Canadian mining companies: And the shaping of global norms of corporate social responsibility

International Journal

Volumn 60, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 977-998

  Dashwood, Hevina S ^a  

^a BROCK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 32944470628     PISSN: 00207020     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/002070200506000406     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Although the GMI officially ended in 2002, for ease of discussion this article uses the term "GMI" throughout. After 2002, the activities of the GMI were carried forward by the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM). A transnational network consists of non-state actors who engage in regular interaction across national boundaries for the purpose of dis-seminating information, knowledge, and norms around a particular global issue or activity. Further elaboration can be found in Michele M. Betsill and Harriet Bulkeley, "Transnational networks and global environmental governance: The cities for climate protection program," International Studies Quarterly (2004): 471-93
2. and in T. Risse-Kappen, ed., Bringing Transnational Relations Back In: Non-State Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
3. An alternative, neo-Marxian explanation might be that mining multinationals are seeking to establish a moral hegemony around appropriate corporate behaviour. While the wealth and power of multinationals appears self-evident, such a perspective fails to capture the nuances in critical debates, both within and outside the mining sector, as to the extent and nature of a company's obligations towards society. Important differences exist with respect to these issues, both among mining companies and other concerned actors, such as NGOs.
4. This comment applies to developed, industrialized countries, and not countries from the developing world.
5. The most important of these include Rodney Bruce Hall and Thomas J. Biersteker, eds., The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002);
6. Virginia Haufler, A Public Role for the Private Sector: Industry Self-Regulation in a Global Economy (Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2001);
7. and A. Claire Cutler, Virginia Haufler, and Tony Porter, eds., Private Authority and International Affairs (New York: State University of New York Press, 1999).
8. Robert O'Brien, Anne Marie Goetz, Jan Aart Scholte, and Marc Williams, eds., Contesting Global Governance; Multilateral Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000);
9. Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998).
10. See, for example, Ann Florini, ed., The Third Force: The Rise of International Civil Society (Washington: Japan Center for International Exchange and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2000);
11. Ronnie Lipschutz, with Judith Mayer, Global Civil Society and Global Environmental Governance (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996).
12. Keck and Sikkink coined the term "transnational advocacy network" to denote NGOs that advocate on behalf of others where no self-interested motives can be discerned. Keck and Sikkink, "Transnational advocacy networks in international politics: Introduction" in Activists Beyond Borders, 8-10.
13. An important exception is Ronnie Lipschutz's conception of global civil society, which is defined as a "proto-society composed of local, national, and global institutions, corporations, and non-governmental organizations." Roddie Lipschutz and Cathleen Fogel, "Regulation for the rest of us?: Global civil society and the privatization of transnational regulation," in Hall and Biersteker, The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance, 124.
14. Ibid.
15. Hall and Biersteker, "The emergence of private authority in the international system," in Hall and Biersteker, The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance, 4. Authorship in this context is understood to mean authority.
16. One aspect of the debate centres on whether industry self-regulation is an acceptable substitute for government regulation. A good discussion of the relevant issues can be found in John Kirton and Michael Trebilcock, eds., Hard Choices, Soft Law: Voluntary Standards in Global Trade, Environment and Social Governance (Toronto: Ashgate, 2004).
17. For an excellent conceptualization of this process, see Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization: A Critical Introduction (New York: Palgrave, 2000).
18. The fact of corporate activity in norms and rule-making raises serious questions around legitimacy and democratic accountability. It is not being suggested here that such questions are not valid, but merely that they need to be separated from efforts to observe and analyze the implications of what is taking place.
19. For a helpful account of the social constructivist challenge to neorealist theorizing in international relations, see John Gerald Ruggie, "Introduction: What makes the world hang together? Neo-utilitarianism and the social constructivist challenge," in Constructing the World Polity: Essays on International Institutionalization (London and New York: Routledge, 1998)
20. and Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics," International Organization 46 (spring 1992): 391-425.
21. Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 47.
22. Ronald Jepperson, Alexander Wendt, and Peter J. Katzenstein, "Norms, identity and culture in national security," in P. J. Katzenstein, ed., The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), 54.
23. Important contributions to this literature include Wendt, "Anarchy is what states make of it";
24. Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999);
25. and Ruggie, Constructing the World Polity.
26. See Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink, eds., The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)
27. and Keck and Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders.
28. Risse et al., "Introduction," in The Power of Human Rights.
29. For a comprehensive list with links to web sites, see Business for Social Responsibility, "Overview of corporate social responsibility," March 2001, www.bsr.org.
30. Ibid.
31. For an excellent recent analysis of the potential of nonstate approaches to corporate governance, see Kernaghan Webb, ed., Voluntary Codes: Private Governance, the Public Interest and Innovation (Ottawa: Carleton Research Unit for Innovation, Science, and Environment, Carleton University, 2002).
32. There is a rich literature on the nature and impact of globalization. One excellent account is that of David Held, Anthony McGrew, David Goldblatt, and Jonathan Perraton, eds., Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999).
33. Corporate social responsibility is understood to refer to the obligations companies have towards their stakeholders (shareholders, employees, customers, local communities, the environment) with respect to their operations touching on the areas of human rights, labour standards, and the environment. There is considerable debate about what corporate responsibility should entail. For a good discussion of the issues, see: Canadian Democracy and Corporate Accountability Commission, "The new balance sheet: Corporate profits and responsibility in the 21st century," Toronto, January 2002, 2-3.
34. A vast array of international instruments covers various aspects of corporate responsibility, including labour standards, human rights norms, and the environment. Rules have been set by organizations such as the ILO, the UN, the OECD, and by trade agreements such as NAFTA.
35. United Nations, "Report of the world summit on sustainable development," Johannesburg, 4 and 37-39.
36. MMSD, "Breaking new ground."
37. International Institute for Environment and Development, "Mining minerals and sustainable development: The results of a scoping project for the world business council for sustainable development," London, 1999, 18.
38. MMSD, "Breaking new ground," 7-8.
39. Introduction, Ibid.
40. Founded in 1991, the ICME's mandate was to promote the development and implementation of environmental and health policies in support of sustainable development. The ICME sponsored a number of conferences and scientific reports throughout the 19905. The ICMM has carried out the initiatives of the GMI since 2002.
41. ICMM, "About ICMM - work programme," www.icmm.com.
42. Ibid.
43. Sustainable development is defined as "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."
44. ICMM, "ICMM sustainable development framework: ICMM principles," May 2003.
45. At the time of writing, member companies included Noranda and Placer Dome (from Canada), Alcoa, Anglo American, Anglogold, BMP Billiton, Freeport, Mitsubishi, Newmont, Nippon, Pasminco, Rio Tinto, Sumitomo, Umicore and WMC.
46. ICMM "Principles," 17. The ICMM hopes that adherence to these principles will produce the outcomes to which the mining sector is aspiring.
47. See Virginia Haufler, "Industry regulation and labour standards," in Andrew Cooper, et al., Enhancing Global Governance: Towards a New Diplomacy? (New York: United Nations University Press, 2002), 167-71.
48. The corporate responsibility policies of Placer Dome and Noranda can be found on their respective web sites: www.placerdome.com and www.noranda.com.
49. The following section draws on information gleaned from interviews with senior executives at Noranda and Placer Dome. This section draws especially heavily on the interviews with James Cooney, Placer Dome (30 July 2002), and David Rodier, Noranda (22 April 2003; 28 October 2003).
50. An excellent elaboration of types of learning processes can be found in Michele M. Betsill and Harriet Bulkeley, "Transnational networks and global environmental governance," International Studies Quarterly (June 2004): 484-89.
51. MMSD, 6.
52. Ibid.