PRESS BRIEFING BY SECRETARY-GENERAL’S SPECIAL ADVISOR ON GLOBAL COMPACT AND WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM

PRESS BRIEFING BY SECRETARY-GENERAL’S SPECIAL ADVISOR

ON GLOBAL COMPACT AND WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM

The Secretary-General will deliver a major keynote address to the World Economic Forum this Sunday, providing world political and business leaders with an update on the Global Compact, his Special Advisor, John Ruggie, told correspondents at a Headquarters press briefing this morning. 

Mr. Ruggie, who holds the rank of Assistant Secretary-General in the Executive Office of the Secretary-General, said that the Secretary-General's visit to Davos, Switzerland would be short, but eventful.  The keynote plenary address was one of several opportunities for the Secretary-General to discuss the achievements of the Global Compact -- a concept he had proposed to the Forum two years ago.  As the Compact has moved from its conceptual to its operational phase, the Secretary-General will also take the opportunity to discuss its future direction.

[The Global Compact is a platform for involvement of leaders of the world business community as well as labour and civil society organizations, aimed at enabling all the world’s people to share the benefits of globalization and at embedding the global market with values and practices that are fundamental to meeting socio-economic needs.  The Compact asks companies to embrace and enact a set of core principles in the areas of labour standards, human rights and environmental practices.  The operational phase of the Compact was launched at a high-level event in New York on 26 July 2000.]

Also on the Secretary-General's agenda was a private meeting with some

12 major international labour leaders, Mr. Ruggie said.  The purpose of that meeting was to discuss how to promote worker's rights in today's global economy, both within and beyond the Global Compact.  The meeting would also allow the Secretary-General to know which avenues and instruments the United Nations should pursue to advance worker's rights.

To raise the visibility of the Compact among companies in the United States, the Secretary-General would also be meeting with a gathering of chief executive officers from United States-based companies, Mr. Ruggie continued.  At that meeting, the Secretary-General would stress the need for United States companies to engage in multi-stakeholder approaches to the issue of corporate social responsibility.  That meant encouraging the participation of social actors, including civil society organizations and labour, in addressing various social issues.

The Secretary-General will also be engaged in a series of bilateral meetings with political leaders, including meetings with the Presidents of Mexico, Nigeria, and Yugoslavia, as well as with the Foreign Minister of Egypt, he added.  The schedule of bilateral meetings was still fluid and the Secretary-General was hoping to meet with as many leaders as possible.

On Monday morning, Mr. Ruggie would be moderating a panel discussion on the Global Compact, he said.  Participants in the panel discussion will include

the head of Amnesty International and the head of the International Confederation of Trade Unions, as well as a number of chief executive officers.  On Sunday evening, Mr. Ruggie will be sharing the Secretary-General's views on globalization, corporate social responsibility and citizenship, by way of a video-conference with civil society members gathered at the "Counter-Davos" event, taking place in Brazil.

Mr. Ruggie was asked what United States companies had already signed on to the Global Compact and which chief executive officers he would be meeting.  It would be a large meeting, involving some 40 participants, Mr. Ruggie responded.  The list of United States companies participating in the Compact as of 26 July 2000 was posted on the Global Compact's Web site.  While a number of announcements from major companies were imminent, further progress was needed with United States companies.  The number was still quite small in comparison with European multinationals.  That was why a special effort was being made.

A correspondent asked how Mr. Ruggie would address the concerns of people in more traditional fields, who might not see, at least in the short term, the benefits of the Compact.  Mr. Ruggie explained that the Global Compact was not a solution to all of globalization's problems.  It was a very specific instrument with specific objectives.  The Compact's objective was to promote, within companies, a greater commitment to the implementation of human rights principles, labour standards and environmental principles.  There were many other aspects of globalization -- income inequalities, lack of access by developing countries to the markets of rich countries, and so on -- that were not covered by the Global Compact.  He did not pretend to have a solution to all of globalization's problems.  What the Compact did address was important.  "We think we have a good vehicle for making a difference in promoting human rights, labour standards and environmental concerns within companies", he said.

The Compact had three main components, Mr. Ruggie said in response to another question.  The first was called the ‘learning forum’, which helped companies implement the Compact's nine general principles into corporate management practices.  A number of companies were now undergoing very serious internal reviews of their practices and the extent to which these practices supported their commitment to the Global Compact.  A second component of the Global Compact was the operational partnership project.  Companies were encouraged to work with the United Nations on the ground in developing countries, on projects which benefited those countries.  For this component, there were a series of ongoing projects.  For example, Cisco Systems was now conducting information technology training in 21 of the least developed countries as one of its contributions to bridging the digital divide.  Such important projects symbolized the Secretary-General's sense of partnership and engaged companies in activities that benefited some of the countries left behind in globalization. 

‘Issue dialogues’ comprised the third component of the Global Compact, Mr. Ruggie continued.  In these dialogues, the United Nations engaged with companies, labour and non-governmental organizations to address crucial dilemmas facing them.  In March, the first comprehensive dialogue would focus on the appropriate role of companies in conflict zones.  A company's involvement in a country experiencing civil war would affect the evolution of that conflict.

Companies themselves were eager to work with the United Nations and other partners to develop a common understanding of what would be the appropriate posture for them when they operated in conflict zones.  Excellent progress was being made on all three components of the Compact.

Asked to specify other developments in other companies, he said Nike -- one of the participating companies -- had been extremely vigilant in the last six months.  There had been press reports on Nike pulling out of certain supply chain arrangements because of the discovery of child labour rights violations.  While he could not say with absolute certainty that Nike's vigilance was the result of the Compact, the additional visibility of working with the United Nations was an incentive to promote worker conditions and rights.

Asked to describe the parametres of obligations of corporate citizenship that the Secretary-General was seeking, Mr. Ruggie explained that, as the result of the activities of corporations, a single economic space had been created.  That single economic space was not viable unless it was underpinned with a much stronger commitment to social, environmental and human rights concerns.  If companies wanted to sustain the global economy, companies must be viewed not only as economic agents but also as broader social actors.  Companies must care about the absence of certain social pillars in the global economy.  "How do you explain, for example, that our rules that protect intellectual property rights were so much stronger than rules protecting fundamental human rights?" he asked.  It could not be explained and it was not sustainable.

He was asked if, given the change of administration in the United States, it was going to be more or less difficult to get companies to sign up for the environmental side of the compact.  Mr. Ruggie responded that it was difficult to know how it would play out.  No one really knew what the environmental policy of the new administration would be.  While there had been much speculation, no one knew what would happen when real decisions had to be made. 

"Things don't work in straight lines, they work in zigs and zags", he said.  Any diminishing of expressions of environmental concern by governments might strengthen civil society actors, and might mobilize support for them, lending to a more confrontational approach.  In the end, that approach might produce more in terms of results.  Much remained to be seen, both on the political and on the civil society side, and then in terms of the dialectic between the two.  It was too soon to tell.   

Asked about the Secretary-General’s plans for promoting the Compact at a local, rather than a global, level, he said the first phase of the Global Compact had been concerned mostly with multinational corporations and reshaping their behaviour.  These operated everywhere, and had as much presence of the United Nations in some instances.  However there had already been some spin-offs.  In Brazil, for example, a civil society organization working with the United Nations had organized some 200 Brazilian companies first to commit to the principles of the Global Compact and then to seek to frame similar multi-stakeholder policies and dialogues in Brazil.  A similar effort was underway in India.   "So we are very much moving in direction of not only pushing the Global Compact globally but also taking it local", Mr. Ruggie said. 

* *** *