CITIZENSHIP, ACCOUNTABILITY AND COMMUNITY: THE LIMITS OF THE CSR AGENDA

In his article, Newell explores the predicaments of poor communities around the globe with regard to the accountability of companies to the communities in which they invest.

An approach of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) lays great emphasis on voluntarism, partnership and self-regulation techniques to tackling social and environmental problems and managing conflicts. While this approach has worked well in Europe and North America, where there are well networked NGOs with huge global presence and highly influential media and telecommunication, there are question marks surrounding its efficacy in the south.

Poor communities often engage corporations from a disadvantaged position and are often restricted by factors such as lack of resources, lack of access to global network, power inequities, underrepresentation, geographical isolation and marginalisation. More so, in the absence of binding contracts, businesses operating within poor communities tend to disregard the importance of CSR but focus more on financial gain, performance enhancement and image management.

The author further explores the different approaches adopted by poor communities to construct mechanisms of corporate accountability. It is worth mentioning that some of these mechanisms are informal, illegal and confrontational but are mostly used where there are no open channels of dialogue with corporations and when the state is unresponsive. The author cites an example in Malaysia, where the indigenes of Penan, predominantly illiterate and without political representation protested against deforestation in Sarawak by manning non-violent blockades across the logging roads.
Also, the author draws upon recent work in Vietnam, where in the absence of NGOs, community driven regulation (CDR) played a vital part in