Paul Hohnen Sustainability Strategies

This article was published in Ethical Corporation on May 25, 2006 .

By invitation :

The other ‘Lisbon Agenda’ - How ISO is changing CSR

The recent third meeting of the ISO Working Group on Social Responsibility in Lisbon was more remarkable for what didnt happen than what did. Which is precisely why it was so important, Paul Hohnen reports

In the EU context, the term ‘Lisbon Agenda’ has acquired a reputation for a certain hubris. As first articulated in 2000, it described a strategy to make the European Union to most competitive area in the world.

It aims to do this by building on the EU's innovative capacity in the field of high technology. Part of the plan involves recognition that social and environmental values will become increasingly important differentiators in the market place.

By contrast, the meeting of the ISO Working Group on Social Responsibility (WG SR) held in Lisbon, Portugal, on 15-19 May, was a far more modest affair.

There was no high falutin' language about world superiority, no agreed final text on outcomes, and a very sober sense of what might be possible. Nonetheless, the agenda set by this ‘other’ Lisbon process could prove to be just as significant in the longer term.

As Ethical Corporation readers will be aware, the goal of the ISO WG SR is to develop the first-ever International Standard on Social Responsibility.

This would amount to guidance on what the concept of ‘social responsibility’ means, and how it might be integrated into the everyday operations of all organizations.

At one level, the process, launched by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) over a year ago in Salvador, Brazil, still has little to show for itself.

Apart from agreement on the broad contents (or ‘design specification’ agreed at the September 2005 Bangkok meeting), the only measurable outcome of the Lisbon meeting was a set of guidelines for further work.

These will now be considered by various working groups, and inform the drafting of a new working draft of the Standard to be considered at the next meeting, scheduled to be held in Sydney in early 2007.

The achievement of Lisbon cannot, however, be measured in terms of the incremental agreements that were reached, significant though some of them were.

They included, for example, provisional agreement among the diverse government, industry, consumer and NGO groups on a working definition of the term ‘social responsibility’.

No mean feat in itself.

A more accurate indication of its success — for that is what it was — was the fact that the ISO process gathered both momentum and a sense of shared purpose.

While wide differences remain between the disparate groups on a range of divisive issues, Lisbon witnessed a new level of willingness to explore viewpoints and negotiate.

Instead of running into the sand, as some had predicted, the ISO process shows every sign of moving forward, albeit cautiously, on all fronts.

This may be attributable to the recognition by those who initially felt threatened by a ‘one size fits all’ guidance standard that there is actually little to fear.

As a non-certifiable voluntary standard, rather that providing a rod for their backs, it could be a useful instrument to increase the performance and respect for the 99.9% of organizations that currently do not have any formal process for assessing their social responsibility issues and impacts.

In many cases, larger businesses already have in place CSR policies that are likely to be well in advance of what ISO may produce.

While it will be relevant for business, the applicability of the standard to public authorities and NGOs ensures a certain equity.

The next working draft is bound to be controversial. Should it be long and detailed in its listing of key principles and guidance, or short and more pragmatic?

How will it handle the sensitive issue of recognizing existing international norms, such as the ILO conventions, and complementing widely-used initiatives such as the Global Compact, the Global Reporting Initiative and the OECD MNE Guidelines.

How will it satisfy the desires of developing country companies seeking international recognition for their efforts?

The short answer is that no one can yet tell. But hundreds of experts from around the world are rolling up their sleeves and working on it.

Paul Hohnen is a consultant and writer on sustainable development and CSR. He attended the Lisbon meeting on behalf of the Global Reporting Initiative.