Abstract
This chapter explores the incentives for different types of actors to advocate corporate water stewardship, and provides an overview of how it has developed since its inception. It finds that there are potential tensions when different actors collaborate under the banner of ‘stewardship’ since different actors conceptualise water problems in distinctive ways. The chapter starts with presenting the corporate perspective and examines how companies conceptualise the water issue and what motivates them to engage. It finds that for companies, the water crisis constitutes a material business risk. However, the risk alone does not explain why companies engage; companies are also incentivised to act because of the business opportunity it can pose, the widening of what constitute as ‘water engagement’, and the pressure from stakeholders and investors to act. The latter part of the chapter turns to examine the water crisis from the perspective of NGOs and finds that for these actors, the water crisis constitutes an environmental or social risk. Despite having a fundamentally different starting point than that of companies, the evidence presented in this chapter suggests that NGOs collaborate with companies to obtain financial and political leverage. The last part of the chapter analyses the evolution of corporate water stewardship, and finds that the concept has been heavily promoted by NGOs, with the purpose of incentivising more companies to engage.
Governments and civil society alike recognise that they can’t tackle the water challenges alone. And I think that they are increasingly aware of the good things that the private sector can do…As they get more aware of this, the willingness to open up and see companies as part of the solution is increasing…The appetite for collaboration is increasing. And I think the appetite is increasing in the right way. Not just seeing companies as a ‘cash-cow’, but as partners in implementation.
Interview 37, 2016, unpublished
Companies are not going to get persuaded by anything other than real demonstrable risk…Companies will not change their behaviour until there is a real business case. You are not going to persuade them. And you can’t criticise them for that. They are in the business to make money, they are not in the business to fix water.
Interview 5, 2015, unpublished.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
As defined by SDG target 6.1,‘safe’ drinking water is free from pathogens and elevated levels of toxic chemicals at all times (WHO/UNICEF JMP 2018a).
- 2.
As defined by the SDG Target 6.2, ‘adequate’ implies a system which hygienically separates excreta from human contact as well as safe reuse/treatment of excreta in situ, or safe transport and treatment off-site (WHO/UNICEF JMP 2018b).
- 3.
The six-year programme (2013–2018) facilitates partnerships between the public sector, the private sector and civil society. It addresses shared water risks on a catchment scale, whilst improving stakeholders’ use and management of water and building their capacity to develop their own solutions (IWaSP 2018).
- 4.
The official United Nations target is to keep ODA at or above 0.7% of GNI.
- 5.
See Chap. 7 for a critical discussion on ‘savings’ and ‘efficiency’.
- 6.
In fact, water often seems to flow in the opposite direction to that which the logic of water savings through ‘virtual water’ trade would suggest. For example, China has a virtual flow of water from its dry north to its wetter south as a result of growing wheat, much of which is then consumed in the wetter south. And to offset the decline in water resources in the north that results from this, they have a south-north transfer of physical water (Guan and Hubacek 2007).
References
2030 WRG. (2012). The water resources group background, impact and the way forward. Washington, DC: 2030 WRG.
Allan, J. A. (1998). Virtual water: A strategic resource –global solutions to regional deficits. Ground Water, 36(4), 545–546.
Allan, J. A. (2011). Virtual water: Tackling the threat to our planet’s most precious resource. New York: I. B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.
Allan, J. A., Merrett, S., & Lant, C. (2003). Virtual water – The water, food, and trade nexus useful concept or misleading metaphor? Water International, 28(1), 4–11.
Anglo American. (2009). Delivering sustainable value: Report to society 2009. London: Anglo American plc.
Baleta, H., & Winter, K. (2017). Towards a shared understanding of water security risks in the public and private sectors. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 33(2), 233–245.
Barrick Gold. (2007). Barrick responsibility report 2007. Toronto: Barrick Gold Corporation.
Barton, B. (2010). Murky waters? Corporate reporting on water risk: A benchmarking study of 100 companies. Boston: Ceres.
Brown, C., & Alexander, M. (2015). In conversation: Managing water through complex and fragmented supply chains. The New Bottom line: Collaborative solutions for growth, FT Water Summit 2015, October 27th, London. [online] Available at https://live.ft.com/Events/2015/FT-Water-Summit. Accessed 7 Dec 2018.
CDP. (2009). CDP water disclosure: the case for water disclosure. London: CDP.
CDP. (2017). A Turning Tide: Tracking corporate action on water security (CDP Global Water Report 2017). London: CDP.
CDP. (2018). About us. [online] Available at https://www.cdp.net/en/info/about-us. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
CEO Water Mandate. (2007). The CEO water mandate: An initiative by business leaders in partnership with the international community. New York: UN.
CEO Water Mandate. (2010). Guide to responsible business engagement with water policy. Oakland: UNCG/Pacific Institute.
CEO Water Mandate. (2013). Eleventh working conference meeting summary. March 4–7, 2013 Mumbai, India. Oakland: Pacific Institute.
CEO Water Mandate. (2014a). Driving harmonization of water-related terminology (Discussion Paper). Oakland: Pacific Institute.
CEO Water Mandate. (2014b). Understanding ‘sufficiency’ in water-related collective action (Discussion Paper). Oakland: Pacific Institute.
CEO Water Mandate. (2014c). Exploring the business case for corporate action on sanitation (White Paper). Oakland: Pacific Institute.
CEO Water Mandate. (2018). What we do. [online] Available at http://ceowatermandate.org/what-we-do/mission-governance/. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
CEO Water Mandate & WWF. (2014). Shared water challenges and interests: The case for private sector engagement in water policy and management (pp. 19–33). Discussion Paper, adapted from a chapter featured in The World’s Water Volume 8. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Chilkoti, A. (2014). Water shortage shuts Coca-Cola plant in India: Ambitious plans of multinationals under threat. Financial Times [online]. Available at https://www.ft.com/content/16d888d4-f790-11e3-b2cf-00144feabdc0. Accessed 21 Sept 2016.
Clark, P. (2014). A world without water. Financial Times [online]. Available at http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8e42bdc8-0838-11e4-9afc-00144feab7de.html#slide0. Accessed 21 Apr 2016.
Coca-Cola Company. (2004). 2004 environmental report. Atlanta: The Coca-Cola Company.
Coca-Cola Company. (2012). The water stewardship and replenishment report. Atlanta: The Coca-Cola Company.
Cramwinckel, J., & Lindström, A. (2013). Water resources and the private sector. In A. Jägerskog, T. J. Clausen, K. Lexén, & T. Holmgren (Eds.), Cooperation for a water wise world: Partnerships for sustainable development (pp. 21–26). Stockholm: SIWI.
Edelman. (2009). 2009 Edelman trust barometer executive summary. [online] Available at http://edelman.edelman1.netdna-cdn.com/assets/uploads/2014/01/2009-Trust-Barometer-Executive-Summary.pdf. Accessed 21 Sept 2016.
Guan, D., & Hubacek, K. (2007). Assessment of regional trade and virtual water flows in China. Ecological Economics, 61, 159–170.
H&M. (2008). Sustainability report 2008. Stockholm: H&M.
Hajer, M. A. (1993). Discourse coalitions and the institutionalisation of practice: The case of acid rain in Britain. In F. Fischer & J. Forester (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning (pp. 43–76). Durham: Duke University Press.
Hajer, M. (2003). Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences, 36, 175–195.
Hepworth, N. (2012). Open for business or opening Pandora’s box? A constructive critique of corporate engagement in water policy: An introduction. Water Alternatives, 5(3), 543–562.
Hepworth, N. D., & Orr, S. (2013). Corporate water stewardship: New paradigms in private sector water engagement. In B. A. Lankford, K. Bakker, M. Zeitoun, & D. Conway (Eds.), Water security: Principles, perspectives and practices (pp. 220–238). London: Earthscan.
Hills, J., & Welford, R. (2005). Case study: Coca-Cola and water in India. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 12(3), 168–177.
Hoekstra, A. Y. (2003). Virtual water: An introduction. In A. Y. Hoekstra (Ed.), Virtual water trade: Proceedings of the international expert meeting on virtual water trade (Research report series no. 12) (pp. 13–23). Delft: IHE.
Hoekstra, A. Y., & Hung, P. Q. (2005). Globalisation of water resources: International virtual water flows in relation to crop trade. Global Environmental Change, 15(1), 45–56.
IPIECA. (2013). The IPIECA water management framework for onshore oil and gas activities. London: IPIECA.
Isdell, N. (2010). Connected capitalism: How business can tackle twenty-first- century challenges. Thunderbird International Business Review, 52(1), 5–12.
IUCN. (2015). IUCN freshwater fish specialist group: Major threats. [online] Available at http://www.iucnffsg.org/freshwater-fishes/major-threats/. Accessed 7 Dec 2018.
IUCN. (2018a). Water: Our work. [online] Available at https://www.iucn.org/theme/water/our-work. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
IUCN. (2018b). Water: Resources. [online] Available at https://www.iucn.org/theme/water/resources. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
IWaSP. (2018). Who we are. [online] Available at http://www.iwasp.org/who-we-are/international-water-stewardship-programme-iwasp. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
Levi Strauss. (2013). CEO water mandate communication on progress 2013. San Francisco: Levi Strauss & Co..
Morgan, A., & Orr, S. (2015). The value of water: A framework for understanding water valuation, risk and stewardship. [online] Available at http://commdev.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/The-Value-of-Water-Discussion-Draft-Final-August-2015.pdf. Accessed 21 Nov 2018.
Nestlé. (2014). Nestlé in society: Creating shared value and meeting our commitments 2014. Vevey: Nestlé S.A.
Newmont. (2016). Form 10-K. [online] Available at https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1164727/000155837016003258/nem-20151231x10k.htm. Accessed 7 July 2017.
OECD. (2016). Development aid rises again in 2015, spending on refugees doubles. [online] Available at http://www.oecd.org/development/development-aid-rises-again-in-2015-spending-on-refugees-doubles.htm. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
Olam. (2015). Annual report. Singapore: Olam International Limited.
Orr, S., & Cartwright, A. (2010). Water scarcity risks: Experience of the private sector. In L. Martinez-Cortina, A. Garrido, & E. Lopez-Gunn (Eds.), Re-thinking water and food security: Fourth Botin foundation water workshop (pp. 181–189). Boca Raton: CRS Press/Taylor & Francis Group.
Orr, S., & Pegram, G. (2014). Business strategy for water challenges: From risk to opportunity. Oxford: Dō Sustainability.
Orr, S., Cartwright, A., & Tickner, D. (2009). Understanding water risks a primer on the consequences of water scarcity for government and businesses (WWF water security series 4). Surrey: WWF-UK.
Pahl-Wostl, C., Gupta, J., & Petry, D. (2008). Governance and the global water system: A theoretical exploration. Global Governance, 14(4), 419–435.
Pegram, G., Orr, S., & Williams, C. E. (2009). Investigating shared risks in water: Corporate engagement with the public policy process. Woking: WWF-UK.
PepsiCo. (2012). PepsiCo 2011/2012 GRI report. New York: PepsiCo.
Prno, J., & Slocombe, D. S. (2012). Exploring the origins of ‘social license to operate’ in the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories. Resources Policy, 37(3), 346–357.
Sarni, W. (2013). Getting ahead of the “Ripple Effect”: A framework for a water stewardship strategy. Deloitte Review, 12, 84–97.
Schmidt, V. A. (2010). Taking ideas and discourse seriously: Explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’. European Political Science Review, 2(1), 1–25.
SDC. (2018). Statistical tables. [online] Available at https://www.eda.admin.ch/deza/en/home/activities-projects/figures-statistics/statistische-tabellen.html. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
Seekell, D. A. (2011). Does the global trade of virtual water reduce inequality in freshwater resource allocation? Society and Natural Resources, 24, 1205–1211.
SIDA. (2016). Deductions for in-country refugee costs lead to redistribution of Swedish foreign aid. [online] Available at http://www.sida.se/English/press/current-topics-archive/2016/deductions-for-in-country-refugee-costs-lead-to-redistribution-of-swedish-foreign-aid/. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
SIDA. (2018). Sveriges bistånd till Världen via alla organisationer inom alla sektorer. [online] Available at http://openaid.se. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
Sojamo, S. (2015). Unlocking the “Prisoner’s Dilemma” of corporate water stewardship in South Africa – Exploring corporate power and legitimacy of engagement in water management and governance. Sustainability, 7(6), 6893–6918.
Tran, M. (2012). Mark Malloch-Brown: Developing the MDGs was a bit like nuclear fusion. The Guardian [online]. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2012/nov/16/mark-malloch-brown-mdgs-nuclear. Accessed 16 Sept 2016.
UN. (1999). Address of secretary-general Kofi Annan to the world economic forum in Davos, Switzerland, February 1, 1999. Press Release SG/SM/6881. [online] Available at http://www.un.org/press/en/1999/19990201.sgsm6881.html. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
UN. (2018). Sustainable development knowledge platform. [online] Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.html. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
UNGC. (2015). Impact: Transforming business, changing the world. New York: DNV GLAS.
UNGC. (2018a). What is UN global compact? [online] Available at https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
UNGC. (2018b). About the UN global compact. [online] Available at https://www.unglobalcompact.org/about. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
UNIDO & UNGC. (2014). Engaging with the private sector in the post-2015 agenda. Consolidated report on 2014 consultations.
UN-Water. (2010). Climate change adaptation: The pivotal role of water. Geneva: UN-Water.
Walton, B.. (2016). Conga Mine in Peru halted by water concerns, civic opposition. Circle of blue [online] Available at http://www.circleofblue.org/2016/south-america/conga-mine-peru-halted-water-concerns-civic-opposition/. Accessed 12 Sept 2016.
WaterAid. (2018). Why WaterAid? [online] Available at https://www.wateraid.org/uk/why-wateraid. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
WEF. (2011). Water security: The water-food-energy-climate nexus. Island Press [eBook].
WEF. (2015). Global risks 2015. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
WHO/UNICEF JMP. (2015). Key facts from JMP 2015 report. [online] Available at http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/JMP-2015-keyfacts-en-rev.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
WHO/UNICEF JMP. (2018a). Drinking water. [online] Available at https://washdata.org/monitoring/drinking-water. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
WHO/UNICEF JMP. (2018b). Sanitation. [online] Available at https://washdata.org/monitoring/sanitation. Accessed 18 Oct 2018.
WWF. (2014). The imported risk: Germany’s water risks in times of globalisation. Berlin: WWF Germany.
WWF. (2018). Freshwater. [online] Available at http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/how_we_work/our_global_goals/water/index.cfm. Accessed 3 July 2017.
Yang, H., Wang, L., Abbaspour, K. C., & Zehnder, A. J. B. (2006). Virtual water trade: an assessment of water use efficiency in the international food trade. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 10(3), 443–454.
Zimmer, D., & Renault, D. (2003). Virtual water in food production and global trade: Review of methodological issues and preliminary results. In A. Y. Hoekstra (Ed.), Virtual water trade: Proceedings of the international expert meeting on virtual water trade (Value of water research report series no. 12) (pp. 93–109). Delft: UNESCO-IHE.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rudebeck, T. (2019). The Rise of Corporate Water Stewardship. In: Corporations as Custodians of the Public Good?. Water Governance - Concepts, Methods, and Practice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13225-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13225-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-13224-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-13225-5
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)