The CSR Newsletters are a freely-available resource generated as a dynamic complement to the textbook, Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation.

To sign-up to receive the CSR Newsletters regularly during the fall and spring academic semesters, e-mail author David Chandler at david.chandler@ucdenver.edu.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Strategic CSR - Zimbabwe

The article in the url below outlines the difficult decisions faced by firms operating in a country when world opinion moves in favor of sanctions and pressure on multi-nationals to withdraw (Issues: Cultural Conflict, p160; Companies Trying to Do CSR Well: Shell, p302):

“Doing business with Zimbabwe at a time when the world's media are showing the violent suppression of dissent can damage their reputations - as many found during the apartheid years in South Africa. Yet withdrawal could hurt ordinary people while having little impact on the government - and might delay recovery when democracy is eventually restored.”

The article cites a number of examples of western firms that provide meaningful employment to hundreds of Zimbabweans. The UK supermarket, Waitrose, for example, imports fish that are fair- trade certified from its Zimbabwe supplier. This firm:

“… employs 450 people, paying them "substantially more" than the minimum basic wage, according to Waitrose. They are also given other cash allowances, free lunches and HIV/Aids support, with medical insurance and membership of pension schemes for permanent employees.”

The article also raises the difficult case of the mining firm Anglo-American, which is currently investing in Zimbabwe to establish a platinum mine. As one source is quoted as saying, withdrawal represents:

"gesture politics . . . If Anglo American pulled out, their shoes would be filled very quickly by the Chinese. The precedent was set in Sudan, where the Chinese moved in after the imposition of western sanctions."

Ultimately, continued involvement legitimizes the current administration and, while life remains bearable for ordinary people, there is little hope of bottom-up regime change. On the other hand, however, withdrawal can cause real pain and can hamper recovery once change occurs. The ‘best’ decision is not apparent and, unfortunately, media coverage tends toward the emotional, rather than helping make the ‘best’ decision for those most affected—in this case, the Zimbabwean people.

Take care
Dave

Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006

Mangetout and Mugabe; Multinationals wrestle with their Zimbabwe role
By John Willman, Business Editor
1469 words
5 July 2008
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
10
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6b315526-49fb-11dd-891a-000077b07658,dwp_uuid=70bd196c-ffc3-11dc-825a-000077b07658.html