Coal and the iron and steel works that consumed it were, 125 years ago, the foundations of Andrew Carnegie’s fortune.(1) So, his life would seem unlikely to hold lessons for investors concerned about global warming. But it does.

Carnegie’s Causes

The Scottish immigrant had two great causes. Most recognize his name today in the US and UK for his philanthropic investments in vehicles offering opportunities for human betterment: Carnegie libraries, university scholarships, Carnegie Hall, Carnegie Mellon University, teacher pensions (TIAA-CREF), etc.

(read more…)

One of the first socially responsible investment (SRI) screens excluded weapons suppliers from investors’ portfolios; today, however, publicly traded companies don’t just build weapons – they fight wars. Privatized Military Operations (PMO) have been integrated into American missions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other less-visible theaters worldwide.

Researchers at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces have produced a fascinating in-depth review of PMO in modern warfare. The report, released in 2007, highlights the extent of PMO involvement in the Iraq war. For example, the ratio of private contract employees to American troops in Iraq is 1 to 1.5.

Private contractors now provide services that have traditionally been the responsibility of American soldiers. Some of these are support tasks, such as maintaining barracks and running kitchens. A more worrisome trend is PMO contractors’ performance of core combat functions: building overseas bases, maintaining weapons, and providing security details.

(read more…)

As we look back at the genocide and military conflict in Darfur, Sudan during 2007, the Sudan divestment movement in the U.S. has largely succeeded in bringing increased pressure on financial firms and companies involved in Sudan to sever their financial ties to the Government of Sudan.

A few of the many divestment-related news stories from the past year are highlighted below:

Institutional investors in Petrochina, a Chinese oil company with significant oil exploration projects in Sudan, faced shareholder pressure to divest from the company. Save Darfur, a U.S.-based advocacy group launched a campaign targeting Berkshire Hathaway, Fidelity, and Franklin Templeton, three of the largest investors in Petrochina.

(read more…)

In September, Burma was on the front pages of global media, the result of the Burmese military junta’s violent crackdown on the peaceful, pro-democracy protests spearheaded by Buddhist monks. Images of soldiers bludgeoning protesters, in one case shooting a Japanese photographer at close range (he later died), held the world’s attention for a number of days.

As of December, the story continued to unfold, mostly without the benefit of front-page coverage, as the media had moved on to other issues. The BBC reported that the UN had confirmed at least 31 deaths in the crackdown.

Later in the month Congress passed a bill aiming to tighten sanctions against Burma. The legislation is meant to close loopholes that allow Burmese gems to be imported through third countries, as well as those that provide the junta access to US banks to launder money in third countries.

(read more…)

“Antitrust” is a word that has long outlived its usefulness. We need a new word – or set of words – that captures society’s imperative to regulate economic and social relations with its corporate creations.

Who recalls why we’re against trusts? At least beyond a vague, queasy feeling about collusion, hidden power, price fixing and political corruption…

In the US, business trusts arose in the 1880’s and 90’s to hold controlling interests in corporations. At that time, state laws existed that restricted ownership of corporations to in-state residents, limited the corporation’s ability to do business across state lines, and imposed capitalization restrictions. Since the trusts were not incorporated, however, these restrictions did not apply to them.

(read more…)

Coca-Cola CEO E. Neville Isdell has urged ‘more companies to get involved’ in protecting the environment. He spoke to a crowd of his peers at a meeting of the UN’s Global Compact in Geneva on July 7.

The Reuters report on his speech described his fervor with phrases such as ‘rattling the pulpit’ and ‘railing against his fellow executives to stand up and do more to protect the environment — particularly drinkable water’.

Exciting – and significant – as Isdell’s speech is, the Reuters story also captured the dilemma for corporations and their stakeholders in setting expectations – and limits – for what does not directly affect the corporate bottom line. Here is an excerpt from the article:

(read more…)