Monday 28 October - SRI & Corporates in Asia

	Speakers & Presentations
Panel Discussions : Asian Values and SRI パネル・ディスカッション: アジアの価値観とSRI
Chair: Mr. Mishko Hansen, University of Hong Kong Panel:
Mr. Boon Chong Na, Asia Pacific Content Leader, Hewitt Associates
	KB	Asian Values and Corporate Performance
Ms. Kyoko Sakuma, Asia Pacific Project Manager, Ethibel Group
	160 KB	Asian Values and SRI
Ms. Mizue Tsukushi, CEO, The Good Bankers, Co., Ltd.
Ms. Mizue Unno, Managing Director, So-Tech Consulting, Inc.
	65 KB	Japanese Perception of SRI/CSR

The panelists began by presenting a range of perspectives regarding Asian values and SRI. The discussion period that followed was spirited, at times controversial, but ultimately highly informative for all involved. Much of the discussion revolved around the tension between international comparability in SRI data, and the need for locally sensitive approaches. The use of questionnaires in research, the interpretation of human rights and other values, and the role of environmental vs employee and other social factors in SRI were all debated.

Panelist Presentation Summaries

Kyoko Sakuma began with remarks on Ethibel's approach to analyzing Asian companies. Ethibel doesn't localize their analytic criteria, but they do localize the questions they ask to assess the criteria. There is also a degree of localization that comes in from the use of relative comparisons (i.e. within a sector, country, etc.) as well as from local stakeholder assessment. She pointed out that some issues, such as the case of labour unions in Japan, are very different than in other countries. She raised several questions including how to handle the international and local dimensions of SRI in multinationals.

Boon Chong Na argued that enlightened business employee relationships are crucial for company performance Asian companies have become world class on business to business and business to consumer levels, but paternalistic traditions have caused them to lag behind regarding employees. He gave numerous illustrations of Hewitt's research on the connection between engaged employees and business success. Interestingly, employee perception of their company's value to society was identified as a key factor which does not necessarily improve business performance, but which almost always damages performance when it is absent.

Mizue Unno identified a process of greatly increasing awareness towards corporate social responsibility in Japan. However, she noted an accompanying reaction against "Anglo-Saxon" standards. There is a strong view that the framework of CSR should be defined by each company, not by universal standards. The environmental dimensions of CSR are well recognized, but social and ethical impacts are much less well understood. At the moment many Japanese companies are not quite sure what to do regarding CSR. Corporate governance, human rights, and labour practices were identified as areas for improvement, while environmental, product and community responsibility were already well-developed.

Mizue Tsukushi argued that there are a multiplicity of values even within Japan, much less all of Asia. While environmental issues can be quantified in relating to company performance, social issues are less clear. However, this is not an obstacle for SRI since "value added research" can explore what the values are in each situation. This process can respect the values of each company, while also embodying the values of SRI clients. For this to work interviews are important as questionnaires cannot go deep enough. Many Japanese companies object to answering questionnaires for this reason. Sustainability, however, requires certain universal values, but these should also be articulated regionally and locally.

Discussion Summary

As the panel was predominantly Japanese as was the audience, the discussion quickly focused on Japanese perspectives on values and SRI.

An interesting question was raised as to whether questionnaire research is basically itself an "Anglo-Saxon" approach. The response from panelists was to an extent yes. Interviews were seen as important because they can get beyond potential misunderstandings to the particular values of the company, and thereby identify the truly responsible companies. Resistance was expressed towards a perceived tendency in SRI research towards cheaper and faster research. A suggestion was made that the use of questionnaires could be combined with local panels to evaluate and interpret results.

A lot of questions were asked concerning human rights, particularly using business in Myanmar as an example. A perspective was put forward that maintaining Japanese investments in essential areas such as healthcare and infrastructure was legitimate. And it was also argued that the US and Europe are hypocritical, making human rights in some areas such an issue while turning a blind eye to Chinese abuses and investing there on a massive scale.

A last area of discussion related to what constituted relevant SRI criteria. A point was made that what consumers, companies, and investors care about in SRI is very much related to "media sensations". So, for example, in the US labour issues such as those surrounding Nike, or human rights questions may loom large. In Japan on the other hand, food scandals mean that food labeling and tracing is a key SRI issue.

Overall, it was felt that the push for global comparability for SRI criteria needed to be balanced against local issues and concerns. There was a perceived opportunity for Japanese investors and companies to contribute more to future international discussion about SRI.