Monday, December 20, 2010

Video: Jeff Hamaoui on Social Innovation & Cross-Sector Partnerships

Jeff Hamaoui is Founder & President of Cazneau. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about the need for forging cross-sector partnerships in order to make social innovation possible. The interview took place in San Francisco on 16 September 2010.

CSR in Finland

Guest blog by Arno Kourula

Finland is a highly developed and educated northern European republic and European Union member country with approximately 5.2 million inhabitants. Since the second World War, Finland has transformed from a farm and forest economy to a diversified modern industrial economy. In this Nordic welfare state, public institutions have traditionally played a significant role in providing a societal safety net and levelling inequalities.

Since the recession of the early 1990s, the country has increasingly opened its financial markets, the energy and telecommunications sectors have internationalized and been privatized, and a large information and communication technology sector has developed lead by Nokia. According to international rankings, the country is one of the least corrupt and of the most competitive nations in the world.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has traditionally been largely implicit in nature, meaning that the state is assumed to take care of social issues and there has not been as strong a philanthropic tradition as in many countries. Nonetheless, a more explicit form of CSR has emerged, although gradually and unevenly. CSR has expanded from quality and environmental management trends towards a more comprehensive understanding of sustainability. Finnish companies have been relatively progressive in CSR and they perceive it as a potential competitive advantage.

Current priority issues in the area include employment practices, ethical consumption, the environment and climate change, competitiveness and cultural adaptation (i.e. operations of Finnish companies abroad). Compared with other European countries, Finland scores high on CSR aspects, such as sustainability reporting, explicit value statements, codes of conduct, adoption of management standards, membership in CSR organisations and networks, and participation in socially responsible investment. In the 2007 State of Responsible Competitiveness evaluation by AccountAbility, Finland is in 3rd place globally.

A key driver for Finnish CSR is legislation and government representatives tend to hold the view that the primary role of the state is to provide a legal framework within which business operates. The government emphasises the voluntary aspect of CSR in its public policy and has not been very keen on promoting Finland as a CSR frontrunner. Key pieces of legislation related to employment, accounting, social security and environmental protection form the baseline for corporate social responsibility. The Finnish government also promotes key international initiatives such as the OECD guidelines, UN Global Compact, and ILO principles.

Key CSR organizations in Finland include the the Committee on Social and Corporate Responsibility (a multistakeholder roundtable organized by the Ministry for Employment and the Economy), the Confederation of Finnish Industries, Finnish Business and Society (an enterprise network) and the Central Chamber of Commerce (ICC Finland).

While most universities in Finland offer courses related to CSR, institutions with larger programs on CSR both in teaching and research include Aalto University, Hanken School of Economics, Turku School of Economics, University of Jyväskylä, and the University of Tampere. All in all, Finland is an interesting case of relatively high adoption of CSR with best practices of CSR initiatives implemented by companies such as Nokia and Kesko.

Source

Based on extracts from the chapter on Finland by Arno Kourula, Project Manager at Aalto University School of Economics, in The World Guide to CSR (Greenleaf, 2010).

Monday, December 13, 2010

The Age of Responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the New DNA of Business

By Wayne Visser

I wanted to share details of a new article of mine, "The Age of Responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the New DNA of Business", just published in the Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics. It distils the essence of my forthcoming book of the same title (out on 18 February 2011) and is downloadable as a Pdf below.

Abstract

This paper argues that CSR, as a business, governance and ethics system, has failed. This assumes that success or failure is measured in terms of the net impact (positive or negative) of business on society and the environment. The paper contends that a different kind of CSR is needed if we are to reverse the current direction of many of the world’s most pressing social, environmental and ethical trends. The first part of the paper reviews business’s historical progress over the Ages and Stages of CSR: moving through the Ages of Greed, Philanthropy, Marketing and Management, using defensive, charitable, promotional and strategic CSR approaches respectively. The second part of the paper examines the Three Curses of Modern CSR (incremental, peripheral and uneconomic), before exploring what CSR might look like in an emerging Age of Responsibility. This new CSR – called systemic or radical CSR, or CSR 2.0 – is based on five principles (creativity, scalability, responsiveness, glocality and circularity) and forms the basis for a new DNA model ofresponsible business, built around the four elements of value creation, good governance, societal contribution and environmental integrity.

Reference

Visser, W. (2010) The Age of Responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the New DNA of Business, Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics 5(3): 7-22. November, Special Issue on Responsibility for Social and Environmental Issues.

Download

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

CSR in Malaysia

By Roger Haw Boon Hong

CSR is not a freshly minted idea to Malaysians; the term might be new to some, but not the concept. CSR principles epitomise the fundamental religious and social values that have held together the very fabric of Malaysian society for millennia.

There are some priorities issues have been covered in this context such as community and social welfare aspects, education, environment, workplace practices, culture and heritage. For instance, over 1,000 community and social welfare projects were implemented in 2008, compared to 350 projects in 1998. Studies have shown that the number of students who obtained scholarships for pursuing various levels of education has increased by 300% within the ten year period 1995–2005.

Since 2000, almost 55% of companies in Malaysia have prioritised environmental protection plans in their projects, as compared to only 10–15% in 1980. According to ASRIA’s studies carried out in 2008, 47% of companies in Malaysia are practising good workplace ethics to create a vibrant, healthy environment for their employees. In 1980, only 5% of corporations were willing to support cultural and heritage projects or events, compared to 35% today.

The Ansted Social Responsibility International Award (ASRIA) has helped to raise awareness about the need for business to be legitimate in the eyes of the public. It seems that the number of listed companies reporting environmental information has increased from 30 in 1999 to 138 in 2007. Disclosure of social performance has risen similarly, from 28 companies in 2002 to 43 in 2003. CSR is not only a large company phenomenon. In 2008, 58% of small companies contributed to society ‘in a big way’, as compared to 18% in 1998, a 40% increase within a ten-year period.

A series of prestigious awards such as ASRIA, MESRA, the Prime Minister’s CSR Awards and StarBiz-ICR Malaysia Corporate Responsibility Awards have been recognising companies that have made a difference to the communities in which they operate through their CSR programmes. The percentage of media reporting on CSR has increased from 35% to 45% between 1980 and 2003, and from 45% to 87% between 2004 and 2008.

In the 2007 budget, the government announced that all listed companies are required to disclose CSR activities in their annual financial reports, including their employment composition by race and gender, as well as programmes undertaken to develop domestic vendors. Recognising that the private sector has been successful in implementing CSR projects for the benefit of low-income groups, the government has established a CSR fund, with an initial sum of MYR50 million (USD15 million), to jointly finance selected CSR projects.

Businesses in Malaysia do not operate in a vacuum. They work with multiple suppliers and customers, who in turn have their own sets of suppliers and customers. The listed companies also have to answer to investors. These are parties who can persuade a company to buy into the concept of CSR. Nowadays, the majority of companies in Malaysia have started to put CSR into practice, while many NGOs have been supporting those responsible companies.

Source

This blog is based on the Malaysia chapter in The World Guide to CSR (Greenleaf, 2010) by Roger Haw Boon Hong. Roger is Professor in Corporate Social Responsibility at Ansted University and Founder and Chairman of the Ansted Social Responsibility International Award (ASRIA).

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Video: Ellen Weinreb on Trends in the Sustainability Jobs Market

Ellen Weinreb is Founder of Sustainability Jobs. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she discusses the sustainability jobs market. The interview took place in San Francisco on 16 September 2010.

Friday, November 26, 2010

The Era of "Leading Big" on CSR Dawns: Unilever's Sustainable Living Plan

By Wayne Visser

“This world has tremendous challenges. The challenges of poverty, of water, of global warming, climate change. And businesses like ours have a role to play in that. And frankly, to me, that's very appealing.” So said Unilever CEO, Paul Polman, in a 2009 interview with McKinsey. He went on to say, “We have every day, in our business, about two billion consumers that use our brands, and so [there is] a tremendous opportunity. And if we do the right thing, we can actually make major progress in society.”

This drive to make a major difference seems, if anything, to have got bigger over the past year. At least, that’s the impression you get from Unilever’s new Sustainable Living Plan, which it launched last week. In it, they committed to double the size of the company, while halving the environmental footprint of their products, sourcing 100% of their agricultural ingredients sustainably by 2015 and helping 1 billion people out of poverty.

Commitments like that are what Sandy Ogg, Chief HR Officer for Unilever, calls “leading big”. Speaking to Polly Courtice, Director of the Cambridge Programme for Sustainability Leadership earlier this year, he said, “There’s so much going on now in the world that if you don’t have amplification and time compression, then it doesn’t rumble. So I call that leading big. You can’t let it drool or dribble out into an organisation like ours and expect to have any impact.”

Jim Collins, author of Built to Last and Good to Great, calls it having a BHAG – a Big Hairy Audacious Goal. And Unilever is certainly not the first. In 1994, Interface’s CEO Ray Anderson committed to become the first "restorative” company in the world (giving back more than they take) and by 1996, outdoor clothing company Patagonia was only using organic cotton. More recently, Wal-Mart has committed to zero waste and 100% renewable energy; Coca-Cola has pledged to become water neutral; and Tesco plans to become carbon neutral.

The fact of the matter is that without “leading big” on sustainability and responsibility, CSR efforts no longer have any real credibility. That’s because there is overwhelming data to show that past efforts – CSR 1.0 approaches – have failed to reverse problems like biodiversity loss, carbon emissions, income inequality and corruption. Instead, continued unsustainable and irresponsible production and consumption has meant business is still more part of the problem than the solution.

“Leading big” is absolutely essential if we are break this pattern of CSR ineffectiveness. When people ask what CSR 2.0 really means, there are two ways to answer. One is to say that it is about a more systemic approach to CSR, one that tackles the roots of the problem, by applying the principles of creativity, scalability, responsiveness, glocality and circularity to the DNA of the business, namely through value creation, good governance, societal contribution and environmental integrity.

The second answer, which is far simpler and no less true, is to say that the dual ‘acid test’ of CSR 2.0 is admission and ambition. Companies have to be prepared to face up (and ‘fess’ up) to their impacts; to admit that they are still a long way from being truly sustainable and responsible; even to concede that they are part of the problem. And then companies have to show their ambition, their willingness to set bold, audacious targets that will reverse the negative social and environmental trends.

In today’s world of low-trust and information overload, only bold leadership on CSR will inspire action and build credibility. Unilever and others are pointing the way and deserve our congratulations and support. They also require our unrelenting scrutiny, to ensure that “leading big” is not simply “talking big”, but rather “acting big” – making real change happen at scale and at pace.

Friday, November 5, 2010

Reflection on "What the Green Movement Got Wrong"

By Wayne Visser

Last night, the UK’s Channel 4 showed a documentary called ‘What the Green Movement Got Wrong’. In some ways, it reminded me of The Apprentice – designed to spark conflict and generate publicity, but having very little to do with inconvenient reality. And of course, it succeeded. The live debate that followed drew indignant responses from the likes of Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and George Monbiot. And while I shared some of their frustration, I am rather less inclined to trash the show.

The fact of the matter is that it raised some important questions about the ‘greens’ (although only the media still uses such an outdated label). Do they rely more on ideology and emotions than science and economics? Have they been right in their belligerent opposition to nuclear and GMOs? Is their distrust in corporations and new technology really justified? Do they slip into the trap of caring more about ‘green things’ than people, especially poor people in developing countries? For example, did they resist the use of DDT to control malaria?

Well, first we have to ask, who are ‘they’? The documentary lumped these mysterious ‘greens’ into one amorphous mass, creating the impression that it is a cogent and unified movement. Paul Hawken, in Blessed Unrest, estimates that there are over 2 million organisations around the world working on issues of social justice and environmental sustainability. What are the chances that they agree on anything, let alone the contentious issues of nuclear energy and GMOs?

The truth is that every movement, including sustainability and responsibility, has the full spectrum of players, from conservatives and Luddites to liberals and techno-optimists. There are those who believe that business and the market are the yellow brick road to utopia, and those who believe that only government policy can take us ‘over the rainbow’. There are pro-nuke and anti-nuke, pro-GMO and anti-GMO and all sorts of liquorice flavours in between.

Leaving the quality of the documentary aside (it was one-sided and contained various factual errors), the freedom to debate the issues is critical. If there’s one thing that drives me mad, it’s the demonization of anyone who happens to disagree with the crowd – and let’s be honest, the sustainability and responsibility ‘crowd’ does suffer from group-think mentality on many issues. Ideology, preconceived ideas and entrenched positions are stronger than most will admit.

My point is that debate is good. Dialogue is even better, but that requires listening, rather than defending dug-in bunker-mentality views. Dialogue is never going to happen in the bright lights of entertainment TV. But we do have a chance now, in the aftermath, to dialogue. The question is, are we mature enough to do so. When last did you change your mind on a key sustainability or justice issue? Are we prepared to practice what we preach about stakeholder engagement?

It was clear that Channel 4 had no intention of being either fair or transparent. As Craig Bennett from Friends of the Earth pointed out during the live debate, they requested that they be interviewed so as to include their views in the documentary, but Channel 4 refused. No surprise there. Channel 4 is not about balanced programming, it is about poking the hornet’s nest to boost viewers and ratings; a sort of documentary version of Jerry Springer if you like.

In the final analysis, the documentary and the debate that followed belong to the last century. The world – and the sustainability and responsibility movement – has long since moved on from simplistic black or white, green or red, market or state, pro or anti thinking. We are in the era of complexity, of hybrid technologies and cross-sector partnerships, of multi-level governance and multi-stage CSR. We must resist the tabloid-style return to cardboard caricatures and melodramatic mudslinging.

Reflection on "What the Green Movement Got Wrong"

By Wayne Visser

Last night, the UK’s Channel 4 showed a documentary called ‘What the Green Movement Got Wrong’. In some ways, it reminded me of The Apprentice – designed to spark conflict and generate publicity, but having very little to do with inconvenient reality. And of course, it succeeded. The live debate that followed drew indignant responses from the likes of Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and George Monbiot. And while I shared some of their frustration, I am rather less inclined to trash the show.

The fact of the matter is that it raised some important questions about the ‘greens’ (although only the media still uses such an outdated label). Do they rely more on ideology and emotions than science and economics? Have they been right in their belligerent opposition to nuclear and NGOs? Is their distrust in corporations and new technology really justified? Do they slip into the trap of caring more about ‘green things’ than people, especially poor people in developing countries?

Well, first we have to ask, who are ‘they’? The documentary lumped these mysterious ‘greens’ into one amorphous mass, creating the impression that it is a cogent and unified movement. Paul Hawken, in Blessed Unrest, estimates that there are over 2 million organisations around the world working on issues of social justice and environmental sustainability. What are the chances that they agree on anything, let alone the contentious issues of nuclear energy and GMOs?

The truth is that every movement, including sustainability and responsibility, has the full spectrum of players, from conservatives and Luddites to liberals and techno-optimists. There are those who believe that business and the market are the yellow brick road to utopia, and those who believe that only government policy can take us ‘over the rainbow’. There are pro-nuke and anti-nuke, pro-GMO and anti-GMO and all sorts of liquorice flavours in between.

Leaving the quality of the documentary aside (it was one-sided and contained various factual errors), the freedom to debate the issues is critical. If there’s one thing that drives me mad, it’s the demonization of anyone who happens to disagree with the crowd – and let’s be honest, the sustainability and responsibility ‘crowd’ does suffer from group-think mentality on many issues. Ideology, preconceived ideas and entrenched positions are stronger than most will admit.

My point is that debate is good. Dialogue is even better, but that requires listening, rather than defending dug-in bunker-mentality views. Dialogue is never going to happen in the bright lights of entertainment TV. But we do have a chance now, in the aftermath, to dialogue. The question is, are we mature enough to do so. When last did you change your mind on a key sustainability or justice issue? Are we prepared to practice what we preach about stakeholder engagement?

It was clear that Channel 4 had no intention of being either fair or transparent. As Craig Bennett from Friends of the Earth pointed out during the live debate, they requested that they be interviewed so as to include their views in the documentary, but Channel 4 refused. No surprise there. Channel 4 is not about balanced programming, it is about poking the hornet’s nest to boost viewers and ratings; a sort of documentary version of Jerry Springer if you like.

In the final analysis, the documentary and the debate that followed belong to the last century. The world – and the sustainability and responsibility movement – has long since moved on from simplistic black or white, green or red, market or state, pro or anti thinking. We are in the era of complexity, of hybrid technologies and cross-sector partnerships, of multi-level governance and multi-stage CSR. We must resist the tabloid-style return to cardboard caricatures and melodramatic mudslinging.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Author in the spotlight: Elaine Cohen interviews Wayne Visser

Snapshot

  • Age? 39
  • Born in? Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
  • Married? Nope
  • Kids? Nope
  • Live in? London
  • Educated at? Universities of Cape Town (South Africa), Edinburgh (Scotland) and Nottingham (England)
  • Favourite movie? Brazil (1985, Director Terry Gilliam)
  • Favourite musician? Johnny Clegg (South African)
  • Favourite CSR report? Patagonia's
  • Favourite flavor ice cream? Ginger
  • Favourite non-CSR book? Shantaram (Gregory David Roberts)
  • Favourite CSR book? Cradle to Cradle (McDonough & Braungart)
  • If I could, I would ... Be a full-time writer

Of all the books you have written on corporate responsibility, which do you feel is the most important in terms of the message you were trying to convey?

The new one, The Age of Responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the New DNA of Business (out 18 February 2011). Not only does it fundamentally challenge business and the notion of CSR - for example, it starts by stating that CSR has failed and should either be killed off, or reinvented - but it is written in an narrative style that I think makes it an easy read, with lots of fascinating cases and stories of 'the good, the bad and the ugly' of corporate sustainability & responsibility.

Which book did you personally enjoy writing the most?

The first one, Beyond Reasonable Greed (co-authored with Clem Sunter), mainly because I used lions and elephants as a metaphor for unsustainable and sustainable companies. It was fascinating researching the traits of both species, and it was fun creatively applying the analogy to business. It was also very forward looking and together with my co-author we developed two future scenarios for business: 'Oases in the Desert' and 'Plains of the Serengeti'. We even ended up with 'leophants' - those companies in between.

What made you decide to publish Landmarks for Sustainability? Which landmark is the most significant in your personal view?

The idea behind Landmarks, which I wrote for the University of Cambridge Programme for Sustainability Leadership, was to capture the seminal events that have shaped the sustainability agenda over the past 20 years (although we also included a timeline of landmarks that goes back almost 100 years). There are certain corporate events - like Shell's Brent Spar fiasco, McDonald's McLibel trial, Nike's supply chain wake-up call and Enron's collapse - that most people in CSR have heard about, but they don't have the facts and figures at their finger tips. Likewise for positive breakthroughs in transparency, fairtrade, poverty alleviation and so-on. We also decided to make it highly visual (lots of photos) and readable (bullets, feature boxes, etc.) to make sure busy people could dip into it easily. For me, the most significant landmark event was the publication of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005, because it shows us the extent to which all our other CSR and sustainability efforts are failing at a catastrophic scale.

The Top 50 Sustainability Books has a similar look and feel to Landmarks for Sustainability. Was that deliberate?

Yes, it was another book for the Cambridge Programme for Sustainability Leadership and it was designed to be a highly accessible reference book. This time, however, we focused on ideas rather than events that have changed the sustainability world. Many people working in sustainability have heard about these classic books, but do not have the time to read them all, so we decided to provide short synopses, with key messages, pull-out quotes and extracts from interviews I did with many of the authors. I think it is a great guide to the most important thinking in sustainability over the past 50 years and more.

In The World Guide to CSR, what surprised you the most as you received contributions from all around the world?

The first surprise was the diversity of submissions - not just the usual suspects among the G20, but also countries like Armenia, Bangladesh, Iran, Iceland, Liberia, Peru, Romania and United Arab Emirates. The second and most delightful aspect was learning how each country's cultural tradition has shaped CSR practices, in some cases (such as in Azerbaijan, Turkey and India) with these influences having evolved over centuries.

Having now completed your world CSR tour, what are the most important insights you bring back with you?

There are so many insights: the fact that a lot of the most important social innovation is taking place in developing countries (like India), that awareness and expectations of CSR are higher in places like Brazil than in the UK, that many non-OECD countries and companies are still stuck in the CSR Ages of Philanthropy and Marketing, that Europe and America is mesmerised by the Age of Management, and that very very few companies anywhere recognise that the concept of CSR - and the larger industrial model of shareholder-driven capitalism - is fundamentally flawed and will never solve the problems it claims to be most concerned about.

How useful do you feel The A to Z of Corporate Social Responsibility remains? It was published a couple of years ago but the jargon has moved on. Do you plan a second edition?

In fact, a second edition came out this year (2010) - a paperback version with updated content, including additions on the global financial crisis and ISO 26000. Beyond this, I don't feel that the underlying concepts or the core codes and standards have changed fundamentally. It remains highly useful as a searchable reference book, especially since it is also out in an e-book version.

Beyond Reasonable Greed was an early book on the subject of corporate responsibility. Did people understand your message? What sort of reactions did you receive? Have companies traded in their fangs for tusks?

The timing for the book was perfect, as it came out just when the Enron and Worldcom scandals were hitting the headlines. So I think the message was intuitively understood, but it was not seriously acted upon. To use the language of the book, we saw the emergence of many 'leophants' after 2002. What is different, comparing this with writing The Age of Responsibility almost 10 years later, is that today there more lion corpses on the slab to dissect (like Lehman Brothers) and a number of genuine elephant companies to learn from (like Interface), as well as any number of injured leophants (like BP) that are getting left behind.

What do you feel Corporate Citizenship in Africa added to the CSR equation in South Africa? Do you feel the CSR message is understood by leading businesses in SA?

The book did a number of things. First, I would say that it was a book about Africa, not just South Africa, but it did point out the general lack of academic research on CSR beyond South Africa and Nigeria. Second, it confirmed our suspicion that most research on CSR in Africa was qualitative, with little or no country-comparative data. And third, it showed that research on CSR in South Africa was also quite skewed, largely towards business ethics. The question of whether CSR is understood by leading businesses in SA is different. The answer is unequivocally 'yes'. That is the interesting thing about many developing countries - businesses know that they can't succeed in societies that fail; often the business case is much clearer and the moral case much stronger.

Making a Difference is a call to action for individuals to leave a meaningful legacy. How would you describe your own personal legacy as you wish to see it?

Making a Difference, which is based on my PhD research, is not only about leaving a legacy, but also about what gives us deep satisfaction or meaning in our work as CSR practitioners. It turns out that motivations vary according to different leadership styles or change agent types - whether you are more of an expert, facilitator, catalyst or activist. As for my source of meaning, I most closely fit the expert type and derive my greatest satisfaction from being a thought leader (if indeed that's what I am) and inspiring others through ideas.

How much of your overall time do you spend writing/editing books on CSR?

Writing goes in waves, although considering that I have written and edited 11 books over the past 8 years, there have not been many periods when I am not writing. I suppose if I had to guess, I'd say I spend about 20% of my time actually writing, but probably 50% of my time is spent doing explicit or implicit research on which the books are based. Lately, a lot of the rest of my time has been spent sharing my thoughts and ideas with others, through teaching, workshops, training and various networks.

Which book gave you the most personal satisfaction and why?

I think that would be Business Frontiers, as this was my first independently authored book. In fact, it is a collection of my writings on social responsibility, sustainable development and economic justice over more than a decade, so it was very satisfying to see those collected together in one place. In addition, it allowed me to publish some of my more creative writing on the subject - with chapters like Holistic Business, The Corporate Battle for Hearts & Minds, Future Images Beyond the Information Age, Connecting Earth & Sky, Tree of Life, and even a poetic parable called Quest for Gold.

Which book about CSR have you not written yet?

There are many I have not written, and in fact I turn down book projects fairly regularly now. The more compelling question is, what am I passionate enough about to want to put in the blood, sweat and tears required to turn it into a book? I'd like to write up my CSR Quest world tour as a kind of travel book with a CSR twist. I'd also like to do a book on Purpose-Inspired Leadership, as well as writing a business parable (i.e. fiction book) that captures the lessons of CSR but never mentions the word. And I'd like to do a book calledSmart, Sustainable and Inclusive, which tackles the macro-level of economics and culture, rather than the micro-level of companies and CSR.

You are also somewhat of a poet and have published a collection of poems? Is this an insurance policy in case CSR doesn’t work out ….. ?

Were it but so! No, not really. Poetry is just my way of expressing a deeper level of myself and being a bit creative (alongside my dabbling in painting, sketching and photography). It is probably my most authentic voice, but poetry is seldom the stuff of fame and fortune. It's a very personal and subjective hobby, which I do primarily for myself. If the words resonate with others - as they do seem to on occasion - then that's a bonus and I am delighted.

Do you like chunky Monkey?

I had to look it up, so I guess that is an answer in itself.

Anything else you want to mention?

People should know that I'm more interested in what is being done that what labels we give things. It so happens that I talk about CSR 2.0 - which I also call systemic CSR or radical CSR - and I use CSR to mean 'corporate sustainability and responsibility', but I really don't care if people have different jargon. For me, the proof must be in the results and for too long we have focused on measuring CSR activities rather than the societal impacts of business. My new test for whether a company is a CSR 2.0 pioneer in the Age of Responsibility is simple: what is their level of admission and ambition? i.e. do they admit the extent of their unsustainability and irresponsibility, and do they set audacious targets like zero waste, 100% renewable energy and rising stakeholder happiness.

Interview date: October 2010

Condensed version published on CSR Wire

Note: All Wayne Visser's books are profiled on his website, including many free downloads

Friday, October 22, 2010

Video: Peter Nicholson on Sustainable Urban Design

Peter Nicholson is Innovationist for Foresight Design. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about trends in sustainable urban design in Chicago. The interview took place in Chicago on 9 September 2010.

Monday, October 4, 2010

Video: David Oser on Community Banking & Sustainable Finance

David Oser is Former Executive Vice President of Shorebank of Chicago, which for many years blazed a trail for community banking in poor area of the city. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about the lessons we can learn from Shorebank's example. The interview took place in Chicago on 8 September 2010.

Friday, October 1, 2010

Video: Woodrow Clark on Climate & Energy Solutions

Woodrow Clark is Managing Director of Clark Strategic Partners and a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace prize (as part of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he discusses solutions to the energy and climate crises we face. The interview took place in Chicago on 7 September 2010.

Understanding Empathy Key to Furthering Corporate Social Responsibility

By: Olivia Coleman

More often than not, Corporate Social Responsibility is understood as moral obligation. We believe that CSR is important simply because it's the right thing to do. Sometimes, we also cast CSR as a set of practices that enables companies to become more efficient. What many don't consider, however, is what certain intrinsic human qualities we develop when we promote Corporate Social Responsibility.

Jeremy Rifkin, an economist, writer, and political advisor argues in his recent book “The Empathic Civilization: The Race to Global Consciousness in a World in Crisis" that, contrary to previously held notions of human nature, we are soft-wired to empathize with others. Drawing from the latest research in neuroscience and other fields, Rifkin essentially says that we have an inherent desire to connect with others, to share, and to alleviate suffering.

With the new globalized economy, however, we are now faced with some of the most urgent dilemmas in the history of the human race. From global warming to military conflict, our planet's sustainability has become increasingly fragile. These problems Rifkin sees have resulted from using old ways of thinking in a completely new world. In other words, at the center of our most pressing global problems is the stagnation of human consciousness.

Rifkin points out that throughout history we have placed limits on our ability to empathize by extending our sympathy only to those within certain social groups. Initially, our race was tribal, and aggression was exerted to those outside our respective tribes. Eventually, with the rise of religion, we replaced tribalism with religious ties. Once the concept of nation states formed, aggression worked in tandem with nationalism.

Rifkin cogently notes that with the development of communication technologies, previous fictional barriers that have retarded the scope of our empathic abilities, like the concept of nation states, are slowly unraveling. Here's where Corporate Social Responsibility comes in. Governments are often concerned only with the welfare of their own nation states, while transnational businesses have the ability to work beyond these fictional boundaries. In this light, the work of CSR is to expand human empathy, to promote it, and to change the way we think on a very fundamental level.

While many decry the rise of a globalized economy, in which businesses cross borders, it is these very businesses--if they make it a point to promote the connection of people and ideas around the world--that have the power to make a substantive difference, and to save our planet from the problems that currently plague it. Thus, if we understand CSR as more than just a mere "responsibility" or a way to make businesses function more efficiently, we have an added motivation to further our goals in making this planet a better place.

By-line:

This guest post is contributed by Olivia Coleman, who writes on the topics of online colleges and universities. She welcomes your comments at her email Id: olivia.coleman33 @gmail.com.

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Video: Paul Munsen on Sun Ovens & Social Entrepreneurship

Paul Munsen is a social entrepreneur and President of Sun Ovens International. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about what he has learned about social entrepreneurship. The interview took place in Chicago on 6 September 2010.

Friday, September 24, 2010

The Ages and Stages of CSR: From Defensive to Systemic CSR

By Wayne Visser

I have found it useful to view the evolution of business responsibility in terms of five overlapping economic periods – the Ages of Greed, Philanthropy, Misrepresentation, Management and Responsibility – each of which typically manifests a different stage of CSR, namely: Defensive, Charitable, Promotional, Strategic and Systemic CSR.

My contention is that companies tend to move through these ages and stages (although they may have activities in several ages and stages at once), and that we should be encouraging business to make the transition to Systemic CSR in the dawning Age of Responsibility. If companies remain stuck in any of the first four stages, I don’t believe we will turn the tide on the environmental, social and ethical crises that we face. Simply put, CSR will continue to fail.

The Ages and Stages of CSR

Table of Key Characteristics

Economic AgeStage of CSRModus OperandiKey EnablerStakeholder Target
GreedDefensiveAd hoc interventionsInvestmentsShareholders, government & employees
PhilanthropyCharitableCommunity programmesProjectsCommunities
MisdirectionPromotionalPublic relationsMediaGeneral public
ManagementStrategicManagement systemsCodesShareholders & NGOs/CSOs
ResponsibilitySystemicBusiness modelsProductsRegulators & customers

Source: The Age of Responsibility, by Wayne Visser (forthcoming, Wiley: Feb 2011)

1. Defensive CSR

The Age of Greed is characterised by Defensive CSR in which all corporate sustainability and responsibility practices – which are typically limited - are undertaken only if and when it can be shown that shareholder value will be protected as a result. Hence, employee volunteer programmes (which show evidence of improved staff motivation, commitment and productivity) are not uncommon, nor are expenditures (for example in pollution controls) which are seen to fend off regulation or avoid fines and penalties.

2. Charitable CSR

Charitable CSR in the Age of Philanthropy is where a company supports various social and environmental causes through donations and sponsorships, typically administered through a Foundation, Trust or Chairman’s Fund and aimed at empowering community groups or civil society organisations.

3. Promotional CSR

Promotional CSR in the Age of Misdirection is what happens when corporate sustainability and responsibility is seen mainly as a public relations opportunity to enhance the brand, image and reputation of the company. Promotional CSR may draw on the practices of Charitable and Strategic CSR and turn them into PR spin, which is often characterised as ‘greenwash’.

4. Strategic CSR

Strategic CSR, emerging from the Age of Management, means relating CSR activities to the company’s core business (e.g. Coca-Cola and water management), often through adherence to CSR codes and implementation of social and environmental management systems, which typically involve cycles of CSR policy development, goal and target setting, programme implementation, auditing and reporting.

5. Systemic CSR

Systemic CSR in the Age of Responsibility focuses its activities on identifying and tackling the root causes of our present unsustainability and irresponsibility, typically through innovating business models, revolutionising their processes, products and services and lobbying for progressive national and international policies.

Hence, while Strategic CSR is focused at the micro level – supporting social or environmental issues that happen to align with its strategy (but without necessarily changing that strategy) – Systemic CSR focuses on understanding the interconnections of the macro level system – society and ecosystems – and changing its strategy to optimise the outcomes for this larger human and ecological system.

Systemic CSR – which I also refer to as CSR 2.0 – is based on five principles: Creativity, Scalability, Responsiveness, Glocality and Circularity. These hold the key to making change happen, at a societal, organisational and individual level, and ensuring that we can all make a difference.

Download

Pdf print version available here

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

5 CSR International courses in London in Oct & Nov 2010

CSR International is offering 5 courses, taught by Professor Wayne Visser,
Director of CSR International and author of nine books on the role of business
in society. Participants receive a CSR International Certificate of Completion.

1. The Age of Responsibility: The Evolution and Revolution of Corporate
Sustainability & Responsibility (25 Oct / 22 Nov 2010)
More information - http://www.csrinternational.org/?p=8318

2. CSR, Marketing & PR: Stakeholder Communication & Reporting Beyond Greenwash
(26 Oct / 23 Nov 2010)
More information - http://www.csrinternational.org/?p=8325
3. CSR Around the World: Learning from Best Practices Across Africa, Asia,
Europe, Latin America & North America (27 Oct / 24 Nov 2010)
More information - http://www.csrinternational.org/?p=8329

4. CSR as a Strategy for Change: Understanding the Drivers of Change at a
Societal, Organisational & Individual Level (28 Oct / 25 Nov 2010)
More information - http://www.csrinternational.org/?p=8333

5. CSR, Governance & Leadership: Organisational Effectiveness & Leadership for
Sustainability & Responsibility (29 Oct / 26 Nov 2010)
More information - http://www.csrinternational.org/?p=8335

For every additional course attended, an extra 5% cash refund of the total
course fees will be paid on completion. Therefore, 2 courses: 5% refund, 3
courses: 10% refund, 4 courses: 15% refund, 5 courses: 20% refund.

Video: Jorge Reyes on CSR & SMEs in Mexico

Jorge Reyes is Director of IDEARSE at Universidad Anahuac in Mexico City. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he shares his Centre's research and experience in Mexico's pioneering Business Accelerator programme. The interview took place in Mexico City on 3 September 2010.

Monday, September 20, 2010

Video: Claudia Nunez Berridi on University Social Responsibility Programmes

Claudia Nunez Berridi is Director of Social Commitment at Universidad Anahuac in Mexico City. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she talks about the universities' Impulse programme for selected students to develop life skills and social responsibility. The interview took place in Mexico City on 3 September 2010.

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Video: Olga Sauma on Cross-sector Partnerships in Costa Rica

Olga Sauma is Director of Business Development for AED (Asociacion Empresarial para el Desarrollo) in Costa Rica. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, she talks about the cross-sector partnerships that AED has facilitated between business and government, especially in education. The interview took place on 20 August 2010 in San Jose.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Video: Maria Morales on CSR Trends & ICT in Costa Rica

Maria Morales is Corporate Citizenship Director for ITS InfoCom in San Jose. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she shares her insights on CSR in Costa Rica, including the lead being taken by the ICT sector. The interview took place on 20 August 2010 in San Jose.

Monday, September 13, 2010

Video: Wilfrid Aiello on Sustainable Tourism in Costa Rica

Wilfrid Aiello is Director General of Horizontes. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about their experiences and trends in sustainable tourism in Costa Rica.The interview took place on 20 August 2010 in San Jose.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Video: Cecilia Mora on CSR Best Practices in Costa Rica

Cecilia Mora is Director RSE Consultores. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she shares some of the CSR best practices she has seen in Costa Rica. The interview took place in San Jose on 20 August 2010.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Video: Jessica Webb on the Rainforest Alliance & Sustainability Certification

Jessica Webb is Manager: Development & Tourism Communications for the Rainforest Alliance in Costa Rica. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she talks about trends in sustainability certification in forestry, agriculture and tourism. The interview took place on 20 August 2010 in San Jose, Costa Rica.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Q&A with Wayne Visser on International CSR Trends

This is an interview by Alda Marina Campos, Director of Pares in Brazil, in which she asks Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, various questions about insights from his CSR Quest world tour and trends in CSR. The interview took place on 6 August 2010 in Rio de Janeiro.

Part 1




Part 2


Monday, August 30, 2010

Video: Alvaro Esteves on Sustainability & Social Innovation in Brazil

Alvaro Esteves is Director of Ekobe. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about his experiences working with companies in sustainability and social innovation working in the favelas. The interview took place on 6 August 2010.

Friday, August 27, 2010

Video: Alda Marina Campos on Sustainability in Brazil

Alda Marina Campos is Director of Pares, a sustainability consultancy. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she talks about sustainability best practices in Brazil. The interview took place on 6 August 2010 in Rio de Janeiro.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Video: Florencia Segura on CSR & Workplace Inclusion in Argentina

Florencia Segura is Founder of AgendaRSE in Buenos Aires. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she talks about CSR and workplace inclusion in Argentina. The interview took place on 20 July 2010 in Buenos Aires.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Video: Ana Muro on Sustainability Trends in Argentina

Ana Muro is Co-ordinator of the CSR Group of the Argentine Business Council for Sustainable Development (BCSD). In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she discusses trends and best practice cases in corporate sustainability in Argentina. The interview took place on 20 July 2010.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Video: Cecilia Rena on Sustainability Best Practices at Arcor in Argentina

Cecilia Rena is Sustainability Strategies Manager for Arcor Group in Argentina. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she discusses some of the best practices being implemented in her company, including supply chain integrity and management incentives. The interview took place in Buenos Aires on 20 July 2010.

Monday, August 23, 2010

Video: Maria Irigoyen on Trends in CSR & Reporting in Argentina

Maria Irigoyen is Project Director at ReporteSocial. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she talks about trends in CSR & reporting in Argentina. The interview took place in Buenos Aires on 20 July 2010.

Sunday, August 22, 2010

Video: Simon Harvey on The Natural Step in New Zealand

Simon Harvey is CEO of The Natural Step in New Zealand. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about this experiences implementing this strategic sustainability framework with companies. The interview took place on 22 June 2010 in Auckland.

Friday, August 20, 2010

Video: Rachel Brown on Sustainability in New Zealand

Rachel Brown is Founder & CEO of Sustainable Business Network in New Zealand. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she gives her views on sustainability trends in New Zealand. The interview took place on 22 June 2010 in Auckland.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Video: Maggie Lawton on Sustainability & Local Government in New Zealand

Maggie Lawton is Head of Strategy & Policy at Manukau City Council in Auckland. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she talks about their experiences of implementing sustainability at a local government level. The interview took place on 22 June 2010 in Auckland.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

10 Paths to the Future for NGOs/CSOs

By Wayne Visser

John Elkington recently asked me 'how the NGO landscape will morph over next decade', especially in non-OECD countries, to feed into some research he is doing on the Future of NGOs. Drawing especially on my work for the World Guide to CSR, and my travels on the CSR Quest world tour, I have tried to capture my insights as 10 Paths to the Future for Civil Society Organisations (CSOs, which I prefer rather than the term NGOs). Using examples from around the world, I believe that in the future, CSOs will increasingly be ...

  1. Platforms for transparency – The role of CSOs as agitators for, and agents of, greater transparency seems set to continue. For example, in Senegal, Benin, and Guinea, CSO intervention has been critical in the development of a free press. And in India, Karmayog allows citizens to report specific instances of bribery and corruption on a live, public website.
  2. Brokers of volunteerism – As companies increasingly see the benefits of volunteerism (greater job satisfaction, productivity, commitment and loyalty), CSOs are increasingly becoming people-brokers, as sources of projects for employee volunteers. For example, the Voluntary Workcamps Association of Ghana (VOLU) coordinates volunteers to help with the construction of schools, reforestation and AIDS campaigning.
  3. Champions of CSR – While some CSOs remain sceptical about CSR, in many countries they are the main agents for promoting CSR. For example, in Iran, a group of CSOs have joined forces with the UNDP to promote CSR through targeted training for managers under the umbrella of the UN MDGs. And in Senegal, CSR awareness has grown mainly due to an CSO called La Lumière in Kédougou.
  4. Advisors of business – A combination of genuine expertise, valuable perspectives and a crunch on funding means that many CSOs are turning to consultancy, working with and advising companies not only on specific social and environmental issues, but also more generally on sustainability and responsibility. For example, in Hungary, as opposed to the traditional role of watchdog, many CSOs engage in consultancy on CSR.
  5. Agents of government – The phenomena of GONGOs (government organised NGOs), GINGOs (government-inspired NGOs), GRINGOs (government regulated/run and initiated NGOs) and PANGOs (party-affiliated NGOs) are becoming more widespread, no longer just seen in China. Even where governments are not setting up or running the CSOs, they are supporting them as key catalysts. For example, Belgian CSOs receive €3 government funding for every €1 they raised themselves.
  6. Reformers of policy – Realising that the ‘rules of the game’ need to change, CSOs are increasingly getting involved in legal reform. For example, in Indonesia, it was largely due to rising pressure from CSOs that the Law No. 40/2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies was introduced to make CSR mandatory.
  7. Makers of standards – In an effort to raise the bar on voluntary action by companies, many CSOs are developing their own social and environmental codes and standards, then inviting business to comply with them. For example, in Israel, the Public Trust Organisation established The Public Trust Code, covering advertising, transparency, disclosure, service and product guarantees, honesty in contracts and privacy of information.
  8. Channels for taxes – In some countries, the effectiveness of CSOs has earned them the ability to source tax dollars directly. For example, in Mexico, the FECHAC (Federation of the Chihuahuan Industry) is an CSO, set up after devastating floods in 1990, that is funded through a special annual tax on more than 38,000 industries. And in Romania, the 2% Law (in terms of the Fiscal Code) allows citizens to redirect 2% of personal income tax to an CSO.
  9. Partners in solutions – Not only are CSOs collaborating with business more and more, but also with governments and multilateral agencies. For example, in South Korea, ‘Cross Sector Alliance’ is one of 5 approaches to CSR being promoted, while in Africa the New Nigeria Foundation provides a platform for mobilizing non-traditional resources through public-private partnerships. In Turkey, TUSEV promotes linkages between domestic and international CSOs and encourages CSR by putting foreign and domestic firms in contact with appropriate CSOs.
  10. Catalysts for creativity – CSOs are increasingly expected to provide solutions, not just point out the problems, especially by launching or supporting social enterprises. For example, in Bangladesh, BRAC (formerly Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee) has been crucial in the microcredit movement, and in Singapore, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), has 12 social enterprises and 4 related organisations that are owned by more than 500,000 workers.
However the future unfolds, it is clear that CSOs will be a significant player in the new landscape of responsible governance and accountability, both as a counter-balancing force and a partner to governments and business. I believe CSOs will be the glue that holds society together in the turbulent years ahead.

Monday, August 16, 2010

Video: John Elkington on Trends in Sustainability & Social Enterprise

John Elkington is the Founder and Non-Executive Director of SustainAbility and Founding Partner and Director of Volans Ventures. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about where he sees the sustainability and social enterprise agenda heading. The interview took place in Athens on 11 June 2010.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Video: Kiara Konti on Corporate Responsibility in Greece

Kiara Konti is Senior Consultant: Corporate Responsibility Services for a professional services firm in Greece. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she discusses her insights in CR trends in Greece. The interview took place on 11 June 2010.

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Video: Maria Lazarimou on the CR Index in Greece

Maria Lazarimou is CEO of Advocate-BM. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she talks about her work with the Corporate Responsibility Index in Greece, as well as her view on the trends in CSR. The interview was conducted on 11 June 2010 in Athens.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Video: Wayne Visser's workshop for AgendaRSE in Argentina

Video montage from the CSR workshop conducted by Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, for AgendaRSE in Buenos Aires, Argentina on 15 July 2010. With thanks to Florencia Segura, Director of AgendaRSE.

Monday, August 9, 2010

Video: Peter Michel Heilmann on CSR & Philanthropy in Europe

Peter Michel Heilmann is President of Eurocharity. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about his experiences working in the charity sector in Europe. The interview took place in Athens on 11 June 2010.

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Video: Tina Passalari on Sustainability in Greece

Tina Passalari is Manager: Sustainability Services for KPMG in Greece. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she gives her perspective from over 10 years of working with companies on sustainability issues in Greece. The interview took place on 11 June 2010 in Athens.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Video: Mark Wehling on CSR and SMEs in China

Mark Wehling is a visiting international CSR scholar at Peking University in Beijing. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he discusses the insights he has gained during his time researching CSR in China, especially among SMEs. The interview took place on 7 June 2010 in Beijing.

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Video: Sam Lee on CSR in China

Sam Lee is the Founder and CEO of InnoCSR in China. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, he talks about trends in CSR in China. The interview took place in Shanghai on 9 June 2010.

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Video: Jacylyn Shi on Sustainability & Women in China

Jacylyn Shi is a CSR consultant, academic and founder of Women in Sustainability Action (WISA) in China. In this interview with Dr Wayne Visser, Director of CSR International, she talks about progress on sustainability in China and the role of women in advancing the agenda. The interview took place in Shanghai on 9 June 2010.

Monday, August 2, 2010

Reflections on CSR in China

By Wayne Visser

It was a great pleasure for me to be back in China in May this year. On my first visit in 2008, it was shortly after the Sichuan earthquake and one of the fascinating things to see was how Chinese bloggers were publicly ranking (and rankling) companies on their response to the disaster. For me, that represented good news and bad news – good news because it meant that civil society was becoming more active and bad news because it was entrenching a philanthropic understanding of CSR. The other experience I had during that visit, which confirmed my fears, was my role on a judging panel for an MBA competition on CSR, where the project we selected (which involved setting up an e-waste recycling facility) was passed over for a philanthropic project (which involved giving money for setting up a school).

During my more recent visit, a number of things seem to have changed. As my Chinese colleagues kept reminding me, two years is a long time in China. The first thing I noticed is that the country is awash with CSR conferences, workshops and training. So much so that generic meetings no longer pull the crowds. Companies know what CSR is and now they want to know how to implement it. Not surprising then that the CSR reporting trend has finally taken off in China as well. For now, this is seen by many companies as an end in itself – often to satisfy Western critics – rather than a first step on a much longer journey. However, along with the reporting trend, there is at least more talk of Strategic CSR, even though the evidence suggests this is more the exception than the rule. A company like State Grid is among this progressive minority, but most large companies are still stuck in a philanthropic, project-based mode of CSR.

The main drivers for CSR seem to have shifted as well. Whereas before, it was mainly Western pressure through the supply chain, now the two main advocates seem to be the Chinese government and the workers themselves. The government has latched onto the CSR concept and is bedding down many elements in legislation ranging from labour conditions to cleaner production. There are also increasing numbers of protests by workers that are dissatisfied with the status quo. Sam Lee mentions the story that was in the headlines recently of an irregular number of suicides in a particular company, which has added impetus to this growing workers' movement. As China rises as an economic superpower and begins to dominate many industries, there is also far more emphasis on safety and quality of products.

Apart from CSR management, China is investing heavily is in the market opportunities provided by CSR issues, especially clean technology. Already in 2006, the richest man in China was reported to be Shi Shengrong, CEO of the solar company Suntech, and the richest women, Zhang Yin, made her fortune from recycling. A 2010 report published by the Pew Environmental Center found that in 2009, China invested $34.6 billion in the clean energy economy, while the United States only invested $18.6 billion. This explosive growth was brought home to me when, at an event of the Women In Sustainability Action (WISA) in Shanghai where I was speaking, I got talking to a supplier of wind turbines to Europe. Simply put, he cannot keep up with the demand. He is turning customers away because there is already 12 months of orders in the pipeline.

In a related trend, I heard far more on this trip about environmental issues. In fact, visiting CSR scholar at Peking University, Mark Wheling, believes that the green issues are what are getting companies away from philanthropic CSR. World Bank estimates put the cost of environmental and associated health costs in China at 3% of GDP, with water pollution accounting for half of the losses. These costs have not escaped the attention of the Chinese government, who is driving environmental legislation and incentives much more strongly now. Many Chinese talk about the Olympics as some kind of watershed. As you may remember, the government shut down many factories around the city and restricted vehicle access. As result, Beijing enjoyed unprecedented blue skies during the 2008 Olympics. When the Olympics was over and the government prepared to go back to business-as-usual, the public objected – they wanted to keep their blue skies – and so at least some of the pollution control policies remained in force.

So, yes, there have been changes over the past two years, and there has been some movement towards Strategic CSR. However, my overall impression is that most companies still view CSR as a philanthropic and public relations exercise. As Jacyclyn Shi reminds us, CSR awards schemes are booming, which is a sure sign of progress, but also immaturity of the market. Perhaps she is right to place her hope in the women of China to be the new pioneers. There has been no shortage of testosterone-fuelled growth in China – and the world – which remains at the heart of the problem. We could benefit from less male yang, and more female yin, in China and in the CSR movement more generally.