The Private Sector and Poverty Reduction
The Private Sector and Poverty Reduction
The Private Sector and Poverty Reduction
Poverty Reduction
This background paper was written as a contribution to the development of From Poverty
to Power: How Active Citizens and Effective States Can Change the World, Oxfam
International 2008. It is published in order to share widely the results of commissioned
research and programme experience. The views it expresses are those of the author and
do not necessarily reflect those of Oxfam International or its affiliate organisations.
1. Why consider the private sector?
According to Oxfams framework of development, people need sustainable livelihoods in order to get
out of poverty. What does that mean? A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets and activities
required for a means of living. It is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from shocks,
maintain itself over time and provide the same or better opportunities for all, now and in the future.
They also need to consume goods and services to meet their immediate needs. Poor people acquire
these assets and consumption goods from four sources:
the natural resource base making use of available land, air, water, biodiversity, plant-based raw
materials and wild foods;
the unpaid, reproductive economy receiving care, nurture and security as members of a
household and community. This is especially important for children, old people and unwell
people and those who are especially dependent on the unpaid work of women
state-provided services using publicly subsidised health clinics, schools, electricity, and water
services, and benefiting from the security and stability created by good governance and the rule of
law.
the market economy selling their labour or production, buying goods and services, and
investing in ventures (for example, providing credit or equity to others, for a return on capital).
On impact:
How does the private sector affect poor peoples acquisition of the necessary assets and
consumption goods?
What is the impact of private sector activity on the assets provided by the natural resource base,
the reproductive economy and state services?
On change:
What creates a dynamic Small and Medium-scale Enterprise (SME) sector?
What causes some companies to change their strategy, policies and behaviour in order to have a
positive impact on poor peoples livelihoods?
Within the monetised economy, the private sector is constituted by all those organisations that are
privately owned and operate for profit, as shown below.
1
Diagram adapted from Henderson, 1991
Within the private sector, we can distinguish further among organisations according to:
size (SMEs vs. large enterprises)
formality (formal vs. informal sector)
ownership and profit distribution (private vs. shareholders, vs. co-ops vs. mutuals)
The private sector relates to poverty reduction through market-based transactions and state transfers
and externalities, as shown below.
The private sector interacts with poor people in the following ways:
2. Meeting needs: poor people purchase goods and 4. Externalities impacting poor peoples
services through markets, such as clothing, food, assets: companies operations affect poor
medicines people as consumers, workers, community,
and citizens through actions, which directly
or indirectly affect poor peoples human,
natural, physical, social and financial assets
(for example, polluting rivers, or lobbying
government policy on trade rules, or
controlling resources through intellectual
property law).
Private sector actors tend to emphasise their market-based contributions (1 and 2), and their
contribution to state resources (3) while downplaying their impacts through externalities (4), unless
the externalities are positive influences such as creating a better business environment or upgrading
their suppliers.
In stylised terms this can be expressed as: reducing poverty is essentially a matter of raising poor peoples
incomes. The route to this is creating jobs and market opportunities through economic growth. It is
the private sector that generates this growth. Hence business is at the heart of poverty reduction.
Oxfams response
The private sector (not simply multinational, but all levels of market-based, privately-owned activity)
is the major employer in most countries and so provides the vast majority of incomes, but,
a) private sector growth relies heavily on state support providing infrastructure, secure property
rights, workforce education and healthcare, and other subsidies (especially beneficial to
business) which enable private actors to function in the market, so it is too simplistic to say
In stylised terms this can be expressed as: the majority of goods and services that poor people need and
consume are provided by the private sector, and if people are repeatedly buying items, then these
must be meeting their needs. The recent rise of the business model, which targets consumers at the
base of the pyramid, means that more products and services are now available to poor people at
affordable prices.
Oxfams response:
a) Poor peoples needs are met both by privately produced goods and services, and by state-
provided services such as water, health, and education;
b) the business model of marketing to poor people has certainly increased the range of products
available to them, and has made many highly valued products more widely and affordably
available;
c) However, it is too easy to argue that any product bought by a poor person is helping to meet
their needs and thereby reduce their poverty. Some of the base of the pyramid discourse
conflates serving poor people with selling to poor people. It ignores the significant influence
of advertising, which accompanies privately marketed products. By contrast, advertising is
rarely used to boost demand for state-provided products such as schooling.
Oxfams response:
TNCs can bring these benefits but the main determinants of whether or not these linkages occur
(beyond tax payments) are:
a) the structure of the industry in which the company operates, and
b) the policies of the host country government.
A company owning manufacturing sites is far more likely to have a business plan spanning 20 years,
and so is more willing to invest in the quality of its local suppliers and distributors than a sourcing
company whose interest in local suppliers may be for 2-3 years only. Moreover, government policy on
joint ventures, and other initiatives to create forward and backward linkages with the local economy
can determine the positive externalities created by having a TNC present but TNCs often lobby
against these problems.
Our skills, innovative capabilities and resources can be used to help poor people out of poverty
In stylised terms this can be expressed as: we act in a philanthropic way through:
creating business opportunities for SMEs along our supply chains;
Oxfams response:
We agree that global companies can play an invaluable role in supporting SME development but they
need to consider:
a) the terms on which they interact with SMEs in their value chains. Do these SMEs equitably
capture value created in the chain? Do they have negotiating power? Can they upgrade within
the chain?
b) Does the entry of a TNC into the market stimulate or depress local competition?
c) Is the business DNA of TNCs really relevant to the context of SMEs in developing countries?
SME entrepreneurs face high risks, uncertain incomes, and high personal costs of financial
loss conditions not familiar to most employees in a TNC.
Oxfams response:
This is what we consider to be real CSR, when the company places poverty reduction at the heart of
company operations through simply operating and behaving in a socially and environmentally
responsible way. It is very different from the other activities above because it is inward-looking, self-
policing and self-reforming (rather than implying that more of my presence is better for you as the
other approaches do). It is rare. And it is usually only possible to maintain while the company has
strong financial results.
Trends in global Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and trends among TNCs
FDI: A recovery from the Asian Crisis
The past fifteen years have seen levels of foreign direct investment to developing countries increase
massively from $43 billion in 1990 to $174 billion in 2003 2 . The developing world has also seen itself
gain a more significant share of global FDI up from 20.6 per cent of world inflows in 1990 to 31 per
cent in 2003 3 . This increase was mainly due to a meteoric rise between 1990 and 1997, finishing when
the Asian financial crisis revealed such investments to be riskier than previously thought. Since then,
investment has suffered a slight decline (somewhat compounded by increased perceptions of risk
following 11 September 2001). However, in recent years this decline appears to have bottomed out,
2
All figures in current US$, i.e. adjusted for inflation. Trade and investment: A global framework for foreign direct investment,
European Commission, trade-info.cec.eu.int/doclib/docs/2005/june/tradoc_113538.pdf
3
Andreas Waldkirch, Foreign Direct Investment in a Developing Country: An Empirical Investigation
www.williams.edu/Economics/ neudc/papers/fdidev_neudc.pdf
Though the volatility of FDI appears to be decreasing, it still remains significantly less stable than
official development aid or overseas remittances. 5 The risks of such volatility were exposed to a severe
degree with the collapse of various Asian economies during the crisis in the late 1990s. At that time,
the withdrawal of loans and lack of expected investment precipitated currency crises and the
bankruptcy of local banks, setting back development in the region by some years.
This concentration has scared those countries not amongst investors favourites, as they fear it will
become increasingly difficult, and competitive, to attract substantial investment. However, the recent
enthusiasm for these five countries should be put in perspective. Whilst China accounts for 39 per cent
of the FDI to developing countries, it also accounts for almost 30 per cent of the developing worlds
population 8 . Relative to GDP, Chinas performance in attracting FDI is good but not extraordinary,
with FDI at 3.8 per cent of GDP in 19992002. Nineteen developing countries did better over the same
period. Chinas performance looks even less extraordinary if adjusted for the round-tripping of FDI
4
FDI Trends, World Bank Public Policy for the Private Sector Journal, September 2005,
http://rru.worldbank.org/documents/publicpolicyjournal/273palmade_anayiotas.pdf
5
Global Development Finance 2005, World Bank
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGDF2005/Resources/gdf05complete.pdf
6
World Bank Public Policy for the Private Sector Journal, September 2005
http://rru.worldbank.org/documents/publicpolicyjournal/273palmade_anayiotas.pdf
7
World Investment Report 2005, UNCTAD
8
World Bank Public Policy for the Private Sector Journal, September 2005
http://rru.worldbank.org/documents/publicpolicyjournal/273palmade_anayiotas.pdf
The increases in FDI are not limited to the richer of the developing countries. The share of net FDI
inflows going to low-income countries has increased substantially, rising from a low of less than 7 per
cent in 2000 to almost 11 per cent in 2003/04, the highest level in the past 15 years. This increase
reflects strong gains in FDI in Indias service sector and in the oil and gas sectors of a few African
countries (Angola, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, and Sudan). The share of FDI going to the least
developed countries has also shown steady gains over the past 10 years, rising from a low of 1 per
cent in 1994 to just under 5 per cent in 2003/04.
However, the share of FDI going to natural resource projects is actually lower than it used to be,
having decreased from 12 per cent of FDI inflows to developing countries in 1989-1991 to 10 per cent
in 2000-2001 (see Figure below). This appears to be part of a more general diversification in the areas
of investment. For example, cumulative FDI flows to the retail trade sector in the 20 largest developing
countries amounted to $45 billion in 19982002 (about 7 per cent of the total to these countries) 11 . The
tendency in the past was to focus almost exclusively on infrastructure and on efficiency-seeking and
tariff-jumping FDI in manufacturing, states a recent World Bank summary of FDI Trends. In the
future more and more FDI will be market-seeking investment in service sectors as well as investment
in tourism and offshore services. 12
9
Resource Flows To Africa: An Update Of Statistical Trends, UNOSA http://www.un.org/africa/osaa/reports/Resourceper
cent20flowsper cent20toper cent20Africaper cent20Anper cent20updateper cent20ofper cent20Statisticalper cent20trends.xls
10
World Investment Report 2005, UNCTAD
11
World Bank Public Policy for the Private Sector Journal, September 2005
http://rru.worldbank.org/documents/publicpolicyjournal/273palmade_anayiotas.pdf
12
World Bank Public Policy for the Private Sector Journal, September 2005
Hhttp://rru.worldbank.org/documents/publicpolicyjournal/273palmade_anayiotas.pdf
13
World Investment Report 2003, UNCTAD
14
Dick Aykut and Dilip Ratha, Transnational Corporations: South-South FDI flows: how big are they?,
www.unctad.org/en/docs/iteiit20043a5_en.pdf
One prominent trend over the last decade is market consolidation and concentration in key industry
sectors like financial services, utilities, telecommunications, extractives, agribusiness, retail and
pharmaceuticals. As markets saturate and competition intensifies, so too are new forms of
organisation being sought to increase efficiency and enable profits to be captured more effectively.
Concentration is happening in two ways. There is consolidation in the sector where companies merge
or acquire each other. In addition, or as an alternative, there can be clustering where companies form
strategic alliances with each other in order to dominate the entire value chain upstream and
downstream. For example, a bank, the grain trader, the pesticide manufacturer and the seed producer
can all work together in the agribusiness industry.
15
Africa in the World Economy - The National, Regional and International Challenges, Fondad, The Hague, December 2005,
www.fondad.org/publications/africaworld/Fondad-AfricaWorld-Chapter16.pdf
16
Goldstein Andrea, Emerging multinationals in the global economy: data trends, policy issues, and research questions.
forthcoming, 2006.
17
World Bank (2004), Patterns of Africa-Asia Trade and Investment: Potential for Ownership and Partnership, Washington D.C.,
October 2004, www1.worldbank.org/rped/documents/ticad4.pdf
18
UNCTAD website
In a survey of some of these companies conducted by UNCTAD, the large majority expected FDI to
developing countries to increase over the next few years. 19 Continued interest by TNCs in developing
countries stems from various factors including the ability to access cheaper sources of labour and skill-
sets and possibilities of overcoming trade barriers. However the biggest driver remains the potential
to capture new markets as markets become saturated in industrialised countries. This trend is playing
out in a number of key sectors: retailing, fast moving consumer goods, banking and other financial
services, telecommunications, and other services.
With young populations, growing middle-income consumers and high rates of private consumption,
many developing countries offer rich pickings. In India, for example, one estimate suggests that
private consumption accounts for 64 per cent of the Indian economy 20 and, whilst still considered a
poor country, it has a consuming middle class of 58million people. 21 Global companies are also
beginning to explore entry into low-income consumer markets in order to capture the so-called
Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid.
Whether this will contribute to lifting poor people out of poverty is still open for debate. Many of the
proponents of this thesis believe that selling to the poor will serve the poor by enabling their access
to goods and services that will improve their quality of life and connectivity with the market, and
therefore lift them out of poverty (see below). 22 Alternative views question whether the causal link is
quite so clear and whether it takes more than simply enabling poor peoples access to goods and
services (albeit at affordable prices) to alleviate their poverty. There are also questions regarding
potential worsening effects. For example, it is questioned whether entry into markets at the base of the
pyramid by global players might drive out local entrepreneurs and create monopolies which could
eventually result in prohibitive pricing. Moreover, there are doubts that the value created will be
distributed equitably along the value chain or if it will result in further polarisation of wealth.
19
Prospects For Foreign Direct Investment, www.unctad.org/en/docs/iteiit20048_en.pdf
20 th
Stephen Roach, Morgan Stanley economist, quoted in a Special Report on Retailing in India, The Economist, April 15 2006
21
ibid. This figure is comes from the National Council of Applied Economic Research that takes into account households with
incomes exceeding $4,400 with 2001-2002 prices. Other more generous estimates based on a bar of $2,000 set the figure at
300m.
22
Prahalad et al.
Country of No. of
Origin firms in
Top 50
Hong Kong 10
Singapore 9
Taiwan 8
Other Asia 12
South Africa 4
Mexico 4
Brazil 3
For now, the significance of these TNCs from developing countries should not be overstated. Firstly,
the number of companies that are comparable to the largest TNCs from developed countries is small
only the top four in the table above are in list of the top 100 TNCs globally. These four, plus Cemex
from Mexico, own almost as much in foreign assets as the remaining 45. Furthermore, the total foreign
assets of all the top 50 TNCs from developing economies in 2003 was barely equal to those of General
Electric, the worlds largest TNC.
However, their current and potential impacts are worth considering. Many of these players are more
open to taking and dealing with risk. For example, Chinese firms are taking on a significant number of
construction and infrastructure projects, which have been avoided, by European or US firms who are
not willing to take on the level of risk commensurate with the initial investment. Southern companies
also have good experience at producing and marketing low-cost products, which may give them an
advantage in accessing low-income consumer markets in developing countries. For example, Chinese
A companys structure is important in determining its connection to poor people. Each industry has a
different structure of supply and distribution chains, different forms of competition and different
shareholder expectations. These shape the scope and form of its interactions with poor people
whether they are employees, suppliers, customers, competitors or neighbours.
The length of time of investment required can deter commitment to location. Mining companies start
up an operation expecting it to last at least 50 years and cannot relocate, only shut down. Capital-
intensive manufacturing firms set up expecting a return over 10-20 years. Low-skill labour intensive
manufacturers can relocate more easily and expect returns within fewer years. Sourcing agents can
redirect their orders overnight. When companies must get involved for the long term, the long-term
interests of the country (such as a strong macro-economy, stable and predictable governance, rising
local incomes, and the capacity of the domestic business community) become more closely aligned to
their interests.
Within any given industry, however, companies can choose to follow different strategies that may
have dramatically different impacts on people living in poverty.
Companies can contribute to poverty reduction when they adopt strategies that aim to profit-by-
investing, rather than profit-by-exploiting, their workforce, the environment, the community, the local
and national business community, and national regulation and governance.
Both kinds of strategies crudely termed here as investing or exploiting for profit - can be profitable
for companies, and so either one can be in the interests of the company. But only the strategy of
investing-for-profit is in the interest of poverty reduction and national development.
The Table below illustrates the impacts of the two contrasting business strategies.
23
FDI Trends, World Bank Public Policy for the Private Sector Journal, September 2005
http://rru.worldbank.org/documents/publicpolicyjournal/273palmade_anayiotas.pdf
The question for anyone interested in improving the poverty impact of business is whether a company
will switch its strategy, from exploiting-for-profit to investing-for-profit?
In order to address this question, three case study examples of multinational companies (Shoprite, Rio
Tinto and Interface) were chosen that have changed specific aspects of their business strategies and
behaviour and now have a better impact on poverty reduction in their area of operations. They have
along the spectrum from exploiting-for-profit towards investing-for-profit. 24 In conducting this
research, key people within the company close to the source of change were approached to discover
what made change happen. From these examples, lessons could be learned about ways in which civil
society and governments can influence further change in the future in other companies. Change
factors in each case are summarised below.
a. How the biggest supermarket in Africa (Shoprite) started buying locally grown vegetables in
Zambia
What happened? Shoprites supermarkets in Zambia used to transport all produce from South Africa,
displacing sales of local vegetable producers and significantly damaging their livelihoods. Then
Shoprite started buying some fresh produce locally in Zambia, integrating local producers into its
supply chains.
b. How one of the worlds largest mining companies (Rio Tinto) improved the community impact of
its operations in Madagascar
What happened? Rio Tinto had a bad reputation among environmental groups for the ecological and
community impacts of its operations. Then the company conducted a social and environmental impact
assessment for a new mine in Madagascar, and has been publicly praised by environmental NGOs for
becoming a leader in this area.
24
A full description of the case studies is provided in the Annex to this paper, How Change Happens in the Private Sector: Just
st
So Stories for the 21 Century.
c. How the biggest carpet company in the world (Interface) became a champion of environmentally
sustainable manufacturing
What happened? A major carpet-making company went from having almost no environmental policy
to being a champion of sustainable zero-emission manufacturing.
But these specific examples of change within individual companies occurred in the face of strong
systemic pressures that militate against more comprehensive change of this kind. For the sake of
clarity, if it is assumed that capitalism is for-profit and privately owned enterprise is financed by
By the early 20th century most of these characteristics had been reversed. Corporations had acquired
the status of persons in the 1886 Supreme Court decision to extend the 14th amendment (which
protects the rights of freed slaves) to also ensure that no state shall deprive a corporation of life,
liberty or property without due process of law. The liability of shareholders had been limited,
corporations had been given perpetual lifetimes, the number of owners could be unlimited, and the
amount of capital a corporation could control was unlimited. The legal obligation of the corporation
became that of maximising returns for its shareholders.
This change in character has had a major influence in shaping the power and behaviour of
corporations, in the US and beyond. The challenge created by this far larger, more enduring and more
powerful form of corporations is exacerbated by the features described in the following paragraphs.
One way of tackling this problem is through a common proposal 25 to integrate the environmental,
social and governance concerns into investor and capital market considerations, so that investors take
account of long-term risks and benefits. There are multiple initiatives underway, such as UNEP
working with major institutional investors. 26
In the UK, the government was going to introduce mandatory reporting on materiality in Operating
and Financial Reviews, but then reversed its stance, saying that this would be gold-plated regulation
hampering the economy. Instead it encourages companies to produce such information voluntarily as
part of best practice. 27
25
See e.g. www.conference-board.org/utilities/pressDetail.cfm?press_ID=2848
26
see www.interpraxis.com/UNresponsibleinvestment.htm
27
see www.manifest.co.uk/manifest_i/2005/0512December/051214ofr.htm
28
For industry-specific data on corporate financing of US elections, see
www.opensecrets.org/industries/mems.asp
The UN did attempt to generate trans-national standards through its 2003 framework of Norms on
Business and Human Rights, but these are no more legally-binding on business than the human rights
covenants already entered into by their host countries, and they operate primarily as advocacy rather
than regulatory tools.
In the absence of prices for these goods, it is up to government regulation to provide the parameters
for their interaction with the market. Regulation is likely to lag behind reality, be partly driven by
political concerns and may not be enforced. Civil society is, as ever, crucial for protecting un-priced
goods where regulation fails.
What constitutes an SME? There is no universal definition, and definitions vary, especially between
developing and industrialised countries. According to the World Bank, the following definitions
apply for the developing country context:
29
Trading Away Our Rights, Oxfam International 2004
One explanation is that the situation is the result of an increase in competition due to globalisation and
the reduction of trade barriers. 30 The theory is that, in a more competitive environment, those
enterprises that do not have to comply with labour law or pay taxes (that is, those in the informal
sector) will do significantly better, and hence there will be shift away from the formal sector. This
argument is controversial however: it is not clear that competition amongst small enterprises (which
are the majority in the informal sector) increases with the reduction of international trade barriers.
Evidence for such an effect is mixed. 31
Is growth of the informal sector good or bad for poverty reduction? From some perspectives it could
be positive: evidence of growing economic activity among new urban populations, urban areas can be
a location of innovation and entrepreneurship, a place for piloting and incubating future business
possibilities. From other perspectives, it is negative: opportunities to expand are limited by the
informality; less tax revenue is contributed to government; and legal norms on workers rights and
environmental protection will not be enforced.
The data do show clearly, however, that the biggest difference in private sector composition between
rich and poor countries is the shift out of informal sector activity into SMEs. In low-income countries,
the share of formal SMEs in employment is about 30 per cent; in high-income countries, that share
doubles to 60 per cent. 32 Likewise, as a share of GDP, informal activity decreases and formal SME
activity increases as countries become wealthier (see Table below).
30
See, for example, Growth, Employment, and Equity: The Impact of the Economic Reforms in Latin America and the
Caribbean, Stallings and Peres, 2000, http://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/3874.html
31
See, for example, The Response of the Informal Sector to Trade Liberalization, Koujianou and Pavcnik, 2002
32
UNDP 2004: 13
SMEs 16 39 51
So far, these data seem to back up the position of most development organisations that a thriving SME
sector is a large part of the answer to generating growth within developing countries. It is surprising
then, that the available evidence on the role of SMEs in economic growth does not make this case. One
prominent cross-country study 33 (76 countries, including over 40 developing or transition countries)
of SMEs in 2003 found:
High correlation between SMEs and per capita GDP growth, but no clarity on causation (do SMEs
cause growth, or does growth cause SMEs, or both?);
No evidence that SMEs reduce poverty or reduce income inequality; there is no evidence of a
significant link between SME activity and the depth or breadth of poverty in a country;
Qualified evidence that the overall business environment facing large and small firms (for
example, ease of entry and exit, sound property rights and contract enforcement) influences
economic growth.
This is only one study but it is based on the largest database of SME activity and is widely cited. Its
failure to produce results that confirm the pro-poor significance of promoting SMEs is surprising,
given that many people assume there would be clear and visible impacts on poverty from SME
development. Comparison of SME development in many countries is shown in Table 2 below.
33
Beck, Demigurc-Kunt and Levine, 2003
The 2004 UN Commission on the Private Sector and Development promoted SMEs 34 . The Commission
was chaired by Paul Martin and Ernest Zedillo, with a number of TNC leaders in the advisory group
including Hewlett Packard, Citigroup, Statoil and McKinsey. According to this commission:
The private sector can alleviate poverty by contributing to economic growth, job creation and poor
peoples incomes. It can also empower poor people by providing a broad range of products and
services at lower prices. Small and medium enterprises can be engines of job creation seedbeds for
innovation and entrepreneurship. But in many poor countries, SMEs are marginal in the domestic
ecosystem. Many operate outside the formal legal system, contributing to widespread informality and
low productivity. They lack access to financing and long-term capital, the base that companies are
built on.
According to this report, actions are therefore needed to upgrade informal sector activity into thriving
SMEs. Table 3 below summarises the suggested actions per actors.
34
UN Commission on the Private Sector and Development
Oxfam has not yet developed an overall position in response to this but we do warn of the dangers of
entrepreneurship over-enthusiasm.
The UN Commission Report begins, This report is about walking into the poorest village on market day and
seeing entrepreneurs at work. It fails to ask the question: if the village is brimming with entrepreneurs,
why is it still the poorest?
Proponents of private sector led development emphasise the dynamism of the micro SME sector,
equating people working for themselves with entrepreneurs. These people certainly are assuming the
risks of business as entrepreneurs do, but may have no desire to be in this position. Labelling them as
entrepreneurs hides a large number of people who are simply pursuing a survival strategy, rather
than strategically building up a viable business.
Source: www.moeasmea.gov.tw/Eng/about_smea/a02.asp
35
See Propositional Statement on The Role of Business in Poverty Reduction: OGBs view
The propensity for businesses to operate and behave in a way that maximises these contributions
however is vastly affected by different factors. For Oxfam to be successful in affecting the business
model implemented by companies, we need to engage not only with the company directly, but we
also need to be able to understand which actors influence company behaviour, how this influence is
effected, what Oxfams leverage is over these actors and how we use it. For example, one of Oxfams
prime concerns is that the growth generated through economic development is not being distributed
equitably: in many developing countries there is growth but the poor are not getting richer and, at
worst, are getting poorer. Oxfam needs to address what the private sector in itself can do, as key
creators of wealth, to ensure a more fair capture of value. We also need to address the role of
governments in regulating the private sector to ensure more equitable distribution of wealth - as part
of their duties towards their citizens.
Figure 2 identifies the array of actors that influence company behaviour and consequently the
companys interaction with poor people as entrepreneurs, producers, workers, consumers and
citizens.
If corporations are pathological, The current form of corporation (unlimited life, unlimited
how should they be tamed? capital, unlimited owners, pursuit of maximum profit) is
increasingly understood as pathological and anti-social. So
how should corporations be reformed? What should be the
limits on their structure and purpose?
How can shareholders take the What mechanisms could help shift fund managers attention
long view? away from quarterly profit reports and on to long-term
prospects?
How can laws without borders be MNCs have global operations but strategically gain from the
created? fragmentation of national laws. What would be the best
framework for holding them accountable on a global scale,
and checking monopolistic trends?
How do you make The socially responsible investment movement works within the current
immaterial risk material? system to increase attention paid to social and environmental concerns,
by presenting them as material risks to the company. But what happens
when these concerns cannot be credibly described as material risks,
when there is not a business case for action. The easy answer is create
a material risk but is that always possible and sustainable? Is regulation
part of the answer? Or is turning all issues into material risk too narrow
an approach?
What makes the first bird Within industries, companies get set on a juggernaut of a path, even
turn? though they all may know that that path leads to an unsustainable or
destructive future. Like a flock of birds, what can make that first bird
turn?
References
Aykut, D. and Dilip Ratha. (2004) Transnational Corporations: South-South FDI flows: How Big Are They?,
www.unctad.org/en/docs/iteiit20043a5_en.pdf, last accessed 20 February 2005.
Ayyagari, Meghana, Thorsten Beck and Asli Demirg-Kunt. (2003) Small and medium enterprises across
the globe: a new database, Washington DC: World Bank.
Bakan, Joel. (2005) The Corporation: the Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power. Free Press.
Beck, Thorsten, Asli Demirg-Kunt and Ross Levine. (2003) SMEs, growth and poverty: cross-country
evidence, http://www.worldbank.org/research/bios/tbeck/sme.pdf, last accessed 5 March 2005.
European Commission. (2005) Trade and investment: a global framework for foreign direct investment,
trade-info.cec.eu.int/doclib/docs/2005/june/tradoc_113538.pdf, last accessed July 2005.
Fondad. (2005) Africa in the World Economy - The National, Regional and International Challenges,
www.fondad.org/publications/africaworld/Fondad-AfricaWorld-Chapter16.pdf.
International Labour Office. (2002) Women And Men In The Informal Economy: A Statistical Picture of the
Employment Sector, Geneva: ILO,
www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/gems/download/women.pdf.
Koujianou, P. and Pavcnik, N. (2002) The Response of the Informal Sector to Trade Liberalisation, working
paper.
Marta Kozak, International Finance Corporation (IFC), Washington, D.C. Date of last update: May 17,
2005, http://rru.worldbank.org/PapersLinks/Open.aspx?id=6358, last accessed June 2005.
Oxfam International. (2004) Trading Away Our Rights: Women Workers in Global Supply Chains, Oxford:
Oxfam.
Roach, Stephen. (2006) Special report on retailing in India, The Economist, 15 April 2006.
Stallings, B. and Peres, W. (2000) Growth, Employment, and Equity: The Impact of the Economic Reforms in
Latin America and the Caribbean, http://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/3874.html, last accessed June
2005
UNDP. (2004) Unleashing Entrepreneurship: Making Business Work for the Poor, Commission on the
Private Sector and Development. New York: UNDP.
Waldkirch, Andreas. (2002) Foreign Direct Investment in a Developing Country: An Empirical Investigation,
www.williams.edu/Economics/eudc/papers/fdidev_neudc.pdf.
World Bank. (2005) Public Policy for the Private Sector, September, Washington DC: World Bank at
http://rru.worldbank.org/documents/publicpolicyjournal/273palmade_anayiotas.pdf, last accessed
June 2005.
World Bank. (2005) FDI Trends in Public Policy for the Private Sector, September, Washington DC:
World Bank http://rru.worldbank.org/documents/publicpolicyjournal/273palmade_anayiotas.pdf,
last accessed June 2005.
World Bank. (2005) Global Development Finance 2005, Washington DC: World Bank
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGDF2005/Resources/gdf05complete.pdf, last accessed July
2005.
This paper was written by Kate Raworth, Sumi Dhanarajan and Liam Wren-Lewis in
April 2006. It is one of a series written to inform the development of the Oxfam
International publication From Poverty to Power: How Active Citizens and Effective
States Can Change the World, Oxfam International 2008.
The paper may be used free of charge for the purposes of education and research,
provided that the source is acknowledged in full. The copyright holder requests that
all such use be registered with them for impact assessment purposes. For copying
in other circumstances, or for re-use in other publications, or for translation or
adaptation, permission must be secured. Email [email protected]
For further information on the issues raised in this paper, please email
[email protected]