We all need
and consume oil, and the myriad of products spawned from its ecosystem. We all
share in the risk of exploiting it, some more directly than others. And then
there are those neighborhoods (next to the refineries) that absorb more risk
than others. And then there are the oil companies that take on the risk of
exploitation, but in the case of BP we are learning about worst practices in
risk management, governance and compliance, not best practices.
British
Petroleum’s lack of governance and risk management combined with our own
government’s absence of regulatory compliance and oversight marks the beginning
of a new era. In this new era
governance, compliance and corporate social responsibility will be driven
primarily by non government organizations that are the voice of the people. It
has become brutally obvious that large trans-national corporations can’t govern
themselves, and more importantly the collaboration between them and
governments, (in this case the oil lobby) facilitates an environment of risk
and recklessness in the management of natural resources.
After
experiencing a near collapse of our financial system, we know now what a joke
Sarbanes Oxley has become and that the government regulatory apparatus
completely failed.
The hard
truth is that our government is challenged to:
·
Manage
our natural resources and fisheries
·
Manage
our financial system
·
Manage
our healthcare system
·
Manage
and/or regulate the safety of our food supply
·
Manage
or control our borders
British
Petroleum is a trans-national corporation active in thirty countries with more
than 22,000 service stations and sixteen refineries, and they upstream 2.3
million barrels of oil a day. BP reported 2009 revenues of $239 Billion, a
profit of $14B so why can’t they manage their risk and govern themselves, they
certainly have the resources?
BP’s Code of Conduct
“A fundamental BP commitment to comply with all applicable legal
requirements and with high ethical standards”
I copied the code of conduct from
their overly green and seemingly environment friendly website, but there is
something about this statement that says who they are. Compliance with all
legal requirements, hum what does that mean? Well it means that they will go
only as far as the law of any country requires and not further. This is in
essence is their problem; they need to go further than applicable legal
requirements in the high risk and “high profit” business they run. Compliance
with “high ethical standards” is about as vague as you can get and we know they
vary with culture, country and company. So what BP is really saying is that we
only go as far as we need to and we don’t go the extra mile because it might
affect profitability and this is further reinforced by the following quote from their CEO Tony Hayward.
“We are responsible for our
operations and we are accountable for setting and observing consistent and high
standards within them. Our code of conduct, for example, provides clear
expectations on behavior and compliance.”
I had a higher view of BP until
the disaster in the gulf exposed their lack of governance and risk management.
BP put up $500 million for a bio-fuels research center at the University of
California at Berkeley and that is great, but now they have a PR and brand
disaster of unprecedented magnitude on their hands. And in my view they have
fueled the fire so to speak by setting up a live feed of the well leaking for
weeks on end. Perhaps some good will emerge from this when all oil companies
take a call to action and re-examine their risk management and governance
across operations.
Enter the NGO
Non Government Organizations like
the World Wildlife Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council have now been
put in a position of power and truly have the opportunity to be the voice of the
people because government has failed. Those who oppose egalitarian groups and
view them as zealots and extremists in some ways will rethink their role in
world business. Like Exxon, BP will recover from this event and we can only
hope they will live up to their responsibility in this terrible environmental
disaster. NGOs now have the power of
social media at their disposal and we know that NGOs and many non- profit
organizations are harnessing that power to gain influence and audience.
As a student of at the University
of Massachusetts College of Food and Natural Resources I learned about the
management of our planet’s resources and was taught that there are three principal
approaches to managing natural resources:
·
Preservation
·
Conservation
·
Exploitation
In the beginning many egalitarian groups
advocated preservation of
natural resources which was and is in direct conflict with the exploitation of our resources,
the management approach still prevalent today driven by our capitalist system. This
put NGOs at great odds with government and industry and their radicalism
challenged many people including the scientific community. Times have certainly
changed as NGOs now are important players in the global economy and can
significantly impact brand reputation through their influence.
Conservation of natural
resources employs management practices that enable the resource to be
sustainably harvested and maintained for our children. This means that
resources are not irreversibly damaged like our fisheries populations, many of
which will never recover from over-harvesting and exploitation. In the case of
oil, it is not a sustainable resource; there is only so much of it on our
planet. That does not give license to energy harvesters to haphazardly manage operations
and put other natural resources and industries at risk, such as fisheries and
tourism. NGOs have a greater responsibility than ever in ensuring that large
multi-nationals and governments are looking out for the best interest of their
people. Join an NGO today and make your voice heard, your state senator, local
representative and/or government may not be looking out for your best interest,
unless of course you are in California where our governor Arnold “just said no” to just drill baby and off
shore drilling!
Further Reading: Why We Hate the
Oil Companies, by John Hofmeister