Principios procesales laborales Los principios procesales

In addition to ongoing efforts to bring greater empirical rigour to the micro-level business case for CSR at the level of the individual firm, there is also an emerging field of research that sets out to address the question:

Assuming that a critical mass of companies acts in a socially and environmentally responsible manner and that economic governance structures and policy incentives are designed to encourage such a strategy, would this result in enhanced overall national or regional competitiveness?17

Led by UK-based AccountAbility, a consortium of think tanks, business networks and research institutions from Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America, with support from institutions such as the World Bank, the European Commission, the Danish and UK governments and the United Nations Global Compact, have been researching this question since 2002.

Simon Zadek, CEO of AccountAbility, argues for a broader, more macro-level context for understanding the evolution of corporate responsibility: “Corporate responsibility can be understood as being about the process by which businesses’ roles in societies are renegotiated and realigned. In this sense, it is more usefully seen as an on-going macro or societal process with micro-level, organisational implications, rather than a micro-level experience that requires generalisation.”18

Likewise, Pascal Lamy, Director General of the World Trade Organisation and former European Commissioner for Trade, has observed, “The societal benefits of corporate responsibility practices will remain limited unless they can be incorporated into broader strategies, and public policies certainly have a role to play in this respect. Until now the debate has largely focused on what individual companies can do to enhance sustainable development goals. [We need to explore]… the challenges, dilemmas, and tensions surrounding the corporate responsibility debate and notably the link between it and the competitive advantage of nations.19

AccountAbility and its research partners define responsible competitiveness as, “markets where businesses are systematically and comprehensively rewarded from more responsible practices, and penalised for the converse.”20 _{In 2003, they}

launched a pilot Responsible Competitiveness Index (RCI), which considered

corporate responsibility indicators alongside more traditionally accepted factors that affect a country’s economic competitiveness. In 2005, a second more robust index was launched with Brazilian-based Fundação Dom Cabral, covering over 80 countries and providing two unique frameworks:21

• A National Corporate Responsibility Index (NCRI) – looking at the state of corporate responsibility on a country-by-country basis, allowing comparison between countries and regions, across different variables and over time;

• A Responsible Competitiveness Index – which links the NCRI with the

competitiveness of nations, drawing on the World Economic Forum’s Growth

Competitiveness Index.

The variables used to construct the 2003 and 2005 NCRI’s are listed in Box 5. In the 2005 index, Nordic countries score well, along with Canada, Austria and Belgium, with South Africa being ranked as the highest emerging economy (excluding Eastern Europe) followed by Korea, Chile, Malaysia, Costa Rica and Thailand. Despite some questions on the robustness of the findings, there is a significant correlation between the competitiveness of a country and its corporate

“The societal benefits of corporate responsibility practices will remain limited unless they can be incorporated into broader strategies, and public policies certainly have a role to play in this respect. Until now the debate has largely focused on what individual companies can do to enhance sustainable development goals.”

responsibility level. The authors of the indices emphasize, however, the fragility of the data and associated statistical and theoretical problems in constructing these new approaches to assessing national and regional competitiveness and they caution that, “such measures therefore need to be treated as indicative, rather than proof of possible causal relationships.”22

Having said this, the data offer some support for the proposition that corporate responsibility can fuel country competitiveness. These indices, together with supporting case study material and other research represent an important contribution to understanding the role that responsible business can play in enhancing a country’s competitiveness.

BOX 5: NATIONAL CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY INDEX VARIABLES: 2003 AND 2005

Source: Responsible Competitiveness: Reshaping Global Markets Through Responsible Business Practices. London: AccountAbility in association with Fundação Dom Cabral, 2005.

NCRI 2003

1. Corporate governance

• Transparency and disclosure rating

• Strength of auditing and accounting standards • Are boards independent?

2. Ethical business practices • Bribe payers’ Index

• Anti dumping measures against country/bn US$ exports • Business costs of corruption

• Strength of corporate ethics

3. Progressive policy formulation • Are environmental gains adversarial? • Are regulatory standards demanding? • Ratification of Kyoto Protocol • Sign up to UN Global Compact

4. Building human capital • Fatal accidents/100,000 workers • Extent of staff training • Employee protection legislation • Employment Laws Index

5. Engagement with civil society • Degree of civic freedom

• Total of consumer groups per 10m people • Public trust in business

• Sophistication of consumers • Customer orientation of companies

6. Contributions to public finance • Corporate tax levels

• Prevalence of irregular payments in tax collection • Public spending on education as % of total public

spending and GNP

7. Environmental management

• Compliance with environmental regulations • Prevalence of environmental management systems • Emissions of carbon dioxide per unit of GDP • Total of Dow Jones Sustainability Index rated

companies as % of total listed companies

NCRI 2005

1. Internal dimension: Corporate governance-ethical practices and Human Capital Development • Strength of auditing and accounting standards • Efficacy of corporate boards

• Corruption Perception Index

• Gap in the implementation of the basic worker rights • Quality of human resources approach: training and

employee development

• Gender equality: private sector employment of women

2. External dimension: Civil society context • Customer orientation

• Civic freedom

• NGOs/1,000,000 people (NGO density per 1,000,000 people group)

3. Environmental management • Stringency of environmental regulations

• Signing and Ratification of environmental treaties – Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety/ Framework Convention on Climate Change/ Convention on Biological Diversity/ Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (US)

• Fossil fuels footprint (WWF) – Total energy footprint (global ha/person)

• Number of certified ISO 14001 – companies per US$ billion