Since Myanmar Centre for Responsible Business was established, we have actively sought to engage Chinese companies.  We have translated our Centre’s leaflet into Chinese, and made contacts with companies through the Chinese Embassy, and China-based consultancies.  We recognise that one barrier is language, so we try to have Chinese speakers on the MCRB team. But another barrier is company culture and hierarchy, and a lack of confidence in engaging with an organisation like MCRB.

Nonetheless, we have built contacts with some of the Chinese companies investing in Myanmar and some have attended our workshops.  When MCRB meets Chinese companies, our conversations generally consist of two pieces of advice: communicate better, and use international standards as a reference.

We encourage companies to map and engage with stakeholders, even the ones who seem hostile. Part of the reason for that hostility is a lack of dialogue.  This leads to information gaps, misunderstandings and further hostility. This can only be resolved through honest dialogue and information sharing. The responsibility is also on community groups, and those who work with them, to train them in how to engage with Chinese companies. One relationship broke down almost before it started after 15 civil society members turned up to a meeting when the Chinese company had requested maximum of seven, such was the local interest in meeting the company for the first time.

The second piece of advice is that all companies, including Chinese ones, cannot simply fall back on the defence that ‘they obey local law’, particularly when that is only sometimes true. Obeying the law is difficult in Myanmar. Firstly, laws are lacking in Myanmar in many areas, including much of health and safety, and the environment. Secondly, where laws exist, they are often poorly designed and poorly enforced and rarely communicated.

Reliance on ‘local law’ is a risk for investors, including Chinese ones. It will not be enough to satisfy stakeholders, whether communities, employees or business partners. Rather investors should aim to incorporate international good practice into the way they run their businesses.

Finally, when we meet a Chinese company that appears to have more corporate relations capacity, we add a third piece of advice and encourage them to engage in legal/policy reform initiatives, and share Chinese experience, both negative and positive.  But it is better if this advice is offered as part of a wider, more structured discussion, like the IFC’s Strategic Environment Assessment on Hydropower, so that it doesn’t appear to be self-interested lobbying. The Chinese experience of industrialisation offers many lessons for Myanmar.  An open and expert discussion can help to build a better policy and legal framework for investment. That’s what all stakeholders want.