[sustran] Advisory Meeting for Shell Sustainable Energy Initiative

[Brian.Williams at unchs.org]

Dear Friends,

     Having recently received some corporate money from 
Daimler-Benz AG in Germany  (on behalf of my agency, I assure 
you) to do a meeting on sustainable transport entitled 
"Transport for the 21st Century" at the Habitat II conference 
in Istanbul, I feel compelled to comment on Mr. Whitelegg's 
comments on corporate "greenwashing" and this Shell 
"sustainable energy initiative" generally.

    In my view, 95% of "corporate sustainable anything" 
initiatives are PR smoke and mirrors operations.  I think in 
transport, there is one glaring exception (Toyota Motors 
Foundation in Japan...see me for data) but by and large, it 
is all image-building.  In the case of Shell, my independent 
sources tell me it is closer to 100% smoke and mirrors, and I 
believe them.  And I happen to agree 100% with Mr. 
Whitelegg's substantive assessment of the problems here with 
this particular initiative.

     However, having said that, I believe that it is all too 
easy to become apalled at the deceit and more difficult to 
channel the energy such a controversial meeting engenders and 
put it to good use.  In the case of Istanbul (as many of you 
recall) 500 people (activists, academics, local authorities 
etc., etc.) got together for one entire day and gave one of 
the senior vice-presidents representing the company a pretty 
good tongue-lashing the entire time.  I recall at one point, 
one person reminded the audience that if it wasn't for 
Daimler-Benz's financial contribution, we wouldn't be having 
a dialogue on the global problems in transport and somebody 
then responded, "If it wasn't for Daimler-Benz, we wouldn't 
NEED this dialogue on transport!"  Needless to say, they 
weren't amused.  Of course the meeting was not pure vitriol 
and there were some good discussions of a substantive nature, 
particularly on the role of technology (Daimler-Benz's 
obvious agenda) as well as some other issues.   

     Did the meeting change their corporate policy?  Probably 
not.  Where they happy they were involved?  Yes, as a matter 
of fact, they were.  I heard later they actually got a great 
deal of mileage out of being affiliated (as a private sector 
company) with a UN initiative.  But what it DID do for many 
of us collectively was to greatly expand our contacts with 
others working in the sustainable transport arena.  And for 
that, I genuinely appreciate Daimler-Benz's financial inputs 
and strongly doubt the opportunity would have arisen without 
them.

     I guess my point is that meetings of this sort do 
provide opportunities.  In particular, for example, this 
meeting in Bangkok may:

1) Provide the opportunity to raise the points John made to 
the source itself.  It may or may not help (probably 
wouldn't) but it certainly wouldn't hurt;

2) An opportunity to "know the enemy" as it were;      

3) An opportunity to informally network and form strategic 
alliances with other who are likely to be in attendance for 
work to change the initative itself or for work in other 
areas.

4) An opportunity for a free trip to Bangkok to work on 
whatever is your own agenda.  For those of you involved in 
sustainable transport, the City of Bangkok is like a living 
laboratory of how not to do things.

     In conclusion, I think accepting money from a suspect 
private-sector operation doesn't mean you endorse the company 
or the initiative.  Boycotting events of this sort do send a 
message and a valuable one, at times.  However, they are also 
opportunities missed.  In weighing the costs and benefits of 
whether or not to participate, let's not forget that no 
matter how flawed the forum, it probably would not have 
occurred at all unless somebody came up with the money.  I am 
of the view that there is "value-added" in practically any 
opportunity for dialogue and we should seize these 
opportunities whenever possible.  

     John, I do not know if, in fact, you were suggesting 
Paul not go.  Perhaps you were just alerting him, and all of 
us, to the hidden agenda and for that, I am appreciative.  
This Shell initiative may be particularly suspect and 
onerous, but I would argue that is all the more reason to go. 
I agonized and wrestled with this same issue during Habitat 
II (taking private money) and (very reluctantly, believe me) 
came up with the general conclusions above vis-a-vis events 
of this sort.  I think for those of you in attendance there, 
we didn't go wrong.  I therefore felt compelled to give my 
two-cents worth on this issue, for what it's worth.

Regards to all, 

Brian Williams, Human Settlements Officer
United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (HABITAT)
Research and Development Division
P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya
TEL: (254 2) 623-916
FAX: (254 2) 624-265
EMAIL: brian.williams at unchs.org