• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • OECD’s CSR Guidelines: Corporate State Department Responsibility?

    This week the U.S. State Department announced the launch of the Stakeholder Advisory Board for the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

    Nanny-state scolds on the left have increasingly called for more corporate social responsibility (CSR). Their mantra is “doing well by doing good,” and they have enshrined CSR principles not only at the OECD but in such vehicles as the U.N. Global Compact and the International Organization for Standardization’s ISO 26000 International Standard: Guidance on Social Responsibility.

    Membership on the advisory board is weighted heavily in favor of pro-CSR NGO activists as well as representatives from big business and public-sector unions. While the mandate of the U.S. National Contact Point (NCP) sounds innocuous enough—to “promote awareness of the Guidelines; work with other governments’ NCPs, foreign businesses, international labor and civil society organizations; and offer a forum for confidential discussion between business and stakeholders”—the establishment of the NCP is itself another big step in CSR mission creep.

    Early efforts of CSR advocates were supposed to be “voluntarily” adopted by businesses, but this latest and more radical phase of CSR is more intrusive and changes the focus from voluntary initiatives to mandated standards, from targeted projects to comprehensive obligations, from flexible communications to highly structured reporting.

    As Jim Kelly of the Federalist Society and Good Governance Watch points out:

    International non-governmental organizations (“NGOs”) and national civil society organizations (“CSOs”) are using a matrix of human rights governance networks to bypass national courts, democracy, and the rule of law to develop “soft law” human rights norms, with which multinational business enterprises will have to comply from the early stages of project research, design, and planning through project completion and beyond.

    The definition of CSR has increasingly cast aside the traditional responsibility of company management to the firm’s owners and has instead coalesced around the claim of a “triple-bottom-line” obligation of companies to deliver economic, social, and environmental “returns” to justify what the left calls the “license to operate.”

    In the CSR world, private companies that operate in these markets become “responsible” only by meeting codes such as ISO 26000. Companies are thus thrust into a quasi-governmental role to address issues ranging from human rights to global warming. This completely ignores the fundamental benefits that companies provide to society through the goods and services they supply, the jobs they generate, and the economic freedom that results.

    The State Department has enough on its hands ensuring that their diplomatic efforts keep America safe and free. It does not need to assume the role of gatekeeper for the U.S. private sector.

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    One Response to OECD’s CSR Guidelines: Corporate State Department Responsibility?

    1. Richard Lock says:

      The key word for me is responsibility. I suspect that governments do not believe that businesses and their leadership are acting on their responsibilities other than out of a cynical self interest. The irony is that the more pressure,regulation and legislation their is, the greater businesses are likely to resist. The business case for a more socially responsible approach that engages with a wide variety of stakeholders is a strong one. Much better to be communicating that message so that leaders recognise the real performance benefits available.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.