Most of us know that India
grows through its industries. With this term we usually imply privately
owned corporate firms making huge profits out of their production units and
creating wealth for their shareholders and owners. While revering these modern
temples of GDP growth some of us may think of those thousands of people
who are displaced from their land for their creation. Some may think of those
people who bear the brunt of the pollution that their plants and mines cause. Some
may point to the people who are directly affected by the oft-lethal traffic
nuisance created by their trawlers and trucks. And some of us (possibly
with an alleged “leftist” inclination) may also grieve for the few hundreds
of workers who give their lives every year in industrial accidents and that multitude
who silently faces serious health issues due to exposure to dangerous
chemicals.
Corporate
Social Responsibility – Buzzword denoting these corporates' gift back to
the society. In the last 3-4 years this term has grabbed a lot of limelight.
Justifiably so, after all who would not want that the profitable ventures do
their bit for the people they directly affect? When I joined Raigarh a couple of months back, I also
revered these temples and appreciated their effort to pro-actively deliver to
the people (showcased so fervently via magazines dedicated for this purpose). The district has a number of primary and secondary industries and
is also amongst the leading mining (both major and minor minerals) zones of the
country. After a number of rude and subtle surprises, my view on this has
undergone a tremendous change.
The Undefined Monster
As they say, the devil lies in the details. While the Central Government’s CSR Directives in Companies Act and the Chhattisgarh state’s recent CSR policy debate on the mode of funding of CSR activities,
it is necessary to carefully define what activities constitute CSR and who will
judge (and be accountable for) the same. For those unfamiliar with the ways of
the world, let me point out that any laxity in this allows for senseless
booking of expenditure under CSR heads. A private company may construct a road
solely for the purpose of transportation of its mineral ore and book it under
CSR – this may be something that the locals protest against, but again – who
decides? Worse, the company may be running a private technical college with profit
in mind and no reservations for the students of the particular district or
state and still call it CSR. Very often, the companies may even use the fund
booked under this head to pacify the “trouble makers” – the politicians and
rogue environmental/RTI activists who thrive on their nuisance value.
Stakeholder Justice & Governmental Regulation
Like all the things that are never admitted yet commonly
understood, CSR is usually treated by companies as the dole out that keeps the
government’s “task-forces” away from their compounds (there are some notable
and creditable exceptions but those companies are increasingly becoming rarer).
The size of the CSR kitty is indicative of the bargaining power of the district
collector. The latter gets this power because it is understood that no industry
follows the rule book to the word in its operations.
I have come to know of cases where collectors have got the
mines of prominent corporate closed for months at a stretch for the latter’s
failure to provide drinking water to the village that they had resettled. Such
examples are few. More commonly, the collectors suggest a few big ticket items
that account for nearly 10-20% of the district’s total CSR booking by various
corporate and leave the rest unmonitored.
I expected earnestness on the behalf of the companies, a
sort of ownership for the school that is physically contiguous to their plant’s
boundary or a sort of quality in their CSR constructions that reflects the
quality of their own industrial constructions. I saw none. Most big companies,
despite having dedicated staff and funds to look after CSR, don’t tend to
respond unless they have some pending work with the Government – fixing of date
for their mine’s public hearing or acquisition of some land for their plant’s
expansion.
Is There a Silver Lining?
Despite my apparent pessimism, I will admit that I have come
across a few companies (a small percentage though) that took CSR in a more
people-centric manner. This is an issue that needs a consensus at all levels of
Government’s hierarchies. If we decide to define the non-negotiable questions
in terms of booking of funds under CSR and ensure effective, time-bound
follow-up at the district level, things will begin to move in a consistent
manner. Most of all, the higher officials of these private companies, should
probably spend lesser time in delivering high-sounding lectures on
“participative profit making” and actually think and chart out their stakeholders’ lists in a prioritized manner.
When we, as the government, acquire land for the industries,
we are consciously uprooting helpless people (and proudly calling it “eminent domain”). The
least of our expectations is that of justice to them and to those who directly
bear the brunt of their negative
externalities. I hope it is they who make it to the top of such lists and
the money flowing in CSR addresses their concerns.
PS: All views expressed here are purely personal and have no
connection with those of the Government. This post has been carefully modified
to fit into the ambit of freedom of speech permitted to officers under the Rule 6 and Rule 7 of All India Service (Conduct) Rules, 1968.
