May Zurich, June 11, 2009 / Charlotte Mansson. According to the reputational risk radar RepRisk, the top ten most environmentally and socially

Transcription

1 Most Environmentally and Socially Controversial Companies in May 2009 Zurich, June 11, 2009 / Charlotte Mansson According to the reputational risk radar RepRisk, the top ten most environmentally and socially controversial companies in May 2009 were: BP, Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, Wal-Mart Stores, Barrick Gold, KBR Inc, RBS, Bertin Ltda, and Nestle. Companies on the list have been severely criticized by the world s media, governmental organizations and NGOs for issues including human rights abuses, severe environmental violations, impacts on local communities, corruption and bribery, and breaches of labor, and health and safety standards. Rankings are based on the Reputational Risk Index (RRI), as measured by RepRisk in May of this year. The RRI is directly derived from the negative press captured by RepRisk and its calculation is strictly rule-based. RepRisk does not measure a firm's overall reputation. Instead, by capturing criticism, RepRisk computes a firm's exposure to controversy and therefore provides an indicator for reputational risk. RepRisk is used by asset owners and asset managers, commercial and investment bankers, supply chain managers, and corporate responsibility experts. BP Exxon Mobil Shell Chevron Wal-Mart Barrick Gold KBR RBS Bertin Ltda Nestle Top ten most criticized and controversial companies in May 2009 The three environmental and social issues for which the ten companies were criticized most were: 1. Impacts on Ecosystems/Landscapes 2. Impacts on Communities 3. Local Pollution ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 1 of 9

2 The RRI ranges from zero (lowest) to 100 (highest) and its calculation is based on the reach of news sources, the frequency and timing of news, as well as its content, i.e. severity and novelty of the issues addressed. The RRI is an indicator of a company's exposure to controversial issues and allows an initial assessment of risks which are attached to investments and business relationships. It also allows the exposure of an entity to be compared with that of its peers and permits risk trends to be tracked over time. The following pages provide a summary of the criticism to which the ten most controversial companies have been exposed, as well as the environmental and social issues that have been associated with these companies. The company s ranking from the previous month is shown in brackets. In addition to the regular top ten list, this month s focus area will be on the Mining industry and its top five most environmentally and socially controversial companies. Please refer to page 9 for more details on methodology. ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 2 of 9

3 BP Plc, Rank 1 [8] A large majority of shareholders from BP PLC have voted against the 2008 pay packages put forward at the annual meeting, claiming they are excessive. WWF criticized BP, Exxon and Rosneft for refusing to join an advisory panel formed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature in response to the potential impacts of oil and gas development on Gray Whale populations in Russian waters. BP came under fire as it proposed to expand its Whiting Refinery in Michigan, which has been releasing dangerous levels of cancer-causing benzene for the past six years. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has cited BP America for breaches of the Clean Air Act at the Whiting refinery. 1. Impact on Ecosystems/Landscapes 2. Local Pollution 3. Impacts on Communities Exxon Mobil, Rank 2 [12] Exxon Mobil Corp was sued over charges that it has allegedly let millions of liters of crude oil seep into the earth below Brooklyn, New York, since 1947 and did not do enough to mitigate the situation. A separate lawsuit filed by the Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) alleges that over the past 12 months Exxon Mobil's Baton Rouge chemical plant has, on at least 66 occasions, released pollution in excess of its air permit. In another incident, a US District Court Judge has ordered Exxon Mobil Pipeline, a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil, to pay USD 6.1 million in fines for violating the Clean Water Act in relation to an incident at its Everett, Massachusetts oil terminal. Fifteen thousand gallons of low-sulfur diesel and kerosene spilled into the Mystic and Island End rivers. ExxonMobil has also come under fire for exploiting Canadian tar sands using a highly polluting and carbon intensive process, which destroys boreal forests and accelerates climate change. It has been named the worst oil company on Green America s Responsible Shopper Website. 1. Impacts on Ecosystems/Landscapes 2. Local Pollution 3. Impacts on Communities ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 3 of 9

4 Royal Dutch Shell, Rank 3 [4] Shareholders and environmentalists from the ShellGuilty campaign voiced their anger about Royal Dutch Shell's track record of alleged polluting, human rights violations and, recently, excessive executive pay despite the company's failure to meet pre-set targets. Campaigners claim the company's activities in Nigeria have caused severe oil spills in the Niger Delta region, the poisoning of communities through gas flaring, the emission of huge amounts of greenhouse gases, and the wasting of approximately USD 2.5 billion of natural gas annually. Along with facing a trial in the Netherlands over pollution allegations in Nigeria, Shell will also stand trial in New York for alleged collusion in human rights abuses dating back to the 1995 hanging of a writer and eight other activists. Sixty percent of Shell's shareholders rejected the plan to pay executives millions of pounds after not meetingperformance metrics, and Shell s CEO will step down in June amidst accusations that the company is the most polluting in the oil sector and shareholder criticism over executive greed. 1. Impacts on Ecosystems/Landscapes 2. Impacts on Communities 3. Local Pollution Chevron, Rank 4 [5] Chevron is facing USD 27 billion in potential damages in one of the world s largest environmental lawsuits in relation to its oil operations in Ecuador. The company has been blamed for increased cancer rates amongst local residents, severe damage to the environment and the degradation ofwater sources through oil contamination, pollution, and improperly treated waste. Shareholders voiced their concern over the effect the lawsuit might have on share prices. 1. Impact on Ecosystems/Landscapes 2. Impacts on Communities 3. Human Rights Abuses and Corporate Complicity ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 4 of 9

5 Wal-Mart Stores, Rank 5 [2] Wal-Mart was mentioned as one of the retailers that sources beef products from companies which allegedly contribute to Amazon rainforest destruction and global warming. Greenpeace claims that these producers expand into the Amazonian rainforest and log and operate illegally, occupy natives' land, and practice modern-day slave labor. Wal-Mart was also accused of sourcing fish products from unsustainable suppliers. 1. Poor Employment Conditions 2. Supply Chain (E, S, L Issues) 3. Human Rights Abuses and Corporate Complicity Barrick Gold, Rank 6 [20] A major toxic spill has been reported at Barrick Gold's Mara Mine in Tanzania. The spill has allegedly contaminated the river Thigithe, which flows into the nearby Mara River, with hazardous sludge. Barrick Gold's Pascua-Lama Project was criticized by community leaders and legal experts from Chile and Argentina who denounced the project as illegal and lacking the social license to operate. The leaders claim it violates human rights guaranteed by the international and national system of law by ignoring the wishes of indigenous land owners affected by the project. NGO MiningWatch Canada made an urgent appeal to the United Nations Special Rapporteurs regarding alleged human rights violations at Barrick s Porgera Gold Mine in Papua New Guinea, claiming that the indigenous landowners were beaten by security forces supported by Barrick Gold. 1. Impacts on Communities 2. Impacts on Ecosystems/Landscapes 3. Local Pollution ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 5 of 9

6 KBR., Rank 7 [120] KBR has been embroiled in a large corruption scandal in which it was accused of paying USD 180 million to officials to secure contracts for the Bonny Island Liquefied Natural Gas terminal in Nigeria. KBR is now being sued by a number of investment funds who claim that mismanagement and corruption by company employees have had serious financial ramifications for shareholders. In addition to the corruption charges, KBR is also under investigation for the electrocution of two soldiers in Iraq, as well as for overcharging the US government by millions of dollars. 1. Corruption, Bribery, Extortion, and Money Laundering 2. Violation of National Legislation 3. Health and Safety Issues Royal Bank of Scotland, Rank 8 [13] RBS has been heavily criticized for its executive compensation scheme and bonus payments, in light of the bank being partly taken over by the UK government and receiving millions of pounds in bail-out money. Outrage was so strong that shareholders rejected the new pay proposals with a % majority, marking the first time that the bank has lost a vote in the remuneration process. In addition, RBS also came under fire for its investment in controversial conflict areas such as Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, as well as investing in oil exploration companies operating in areas of pristine nature such as Greenland. 1. Global Pollution (Including Climate Change) 2. Impacts on Ecosystems/Landscapes 3. Executive Compensation Issues ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 6 of 9

7 Bertin Ltda., Rank 9 [New Entry] Bertin was accused of contributing to climate change and rainforest destruction by clearing Brazilian rainforests in order to make way for cattle production. NGO investigations found that Bertin, which is part-owned by the Brazilian government, sources cattle from farms that have allegedly carried out illegal deforestation. 1. Impacts on Ecosystems/Landscapes 2. Global Pollution (Including Climate Change) 3. Supply Chain (E, S, L Issues) Nestle SA, Rank 10 [6] Nestle was accused of trying to control rural and community water resources. NGOs claim the company used costly legal battles and public relations campaigns that communities could not compete with, negotiated directly with officials rather than with the affected communities, avoided required environmental reviews and exceeded water extraction limits. In addition, several NGOs claimed that Nestle continues to buy most of its cocoa from Ghana and the Ivory Coast despite alleged ongoing forced and child labor practices in those countries. 1. Impacts on Ecosystems/Landscapes 2. Impacts on Communities 3. Overuse and Wasting of Resources ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 7 of 9

8 Most Environmentally and Socially Controversial Companies May 2009: Mining Top Five Companies: 1. Barrick Gold 2. Rio Tinto 3. Xstrata 4. Vedanta Resources Top Three Issues: 1. Impacts on Ecosystems/Landscapes 2. Impacts on Communities 3. Human Rights Abuses and Corporate Complicity 5. Frasure Creek Mining Barrick Gold, Rank 1 Please refer to Most Controversial Companies section of report, Rank 6. Rio Tinto, Rank 2 At Rio Tinto's annual meeting in London shareholders heavily criticized the company s practice of dumping waste minerals and chemicals directly into rivers at the Grasberg Gold Mine in Indonesia, a practice that has resulted in the company being expelled from several funds. NGOs allege that severe human rights violations have taken place at Muriel Mining Corporation's Mande Norte mining exploration site, which Rio Tinto is also involved in. A lawsuit under the Alien Tort Statute has been brought against Rio Tinto for alleged human rights abuses in Papua New Guinea. Xstrata, Rank 3 Xstrata's Mount Isa Mine in northwest Queensland, Australia was labeled as one of the country s biggest polluters on the National Pollutant Inventory. Several families are currently suing Xstrata, claiming their children have been poisoned through its mining activities. A third of Xstrata shareholders voted against the company s remuneration report as investors are believed to be angry about the company s plans to increase pay and issue bonuses despite a 35% fall in earnings last year. Vedanta Resources, Rank 4 Vedanta was granted approval by the Indian Government for its controversial bauxite mine on the Niyamgiri mountain in Orissa, despite fierce local tribal opposition. Locals and NGOs claim the mine will destroy large amounts of forest, pollute rivers and have other impacts on the tribe. Vedanta was also accused of money laundering and tax evasion in relation to its Sterlite subsidiary. Frasure Creek Mining, Rank 5 The Sierra Club urged that action be taken to protect the Robinson Forest in the US from a strip mining project proposal by Frasure Creek Mining. The mining activities would allegedly destroy native forest, which is home to endangered animal and plant species ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 8 of 9

9 Methodology RepRisk objectively monitors the level of criticism to which a company is exposed. All data is collected and processed by a strictly rule-based approach; it is not the result of an assessment, rating or verdict from our analysts. The "Most Environmentally and Socially Controversial Companies" report was compiled using information from the RepRisk database, which consists of negative news on companies environmental and social performance. The RepRisk database currently covers more than 9,000 companies and holds news from thousands of sources, ranging from commercial newspapers and on-line media to NGO websites, blogs and newsletters. Once the negative news has been identified with advanced search algorithms and analyzed for its novelty, relevance and severity, risk analysts enter it into the database and link it to the companies in question. No news is entered twice unless it has been escalated to a more influential source or higher-profile media outlet. This helps to ensure the balanced and objective rating and weighting of the negative news, and thus the company s RRI. The RRI measures the risk to a company s reputation, not its actual reputation in general. Each report is compiled by taking the ten most criticized companies in our database of more than 10,000 companies. For more information about the "Most Environmentally and Socially Controversial Companies" report, please contact Charlotte Mansson at mansson@ecofact.com, tel: , or visit our websites: or RepRisk RepRisk is a web-based tool that provides insights into environmental and social issues that present financial and reputational risks to a bank, company, or investment portfolio. It facilitates the identification and assessment of controversial issues associated with specific companies and business relationships. RepRisk's assessment of the environmental and social performance of a company is based on the company's activities in the field as observed by independent third parties, and is not derived from information provided by the company itself. Every day, RepRisk captures the reactions of print media, more than 650 NGO websites and newsletters, news websites, blogs and other online sources on controversial issues relevant to financial institutions, other companies, and projects. RepRisk covers controversial issues ranging from employee and community relations to resource availability and efficiency, environmental footprint and product portfolio-related risks. In particular, it addresses all of the principles of the UN Global Compact. ECOFACT ECOFACT is a leading provider of reputational, environmental and social risk management solutions in the financial industry. ECOFACT is based in Zurich and leverages a global network of sector and issue specialists. Our client base consists of asset managers, pension funds, commercial and investment banks, the leading development banks, insurance companies, and governmental agencies. ECOFACT AG was founded in 1998 as a spin-off from a leading Swiss bank and is a fully independent corporation. ECOFACT AG 2009, all rights reserved RepRisk is a registered trademark of ECOFACT AG Page 9 of 9