To the extent that codes of conduct inspire corporations to examine their business practices, expand their disclosure to stakeholders, and offer substantive commitments for self-regulation, they can be valuable tools. For example, the “Responsible Care Program” – a detailed code of conduct followed by many of the world’s major chemical manufacturers – has reportedly led to significant changes in how chemical companies conduct business and interact with local communities.
The Responsible Care Program was first adopted by Canadian chemical corporations in 1986 and subsequently by the International Council of Chemical Associations in the 1990s. It has since spread to chemical manufacturers in 47 countries. The code commits companies to responsibly manufacture, store, and ship chemical products, and to actively communicate with the communities in which they work (ICCA 1999; ACC 2002; ACC 2003).
Although some experts question the effectiveness of Responsible Care, industry members cite significant results. The Canadian version of the Responsible Care program, which requires public reporting on emissions of certain pollutants, points to a 50 percent reduction in total discharges from 1992 to 1996 (Harrison 1999:37). The American Chemistry Council says that its members, which must all actively participate in the U.S. program, reduced their toxic chemical releases by 58 percent from 1988 to 1997, while increasing production by 18 percent (ACC 2002). It is not clear, however, how much these reductions stem from adherence to the Responsible Care code, as opposed to stricter government regulations or other factors (Harrison 1999:37).
If crafted properly, industry codes of conduct can provide civil society with a lever for pushing corporations to improve their performance, actively involve citizens and communities in key decisions, and provide more information on their operations and impacts. Comprehensive codes that are monitored and independently verified can give stakeholders a means of influencing corporate behavior in places where government policy or regulatory enforcement are weak. For example, in El Salvador, the Gap clothing company set up an independent monitoring group in cooperation with the Interfaith Centre on Corporate Responsibility, Business for Social Responsibility, and the National Labor Committee to verify the Gap’s compliance with its corporate code (Jenkins 2002:44).
Codes of conduct that are the basis for product certification or eco-labeling programs can give consumers greater access to information about the environmental and social impacts of products. Many codes foster the “greening” of the supply chain by asking signatory companies to extend the concept of responsibility to the activities of their suppliers as well as their subsidiaries (Jenkins 2002:49).
