Code of conduct for corporations

Home Up Contents Status of business and consumer rights  ] New way of doing business  ] Guidelines and criteria for projects  ] A global regulatory framework  ] Corporate social responsibility  ] Code of conduct for corporations  ] Business responsibility for sustainable development  ] Preventive actions against polluters  ] Corporate accountability  ] Projects and programs  ]

The 1990s saw a proliferation of corporate codes of conduct and an increased emphasis on corporate responsibility. These emerged in the aftermath of a period that saw a major shift in the economic role of the state, and in policies toward transnational corporations (TNCs) and foreign direct investment. Whereas in the 1970s many national governments had sought to regulate the activities of TNCs, the 1980s was a decade of deregulation and increased efforts to attract foreign investment. A similar trend occurred at the international level, where efforts at regulation had been unsuccessful.

It is in this context that the recent wave of voluntary codes of conduct must be situated. Voluntary codes of conduct range from vague declarations of business principles applicable to international operations, to more substantive efforts at self-regulation. They tend to focus on the impact of TNCs in two main areas: social conditions and the environment. A variety of stakeholders, including the Global Community, international trade union organizations, development and environmental NGOs and the corporate sector itself have played a role in the elaboration of codes of conduct for international business.

The Global Community has gone one step further and is now offering TNCs a solution to all problems related to global ethics, codes of conduct and ways of doing business.

The Global Community proposes to corporations that they take responsibility on behalf of society and people, and that they should pay more attention to human and Earth rights, working conditions and getting ride of corruption in the world of business and trade. We have developed a criteria, and we ask you to turn it into practice. Governments should encourage enterprises to use the criteria both by legal and moral means. At first, the criteria should be adopted in key areas such as procurement, facilities management, investment management, and human resources. Corporations want to be seen as good corporate leaders and have a stronger form of accountability. Business and trade will prosper after stronger common bonds and values have been established. Adopting the criteria will have a beneficial impact on future returns, and share price performance.

Obtaining one ECO, the Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship, will help businesses to be part of the solution to the challenges of globalisation. In this way, the private sector in partnership with the civil society can help realize a vision: allowing a global equitable and peaceful development and a more stable and inclusive global economy.

Several changes in the global economy have contributed to the growing interest in corporate social responsibility and codes of conduct. The growth of "global value chains", through which Northern buyers control a web of suppliers in the South, has led to calls for the latter to take responsibility not only for aspects such as quality and delivery dates, but also for working conditions and environmental impacts. At the same time, the increased significance of brands and corporate reputation makes leading companies particularly vulnerable to bad publicity. Changing public attitudes are also an important part of the context in which corporate codes of conduct have been adopted. Companies in the North can no longer ignore the impact of their activities on the environment with impunity. Developments in global communications, which have enabled corporations to control production activities on an ever-widening scale, have also facilitated the international transmission of information about working conditions in their overseas suppliers, increasing public awareness and facilitating campaigning activities.

A range of stakeholders are involved in drawing up voluntary codes of conduct, or can be affected by their adoption. These include large and small firms, Northern and Southern NGOs, trade unions, shareholders and investors, consumers, consultancy firms and verifiers, Southern exporters, workers in the South, Southern governments, and local communities. All have specific interests that predispose them more or less favourably toward corporate codes, and influence the kinds of codes that they would like to see implemented.

One of the striking characteristics of the recent growth of codes of conduct is their tendency to be concentrated in certain sectors, particularly trade, textiles, chemicals and extractive industries. Codes addressing labour issues tend to be concentrated in sectors such as garments, footwear, sports goods, toys and retailing, whereas environmental codes are more likely to be found in chemicals, forestry, oil and mining.

Codes of conduct can be divided into five main types: company codes, trade association codes, multi-stakeholder codes, model codes and inter-governmental codes. Codes vary considerably in scope. Many do not even cover all of the International Labour Organization's core labour standards. Company codes and trade association codes often have a more limited scope than those developed in conjunction with other stakeholders. There are also differences in the coverage of codes. Although many do cover the firm's suppliers, they often do not extend all the way along the supply chain, and very rarely cover home-based workers. Provisions for the implementation of a particular code, and for effective monitoring, are crucial if it is to have any real impact. Here, too, one finds weaknesses, with only a small proportion of codes making provision for independent monitoring.

In evaluating corporate codes of conduct, several limitations need to be pointed out. Some of these are practical, arising from the way codes have (or have not) been implemented up to now. Others are inherent to corporate codes as an instrument, and therefore go beyond constraints related to the way codes have been applied in the past. Despite the recent proliferation of codes, their implementation remains relatively limited. Other shortcomings relate to the limited number of issues they address, and who such codes apply to. More deep-seated structural limitations of codes of conduct relate to the "drivers" that gave rise to their proliferation during the 1990s. Not only are they limited to particular sectors, where brand names and corporate image are important, but they are also mainly applied to firms engaged in exporting. Finally, there is a tendency for codes to focus on particular issues—those regarded as potentially highly damaging for companies to be associated with. In other words, issues that have a high profile in developed countries are likely to figure prominently in most codes.

Notwithstanding the limitations of codes, they can and have generated positive benefits for stakeholders. Examples where working conditions have improved show that codes can provide leverage on corporate behaviour. Furthermore, because of codes of conduct, firms increasingly accept responsibility for the activities of their suppliers as well as their own subsidiaries.

There is a danger, however, of codes being seen as something more than they really are, and used to deflect criticism and reduce the demand for external regulation. In some cases, codes have led to a worsening of the situation of those whom they purport to benefit. Concern has also been expressed that they may tend to undermine the position of trade unions in the workplace.

The limitations and dangers of codes of conduct are undoubtedly real. It is thus important to develop strategies to ensure that codes are complementary to government legislation and provide space for workers to organize. They are most likely to do so when they are multi-stakeholder codes, rather than when they are unilaterally developed by companies or trade associations. Codes of conduct should be seen as an area of political contestation, not as a solution to the problems created by the globalization of economic activity.



Back to top of page


Global governance ] Reforming the United Nations ] Global ministries ] Earth security ] Global Community Assessment Centre ] Greenhouse gas emissions ] Global warming ] Climate change adaptation ] Global response to events ] Global co-operation ] Models of global governance ] Restoration of the planet, our home ] Universal health care ] Employment for every global citizen ] Education for all global citizens ] Drinking water, clean air and food for all ] Eradicating poverty ] Earth environmental governance ] Our overpopulated planet ] Global economy and trade ] Earth Court of Justice ] Corporate social responsibility ] A global regulatory framework ] Mgmt of world financial institutions ] New way of doing business ] Global tax ] Settling of disputes between nations ] Abolition of weapons of mass destruction ] Management of Earth resources ] Global warning systems ] Preventive actions against  polluters ] Agriculture and needs of the G. C. ] Cattle and beef industry ] Forest industry and paper manufacturing ] Profit-based conservation strategies ] Cities: power, rights and responsibilities ] Projects and programs ] [ Code of conduct for corporations ] Media ownership and global regulation ] Corporate accountability ] Crude oil future ] Fossil fuels ] Alternative energy ] Genetically modified foods ]




Back to top of page

Send email to with questions or comments about this web site.

Copyright © 2004 Global Community WebNet Ltd.