[sustran] WBCSD - General commentary

[eric.britton at ecoplan.org]

Here by way of food for thought is an extract from a long piece by Ian
St. John commenting on the first report in this series written some two
year ago. I bring it to you attention once again not to slam the WBCSD
team, but rather to provide you all with further background on the kind
of tight corner they find themselves in. What perhaps we can hope to
achieve this time around is to take a positive step in fashioning and a
new and much deeper working relationship between these companies, their
industrial network (to give the WBCSD a name), and civil society. Again,
it is hard for any of us to change our ways.  And not least when we feel
under attack. Proof of our success will be that we and they find some
ways to move ahead together to advance the New Mobility Agenda in the
way which the present urgent circumstances provide.  

 

 

 

 

 From: Ian St. John
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&newwindow=1&safe=off
&q=author:istjohn%40spamcop.net+>  (istjohn at spamcop.net
<mailto:istjohn%40spamcop.net> )
Subject: Re: You pay for it 

Newsgroups: sci.environment
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&newwindow=1&safe=off
&group=sci.environment> 
Date: 2002-10-11 22:50:31 PST

 

Sustainable mobility?
 
The WBCSD's 'Sustainable Mobility' project, focusing on the transport
sector, released its first report in March 2001.28 The working group is
run
by major automobile and energy corporations, including BP,
DaimlerChrysler,
General Motors, Michelin, Norsk Hydro, Renault, Shell and Toyota. The
project claims to develop a long-term vision of future mobility, but
fails
to tackle the inherent unsustainability of continued growth in global
transport volumes.
 
A characteristic feature of WBCSD projects is their attitude to civil
society groups with a moderate critique. This kind of 'constructive
criticism' is often included in project reports or on websites. The
'Sustainable Mobility' website, for instance, features an article
describing
some NGO critique to the project's report, while highlighting that the
critics "acknowledged the report was not unduly biased towards the
interests
of the auto and oil industries."29 This approach contributes to an open,
transparent and consensus-seeking image. 
 
Meanwhile, those with a more fundamental critique are not offered any
such space. 
The 'Sustainable Mobility' website for instance is silent about
Prague-based campaign 
Group Carbusters, which has strongly criticized the project's corporate
vision.
Carbusters slammed the project for merely promoting technological fixes
and
the privatisation of public transport systems, while refusing to
consider
the option of reduced mobility. After attending one of the project's
stakeholder dialogues, Carbusters concluded that "It all boils down to
another advertising campaign for their wonderful 'green' cars."30 
 
The 'Sustainable Mobility' website provides information about the
stakeholder
dialogue held in Prague, but is silent about the protest action held
outside
the event.31 On seeing the activists, the project director's first
reaction

was to ask: "Do any journalists know about this?"32

 

  28.. The report was produced by the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and Charles River Associates
  29.. WBCSD mobility report attracts fire from NGOs, 12 April 2002.
  30.. They Say: People Desire Mobility, by Ivana Jakubkova, Carbusters.

  31.. Participants entering the stakeholder dialogue were given copies
of the Ultimate Greenwash Award which the WBCSD has received from
Corpwatch.

  32.. They Say: People Desire Mobility, by Ivana Jakubkova, Carbusters.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040727/7b6ff4e1/attachment-0001.html