shareholders, these CSR and ‘triple-bottom line’ efforts have been widely criticised as little more than window-dressing and corporate spin, and largely ineffective in tackling our most pressing social and environmental crises

…

Continue reading

[button size=”small” color=”blue” style=”download” new_window=”false” link=”http://www.waynevisser.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/article_usa_bcorps_wvisser.pdf”]Pdf[/button] Can legal reforms rescue business back from greedy shareholders? (article)