Advocacy against genocide - mired in debate?
Roya Wolverson
Issue date: 4/4/07 Section: KSG News
- Page 1 of 3 next >
Sarah Catherine Phillips (MPP2) is a tried and true advocate against genocide at the Kennedy School. Lately, she's been taking the cause at Harvard to the next level.
Last month, under Phillips's lead, the Harvard Darfur Action Group's (HDAG) Divestment Committee wrote a letter to Interim President Derek Bok urging Harvard to adopt the Genocide Intervention Network's (GI-Net) targeted divestment model against companies believed to be complicit in genocide, especially in Sudan. The letter was supported by 50 Harvard-wide student groups as well as many Kennedy School lecturers, fellows and administrators, including Jacqueline Bhabha, L. David Brown, Marshall Ganz, Omer Ismail, David King, Michael Kremer, Samantha Power, Christopher Robichaud, Robert Rotberg, Sarah Sewall and Dean Joseph McCarthy.
So far, the University's anti-genocide strategy for Sudan has been to divest from offending companies on an ad-hoc basis. The targeted model seeks to improve upon this strategy with a uniform set of criteria to methodically screen and scrutinize companies. According to the model, companies that warrant scrutiny: (1) have a business relationship with the Sudan government, (2) impart minimal benefit to Sudan's underprivileged, and (3) demonstrate no substantial corporate governance policy regarding Darfur. GI-Net creates a list of these companies, monitors their activities daily and provides the list as a guide to investor companies free of charge.
The model also includes a shareholder engagement component, whereby divestment only occurs after investors have urged the "worst offending" companies to change their behavior. To protect investor returns (of common concern to investors considering divestment), the model allows exemption in certain cases where divestment can be proven to neglect investor responsibilities to shareholders.
Advocacy for the targeted divestment model comes at an apt moment for Harvard, which was recently reported in The Crimson to be falling short of its moral stance on Darfur. Harvard announced in April 2005 that it would sell its shares in two Chinese oil firms, PetroChina and Sinopec, accused of financing the genocide in Sudan. While the announcement served as a catalyst for a national divestment movement, The Crimson reported in January that the University still holds some $16 million in indirect investments in PetroChina and Sinopec through investment in funds managed by Barclays Bank. GI-Net says its targeted model would catch those indirect investments by screening mutual fund activity, rather than relying on a student newspaper to be the institution's moral and financial watchdog.
Last month, under Phillips's lead, the Harvard Darfur Action Group's (HDAG) Divestment Committee wrote a letter to Interim President Derek Bok urging Harvard to adopt the Genocide Intervention Network's (GI-Net) targeted divestment model against companies believed to be complicit in genocide, especially in Sudan. The letter was supported by 50 Harvard-wide student groups as well as many Kennedy School lecturers, fellows and administrators, including Jacqueline Bhabha, L. David Brown, Marshall Ganz, Omer Ismail, David King, Michael Kremer, Samantha Power, Christopher Robichaud, Robert Rotberg, Sarah Sewall and Dean Joseph McCarthy.
So far, the University's anti-genocide strategy for Sudan has been to divest from offending companies on an ad-hoc basis. The targeted model seeks to improve upon this strategy with a uniform set of criteria to methodically screen and scrutinize companies. According to the model, companies that warrant scrutiny: (1) have a business relationship with the Sudan government, (2) impart minimal benefit to Sudan's underprivileged, and (3) demonstrate no substantial corporate governance policy regarding Darfur. GI-Net creates a list of these companies, monitors their activities daily and provides the list as a guide to investor companies free of charge.
The model also includes a shareholder engagement component, whereby divestment only occurs after investors have urged the "worst offending" companies to change their behavior. To protect investor returns (of common concern to investors considering divestment), the model allows exemption in certain cases where divestment can be proven to neglect investor responsibilities to shareholders.
Advocacy for the targeted divestment model comes at an apt moment for Harvard, which was recently reported in The Crimson to be falling short of its moral stance on Darfur. Harvard announced in April 2005 that it would sell its shares in two Chinese oil firms, PetroChina and Sinopec, accused of financing the genocide in Sudan. While the announcement served as a catalyst for a national divestment movement, The Crimson reported in January that the University still holds some $16 million in indirect investments in PetroChina and Sinopec through investment in funds managed by Barclays Bank. GI-Net says its targeted model would catch those indirect investments by screening mutual fund activity, rather than relying on a student newspaper to be the institution's moral and financial watchdog.
Be the first to comment on this story