abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

这页面没有简体中文版本,现以English显示

故事

2022年2月7日

Global: Oxfam America calls on EITI members to support meaningful Company Expectations & consequences for non-compliance

An excavator works at an opencast manganese ore mine in Ukraine

On January 10, 2022, Oxfam America sent an open letter to board members and US-listed supporting companies of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) requesting their responses to questions about EITI's Company Expectations. In the letter, Oxfam highlights gaps in the existing Company Expectations and notes that EITI member companies can currently enjoy the benefits of membership while flaunting, and in some cases lobbying against, core transparency elements of the EITI.

Oxfam invited 29 EITI Supporting Companies to respond to the following questions:

  1. What minimum threshold of compliance with Company Expectations should be required for a company to be listed with the distinction of being an EITI Supporting Company?
  2. Does your company agree that Expectation 1 should mandate meaningful support, like requiring that EITI Supporting Companies will voice their support for – and not undermine by lobbying against – laws, regulations, and policies that promote transparency efforts aligned with the EITI Standard in the jurisdictions they operate in and globally?
  3. Does your company agree that EITI Supporting Companies should make project-level payments-to-government disclosures, in line with the EITI Standard, in all jurisdictions where they operate, as outlined in Company Expectations 2 and 3?
  4. Does your company believe that companies should be excused for not complying with Expectation 2 if they provide an explanation for their non-compliance? Has your company ever encountered a law that prevented you from complying with Expectation 2?
  5. What consequences should exist for EITI Supporting Companies that do not comply with the Company Expectations?
  6. Are EITI Board Members that do not comply with the Company Expectations able to adequately represent the interests of your company, the Supporting Company constituency, and the Initiative as a whole?

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre invited Alcoa, AngloAmerican, AngloGold Ashanti, ArcelorMittal, Barrick Gold, BHP, BP, Centerra Gold, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni, Equinor, ExxonMobil, Freeport-McMoRan, Gold Fields, Hess, Kinross Gold, Kosmos Energy, Newmont, Norwegian Bank Investment Management, Repsol, Rio Tinto, Shell, Sibanye-Stillwater, Southern Copper, Teck Resources, Trafigura, TotalEnergies, and Vale to respond to the concerns outlined in Oxfam's open letter. A total of 22 companies responded, including 5 that sent their responses directly to Oxfam.

Their responses or non-responses are recorded below.

企业回应

Rio Tinto 浏览回应
Sibanye-Stillwater 浏览回应
Repsol 浏览回应
Trafigura Beheer 浏览回应
Southern Copper (part of Grupo México) 浏览回应
Chevron 浏览回应
Shell plc 浏览回应
Kosmos Energy 浏览回应
Freeport-McMoRan 浏览回应
Equinor (formerly Statoil) 浏览回应
Kinross Gold

没有回应

Alcoa 浏览回应
Anglo American 浏览回应
AngloGold Ashanti 浏览回应
ArcelorMittal

没有回应

Centerra Gold

没有回应

ConocoPhillips

没有回应

ExxonMobil

没有回应

Gold Fields

没有回应

Hess Corporation

没有回应

Newmont (formerly Newmont Goldcorp) 浏览回应
Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) 浏览回应
Teck Resources 浏览回应
TotalEnergies (formerly Total) 浏览回应
Barrick Gold 浏览回应

时间线