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

這頁面沒有繁體中文版本,現以English顯示

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.

企業回應

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

沒有回應

Alcoa 瀏覽回應
Anglo American 瀏覽回應
AngloGold Ashanti 瀏覽回應
ArcelorMittal

沒有回應

Centerra Gold

沒有回應

ConocoPhillips

沒有回應

ExxonMobil

沒有回應

Gold Fields

沒有回應

Hess Corporation

沒有回應

Newmont (formerly Newmont Goldcorp) 瀏覽回應
Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) 瀏覽回應
Teck Resources 瀏覽回應
TotalEnergies (formerly Total) 瀏覽回應
Barrick Gold 瀏覽回應

時間線