• Investment World
• eWorld
• Catalyst
• Mentor
• Life
• Canvas
• Praxis
• Urban Pulse
• Brand Quest

K.G. Kumar

AS the cola multinationals in India continue to get bad press for their laxity in maintaining quality and food safety standards in the country, the debate is shifting to corporate irresponsibility and the double standards of transnational corporations.

The recent findings of the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) - set up and nurtured by the very upright and courageous environmentalist, the late Mr Anil Aggarwal - reveal that Coca-Cola and Pepsi Foods were selling soft drinks that contained pesticide residues well in excess of European Union norms. Earlier, the CSE's tests of bottled water sold by Coca-Cola and Pepsi revealed levels of toxicity that would not meet international regulations.

Though both companies have rebutted the CSE claims, it is difficult to totally dismiss the CSE findings. CSE is a sound environmental non-governmental organization that has won respect and plaudits from all over the world, both for its attempts at popularising and demystifying science as well as its campaigning and advocacy for a cleaner, healthier environment.

Indians - and especially Delhiites - will remember the singular role the CSE had in ensuring legislation to contain vehicular pollution in the capital city. The CSE is not wont to flashy histrionics, nor is it an irresponsible whistleblower. Thus, the India cola manufacturers cannot get away with brusque threats of litigation and media advertisements alone.

Multinationals operating out of India need to address the larger issue of environmental double standards. Often, the flouting of standards is not some incidental byproduct of manufacturing practice. Sometimes, it is - shockingly enough - part of corporate strategy.

Some years ago, as Ms Vandana Shiva, a leading environmental scientist, reports, Mr Lawrence Summers, who was the World Bank's Chief Economist and was responsible for the 1992 World Development Report devoted to the economics of the environment, suggested that it makes economic sense to shift polluting industries to the Third World countries.

In a memo to a senior World Bank staff, dated 12 December 1991, the Chief Economist wrote, "Just between you and me, shouldn't the World Bank be encouraging more migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs (less developed countries)?"

Much the same sentiment rules the high-tech world of computer manufacturing. Three years ago, the Clean Computer Campaign, a project of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC), completed a comprehensive analysis of environmental information contained on the Web sites of 44 of the largest high-tech companies in the world.

The survey found that Japanese companies received the top scores in seven out of the eight categories evaluated. US companies (as well as other transnational high-tech companies) practise "double standards" in their global environmental behaviour, meeting higher standards in Europe and Japan than in the US due to weaker US regulations. No company provided enough reliable information to evaluate their performance in the Third World, reported SVTC.

This survey uncovers significant double standards in global environmental reporting, as US high-tech companies rank a poor second or third - and, in some cases, live in the cellar - when compared to other global consumer electronics companies, SVTC said.

In anticipation of the Pollution Release and Transfer Registry rules being widely adopted, many companies - especially Japanese companies - have started to disclose their chemical usage on their Web sites. US companies, which were the global leaders in terms of toxic chemical release information, have now fallen behind, SVTC added.

These instances reveal that not much has changed since 1962 when Rachel Carson, environmental scholar and natural historian, published her pioneering work, Silent Spring. She talked of "an era dominated by industry, in which the right to make a dollar at whatever cost is seldom challenged.

When the public protests, confronted with some obvious evidence of damaging results of pesticide applications, it is fed little tranquilizing pills of half-truths. We urgently need an end to these false assurances, to the sugar coating of unpalatable facts... In the words of Jean Rostand, `The obligation to endure gives us the right to know'."

Sounds as if she was addressing Coca-Cola and Pepsi.

The writer can be contacted at kg@tug.org.in

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication

Stories in this Section
Channels to woo investors

Copyright © 2003, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line