2012 Fortune China CSR Ranking Report
1
2
3
Ranking Results .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Multinational Companies.................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Chinese Companies ............................................................................................................. 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 6
2.1
Fortune China CSR Ranking 2012 Research Board .............................................................. 6
2.2
The Purpose of the Fortune China CSR Ranking ................................................................. 6
Key Analysis and Findings .......................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Chinese companies: a narrow view of CSR ................................................................................. 7
3.2 Corporate philanthropy: just more of it does not lead to better CSR performance ................... 7
3.3 External influence: Chinese government, industry associations and investors help shape CSR
in China ............................................................................................................................................. 9
3.4 Transparency and credibility: reinforcing CSR communication does pay off ............................ 10
4
5
6
Ranking Methodology .............................................................................................................. 11
4.1
Ranking Model .................................................................................................................. 11
4.2
Company Samples Selection ............................................................................................. 12
4.3
Benchmarking: Against the Global CSR Standard - ISO26000 ........................................... 13
4.4
Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 13
4.5
Continuous Improvement ................................................................................................. 13
Industry Findings ..................................................................................................................... 15
5.1
Industry Overview ............................................................................................................. 15
5.1.1
Multinational companies ................................................................................................. 15
5.1.2
Chinese companies .......................................................................................................... 15
5.2
Industry details ................................................................................................................ 16
5.2.1
Airlines ............................................................................................................................. 16
5.2.2
Automobiles ..................................................................................................................... 17
5.2.3
Oil and Gas ....................................................................................................................... 18
5.2.4
Industrial Goods and Services .......................................................................................... 20
5.2.5
Construction & Materials ................................................................................................. 21
5.2.6
Utilities ............................................................................................................................. 22
5.2.7
Telecommunications ........................................................................................................ 22
5.2.8
Consumer Electronics....................................................................................................... 23
5.2.9
Technology ....................................................................................................................... 25
5.2.10
Retail ................................................................................................................................ 26
5.2.11
Personal & Household Goods .......................................................................................... 27
5.2.12
Basic Materials ................................................................................................................. 28
5.2.13
Health Care ...................................................................................................................... 30
5.2.14
Financials ......................................................................................................................... 31
About the Developers .............................................................................................................. 33
1
1
Ranking Results
1.1 Multinational Companies
Fortune
2011
2012
Rank
Rank
15
1
↑
73
Sony
Consumer Electronics
86.3
7
2
↑
22
Samsung Electronics
Consumer Electronics
81.3
4
3
↑
195
Intel
Technology
78.7
9
4
↑
25
Ford Motor
Automobiles
77.3
22
4
↑
365
3M
Industrial Goods & Services
77.3
24
6
↑
152
Dow Chemical
Basic Materials
76.5
N/A
7
N/A
79
BMW
Automobiles
74.6
5
8
↓
71
BASF
Basic Materials
74.5
8
9
↓
143
Nokia
Technology
74.4
3
10
↓
89
Toshiba
Consumer Electronics
74.1
28
11
↑
28
Hewlett-Packard
Technology
73.9
N/A
12
N/A
123
Johnson & Johnson
Health Care
73.5
13
13
—
136
Unilever
17
14
↑
1
10
15
↓
46
16
12
Progress
Global
Company
Industry
Score
500
Personal & Household
Goods
73.3
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Retail
72.9
253
Sharp
Consumer Electronics
72.7
↑
32
Carrefour
Retail
70.3
17
↓
178
Bayer
Basic Materials
70.1
6
18
↓
16
General Electric
Industrial Goods & Services
69.5
1
19
↓
124
Dell
Technology
68.9
2
20
↓
2
Royal Dutch Shell
Oil & Gas
68.3
45
21
↑
52
Technology
68.1
36
22
↑
47
Siemens
Industrial Goods & Services
67.3
44
22
↑
40
Hitachi
Industrial Goods & Services
67.3
N/A
24
N/A
90
Peugeot
Automobiles
66.9
14
25
↓
24
Toyota Motor
Automobiles
66.5
42
25
↑
8
Daimler
Automobiles
66.5
21
27
↓
429
Ricoh
Technology
66.4
11
28
↓
50
Panasonic
Consumer Electronics
66.3
16
28
↓
427
Motorola Solution
Technology
66.3
17
28
↓
42
Nestlé
N/A
31
N/A
61
Tesco
Retail
65.9
N/A
32
N/A
39
Citigroup
Financials
65.5
N/A
33
N/A
11
Total
Oil & Gas
65.3
19
34
↓
80
Procter & Gamble
International Business
Machines
Personal & Household
Goods
Personal & Household
Goods
66.3
64.9
1
Fortune
2011
2012
Rank
Rank
N/A
35
N/A
3
Exxon Mobil
Oil & Gas
63.5
26
36
↓
55
Hyundai Motor
Automobiles
62.8
N/A
37
N/A
64
Aviva
Financials
62.3
N/A
38
N/A
13
Volkswagen
Automobiles
61.9
N/A
38
N/A
120
Microsoft
Technology
61.9
30
40
↓
45
Honda Motor
Automobiles
61.7
N/A
41
N/A
65
Metro
Retail
61.5
N/A
42
N/A
119
Robert Bosch
Consumer Electronics
60.4
N/A
43
N/A
93
Deutsche Post
Industrial Goods & Services
60.3
24
44
↓
339
L.M. Ericsson
Technology
59.9
19
45
↓
4
BP
Oil & Gas
59.1
N/A
46
N/A
103
Pfizer
Health Care
57.7
N/A
47
N/A
14
Axa
Financials
57.1
N/A
48
N/A
46
HSBC Holdings
Financials
56.9
N/A
48
N/A
114
Boeing
Industrial Goods & Services
56.9
N/A
48
N/A
60
Industrial Goods & Services
55.9
N/A
51
N/A
27
Allianz
Financials
55.5
47
52
↓
48
Nissan Motor
Automobiles
54.9
N/A
53
N/A
20
General Motors
Automobiles
51.1
N/A
54
N/A
36
J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.
Financials
50.4
N/A
55
N/A
10
Chevron
Oil & Gas
50.3
41
56
↓
125
Mitsubishi
Basic Materials
43.7
N/A
57
N/A
111
Apple
Technology
36.5
N/A
58
N/A
82
SK Holdings
Oil & Gas
27.2
N/A
59
N/A
131
Seven & I Holdings
Retail
21.1
Progress
Global
Company
Industry
Score
500
Hon Hai Precision
Industry
2
1.2 Chinese Companies
Fortune
2011
2012
Rank
Rank
1
1
—
35
13
2
↑
5
3
4
Progress
Company
China
Industry
Score
500
China COSCO Holdings Company
Industrial Goods &
Limited
Services
47
ZTE Corporation
Technology
↑
16
Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd
Basic Material
62.6
4
—
1
Oil & Gas
61.4
14
4
↑
5
18
6
↑
17
29
7
↑
2
15
8
↑
32
2
9
↓
3
43
10
↑
8
7
11
↓
21
38
11
↑
40
3
13
↓
22
Lenovo Group Limited
Technology
53.6
21
14
↑
41
Suning Appliance Co., Ltd
Retail
50.6
11
15
↓
15
Basic Material
50.2
40
15
↑
42
Airlines
50.2
18
17
↑
62
Financials
49.6
25
17
↑
34
Airlines
49.6
9
19
↓
9
Financials
49.4
8
20
↓
45
Basic Material
48.2
39
21
↑
23
Financials
46.8
20
22
↓
7
Financials
46
30
22
↑
10
Automobile
46
China Petroleum & Chemical
Corporation
China Railway Construction
Construction &
Corporation Limited
Materials
Ping An Insurance(Group) Company
of China, Ltd
PetroChina Company Limited
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co.,
Ltd
Oil & Gas
58.8
Basic Material
China State Construction
Construction &
Engineering Corporation Limited
Materials
Wuhan Iron and Steel Company
Limited
Metallurgical Corporation
China
of
Ltd
China Eastern Airlines Corporation
Limited
China Citic Bank Corporation
Limited
Air China Limited
China Construction Bank
Corporation
China Coal Energy Company
Limited
China Pacific Insurance (Group) Co.,
Ltd
Industrial and Commercial Bank of
China Limited
SAIC Motor Corporation Limited
61.4
59
Telecommunication
Limited
65
Financials
China Mobile Limited
China Shenhua Energy Company
74.8
57
56.8
56.4
Basic Material
54
Basic Material
54
3
Fortune
2011
2012
Rank
Rank
45
22
↑
4
China Railway Group Limited
N/A
25
N/A
29
Huaneng Power International, Inc
12
26
↓
30
Bank of Communications Co., Ltd
24
26
↓
56
31
28
↑
44
21
29
↓
36
10
30
↓
12
17
31
↓
57
N/A
32
N/A
37
23
33
↓
13
15
34
↓
26
33
35
↓
43
GD Midea Holding Co., Ltd
N/A
36
N/A
11
Argriculture Bank of China Limited
Financials
N/A
37
N/A
27
Hebei Iron and Steel Co., Ltd
Basic Material
34
38
↓
19
49
39
↑
14
50
40
↑
50
N/A
41
N/A
28
N/A
42
N/A
39
N/A
42
N/A
49
41
44
↓
6
47
45
↑
38
N/A
46
N/A
6
47
N/A
25
Progress
Company
China
Industry
Score
500
Gree Electric Appliance, Inc of
Zhuhai
China Merchants Bank Co., Ltd.
China Southern Airlines Company
Limited
Bank of China Limited
Datang International Power
Generation Co., Ltd
Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical
Company Limited
Construction &
Materials
Utility
Consumer
Electronics
Financials
43
Airlines
Financials
42.2
42
Utility
41.8
Oil & Gas
41.6
Construction Limited
Materials
China United Network
43.4
43.4
Construction &
Limited
44
Financials
China Communications
Aluminum Corporation of China
46
Basic Material
Consumer
Electronics
40.8
39.8
38.6
37.8
36
Telecommunication
35.6
Telecommunication
32.2
Basic Material
29.6
Technology
29.4
China Resources Enterprise Limited
Retail
28.8
Xiamen C&D Inc
Retail
28.8
Financials
27.8
Jiangxi Copper Company Limited
Basic Material
27.4
48
Sinopharm Group Co. Ltd.
Health Care
27.2
↓
24
Minmetals Development Co., Ltd
Basic Material
48
N/A
20
49
↓
18
Communications Limited
China Telecom Corporation Limited
Maanshan Iron & Steel Company
Limited
Great Wall Technology Company
Limited
China Life Insurance Company
Limited
PICC Property and Casualty
Company Limited
China National Offshore Oil
27
Financials
24.8
Oil & Gas
21.6
4
2011
2012
Rank
Rank
Fortune
Progress
Company
China
Industry
Score
500
Corporation
27
50
↓
31
N/A
51
N/A
46
36
52
↓
25
N/A
53
N/A
33
Angang Steel Company Limited
Basic Material
Shanghai Construction Group Co.,
Construction &
Ltd
Materials
Dongfeng Motor Group Company
Limited
China Greatwall Computer
Shenzhen Co., Ltd
19.4
19
Automobile
17.2
Technology
7.6
5
2
Introduction
Fortune China CSR Ranking 2012 was co-developed by Fortune China and InnoCSR Co. Ltd., a
Shanghai-based consulting firm specialized in CSR strategy and assessment. To maintain consistency
and fairness, we are guided by a professional Research Board.
2.1 Fortune China CSR Ranking 2012 Research Board
Mr. Sam Yoon-Suk Lee, Founder and CEO of InnoCSR
Dr. Zucheng Zhou, Professor of Management and Business Ethics, Shanghai Jiaotong University
Dr. Bala Ramasamy, Professor of Economics, China Europe International Business School
Dr. Jay Hyuk Rhee, Professor of International Business and Strategy, Korea University Business School
Mr. Zhanhong Zhou, Assistant Managing Editor, Fortune China
2.2 The Purpose of the Fortune China CSR Ranking

Raise CSR awareness through active communication

Develop the business case for CSR in China - show how ‘doing good’ contributes to ‘doing well’

Provide a standard for companies in China to assess their CSR performance

Encourage healthy competition in social responsibility and towards CSV
Fortune China CSR Ranking 2012 is our second publication of this nature. Based on 2011’s ranking
results, the research board carefully considered feedback from various stakeholders. We then
collected more information and dived deeper into relevant policies, including local laws, industry
regulations, and other relevant CSR trends of the year. Incorporating that knowledge, we improved
some parts of the assessment model to capture a better snapshot of current CSR practices. Please go
to “Methodology” (page 6) to see detailed information about changes.
Compared with our 2011 ranking, companies in general have made great strides in improving their
CSR, as reflected in the average scores in both multinational (13% increase from 2011) and Chinese
populations (11% increase from 2011). Awareness of social responsibility is gradually being integrated
into the daily management and operations of various companies; promoted by the state government,
industry associations, and public opinion. We see as a confirmed trend that CSR becomes an
important component in business strategy, powering growth, while companies increasingly
communicate about their initiatives in this area in an effort to improve transparency with their
stakeholders and society at large. Thereby, they are “doing good” while “doing well”.
6
3
3
Key Analysis and Findings
Compared with our 2011 ranking, we are pleased to see that companies overall have improved their
CSR performance from last year, for both Chinese and multinational companies. Most newcomers
place in the bottom half of the ranking, with a few exceptions, such as multinationals BMW (#7) and
Johnson & Johnson (#12), and we hope to see them climb among their peers next year.
A detailed analysis of the CSR performance of our population through the lenses of our model showed
some trends among Chinese companies and revealed some interesting findings about the efficiency of
some CSR initiatives. With a few notable exceptions such as top scorers COSCO and ZTE, most Chinese
companies still view CSR as corporate philanthropy. However, external influence, such as the Chinese
government and investors, are pushing for a better understanding of CSR through standards. In
addition to following government policy and industry standards, reinforcing the credibility of company
disclosure through third-party auditing and external verification does pays off.
3.1 Chinese companies: a narrow view of CSR
Domestic companies give focus to CSR initiatives which directly impact their internal operations, such
as communication with shareholders, sustainable use of resources, diversity within their board
structure, etc. Conversely, areas outside of their direct operations are given less priority: supply chain,
climate change, and biodiversity currently lack CSR initiatives within Chinese corporations.
This narrow focus is especially true with regard to corporate philanthropy. While their multinational
counterparts have moved on from this traditional view of CSR, Chinese companies still see social
responsibility merely as corporate philanthropy. Our analysis shows that philanthropy by itself does
not lead to better CSR performance. In our ranking, philanthropy accounts for 13% of the total score.
However, for more than half of the companies, corporate philanthropy accounts for more than 13% of
their overall score, and for some even up to 30%. Yet these companies are usually ranked at the
bottom of our list.
3.2 Corporate philanthropy: just more of it does not lead to better CSR performance
Given the importance of philanthropic activities in China, many companies heavily invest in this area,
but for both Chinese and multinational companies, this investment difference does not lead to CSR
impact difference. As shown below, there is a big gap between the top and bottom ten donators, but
the gap is not reflected in their respective CSR performance.
Table 25: Philanthropy within Chinese companies
Average Score
Donation/Revenue
Top Ten Donators
45.08
0.17770%
Lowest Ten Donators
37.84
0.00077%
Table 26: Philanthropy within multinational companies
Average Score
Donation/Revenue
Top Ten Donators
69.61
0.34%
Lowest Ten Donators
67.2
0.02%
7
Similarly, greater diversity in the types of community projects does not necessarily lead to better CSR
performance. After evaluating the scope of the community projects initiated by Chinese companies in
our population, we observed that there is a jump in the average score of Chinese organizations
between those who conduct 3 or less types of community projects and those who conduct more than
3 types (see figure 1 below). However, for those conducting more than 3 types of community projects,
their average score range is quite narrow (between 44.2 and 52.2 points). The same fact is observed
for multinationals: those who conduct 4 types or less of community programs score on average much
lower than those who conduct more than 4 types (see figure 2). But for companies with more than 4
types of programs, the average score range is only 66.2-73.4. Therefore, in both groups, there seem to
be a tipping point beyond which greater diversity of community projects stops adding value to the CSR
performance. This finding confirms the fact that philanthropy alone is not sufficient to ensure good
CSR performance.
Fig. 1: CSR performance of Chinese companies by diversity level of community programs
Fig. 2: CSR performance of multinational companies by diversity level of community programs
8
As major organizations, companies of our ranking have a potential to play an important role in the
promotion of CSR in China. Therefore, they should broaden their CSR strategy and embrace the entire
spectrum of CSR initiatives. One way to do this is to effectively engage with stakeholders, both internal
and external, in order to integrate their views into the company’s strategy. In doing so, companies
align CSR with the overall business and social objectives, thus positively impacting society and their
own bottom line.
Fortunately, there are external forces to guide Chinese companies in their understanding of CSR.
3.3 External influence: Chinese government, industry associations and investors help shape CSR in
China
The Chinese government, as well as industry associations and investors are playing an active role in
pushing for a better integration of CSR among domestic companies by issuing – and imposing – their
own CSR standards.
For this year’s ranking, part of the analysis is based on company data released in 2010, which is the
last year of China’s 11th 5-Year Plan. Mapping our criteria to the 5-Year Plan resulted in 24 out of 40
(60%) sub-criteria matches. Utilizing a hundred-point system, the average score for Chinese companies
in those 24 sub-criteria is 57 (the highest individual score was 90). In contrast, the average score was
much lower for the remaining 16 sub-criteria, at 37 points. This result shows that to some extent, the
CSR objectives in 11th 5-Year Plan serves as a guideline for Chinese companies in determining their
strategy in this field.
Along the same trend, the Guidelines for Central Enterprises to Fulfill Social Responsibilities issued by
the SASAC (State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission) is quickly becoming one
of the standard guidelines in CSR reporting. Other industry standards such as China's Industrial
Enterprise and Industrial Association Social Responsibility Guideline and China Banking and Financial
institutions Enterprise Social Responsibility Guideline are followed by almost all companies in the
relevant industry. Chinese companies are facing increasing scrutiny from the government and industry
9
associations to standardize CSR activities. This top-down process is slowly boosting CSR performance
in China.
CSR is also making its way into the financial world, as shown with the growth of Socially Responsible
Investing (SRI), which has quadrupled in the past 15 years, whereas overall investments of assets only
increased by 260 percent over the same period. Major stock market indices now have dedicated
indices which measure the CSR performance of their constituents, such as the Dow Jones
Sustainability Index, FTSE4Good, Hang Seng Corporate Sustainability Benchmark Index and Shanghai
Stock Exchange Social Responsibility Index. In mainland China, the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the
Shenzhen Stock Exchange have released compulsory guidelines towards CSR disclosure, thus expecting
their constituents to follow strict requirements for their CSR reports. This measure proved effective: in
our ranking sample, 76% of the domestic companies publishing a CSR report follow the either the
Shanghai or Shenzhen Stock Exchange Guidelines. Chinese companies have also started to integrate
the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standard in their CSR disclosure.
For multinational companies, 37 out of 59 ranked companies are listed and 8 out of the top 10
companies (excluding Ford and Sony) on our ranking are included in the DJSI. On average, companies
listed on the DJSI score 12% higher than those who do not. This fact shows the positive impact of
investors’ CSR requirements on listed companies.
The Chinese government, industry associations and investors are important external forces pushing to
broaden the view of domestic companies regarding CSR. By issuing guidelines and imposing disclosure
standards, they send a clear message to major corporations about their expectations as stakeholders.
The next step in improving CSR disclosure is greater transparency and credibility through third-party
audit or verification.
3.4 Transparency and credibility: reinforcing CSR communication does pay off
As is the case with their multinational counterparts, CSR reports are fast becoming the main channel
for Chinese companies to communicate their sustainability initiatives to stakeholders. But many have
not yet grasped the value-adding of ensuring credibility and improving transparency of this
communication. In our ranking, only 14 out of 39 (36%) Chinese companies had third-party audits on
their report content and only 11 (28%) disclosed how they determined material issues. Companies
who have an independent CSR report audit or disclose their material issue mechanisms rank higher
than those who have not. This case is clearly proven by the multinational companies, as shown in
table 27.
Table 27: CSR report auditing among multinational companies
Number of Companies
Average Score
Companies with 3rd party audits of CSR report
38
67.31
Companies with no reports or 3rd party audits
21
57.65
In the light of this finding, we strongly recommend that companies, regardless of inclusion in the
ranking, adopt a third-party audit for their CSR report. It is one of the most effective ways to increase
transparency and add credibility to their communications. Audits also encourage companies to build
10
systematic CSR disclosure mechanisms. Moreover, third-party audit does not necessarily incur extra
costs, as stakeholder verification is also a viable alternative option.
Better material issues disclosure also drive better CSR performance, as shown in Fig. 3. The processes
in which companies identify and address issues shape the approach that they take in reporting
information deemed important to various stakeholders. Taking the time to properly establish material
issues disclosure will lead to a more transparent and focused CSR communication.
Fig. 3. Correlation between material issues disclosure level and CSR performance
4
Ranking Methodology
4.1 Ranking Model
Companies are ranked based upon their aggregated score across 3 domains, with 4 criteria under each
domain, as shown below. These total 12 criteria across 3 domains are further extended into 40
sub-criteria and 139 scoring indicators. These 139 scoring indicators represent a set of questions,
which are answered based upon the analysis of information disclosed publicly by each company. Each
indicator’s score is aggregated to calculate the final ranking score.
Table.1 Fortune CSR Ranking Domains and Criteria Overview
ENVIRONMENT (40%)
SOCIAL (40%)
GOVERNANCE (20%)
Environmental Management
Labor Practices
Board Structure & Diversity
Pollution Prevention
Customers
Fair Marketplace Practices
Resource Use
Community
CSR Management
Supply Chain & Human Rights
CSR Communication
Climate Change &
Biodiversity
Overall score and ranking is based upon aggregated scoring from all three domains. In 2012, the
Research Board reweighted the Environment, Social, and Governance domains at 40%, 40%, and 20%,
11
respectively. We believe that this evens the playing field for all companies and fits the reality of doing
business in China more accurately.
4.2 Company Samples Selection
Domestic and multinational company samples were strictly selected. Domestic companies were
selected from two groups. The first group included the top 50 in the Fortune 500 China Companies
2011 (based on net revenue). The second group included the top 25 companies from Fortune China
CSR Ranking 2011 that failed to make into 2012’s Fortune 500 China Companies list. In total, 53
domestic companies were selected.
A similar selection process was applied to multinational companies. We looked at companies from the
Fortune Global 500 2012 list (also based on net revenue), then selected the 50 companies with the
largest revenues and/or investments in mainland China, based on data provided by China’s Ministry of
Commerce. Finally, we also included companies which placed in the top 25 in the 2011 Ranking, but
originally were not selected based on the first two criteria. The final list comprised 59 multinationals.
Compared with 2011 selection criteria, we eliminated the requirement for domestic companies to
have a published CSR report for the year. And for multinationals, we eliminated the requirement to
have published 3 consecutive yearly reports. Through this, we hope to motivate companies who
recently started their CSR in China to increase CSR communication and transparency.
According to ICB (Industry Classification Benchmark), all ranked companies are classified into 14
industries sectors as shown below.
Table 2: Industry Distribution
Sector
Domestic
Multinational
Airlines
3
0
Automobiles
2
10
Basic Materials
12
4
Construction & Materials
5
0
Finance
11
6
Consumer Electronics
2
6
Health Care
1
2
Industrial Goods & Service
1
7
Oil & Gas
4
6
Personal & Household Goods
0
3
Retail
3
5
Technology
4
10
Telecommunication
3
0
Utilities
2
0
53
59
Total
12
4.3 Benchmarking: Against the Global CSR Standard - ISO26000
Based on our findings from 2011 CSR ranking, we maintained ISO26000 as our standard for CSR
disclosure. Although the structure looks different, our final model still covers all 7 core subjects and 33
out of 36 related issues listed in the ISO26000.
Fig.3: ISO26000 Core Subjects
Organizational Governance
Human Rights
Labor Practices
The Environment
Fair Operating Practices
Consumer Issues
Community Involvement and Development
We partially changed the scoring. The new model covers 3 domains: Environment, Social, and
Governance, which are further divided into 12 criteria, 40 sub-criteria, and 139 indicators. We
streamlined the model, making it more accurate and a better reflection of China’s current situation.
4.4 Limitations
The Fortune CSR ranking framework offers a standardized assessment of CSR performance and
disclosure of leading companies in China. Scoring relies upon corporate disclosures in the public
domain (annual reports, CSR reports, website disclosures). Although more and more companies are
publishing their CSR report, some of them still lack relevant experience, such as not-enough coverage,
or even not being accustomed to reporting publicly. In such cases the CSR ranking may not fully
capture the extent of a company’s CSR practices, as we only assess publicly disclosed information. On
the other hand, we also believe that it is the company’s responsibility to communicate more with their
stakeholders, and disclose more CSR activities and contributions to the public.
Additionally, due to our strict selection criteria, many companies do not fall into our sample selection
pools in the beginning, so certain industries are underrepresented with limited companies in our
ranking list. For example, in Industrial Goods and Services, COSCO was the only domestic company
that met our requirements.
Industries with only one company do not accurately represent the whole
sector.
Finally, due to the nature of our scoring framework, multinational and domestic companies cannot be
compared directly. Unfortunately, the different size and scope of operations in China makes it
necessary for us to score the two groups separately. This is something we continue to work on and
hope to further improve.
4.5 Continuous Improvement
We recognize that CSR expectations are constantly changing and we seek to improve our methodology
on a continual basis through regular review of our assessment criteria by the Research Board and
stakeholder feedback. Comparing with 2011 ranking, 2012 ranking is continuously improved on
following aspects:
-
Samples Selection Criteria Improvement:
o
Focus on the selection of the largest companies and removal of the “publication of CSR
13
report” requirement to encourage CSR disclosure in these major corporations and align
selection criteria between Chinese and multinational companies.
o
Inclusion in the ranking population of companies which placed in the top 25 Fortune CSR
Ranking 2011 but were not originally selected based on selection criteria.
-
Scoring Model Optimization:
o
Removal of industry-specific domain weight according to high/low environment impact
classification. For year 2011, the E, S and G domains weight was either 30/40/30 for low
environment impact industries or 40/30/30 for high environment impact industries. But
this year, the same 40/40/20 domain weight distribution was applied to all industries, in
order to reflect the evolving CSR trend in China.
o
Consolidation of some scoring indicators and subcriteria (from 45 in 2011 to 40 in 2012)
in order to optimize the evaluation process, while reaffirming the alignment of the
model with the IS0 26000.
With the explosion of CSR and sustainability ratings across the globe, there has been growing focus on
the way rating companies are carrying out their assessments. In order to address this concern, the
methodology developers are open to discuss more details about our research methodology. We hope
to ensure continued accuracy and quality through constructive dialogue, stakeholder feedback, and
regular internal review.
14
5
Industry Findings
5.1 Industry Overview
5.1.1 Multinational companies
Table 3. Multinational Companies Score breakdown by industry
Industry
Numbers of
Companies
Average
Average
Average
Average
Weighted
Environment
Social Score
Governance
Score (100%)
Score (40%)
(40%)
Score (20%)
Consumer Electronics
6
73.5
20.0
45.6
7.7
Personal & Household Goods
3
68.1
19.2
40.2
8.7
Basic Materials
4
66.2
19.1
38.0
9.0
Technology
10
65.5
17.3
39.3
8.8
Industrial Goods & Services
7
64.9
16.8
39.4
8.6
Automobiles
10
65.5
18.6
38.7
8.1
Retail
5
58.3
14.7
36.8
6.7
Financials
6
57.9
15.7
33.5
8.6
Oil & Gas
6
55.6
14.0
33.5
8.1
Total average
63.9
17.3
38.3
8.3
* Industries with less than 2 companies are not included.
Among the multinationals, Consumer Electronics ranks first among all the industry sectors, with 3
companies in the top 10 of the CSR ranking. Thanks to outstanding performance in Environment and
Social domains, it is the only industry with an average score above 70. However, the industry performs
weakly in Governance, ranking second-to-last above Retail.
Personal & Household Goods ranks second, overall as well as in the Environment and Social domains.
Companies in these two industries are consumer goods manufacturers which have come under
scrutiny from the public because of the nature of the goods (e.g. food for Personal & Household
Goods) or the hazardous substances used in their production (e.g. lead and mercury for Consumer
Electronics). High performance in Consumer Electronics proves the effectiveness of a strong industry
standard, such as the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), whose Code of Conduct subjects
its members to stringent CSR standards.
At the other end of the spectrum is the Oil & Gas industry sector, which scores last in Environment
and Social domains. This sector should greatly improve its performance in Environment, considering
the nature of its activities, and the recent events which tarnished the industry's reputation.
5.1.2 Chinese companies
Table 4. Chinese companies Score breakdown by industry
Industry
Numbers of
Companies
Average
Average
Average
Average
Weighted
Environment
Social Score
Governance
Score (100%)
Score (40%)
(40%)
Score (20%)
15
Airlines
3
47.3
9.1
31.6
6.7
Oil & Gas
4
45.9
12.1
27.8
6.0
Construction & Materials
5
44.7
10.6
28.5
5.7
Financials
11
42.7
7.0
28.2
7.4
Basic Material
12
42.1
12.1
24.6
5.4
Telecommunication
3
41.5
6.8
28.4
6.3
Technology
4
38.9
11.9
22.5
4.6
Retail
3
36.1
6.1
24.5
5.4
Total average
42.40
9.46
27.01
5.93
* Industries with less than 2 companies are not analyzed
On the Chinese companies' side, Airlines achieved the highest average score, thanks to strong
performances in social and governance domains. The industry is under heavy regulation from the
Chinese government, and all its companies are listed in Stock Exchanges, which impose stringent
disclosure requirements. As such, companies in this sector have recognized the importance of CSR and
effectively communicate about it.
Under scrutiny from the government and the public, Oil & Gas and Basic Materials obtain the highest
score in Environment. They have been aware of their status as high polluting industries, and are
making efforts to reduce their impact to the environment.
Due to poor performance across all three domains, Retail obtains the lowest average score among all
industry sectors. To catch up their multinational counterparts, domestic retail companies should
integrate CSR into their overall strategies, and recognize the CSR importance crossing the whole value
chain, such as supplier influence and customer relationship.
5.2 Industry details
5.2.1 Airlines
Three Chinese Airline Companies are on the ranking.
Table 5: Airline Industry Ranking
Ranking
Company
Score
1
China Eastern Airlines Corporation Limited
50.2
2
Air China Limited
49.6
3
China Southern Airlines Company Limited
42.2
Industry Average
47.3
Industry Leader: China Eastern Airlines
For this industry, China Eastern Airlines disclosed its social responsibility performance the most.
Compared with other companies, China Eastern Airlines gets particularly high marks in the social area.
This is due to their commitment to well-planned community projects and volunteer activities. China
Eastern Airlines actively donates to earthquake relief projects and has launched their own large-scale
volunteer project called “Love in Eastern Airline.” In all, China Eastern Airlines has organized over 1155
projects involving 47,412 employees.
16
Industry Focus:

Energy-efficient airplanes, carbon emissions reduction through optimized air routes, shortening
flight distance, etc.

Actively mitigating and adapting to climate change, pursues carbon neutrality and emission
trading.

Further improve in-flight service and passenger cabins.
Industry Best Practices:

Air China stresses safety. In 2010, they organized an anti-terrorism and anti-skyjacking exercise to
minimize the growing threat of terrorism.

China Eastern Airlines cares about employee mental health. They offer employees psychological
help. For example, individual sessions through email, helping employees to relax and relieve
stress.

Air China promotes the usage of biofuels. Partnering with Petro China, Boeing, and Honeywell
UOP companies, Air China plans to conduct China’s first biofuel flight in 2011.

In 2010, China Southern Airlines invested around 240 million RMB, directly and indirectly, to
improve their environmental impact. Investment covered the purchase of new planes, engine
retrofits, and energy-saving technology in ground equipment.
5.2.2 Automobiles
There are 10 multinational and 2 local companies on our ranking. Geographically, the MNCs cover
Europe, North America, and East Asia.
Table 6: Automobile Industry Ranking - MNC
Company
Country
Score
1
Ford
USA
77.3
2
BMW
Germany
74.6
3
Peugeot
France
66.9
4
Daimler
Germany
66.5
4
Toyota
Japan
66.5
6
Hyundai
South Korea
62.8
7
Volkswagen
Germany
61.9
8
Honda
Japan
61.7
9
Nissan
Japan
55.5
10
General Motor
USA
51.1
Ranking
Industry Average
64.48
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Ford
In line with 2011 results, Ford is once again a industry leader with a score of 77.3. In this year’s
478-page CSR report, Ford puts emphasis on climate change, labor rights, and supply chain
engagement. In their product development stage, they utilize the Design for Environment tool and
consider every impact.
17
Table 7: Automobile Industry Ranking - CHN
Ranking
Company
Score
1
SAIC Motor Corporation Limited
46
2
Dongfeng Motor Group Company Limited
17.2
Industry Average
31.6
Chinese Company Industry Leader: SAIC Motor Corporation Limited
Similarly, SAIC Motors is doing relatively better in the social area. During the Shanghai World EXPO,
SAIC’s new-energy motors transported more than 75% of total visitors; saving around 2,811 tons of
fuel, 8,854 tons of carbon, and reducing 385 tons of other harmful substances. In social investments,
SAIC Motors donated about 15 million RMB. In addition, they invested nearly 38.3 million RMB in 23
energy-saving innovation projects, reducing coal usage by 7,162 tons.
Industry Focus:

Continuous improvement of product quality and increase investment in alternative-fuel vehicles
(especially electric vehicles)

Development of energy-efficient and low-emission vehicles through Life Cycle Analysis and
Design for Environment

Most manufacturing plants are LEED certified (green building standard).
Industry Best Practices:

SAIC Motors is improving their fuel efficiency to meet consumer requirements. Besides the
independent development of their “New Small Engine,” SAIC partnered with General Motors to
develop a series of engines with low exhaust emissions. These innovations will reduce fuel
consumption and carbon emissions by 20%.

At Shanghai GM’s Dongyue plant, GM organized a “Green Driving” activity. In it, GM chose the
“top ten green drivers,” and encouraged employees to practice green driving habits.

The “Nissan LEAF” is the first 100% electric car on the market that is both affordable and
mass-produced.

Hyundai uses Design for Recycling for their vehicles.

Ford is the first automobile company to require all their suppliers to fully comply with and pursue
ISO14001 standards.

Through “Honda Green Action”, Honda actively motivates their employees to follow a number of
environmental initiatives.
Honda is then able to collect and share results via the internet, TV,
and other media.
5.2.3 Oil and Gas
In this industry, we had 10 companies in our ranking this year: 6 multinationals and 4 domestic
companies.
Table 7: Oil & Gas Industry Ranking - MNC
Ranking
Company
Country
Scores
1
Royal Dutch Shell
Netherlands
68.3
2
Total
France
65.3
18
3
Exxon Mobil
USA
63.5
4
BP
UK
59.1
5
Chevron
USA
50.3
6
SK Holdings
South Korea
27.2
Industry Average
55.62
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Royal Dutch Shell
This is Shell’s second time leading the industry. Their strong CSR systems have led to a comprehensive
disclosure of their activities. Furthermore, Shell excels in utilizing multiple channels to communicate
and actively employs third-party auditing. A highly efficient environment management system covers
all of Shell’s operations. Regular internal and external audits ensure that standards are being met.
For community projects, Shell stresses sustainability and consistency. Their projects “Shell Beautify the
Environment Action” and “Energy Sustainable Development Education for Youth” have been well
received by the public.
Table 8: Oil & Gas Industry Ranking - CHN
Ranking
Company
Scores
1
China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation (CPCC)
61.40
2
PetroChina Company Limited
58.80
3
Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical Company Limited
41.60
4
China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC)
21.60
Industry Average
45.85
Chinese Company Industry Leader: China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation
In China, CPCC held onto first place due to their strengths in environment, social. In the environment
area, CPCC disclosed their efforts on pollution and carbon-emission reductions in great detail, and
published relevant data to verify their commitments. In the social area, CPCC is the only company in
this industry to mention human rights and integrate relevant practices into their operations.
Furthermore, CPCC pays high attention to employee welfare and training; providing detailed solutions
to minimize hygiene and safety risks in the working place.
Industry Focus:

Heavy effort to combat climate change and actively pursue carbon capture technology

During the exploration phase, companies try to control pollution and emissions; afterwards they
focus on helping local ecosystem and environment recover.

Localize operations and develop local suppliers.
Industry Best Practices:

In order to eliminate the risk of unethical operations, Exxon Mobile considers all safety,
environmental, and human rights aspects via their Operations Integrity Management System.

BP optimizes ship logistics through their advanced Virtual Arrival system, real-time weather and
port information is used to enhance fuel efficiency.

To minimize typhoon casualties, CNOOC used helicopters (400 times) and ships (40 times) to
19
evacuate affected staff.

CPCC trained a hundred “Health, Safety and Environment” (HSE) consultants and launched their
“Management on Corporate Hazard and Operability” policy. In addition, they conducted several
internal and external audits to measure HSE compliance as well running operation evaluations to
measure performance.
5.2.4 Industrial Goods and Services
This industry covers industrial transport, electronics manufacturing, and other relevant logistical
services. There are 8 companies on the ranking.
Besides COSCO, the rest are all multinational
companies.
Table 8: Industrial Goods and Services Industry Ranking - MNC
Ranking
Company
Country
Score
1
3M
USA
77.3
2
General Electronic
USA
69.5
3
Hitachi
Japan
67.3
4
Siemens
Germany
67.3
5
Deutsche Post
Germany
60.3
6
Boeing
USA
56.9
7
Hon Hai Precision Industry
Taiwan
55.9
Industry Average
66.48
Multinational Company Industry Leader: 3M
3M has their own way of disclosing corporate social responsibilities. As a high-impact company in
terms of pollution, 3M puts considerable effort into environmental disclosure, and accordingly has the
highest environmental score in this industry. In addition, 3M also applies advanced environmental
impact assessment tools, such as life cycle analysis to control waste and reduce emissions.
Table 9: Industrial Goods and Services Industry Ranking - CHN
Ranking
1
Company
Score
China COSCO Holdings Company Limited
77.4
Chinese Company Industry Leader: COSCO
COSCO leads the whole Chinese group. No other domestic firm could match COSCO’s deep research on
ISO26000 and subsequent improvements to their CSR report. COSCO’s disclosure is very systematic,
comprehensive, and includes specific data; making their report highly consistent, readable, and
credible.
Industry Focus:

Stress management and energy efficiency

Carbon emissions management

Human rights policies; measures to avoid potential human rights risks

Community projects - focus on education (e.g., conduct environmental programs at schools and
offer “innovation scholarships”)
20
Industry Best Practices:

Boeing founded the “Aircraft Fleet Recycling Association” with 11 other companies. The program
has recycled about 7,000 civilian and military airplanes

COSCO independently developed a “carbon-emissions calculator.” They are the first Chinese
company to provide emissions calculation for customers and help them choose environmentally
friendly air routes.

As part of their green education activities, Siemens organized and sponsored 30 primary school
students, from migrant worker families, to visit the Shanghai World EXPO.
5.2.5 Construction & Materials
This year, all 5 companies in this industry are state-owned enterprises with revenues totaling more
than 100 billion RMB each. Compared with other industries in our ranking, Construction Materials is
highly profitable.
Table 9: Construction & Materials Industry Ranking
Ranking Company
Score
1
China Railway Construction Corporation Limied
2
China State Construction Engineering Corporation Limited 56.4
3
China Railway Group Limited
4
China Communications Construction Limited
5
Shanghai Construction Group Co.,Ltd
Industry Average
61.4
46
40.8
19
44.7
Industry Leader: China Railway Construction Corporation Limited
CRCC outperforms other companies in the environmental and social area. In the environment, CRSS
pays heavy attention to enhancing employee environmental awareness. Adding to a environmental
management system, they also employ personnel specifically to ensure high efficiency. CRSS is one of
the few companies that proactively evaluates human rights risks during operations, compared with
just issueing a statement on human rights.
Industry Focus:

As high-risk polluters, companies focus on waste and emission reduction. Specifically, they tend
to disclose more on recycling water and dust management.

Emphasis on protecting the ecosystem; particulary when projects finish, companies try to restore
the site to previous conditions

Put a premium on employee safety during construction; regular training and strict systems to
raise safety awareness
Industry Best Practices:

China Railway Group recognizes the contribution and importance of migrant workers. They
initiated the idea of “5 equals,” through which migrant workers enjoy the same welfare and
rights as formal employees.

In order to reach a zero emission goal, China Railway Group developed a automated recycling
21
system to efficiently reuse waste

In addition to physical health, CRCC also offers psychological counseling to decrease the risk of
mental illness
5.2.6 Utilities
Utilities are comprised of only 2 state-owned Chinese companies.
Table 10: Utilities Industry Ranking
Ranking
Company
Score
1
Huaneng Power International Inc.
44
2
Datang International Power Generation Co., Ltd.
41.8
Industry Average
42.9
Industry leader: Huaneng Power International Inc.
Compared with other industries, Utilities scored relatively lower. Huaneng leads with a slight
advantage over Datang. Their carbon capturing project in Shidongkou power plant was selected for
the “United Nations Environmentally-friendly Cities Demonstration Project.” Huaneng has also won
several honors in CSR; for example, their Haimen power plant won the “2010 Most Socially
Responsible Corporation in National Power Systems”
Industry Focus:

Huaneng and Datang both use carbon capture systems to effectively minimize GHG emissions
and continuously strive to be more environmentally friendly.

Both companies focus on occupational safety and health education: including conducting safety
training and disseminating safety handbooks.
Industry Best Practices:

Datang power has their own online environment protection platform. They closely monitor
various pollutants and emissions. Datang also maintains strict energy-efficiency standards in all
machine-sets and sub-plants. Furthermore, Datang has thoroughly improved managerial
expertise in environmental protection.

In 2010, Huaneng completed improving their equipment to include desulfurization,
denitrification and carbon removal.
5.2.7 Telecommunications
As with the utilities sector, the three companies in Telecommunications are also all Chinese
state-owned enterprises. The three constituents rank in the same order as
in year 2011.
Table 11: Telecommunication Industry Ranking
Ranking
Company
Score
1
China Mobile Limited
56.8
2
China United Network Communications Limited
35.6
3
China Telecom Corporation Limited
32.2
Industry Average
41.53
22
Industry Leader: China Mobile Limited
China Mobile outperforms its competitors in the green supply chain, employee psychological health
and social philanthropy areas. Till now, it has signed a “Green Action Plan” with 53 suppliers to
develop environmental products together, and motivate the greening of its whole supplier chain.
Besides, the company strengthened the recyclability of SIM cards by using easily recyclable materials
such as ABS in its fabrication. On the social side, China Mobile pays special attention to employees’
psychological health: in 2010, it carried out “Employee Assistance Program” to ease psychological
pressure and improve mental health.
In addition, China Mobile unfolded various initiatives to help employment and support
entrepreneurship, such as the “Youth Ethnic Employment and Entrepreneurship Base”, which assists
ethnic minorities living in remote provinces of China. Besides, company built a long-run relationship
with the “International Junior Achievement”, a non-profit organization which encourages volunteers
to go into classrooms and communicate with undergraduates about their jobs and professional
experiences.
Industry Focus:

Initiatives towards vulnerable groups: strengthen service for aged, disabled and ethnic minorities,
and improve the accessibility of telecommunication services;

Environmental protection: mitigate climate change, integrate energy-saving systems into
operational process, and implement Intelligent Electronic Control System in facilities to save
resources.
Industry Best Practices:

China Mobile founded an online communication platform for volunteers, to help them share
experience and information;

China Telecom launched obstacle-free stores for the disabled.
5.2.8 Consumer Electronics
There are 8 companies from this industry, of which 6 are multinationals and 2 are domestic firms.
Among the multinational companies, most of them are from East Asia, with the exception of Bosch
which is based in Germany.
Table 12: Consumer Electronics Industry Ranking - MNC
Ranking
Company
Country
Score
1
Sony
Japan
86.3
2
Samsung
South Korea
81.3
3
Toshiba
Japan
74.1
4
Sharp
Japan
72.7
5
Panasonic
Japan
66.3
6
Bosch
Germany
60.4
Industry Average
73.5
23
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Sony
Sony is the leader not only in this industry, but of the whole MNC population. Its performance in
environment, social and governance are outstanding. All its operational sites in China including
headquarters and invested companies have obtained ISO14001 environmental management system
certification. Besides, Sony actively mitigates climate change: the company has set a target of “zero
load on environment” by 2050 and has partnered with WWF on environmental issues since 2006. In
addition, Sony promotes “Green Partner Environmental Certification” in China, regularly conducting
both internal and external audits for its suppliers based on Green Partner’s standards. As a result, in
2010, the company reported zero environmental accidents. Moreover, Sony launched supplier
meetings to encourage the sharing and training about environmental initiatives among suppliers. It
also introduced a CSR promotion officer within the company, participates in many social responsibility
organizations like “Corporate Citizen Committee” and “ECFIC CSR Team”. It carries out CSR forum
every year, increasing social responsibility awareness among employees by inviting experts to give
presentations.
Table 13: Consumer Electronics Industry Ranking - CHN
Ranking
Company
Score
1
Gree Electric Appliance, Inc., of Zhuhai
43.4
2
GD Midea Holding Co., Ltd
38.6
Industry Average
41.0
Chinese Company Industry Leader: Gree Electric Appliance, Inc of Zhuhai
Gree is again the industry leader this year. As the representative of Chinese consumer electronics,
Gree is the world’s largest professional air-conditioning company combining R&D, manufacturing,
marketing as well as after sale service. Gree places special importance on technological innovation: its
10 innovations were elected state science and technology projects, making Gree one of companies
that own most state projects in air-conditioning industry. Gree also focuses on increasing the energy
efficiency of its products: in 2010, the company managed to reduce product energy consumption by
10.26% compared with 2009. Gree’s philanthropy initiative includes a donation of 10 million RMB to
support the reconstruction of Yushu.
Industry Focus:

Build resource-efficient factories, focus on the management of chemical substances;

Apply life cycle analysis, reduce carbon emissions;

Develop more environmentally-friendly products, reduce impact on environment through
technological innovation;

Training employees and suppliers on CSR.
Industry Best Practices:

Biodiversity conservation: Sony’ Green Star program, assesses the environmental performance of
Sony Group manufacturing and nonmanufacturing sites worldwide. The company also organized
a set of activities in Japan and China to raise employees’ awareness about natural conservation.

Samsung, Toshiba and Panasonic all try to minimize the environmental impact of chemical
substances, through substance evaluation and substitution.
24

Samsung, Sharp and Panasonic are researching and developing energy-efficient LCD products.
Toshiba set an “eco target” for environmental performance in product design and development.
Samsung carries out research on solar-powered cell phones and corn-based phone shells.

Companies actively mitigate climate change and reduce CO2 emission. Panasonic built an
internal database and key word searching tool to support employee learning, which contains
more than 1000 cases about how to reduce carbon emissions. Samsung was named “top
company in CDP Leader Index” among the world’s IT companies by the Carbon Disclosure
Project”.
5.2.9 Technology
There are 10 multinational and 4 local companies in this industry, which represents 12.5% of the total
population in our ranking. Except for Apple, which chooses not to publish a CSR report, other
companies all tend to perform well.
Table 14: Technology Industry Ranking – MNC
Ranking
Company
Country
Score
1
Intel
USA
78.7
2
Nokia
Finland
74.4
3
HP
USA
73.9
4
DELL
USA
68.9
5
IBM
USA
68.1
6
Ricoh
Japan
66.4
7
Motorola
USA
66.3
8
Microsoft
USA
61.9
9
Ericsson
Sweden
59.9
10
Apple
USA
36.5
Industry Average
68.17
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Intel
Intel gets high scores on the employee and supply chain areas. The company values employee
wellbeing by offering physical and psychological health programs, and specific health plans (including
plans for pregnant personnel). Intel regularly conducts workshops to teach and advise employees how
to relieve and overcome depression and balance work-life. Additionally, Intel pays high attention to
green purchasing. It requires all its purchasing team to take sustainability criteria into consideration
when making buying decisions.
Table 15: Technology Industry Ranking – CHN
Ranking
Company
Score
1
ZTE Corporation
65
2
Lenovo Group Limited
53.6
3
Great Wall Technology Company Limited
29.4
4
China GreatWall Computer Shenzhen Co., Ltd
7.6
Industry Average
38.9
25
Chinese Company Industry Leader: ZTE Corporation
ZTE gives special importance to employee well-being. The company has set up an international
Employee Assistance Program which supports employees in various areas such as mental health. Intel
also offers extended maternity leave for female staff, as well as special dining hall and room for
mothers and new-born babies. To support work-life balance, the company founded many internal
associations such as photography club, dancing club and climbing club, and holds regular “family day”
to help employees balance work and life.
Industry Focus:

Green supply chain: 11 out of 14 companies are members of the Electronic Industry Citizenship
Coalition, integrating CSR into their supplier code of conduct;

Climate change mitigation: integrate it into company’s overall decision making;

Promotion of recycling and reuse of resources, initiation of take-back projects;

Support of youth development in poor areas and social contributions towards education.
Industry Best Practices:

Intel cooperates with China Electronic Energy Saving Committee and Climate Saver Computing
Initiatives, to promote energy saving in the IT sector as well as sharing technology and
information.

Apple is the first company in the technology industry which reports its entire carbon footprint,
including the impact of its products on the environment through consumer use.

Recyclability: Nokia’s mobile phones are 100% recyclable.
A few companies offer packaging
which are 100% recyclable, such as Dell’s sustainable bamboo packaging and Motorola’s 100%
paper-based standard packaging for their mobile phones.

Intel’s Sustainability in Action Grant Program enables employees to apply for funding for
innovative environmental projects.
5.2.10
Retail
Retail industry comprises 5 multinational companies and 3 Chinese companies. Within the
multinational companies, Seven & i Holdings (Japan) bottomed the industry ranking because of its lack
of CSR report for the year 2010. On the domestic side, Suning shows a safe lead among its peers.
Table 16: Retail Industry Ranking – MNC
Ranking
1
Name
Wal-Mart Stores,
Country Overall
USA 72.9
Inc.
2
Carrefour
3
Tesco
4
Metro
5
Seven & i Holdings
Industry Average
France 70.3
UK 65.9
Germany 61.5
Japan 21.1
58.3
26
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Walmart
The world’s largest retailer also tops the retail industry in CSR performance. Walmart actively engages
with stakeholders, cooperating with government, academic institutions, NGOs, suppliers and food
producers and making joint efforts
to provide healthier and more environmentally-friendly green
products. On a global scale, Walmart conducted more than 100,000 supplier CSR audits to ensure
compliance and raise awareness among its supply chain. Internally, Walmart launched “My
Sustainability Plan” where employees can share their environmentally-friendly ideas and initiatives, in
order to foster a CSR-oriented culture.
Table 17: Retail Industry Ranking – CHN
Industry
Company
Overall
1
Suning Appliance Co., Ltd
50.6
2
China Resources Enterprise Limited
28.8
2
Xiamen C&D Inc
28.8
Industry Average
36.1
Rank
Chinese Company Industry Leader: Suning Appliance Co., Ltd
Suning’s CSR initiatives focus on the joint training with business partners to enhance business skills of
employees. The company established “Samsung Suning Marketing College” with Samsung,
co-organizes the “SHMS Dynamic 100” training program with Haier and cooperates with LG on the
joint management and accounting training programs.
Suning also established its own E-Learning
system for employee career development and advancement. In 2010, 9 national training centers, and
4 regional training centers have been established. .Suning increased the efficiency of its logistics
system with the use of warehouse and transportation management systems, thus reducing its impact
on the environment.
Industry Focus:

Providing safe, healthy and green products to its customers through proper management of
operations and supply chain.

Paying attention to employee health, skill development and career advancement.
Industry Best Practices

Green products: all the fresh food products sold at Seven-Eleven (Seven & i Holdings) have been
free of preservatives and artificial coloring since 2001.

Carbon footprint: in 2010, Metro Group became one of the first companies capable of calculating
the CO2 emissions of its truck logistics in the German-speaking region.

Supplier employee safety: Carrefour decided to stop using sandblasting in the production of
textile of sold under its brands.
5.2.11
Personal & Household Goods
The Household and Personal Goods industry includes only 3 companies, all multinationals.
Table 18: Personal & Household Goods Industry Ranking
27
Ranking
Name
Country
1
Unilever
UK
73.3
2
Nestle
Switzerland
66.3
3
Procter & Gamble
USA
64.9
Industry Average
Overall
68.17
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Unilever
Unilever topped the multinational industry ranking for the second year in a row with leading
performance in environment and natural resources protection, consumer relationship, and
community involvement. In 2010, the company announced a three-fold “Sustainable Living Plan”, to
promote health, hygiene and nutrition, reduce their products’ environmental impact, and source from
sustainable agriculture. At store level, Unilever participated in “Earth Month” and reached out to
consumers to advocate behavior towards saving water. The company invested three times on an
onsite wastewater treatment plant, amounting to RMB 14.5 million, and increasing the capacity of
water processing from 350 tons to 1,300 tons per day.
Industry Focus:

All the companies put emphasis on product traceability and sustainable sourcing, such as
Unilever’s Rainforest Alliance-certified Lipton tea.

All the companies have research institutes dedicated to developing safe products.

Companies implements a wide variety of training programs, ranging from development of
professional skills for employees and suppliers, to employee wellbeing with P&G’s free yoga
lessons.
Industry Best Practices:

P&G and Unilever both developed innovative and low-cost technology to make clean drinking
water more accessible: P&G’s PUR Purifier of Water technology and Unilever’s Pureit. PUR is part
of the P&G Children’s Safe Drinking Water program which provides clean water to people in
some of the most impoverished places in the world.

Nestle has an online Nutrition compass, which helps consumers to determine which products are
the most healthy for their diet.

Unilever has electric bus for daily commute, encouraging employees of low-carbon life style.
5.2.12
Basic Materials
Comprising 16 constituents in the metal, mining and chemical sectors, Basic Materials is the industry
with the second largest presence amongst ranked companies. The industry comprises 4 multinational
companies and 12 Chinese companies. Dow tops the industry this year, up from 3rd place in 2009.
Mitsubishi lagged in the ranking because of the lack of CSR report for the year 2010. On the domestic
side, Baosteel remains the leader.
Table 19: Basic Materials Industry Ranking – MNC
Ranking
Name
Country
Overall
28
1
Dow
USA
76.5
2
Basf
German
74.5
3
Bayer
German
70.1
4
Mitsubishi
Japan
43.7
Industry Average
66.2
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Dow
Dow Chemical achieved a leading position in the Basic Materials industry through great efforts in
employee relationships, community involvement and consumer relations. Internally, the company put
forward labor and human rights-related policies to ensure equal pay for equal work regardless of
discrimination. Besides, Dow continued its “Drive to Zero” initiative, where each employee makes a
personal commitment to zero incidents, zero injuries and zero excuses. Dow provided energy-efficient
heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) solutions for the 2010 Shanghai World Expo.
Moreover, Dow has cooperated with “Junior Achievement”, a non-profit organization, since 2007 and
has sent employee volunteers to teach about career coaching and life experience in classrooms.
Table 20: Basic Materials Industry Ranking – CHN
Ranking
Company
Overall
1
Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd
62.6
2
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co.,Ltd
57
3
Wuhan Iron and Steel Company Limited
54
3
China Shenhua Energy Company Limited
54
5
Metallurgical Corporation of China Ltd
50.2
6
China Coal Energy Company Limited
48.2
7
Aluminum Corporation of China Limited
39.8
8
Hebei Iron and Steel Co.,Ltd
9
MaanshanIron&Steel Company Limited
29.6
10
Jiangxi Copper Company Limited
27.4
11
Minmetals Development Co.,Ltd
27
12
Angang Steel Company Limited
19.4
Industry Average
42.1
36
Chinese Company Industry Leader: Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd
Baosteel focuses on reducing the environmental impact of its supply chain. The company now gives
preference to suppliers with ISO 14001 certification, while helping eligible suppliers to obtain the
certification. Baosteel requires major carriers to have ISM/NSM management system. Internally, the
company has recycled more than 130,000 tons of wasted equipment as of 2010, saving 80 million
RMB.
Industry Focus:

Prevention of occupational disease and injuries through providing protection articles or increase
the use of machine and regular health checks.

Development of innovative technology and facilities to reduce the impact on the environment,
29
such as increase of material recycling and improvement of waste management within
operations.
Industry Best Practices:

BASF held “1+3” project in partnership with the China Business Council for Sustainable
Development (CBCSD): one CBCSD member teams up with 3 types of business partners
(customer, supplier and logistics service provider) and guides them towards best practices in
sustainability.

Baosteel held the “4th Baosteel Academy Annual Meeting”, inviting more than 500 specialists
from China and abroad to discuss the theme “Green Baosteel, Better World”.

Tanggang stepped up its employee education and career advancement initiatives: in 2010, the
company trained close to 30,000 employees in 725 training sessions, spending 21 million RMB
(up 17.6% from 2009).

China Shenhua donated 4.864 million RMB to various philanthropy causes, including the support
of leucosis children and of more than 700 children with congenital heart disease. Besides,
Shenhua established various education projects such as the “1+1 Hope Project Education”.

Bayer established the “Food Supply Chain Cooperation” project, which uses their expertise to
promote sustainable production and consumption of fruits and vegetables from farmers to
consumers.

Mitsubishi considers the impact of the local indigenous community before embarking on a
project or investment. The company also ensures the protection of the local culture by actively
engaging with community stakeholders.
5.2.13
Health Care
Health Care includes 3 of the 100 companies in our ranking. 2 are multinationals and 1 is a domestic
company.
Table 21: Health Care Industry Ranking – MNC
Ranking
Company
Country
Score
1
Johnson & Johnson
USA
73.50
2
Pfizer
USA
57.70
Industry Average
52.80
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Johnson & Johnson
Johnson & Johnson holds a safe lead and shows a strong commitment to promoting sustainable
consumption through its active role playing in environment protection initiatives and thorough
disclosure of corporate social responsibility. Johnson & Johnson pursues carbon neutrality in its
operations and actively joined the Carbon Disclore Project and other related climate change
organizations such as the US Climate Action Partnership. Johnson & Johnson provides special
healthcare training and handbooks for pregnant employees.
Table 22: Health Care Industry Ranking – CHN
Ranking
Company
Score
30
1
Sinopharm Group Co. Ltd.
27.20
Chinese Company Industry Leader: Sinopharm Group Co. Ltd
Sinopharm is the only local company listed in our CSR ranking. Sinopharm actively donated to Yushu
earthquake and Haiti earthquake and joined reconstruction in earthquake-hit areas. In addition, the
company internally organized employee volunteering participation in the 2010 Shanghai World Expo. .
Sinopharm works to increase its CSR performance by encouraging 5 of its subsidiaries to get SA8000
social responsibility management system certification.
Industry Focus:

Environmental protection: optimal resource use, such as energy and water; reduction of CO 2
emissions from operations. Poverty alleviation: designing products and services for low-income
groups, such as Pfizer’s affordable vaccines against pneumococcal disease.

Support of community health: training of health professionals in poor communities, such as
Johnson & Johnson’s support the Chinese Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP). Promotion
sustainable consumption; raising awareness among the public about animal testing and the use
of stem cells in the industry.
Industry Best Practices:

Sinopharm promoted the use of e-documents to avoid transfer of paper between departments,.
The company also introduced video conference meetings, which are now mainly used in more
than 90 % of its branches.

Pfizer implements the “every day greener initiative” program, aimed at promoting green office
policies among its employees. The program includes a set of rules which ranges from replacing
paper and plastic products with china, glassware and silverware, to replacing cans with soda
fountain dispensers.
5.2.14
Financials
Financials, comprised of banks, financial services and insurance sectors, is the largest industry in our
ranking, with 17 companies (6 multinationals and 11 Chinese companies). Relative to other industries,
companies in Financials implement limited environmental initiatives, resulting in a lower overall CSR
score. This is due to the nature of their business and their lower environmental impact relative to
other groups.
Table 23: Financial Industry Ranking – MNC
Ranking
Company
Country
1
CitiGroup
USA
65.5
2
Aviva
UK
62.3
3
AXA
France
57.1
4
HSBC Holdings
UK
56.9
5
Allianz
Germany
54.9
6
J.P. Morgan Chase & Co
USA
50.4
Industry Average
Score
57.85
31
Multinational Company Industry Leader: Citigroup
Citigroup participates in many socially beneficial projects: for example, Citi Fund cooperated with
Internal Junior Achievement to assist young entrepreneurs improve business skills through social
practices. The company tries to minimize its indirect environmental impact by actively adopting
Equator Principles when screening investments.
Table 24: Financial Industry Ranking – CHN
Ranking
Company
Score
1
Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd
59
2
China Citic Bank Corporation Limited
49.6
3
China Construction Bank Corporation
49.4
4
China Pacific Insurance (Group) Co., Ltd
46.8
5
Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited
6
Bank of Communications Co., Ltd
7
China Merchants Bank Co., Ltd.
43
8
Bank of China Limited
42
9
Agriculture Bank of China Limited
37.8
10
China Life Insurance Company Limited
27.8
11
PICC Property and Casualty Company Limited
24.8
Industry Average
42.69
46
43.4
Chinese Company Industry Leader: Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd
Ping An’s position as Chinese leader of the Financial industry is mainly due to its outstanding
performance on the social and governance areas. In 2010, Ping An has finished the setup of 100 Hope
primary schools around China. At the same time, the company actively supports higher education,
and has provided 10.69 billion RMB in scholarships and other awards to 3,080 students a.
As a
result, the company was named top three “Corporate Social Responsibility Award” by
Singapore-based Asia Insurance Review, was and selected “China CSR Outstanding Company” by
China Business News.
Industry Focus:

Green office initiatives, such aspromoting energy-saving light and paperless office;

Consumer education;

Community projects: contribute to education and employment skills development in poor areas.

Responsible investment: comply with the “Equator Principles” or United Nation’s responsible
providing financial knowledge, and helping customers to invest properly;
investment principles when making investment decisions;

Low-carbon finance: prioritizing support of environmentally projects;

Economic development of rural areas and Western China, support of small and medium
enterprises (specific to Chinese companies).
Industry Best Practices:

Both Citigroup and J.P Morgan adopted the “Equator Principles” to include sustainability criteria
in their investment screening.

J.P Morgan cooperates with China Foundation for Poverty on micro-loan projects;
32

Ping An invested 3 million RMB in the “Million Forest” campaign co-organized by the Climate
Group, China Green Foundation and UNEP. The company also provides CSR-specific training for
its employees.
Axa offers an annual self-assessment tool and a CR maturity indicator, enabling
local entities to measure their progress in a number of areas related to corporate responsibility
on various indicators.

Agricultural Bank of China’s ”Green loan project” gives priority to
environmentally-friendly
projects and energy-saving investments. The company maintains strict control on loans to
industries considered highly polluting or energy intensive. such as those with high pollution, high
energy-consumption and excess capacity.

Bank of China, China Merchant Bank and China Construction Bank all activaly participated in the
first “Banking industry Public Education Day”;

Allianz promotes the development of Chinese green agriculture projects via donations, free
training and free products and services.
6
About the Developers
InnoCSR is the premier responsible business solutions provider in Asia.
We facilitate knowledge
sharing and collaboration between business and society through independent Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) research and strategic cross-sector partnerships.
InnoCSR’s emphasis on research provides a strong foundation for our consulting and training offerings,
addressing the specific challenges clients face and tailoring actionable recommendations based on our
holistic knowledge of industry trends, government policies and firm positioning.
Since 2008, our team has provided advisory services to top international and domestic companies
operating throughout Asia-Pacific.
With a proven track record of achieving positive impact on
corporations’ bottom lines and also on society, InnoCSR has earned its solid reputation for delivering
win-win results by “Doing Good and Doing Well.”
33