(Pix Source HERE)
This Blog Essay site devotes every February to a series of integrated
but short essays on a single theme. For 2013 this site introduces a new
theme: The U.S. National Contact Point: Corporate Social
Responsibility Between Nationalism, Internationalism and Private Markets
Based Globalization.
Part 8: The Context of Specific Instance Statements Among OECD NCPs; a Study in Contrasts.
This series builds on some ideas I have been working through for a number of years relating to a fundamental shift in the approaches to corporate governance that broaden the ambit of corporate governance issues from a singular focus on internal governance (the relationships among officers, shareholders and directors) to one that includes corporate behavior and the standards by which officers, directors and shareholders exercise their respective governance authority. This shift also changes the scope of what is understood as "law" to be applied to issues of corporate governance, from one principally focused on national law to governance norms that may be sourced in the declarations and other governance interventions of public and private international bodies. Lastly, it appears to point to an evolution to the role of the state from the principal source of standards and enforcer of law to a vehicle for the implementation of international standards in which enforcement power is left to global market actors--principally consumers and investors function of the decisions of global actors. All of this is inconsistent with traditional notions of the role of law, the scope of corporate governance and the nature of corporate social responsibility int he United States. The extent to which the United States participates in the construction of these autonomous international systems may suggest the direction in which government policy may be moving away from the traditional consensus of corporate responsibility to something perhaps entirely new.
This post focuses on the self conception of the U.S. National Contact Point under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (2011) (MNE Guidelines). Subsequent posts will consider the American National Contact Point within the context of the NCP system and note the divergence of the US approach to that of important European counterparts by considering its specific instance jurisprudence.
Part 8: The Context of Specific Instance Statements Among OECD NCPs; a Study in Contrasts.
This series builds on some ideas I have been working through for a number of years relating to a fundamental shift in the approaches to corporate governance that broaden the ambit of corporate governance issues from a singular focus on internal governance (the relationships among officers, shareholders and directors) to one that includes corporate behavior and the standards by which officers, directors and shareholders exercise their respective governance authority. This shift also changes the scope of what is understood as "law" to be applied to issues of corporate governance, from one principally focused on national law to governance norms that may be sourced in the declarations and other governance interventions of public and private international bodies. Lastly, it appears to point to an evolution to the role of the state from the principal source of standards and enforcer of law to a vehicle for the implementation of international standards in which enforcement power is left to global market actors--principally consumers and investors function of the decisions of global actors. All of this is inconsistent with traditional notions of the role of law, the scope of corporate governance and the nature of corporate social responsibility int he United States. The extent to which the United States participates in the construction of these autonomous international systems may suggest the direction in which government policy may be moving away from the traditional consensus of corporate responsibility to something perhaps entirely new.
This post focuses on the self conception of the U.S. National Contact Point under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (2011) (MNE Guidelines). Subsequent posts will consider the American National Contact Point within the context of the NCP system and note the divergence of the US approach to that of important European counterparts by considering its specific instance jurisprudence.
This page carries a list of statements or press releases issued by National Contact Points with regard to specific instances which have arisen in the implementation of the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. These statements can also be accessed via the government websites of the countries concerned.
Argentina / Argentine
- Public
statement by the Australian NCP on the transfer of a specific instance
involving an Australian-headquartered enterprise to the Chilean NCP, 1 March 2012
- Public
statement by the Australian NCP on the transfer of a specific instance
involving an Australian-headquartered enterprise to the Argentinean NCP, 20 August 2011
- Statement
by the Australian NCP on the complaint by the Construction, Forestry,
Mining, Energy Union – Mining and Energy Division (CFMEU) Trade Union
against Xstrata Coal Pty Ltd (XSTRATA), 8 June 2011
- BHP Billiton – Cerrejon Coal specific instance: statement by the Australian NCP, 12 June 2009
- ANZ specific instance: statement by the Australian NCP, 13 October 2006
- GSL Australia specific instance: evaluation by the Australian NCP, 13 October 2006
- GSL Australia specific instance: statement by the Australian NCP, 6 April 2006
- Recommendations
of the French NCP to EDF and its partners regarding the “Nam Theun 2”
Project in Laos / Recommandations du PCN français à l'intention de
l'entreprise EDF et de ses partenaires au sujet de la mise en œuvre du
projet "Nam Theun 2" au Laos, 26 May 2005
- Public statement by the French NCP concerning ASPOCOMP / Communiqué publié par le PCN français concernant ASPOCOMP, 13 November 2003
- Recommendations by the French NCP to Companies on the Issue of Forced Labour in Burma, 28 mars 2002
- Recommendations by the French NCP to Companies on the Issue of Forced Labour in Burma, 28 March 2002
- Marks & Spencer, Communiqué du PCN français, 13 décembre 2001
-
Press release by the Finnish NCP on Metsä-Botnia in Uruguay, 22 December 2006
- Final statement of the Irish and Netherlands NCPs on the complaint against the Corrib Gas project, 30 July 2010, 30 July 2010
- Joint
final statement by the German NCP, the European Center for
Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) and Otto Stadtlander GmbH
regarding a complaint by the ECCHR against Otto Stadtlander GmbH/Bremen, 17 November 2011
[ German original version ] -
Statement by the German NCP on DGB and Bayer AG, 29 June 2007
-
German Clean Clothes Campaign against adidas-Salomon, 24 May 2004
- Initial assessment by the Japanese NCP on the Specific Instance at Top Thermo Mfg. (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd, 16 February 2012 [ Japanese original version ]
- Statement by the Mexican NCP in the case of SUTEIVP against Industria Vidriera del Potosí [ Spanish ], 13 January 2010
- Final
report by the Dutch NCP on the Specific Instance notified by CEDHA,
INCASUR Foundation, SOMO and Oxfam Novib concerning Nidera Holding B.V., 3 February 2012
- Final statement of the Irish and Netherlands NCPs on the complaint against the Corrib Gas project, 30 July 2010, 30 July 2010
- Statement by the Netherlands NCP on complaint by Shehri-CBE concerning Makro-Habib Pakistan Limited, February 2010
- Final statement by the Netherlands NCP concerning Pandacan oil depot Manila, Philippines, 14 July 2009
- Joint statement by the Netherlands NCP, FNV, CNV and IHC Calland, July 2004
- Statement by the Netherlands NCP on Chemie Pharmacie Holland, May 2004
- Joint statement by the Netherlands National Contact Point, Adidas and the India Committee of the Netherlands and Background report, 12 December 2002
- Initial assessment and conclusion by the Norwegian NCP on the complaint from the Climate Network and Concerned Scientists Norway against Statoil, 2012
-
Final
statement by the Norwegian NCP on the complaint from The Future in our
Hands (FIOH) against INTEX Resources ASA and the Mindoro Nickel Project, January 2012
-
Initial
assessment by the Norwegian NCP on the complainst by the Norwegian
Support Committee for Western Sahara against Sjovik AS, 8 March 2012
-
Statement by the Swedish NCP on the CEDHA complaint against Nordea, 24 January 2008
- Final
statement by the UK NCP on the Complaint from Justiça Ambiental et al.
against BHP Billiton PLC (on Mozal SARL) in Mozambique, 13 September 2012
-
Statement by the UK NCP on the Vedanta Specific Instance, 25 September 2009
-
Statement by the UK NCP on G4S and Union Network International, 12 December 2008
-
Statement by the UK NCP on Afrimex (UK) LTD, 28 August 2008
-
Statement by the UK NCP on DAS Air, 18 July 2008
-
Statement by the UK NCP: Anglo-American, 4 May 2008
-
Final assessment by the UK NCP on PSA Peugeot Citroën, 1 February 2008
- Statement by the UK NCP on National Grid Transco plc, 6 July 2005
-
Statement by the UK NCP on Avient, 8 September 2004
-
Statement by the UK NCP on De Beers, 26 April 2004
- Initial Assessment by the US NPC of the complaint by Edouard Teumangie against AES Corporation, 13 September 2012
- Statement by the US NCP on the specific instance regarding UNITE HERE and LSG Sky Chefs, 1 March 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment