President Trump\u2019s first 100 days have not been good for the planet. While the question of whether he will fulfil his campaign promise of rolling back the US\u2019s commitment on the Paris climate deal is still to be settled<\/a>, he has stuffed his cabinet with climate change sceptics<\/a>. Most notably, the appointment of Scott Pruitt to head up the US Environmental Protection Agency met with a storm of criticism<\/a>. This was hardly surprising given his ties with the energy industry, his denial of man-made climate change, and a long history of fighting the very agency he has been appointed to lead.<\/p>\n Trump and his cabinet have not been slow in rolling back environmental regulation introduced during the Obama presidency. As part of an effort to revive the coal industry, an executive order last month started unravelling Obama\u2019s clean power plan (CPP). As the New York Times reported<\/a>, the order effectively ceded the US\u2019s leadership in addressing climate change and turned \u201cdenials of climate change into national policy\u201d.<\/p>\n While such developments were hardly unexpected, what has been interesting has been the corporate response. Last November, nearly 400 US companies including Nike, Levis Strauss and Starbucks demanded that he leave in place low-emissions policies<\/a>. In the wake of the CPP announcements in March many companies again took a public stand against the policy reversal<\/a>. For example, Mars Inc. expressed disappointment at the policy change while tech companies including Apple, Amazon and Microsoft signed a joint statement<\/a> supporting the CPP.<\/p>\n It is rare to hear companies, and US companies in particular, arguing to keep regulation. They are also usually unwilling to take explicit political stands in the public eye, preferring to use lobbying and more covert forms of political influence to sway governments to act in their interests. But the corporate response to the climate rollback seems to be part of a broader change of heart among senior executives to take public positions against what they see as undesirable policy shifts.<\/p>\n This change was first noticeable following Trump\u2019s immigration ban back in January that saw wholesale restrictions on refugees and others from predominantly Muslim countries from entering the US.\u00a0As Business Insider reports<\/a>, \u201cBefore the day was over, Facebook's CEO had published a post denouncing the order. By the end of the weekend, Starbucks' CEO had outlined plans to hire 10,000 refugees. And, within a week, Uber's CEO had quit Trump's economic team as thousands deleted their accounts with the ride-hailing app.\u201d<\/p>\n The response by corporate America to the immigration ban was significant and widespread. Rather than the usual caution about taking a political stand on a hot button issue, companies as diverse as Coca Cola, Google, and Ford\u00a0came out against the policy<\/a>. The tech industry\u2019s response gained a lot of attention, not only because high profile companies and their leaders such as Sergey Brin at Google actively spoke out against the executive order, but also because regular tech industry employees staged walkouts and protests rarely seen before in the industry. For many in tech, the Atlantic reported<\/a>, this was the first time they had taken part in political activism in their lives.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n So what does all this mean? There are a number of ways of looking at this, but the big change for me is that US companies are starting to acknowledge a meaningful role for themselves as explicit political actors. In the past, few company executives would ever admit that their actions were in any way political. \u201cWe don\u2019t do politics\u201d was the mantra, despite the billions of dollars spent on lobbying and trying to buy influence in Washington. However, as companies have more openly started addressing issues traditionally thought of as government responsibilities \u2013 protecting human rights, providing public goods, enforcing social and environmental standards, and the like \u2013 the cloak has gradually slipped.<\/p>\n Scholars of corporate responsibility such as myself have been analysing these developments over the past couple of decades, labelling these new corporate behaviours variously as \u201ccorporate citizenship<\/a>\u201d, \u201cpolitical CSR<\/a>\u201d, or \u201cprivate governance<\/a>\u201d. So the response by corporate America to Trump\u2019s first 100 days is not so much a sudden change in their core corporate responsibility behaviours, more a new found willingness to start acknowledging what has been increasingly apparent all along: corporations do indeed play an explicitly political role.<\/p>\n Acknowledging something is the first step to dealing with it. And the role of business in politics is something that we certainly do need to address as a matter of urgency. Most business leaders may not be completely comfortable yet with admitting their political role, but many do want to start thinking more seriously about their impact on the world, as Mark Zuckerberg\u2019s recent 6,000 word manifesto<\/a> exemplifies. Further radical announcements from the Trump administration are likely to incite yet more corporate political activism. So while we may not be able to thank President Trump for his impact on the planet, he may yet be responsible for a breakthrough moment in companies\u2019 understandings of their changing role in society.<\/p>\n President Trump has introduced a flurry of legislation in his first 100 days. Companies and their CEOs are responding by taking stands on political issues in ways rarely seen before. Andrew Crane asks whether this could end up transforming...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":944,"featured_media":363,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[3,29,38,14],"tags":[42,43,41,39,40],"class_list":["post-95","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-business-and-society","category-environment","category-human-rights","category-policy","tag-climate-change","tag-corporate-citizenship","tag-corporate-responsibility","tag-trump","tag-usa"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/133\/2017\/04\/washington-protest-blog.jpg","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pd4Pj1-1x","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/95","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/944"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=95"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/95\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/363"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=95"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=95"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=95"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"company-reaction-immigration-ban\"](\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/business-and-society\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/133\/2017\/04\/company-reaction-immigration-ban-1024x825.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\nHeader image by Ted Eytan<\/a><\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"