Competitiveness and Innovation Archives

Colombia Officially Joins OECD, Becomes 37th Member

Published on June 6, 2018

OECD countries have officially agreed, on May 25, to invite Colombia to become a member of the organization. An Accession Agreement was signed by Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and OECD Secretary General Angel Gurria on May 30 during the OECD Ministerial meetings in Paris. Colombia is the 37th country and the third member country from the LAC (Latin America and the Caribbean) region to join the OECD.

“Through the OECD accession process Colombia has made impressive strides in, for example, reforming its justice system and reducing informality in the labor market,” said Gurria. “The accession process has been instrumental in the design and implementation of new national policies, such as on water and chemicals management. Colombia took important steps to improve its governance of state-owned enterprises, including removal of ministers from the boards. To comply with the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Colombia significantly modified its corporate liability regime. The list of reforms goes on.” Gurria’s full remarks at the signing ceremony can be found here.

Colombia was invited to begin the accession process in 2013. Over the past five years, 23 OECD Committees conducted an in-depth review of Colombia’s legislation, politics and practices, to align them with OECD standards. The final two Committees where reforms were required were the Labor Committee and the Trade Committee. The Labor Committee concluded their process during their recent meeting in March. The Trade Committee concluded their April meeting with a draft formal opinion, which was finalized several weeks later, just ahead of the Ministerial. Rob Mulligan, USCIB senior vice President for policy and government affairs, was in Paris last week for the Ministerial.

“USCIB has been actively involved in providing input into Colombia’s accession process via Business at OECD (BIAC), the official business voice at the OECD,” said Mulligan. “The main affected sectors throughout that process were pharmaceuticals, distilled spirits, and trucking. Many issues were resolved before accession, and we look forward to continued progress and concrete actions being taken on outstanding issues.” View USCIB’s official statement here.

“Moving forward, USCIB will play an active role in providing U.S. business input to the OECD on any upcoming accession processes,” added Mulligan. The countries that have expressed interest are Argentina, Brazil, Peru, Romania, Croatia, and Bulgaria. At this time, no new process has commenced.

Education and Re-skilling in the Age of AI

Published on May 29, 2018

By Andreas Schleicher, Shea Gopaul and Peter Robinson

Faced with major economic and social disruption, business and policy leaders are joining together to devise strategies and models to adapt the skills of the existing and future workforce to the opportunities offered by AI, automation, robotics and digitalization. McKinsey reports that 42% in the United States, 24% in Europe, and 31% in the rest of the world admit they currently lack a “good understanding of how automation and/or digitization will affect […] future skill needs.”

To prepare for looming technological upheavals, we need to understand the current educational and training landscape, its limitations, examine the latest research on the future skills needed and highlight some of the most effective employment and human resources strategies and educational models that can better position all stakeholders for the imminent change. We argue that by working together, especially through public-private partnerships, business and policy leaders can develop effective work-readiness and skill matching solutions, lifelong learning and re-skilling approaches to prepare both employers and employees for the changing world of work.

Teaching People to Learn

For some, AI and globalization can be liberating and exciting; but for those who are insufficiently prepared, they can mean uncertainty in employment, and a life without prospects. Our economies are shifting towards regional hubs of production, linked together by global chains of information and goods, but concentrated where comparative advantage can be built and renewed. This makes the distribution of knowledge and wealth crucial, and that is intimately tied to the distribution of educational opportunities.

The dilemma for education is that the kinds of things that are easy to teach have now become easy to digitize and automate (e.g. memorization vs. critical thinking). The modern world does not reward us just for what we know – Google knows everything – but for what we can do with what we know. So, the focus must shift to enabling people to become lifelong learners, which encourages constant learning, unlearning and relearning when the contexts change, and integrates both the practical world of work, with the theoretical world of learning. The future is about pairing computers with the cognitive, social and emotional skills of human beings.

These days, AI algorithms sort us into groups of like-minded individuals. They create virtual bubbles that amplify our views and leave us insulated from divergent perspectives. Tomorrow’s educational institutions will need to help students to think for themselves and join others, with empathy, in work and citizenship, and build character qualities such as perseverance, empathy or perspective taking, mindfulness, ethics, courage and leadership.

But to transform schooling at scale, we need not just a radical, alternative vision of what’s possible, but also smart strategies and effective institutions. Our current educational institutions were invented in the industrial age, when the prevailing norms were standardization and compliance, and when it was both effective and efficient to educate students in batches and to train teachers once for their entire working lives. The curricula that spelled out what students should learn were designed at the top of the pyramid, then translated into instructional material, teacher education and learning environments, often through multiple layers of government, until they reached, and were implemented by, individual teachers in the classroom.

This structure, in a fast-moving world, reacts to current needs, far too slowly. Today, we need to embrace AI also in ways that elevate the role of educators from imparting received knowledge towards working as co-creators of knowledge, as coaches, as mentors and as evaluators. AI can support new ways of teaching that focus on learners as active participants (e.g. chat bot, gaming applications).

Public/Private Coming-Together Around Skills

With 40% of employers reporting that they lack the talent required, it is surprising that at the same time global youth unemployment as stated by the International Labor Organization (ILO) is at 66 million. There is clearly a mismatch and the private sector has a critical role to play in resolving this skills-education deficit. Employer-driven education (i.e. apprenticeships, traineeships, internships, learnerships) are key in equipping the workforce with the soft and technical skills that employers require.

In countries such as Switzerland and Germany with robust apprenticeship programs and strong employer engagement, the rate of youth unemployment is very low. So, why aren’t there more apprenticeships and employer driven education? In many countries, the policies, regulations, registration process for setting up work-based learning programs are cumbersome and time-consuming for employers. The return on investment (ROI) is often unknown, e.g. in the U.S. for every $1 spent there is a return of $1.47. Lastly, educational institutions are not always linking to employers on curriculum design to reflect the world of work’s latest needs.

We have learnt at the Global Apprenticeship Network (GAN), a public-private partnership (PPP), that the convening of key stakeholders at the local city and country level ensures that education and legislation is better attuned to the world of work. Although private and public stakeholders do not always speak the same language, bringing them together increases their mutual understanding of the needs and changes that will assist in getting skills for business and jobs for youth.

Employers are uniquely positioned to define the skills required in the world of AI, robotics and automation as they are developing these technologies. Sadly, their importance as not only job creators, but also curricula designers, are often overlooked and they are often left out of the conversation and decision-making process. Work-based learning and notably apprenticeships connect education to work and we are seeing more and more employers creating innovative apprenticeships – part-time apprenticeships, pre-apprenticeships and a vast range of online tools. e.g. e-apprenticeships. In the last five years since GAN’s inception, it has become increasingly apparent that these models must be leveraged to ensure that not only youth, but also middle-aged and senior population groups adapt their skills and competencies to the fast evolving economic and technological context. In short, with the need for re-skilling and lifelong learning on an unprecedented scale, innovative apprenticeships can help get skills for business and jobs for all.

Below are two business-led initiatives that further illustrate the power of public-private partnership in skilling and reskilling. With the uncertainties linked to fast-paced technological change, these models show us how all actors – public and private- can join forces to ensure that skill development is continuously connected to present and future socioeconomic needs.

The first is IBM’s P-TECH school, a public-private partnership educational model that addresses postsecondary degree completion and career readiness by smoothing the transitions between high-school, college, and the professional world in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). It recognizes that students need early and engaging experiences with the world of work, to make the academic work in high school and college meaningful and to fully prepare them with the workplace skills required by employers. The model pairs educational institutions with “employer partners” to act as mentors, develop curriculum, organize site visits, internships and other workplace learning opportunities.

The sustainability of the model depends on public authorities’ active involvement to develop appropriate frameworks, regulations, licensing, etc. Starting with one school in 2011 and engaging over 400 business partners, P-TECH expects to have 100 schools in 2018. IBM also ensures that its own workforce has continuous access to lifelong learning. Through the Think40 program IBM staff is asked to pursue at least 40 hours of personal and technical skills development through formal classes, self-paced learning, and online resources. The Think Academy platform allows IBM staff to access customized training which is constantly updated to IBM’s clients’ most current and pressing needs.

The second example is based on Randstad’s approach to “put humans first” in the age of digital transformation. Randstad supports clients to integrate versatility in their organizational culture, through a wide variety of re-skilling mechanisms, ranging from external & internal training, mentorship to job rotations and adult apprenticeships. Moreover, Randstad operating companies facilitate the integration and reintegration of vulnerable segments of society (e.g. youth, women, senior staff) with more than 100 social innovation programs mostly through public-private partnerships across the world. For example, in Spain, the Randstad Foundation works with more than 600 companies to ensure the reintegration of those at risk of exclusion from the labor market. In Italy and in the Netherlands, Randstad focuses on employees over 50 years of age, by organizing training in the latest technologies, advocacy, and networking opportunities (12 events to date) with employers.

This overview of initiatives, models and partnerships demonstrates that, through collaboration involving public and private entities, excellent strategies can be developed, not only to adapt to the upcoming technological change, but also to capitalize on the opportunities technology has to offer for the creation of better jobs and better lives.

Employers Are Optimistic in the Age of AI

We’re all being told that our jobs are doomed by robots and automation. But the OECD estimates that only nine percent of jobs across the 35 OECD nations are at high risk of being automated, although of course even nine percent can generate plenty of social difficulties. But there is an established track record throughout history of new technologies creating at least as many new jobs as they displace. Usually these new jobs demand higher skills and provide higher pay. The biggest threat is that our educational institutions won’t be able to keep pace with the new skills demands including the important skills that AI will not be able to replace.

For global employers, there is a steadily growing mismatch between what companies need in terms of skills and what the workforce is coming equipped to do. In an economy with a significant on-demand labor force, two main types of competencies will be needed: “technical” – or in other words, related to deep knowledge of a specific domain, whether welding or engineering, and “transversal,” which applies to all occupations. Those are described by the Center for Curriculum Redesign as creativity, critical thinking, communication and collaboration.

The Skills Employers Will Seek

So what skills will managers need as a result of likely structural changes, driven by AI and growth of the on-demand economy? A recent survey by Business at OECD (BIAC) surveyed 50 employers’ organizations worldwide. It showed that employers value not just the skills and character traits described above, but also character qualities as well, such as mindfulness, curiosity, courage, resilience, ethics, leadership and meta-learning (e.g. growth mindset and metacognition).

Furthermore, it is becoming increasingly clear that, in a constantly changing world, an individual’s versatility matters; so, the model developed by Jim Spohrer of IBM, of a “T-shaped” person, holds true: broad and deep individuals capable of adapting and going where the demand lies.

Employers’ organizations at the national and global levels are already developing innovative programs to help governments and educators anticipate the needs of the future workforce. Through robust action at the global level, including through the G-20 and the OECD, policy makers can also make sure that they are helping their populations succeed and thrive in a world of AI and other technological advances.

This overview highlights the strength of partnerships between the public and the private sector in preparing for the unpredictable. For such alliances to reach their full potential, on the one hand governments and policy makers must be open to the private sector’s input and on the other hand employers need to take a long term view of the ROI and accordingly commit resources in skilling and educating their current and future staff, notably through apprenticeship and work-readiness programs.

Andreas Schleicher heads the Directorate of Education and Skills at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Shea Gopaul is executive director and founder of the Global Apprenticeship Network (GAN). Peter Robinson is president and CEO of the United States Council for International Business (USCIB).

For more information, please contact:

OECD: news.contact@oecd.org
GAN: gueco@gan-global.org
USCIB: jhuneke@uscib.org

Colombia Statements Picked Up by Inside US Trade and Politico

Published on May 29, 2018

USCIB has been actively involved in providing input into Colombia’s accession process to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Most recently, USCIB’s views on Colombia’s progress to meet certain standards have been published in Politico and Inside U.S. Trade.

In Politico, USCIB stated that it welcomed the progress Colombia has made over the past several years in the context of the accession process to the OECD. “As the official voice representing US business in this process, we acknowledge the steps taken by Colombia to meet the high standards of the OECD in various sectors,” the statement reads. “We look forward to continued progress and concrete actions being taken on outstanding issues, including on pharmaceuticals and trucking, where the current status does not yet rise to the level of like-mindedness with other OECD countries on open trade and investment. As the OECD considers inviting additional countries to join, USCIB will continue to advocate on behalf of US business to ensure that all OECD countries continue to meet high standards.”

Read the full news story in Politico here.

Additionally, Inside U.S. Trade also highlighted this statement, along with those of NAM and PhRMA.

USCIB Senior Director for Investment, Trade and Financial Services Eva Hampl, who coordinates U.S. business input on OECD accession issues, noted, “USCIB has worked over the past several years to represent and address any issues U.S. industry faces in Colombia in the context of the OECD accession process. Colombia is an important market for U.S. business, and it is important to ensure that the high standards of the OECD are met. We look forward to continued progress, as Colombia officially joins the OECD this week.”

USCIB Senior Vice President for Policy and Government Affairs Rob Mulligan is currently in Paris attending the annual OECD Forum, where the Colombia accession process will be finalized. Colombia is expected to sign an Accession Agreement on May 30 during the upcoming meeting of the OECD Council at the ministerial level. Colombia will become the 37th member of the OECD upon signing.

USCIB Provides Input to OECD’s Work on Digital Economy

Published on May 29, 2018

USCIB’s Vice President for ICT Policy Barbara Wanner, along with several USCIB members, participated in the May 14-18 meetings of the OECD’s Committee on Digital Economy Policy (CDEP) and its Working Parties, which focused on advancing the OECD’s Going Digital project on the digital transformation of the economy, rolling out plans for a Global Forum on Digital Security for Prosperity, and featuring a special Roundtable discussion on privacy interoperability. The Going Digital Project was officially launched in Berlin in 2017 and aims to examine how the digital transformation affects policy-making across a large spectrum of policy areas, including competition, consumer policy, digital economy policy (privacy, security, infrastructure, economic impact), science, technology and innovation, industry and entrepreneurship, insurance and private pensions, financial markets, fiscal affairs and taxation and much more. The project will draw on national experiences and policy experimentation occurring across the OECD’s 35 member countries, its accession countries, key partners and many other economies involved in the OECD’s work.

At the meetings earlier this month in Paris, USCIB members, participating under the auspices of Business at OECD (BIAC), made numerous interventions throughout the five days of meetings, focused on elements of the Going Digital Project, such as projects on Artificial Intelligence, Online Platforms, and E-Commerce. In particular, BIAC Vice Chair Rich Clarke (AT&T) played an important behind-the-scenes role building consensus on two important telecommunications initiatives, and Carolyn Nguyen (Microsoft) offered her company’s perspective in the privacy interoperability roundtable.

Wanner was on the microphone for BIAC expressing business interest and support for the Global Forum on Digital Security for Prosperity. “As the OECD’s Going Digital Project advances, the business community greatly appreciates the opportunities to provide input,” said Wanner. “We look forward to continuing to work with the OECD, through BIAC, to provide value and ensure the success of the project as well as the upcoming Global Forum on Digital Security for Prosperity.”

Governments Reject Discriminatory Barriers to Business at UN Climate Talks

Published on May 21, 2018

Following intense and sometimes contentious negotiations, governments meeting in Bonn under the UN climate treaty last month rejected any reference to “conflict of interest” or conditionality for observer organizations. Commenting on the successful conclusion of UN discussions to allow transparent and inclusive involvement of business, Justin Perrettson (Novozymes), who co-chairs the USCIB Environment Committee encouraged  “all Parties to take full advantage of the depth and breadth of business engagement and experience with climate change issues and to partner with business to help inform and implement ambitious national pledges.”

Countries including the Africa Group, China, Ecuador, Venezuela and Cuba began the Bonn deliberations arguing for new measures to protect against “undue business influence,” and proposing language to:

  1. define “conflict of interest” in a way that would inherently discriminate against business
  2. require a statement of support of the UNFCCC in order for any non-governmental entity to be allowed to observe the climate negotiations.

Climate Justice, Youth, Indigenous Peoples and Women and Gender NGOs all advocated restricting, or even banning, certain sectors of business from the UNFCCC discussions, asserting a distorted interpretation of “conflict of interest,” and citing the precedent of the World Health Organization Framework of Engagement for Non State Actors (FENSA).

Along with Perrettson, USCIB representatives Nick Campbell (Arkema) and USCIB Vice President for Strategic International Engagement, Environment and Energy Norine Kennedy met with U.S. and other government delegations to make the case for inclusive and transparent engagement opportunities for all stakeholders, including business. In addition to the U.S.,  Australia, New Zealand and Norway spoke out definitively against the addition of any such business discriminatory practices.

The Bonn Climate Change Conference took place from April 30 to May 10 in Bonn, Germany. Approximately 4000 participants from governments, UN bodies and agencies, intergovernmental organizations, business and civil society organizations, and the media were on hand to make final preparations for the 24th Conference of Parties (COP24) in Katowice, Poland, which will take place later this year (December 3-18, 2018).

The main objective of the Bonn negotiations was to advance the Paris Agreement Work Programme (also known as “the Paris Rulebook”) and develop “negotiating text” for the decisions required to make the Paris Agreement operational by COP24. When complete, the Paris Rulebook would set out procedures for carbon markets and guide the tracking of comparability of effort across different national pledges.

Limited progress in Bonn necessitated the announcement of a supplementary negotiation session to be held in Bangkok, Thailand (August 31 to September 8).  It will be critical to have a negotiating text at the end of the Bangkok session if the Paris Rulebook is to be agreed at COP24.

USCIB members seeking more information on climate change and conflict of interest discrimination should contact Norine Kennedy and attend USCIB’s June 7 Environment Committee in NYC

UN Global Pact for Environment Negotiations to Begin

Published on May 18, 2018

After months of informal discussion, UN Member States have voted to launch a negotiation toward the development of a “Global Pact for Environment.” An initiative of French President Emanuel Macron, the Pact is to be a binding, universal “umbrella text” providing a common global legal basis for:

  • environmental policy principles, such as the polluter-pays and precautionary principles;
  • environmental rights-based approaches;
  • other international environmental regulations and treaties.

The United States voted against the resolution to launch the negotiations, while 143 countries voted in favor.  A copy of the resolution is available here.

U.S. Ambassador to the UN in New York Nikki Haley commented on the new General Assembly resolution stating, “When international bodies attempt to force America into vague environmental commitments, it’s a sure sign that American citizens and businesses will get stuck paying a large bill without getting large benefits. The proposed global compact is not in our interests, and we oppose it.”

As a basis for the deliberations, the UN will develop a report “that identifies and assesses possible gaps in international environmental law and environment-related instruments with a view to strengthening their implementation,” to be delivered to the UN General Assembly in New York. It is widely expected this report will be prepared by UN Environment.

“An ad hoc open-ended working group, under the auspices of the General Assembly, (will) consider the report and discuss possible options to address possible gaps in international environmental law and environment-related instruments, as appropriate, and, if deemed necessary, the scope, parameters and feasibility of an international instrument, with a view to making recommendations to the General Assembly, during the first semester of 2019, which may include the convening of an intergovernmental conference, to adopt an international instrument.”

Non-governmental organizations, including those representing business, will be allowed to observe the negotiations.  A first “organizational” meeting will take place in New York in late July; following that, deliberations will begin in Nairobi, Kenya at UN Environment headquarters based on a review of the report.

“USCIB will closely follow the negotiations, and work with the Administration, other governments and the International Chamber of Commerce to understand the specifics of what is to be proposed,” said Norine Kennedy, who leads USCIB’s work on strategic international engagement, environment, and energy. “USCIB will continue to gather intelligence, as questions remain on the legal form of the ‘Pact,’ and how it would relate to other existing agreements, such as UN Climate and chemicals conventions,  and the Sustainable Development Goals.”

USCIB members seeking more information on the GPE should contact Norine Kennedy, and attend USCIB’s June 7 Environment Committee in NYC.

Hampl Testifies Regarding Proposed China Tariffs

Published on May 18, 2018

 Following the Trump administration’s proposed Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods, USCIB Senior Director for Investment, Trade and Financial Services Eva Hampl testified before the Section 301 Committee, chaired by USTR on May 16 regarding the proposal. Hampl’s testimony reflected USCIB member concerns about potential consequences the proposed tariffs will have on sectors vital to the U.S. economy. Her testimony was drawn from comments USCIB sent earlier this month to the U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. Hampl was joined by over 100 other business representatives to share specific concerns regarding the proposed tariffs.

“We believe that the imposition of tariffs will not achieve the important goal of changing China’s behavior in the space of emerging technologies and intellectual property rights,” said Hampl in her testimony. “China’s threat of retaliation further exacerbates uncertainties caused by this proposed action. Rather than create more opportunities for U.S. business, sweeping tariffs will stifle U.S. agriculture, goods, and services exports and raise costs for businesses and consumers.

Hampl emphasized the need for a “holistic structure” to address the aforementioned issues. Speaking on behalf of USCIB, Hampl applauded the Trump administration for looking at alternative approaches, such as initiating a WTO dispute by requesting consultations with China.

“It is important for the administration to address these issues with a broad view, working collectively with U.S. industry, Congress, and our trading partners, to adequately address China’s unfair trade practices and get China to be WTO compliant,” noted Hampl.

The proposed tariffs pose a unique challenge to industrial inputs, which represent over 80 percent of the proposed list. Tariffs on industrial goods are especially problematic because they represent not just a tax on U.S. consumers but a tax on U.S. manufacturers and workers, and on the products they export. Tariffs on aerospace, machinery and IT parts and other advanced technologies can undermine the most competitive sectors of American manufacturing, driving up production costs in the U.S., impacting U.S. manufacturing employment, and making U.S. manufacturers less competitive against global rivals.

“Tariffs on industrial parts imported into the U.S. could have the unintended consequence of prompting manufacturers to move final production outside of the U.S.,” warned Hampl. “To see how U.S. companies will be affected by the tariffs, it is important to look to how the supply chain functions. China is the second largest economy and the largest manufacturing economy in the world. We cannot ignore that China may have some unique capabilities, at the product level, that U.S. businesses need to tap into in order to remain globally competitive. For many products or inputs, there is no feasible alternative to procuring from China. We urge the Administration to use this process to ensure that its actions do not inadvertently harm some of the most competitive sectors of the U.S. economy, and the hundreds of thousands of American jobs that depend on them.”

In addition to the testimony, USCIB also co-sponsored a reception last week for Hill staff centered around the China 301 hearing, as well as NAFTA, celebrating Great American Jobs Supported by Trade. Representatives from U.S. government, companies, and associations, spent the evening discussing various important developments in the trade space.

USCIB Warns of Potential Harms to the US Following China Tariffs

Published on May 14, 2018

In light of the Trump administration’s proposed Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods, USCIB sent comments last week to the U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer expressing concern about the potential unintended negative consequences the proposed tariffs will have on sectors vital to the U.S. economy and jobs. With $587.6 billion in total goods trade in 2016, China has become the United States’ largest goods trading partner. China was also the third-largest export goods market in 2016 for the U.S., while U.S. foreign direct investment in China was $13.8 billion in 2016, with the ICT sector alone encompassing $4.34 billion.

“China can be a challenging market for U.S. companies to navigate. The ongoing intellectual property rights violations, forced technology transfer requirements, and state interventions harm U.S. companies, workers, consumers, and competitiveness,” stated Eva Hampl, who leads USCIB work on China-related issues.

Made in China 2025 is considered by many an indication that China plans on further advancing in developing their high-tech industries, such as robotics, advanced information technology, aviation, and new energy vehicles, with the eventual goal of global dominance in those industries through uncompetitive means such as subsidies.

“While this unfair advantage to Chinese companies in the high-tech industry space is a legitimate threat to U.S. leadership in innovation, continued engagement in the Chinese market is also very important for U.S. companies in terms of their ability to be globally competitive,” emphasized Hampl. “USCIB members are very concerned that these proposed tariffs will stifle the U.S. economy, and not achieve the important goal of changing China’s behavior in the space of emerging technologies and intellectual property rights. China’s threat of retaliation further exacerbates uncertainties caused by this proposed action. Rather than create more opportunities for U.S. business, sweeping tariffs will stifle U.S. agriculture, goods, and services exports and raise costs for businesses and consumers.”

The comments urge the administration to use this public comment period to listen to USCIB members and other U.S. stakeholders who explain how they will be directly affected by the proposed tariffs.

“It is critical that the administration exclude from its tariffs particularly those products that cannot feasibly be replaced by non-Chinese sources, where the harm of potential tariffs would fall more on U.S. businesses, workers, and exporters than on Chinese entities,” said Hampl. “Hurting American exporters cannot be the outcome of a process designed to level the playing field in China.”

USCIB has also signed on to a broader coalition of trade associations to echo these and other business concerns. Additionally, USCIB is co-sponsoring a reception later this week for Hill staff centered around the China 301 hearing, as well as NAFTA, celebrating Great American Jobs Supported by Trade. Finally, USCIB will also testify this week as part of the China 301 hearing.

USCIB Members Honored with Best Corporate Citizens Ranking

Published on May 14, 2018

Corporate Responsibility magazine has honored several USCIB members, including Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, AT&T, Qualcomm and Walt Disney, among many others, in their annual 100 Best Corporate Citizens rankings. Each year, the 100 Best Corporate Citizens ranking measures the success of the Brands Taking Stands movement by celebrating the most successful, most transparent companies that report on their responsible practices.

The 100 Best Corporate Citizens list documents 260 ESG data points of disclosure and performance measures—harvested from publicly available information in seven categories: environment, climate change, employee relations, human rights, governance, finance, and philanthropy & community support.

The list ranks the Russell 1000 Index and research is conducted by ISS Corporate Solutions.  There is no fee for companies to be assessed. Companies listed on the Russell 1000 are analyzed using publicly available records from their websites, annual reports, shareholder calls, media interviews, NGOs and government documents. The analysis includes 260 data points on environmental, climate change, human rights, employee relations, corporate governance, philanthropy, and financial performance.  As a result, companies are rated on what information they disclose as well as how much they disclose.

To compile this ranking, data is obtained from public records and not from private self-reports to the analysts. Many rankings ask companies to fill out surveys and questionnaires about internal operations and ours relies on what is publicly available. That’s because transparency and public commitments help make a company’s sustainability program stronger.

 

Download a copy of the complete list and information on the methodology here

View past 100 Best Corporate Citizens winners here

Russian Sanctions: How Do They Affect US Business?

Published on May 14, 2018

A roundtable discussion was held at HodgsonRuss LLP in New York on April 26, connecting participants from Washington DC, New York and Europe to discuss the recent sanctions imposed by the U.S. Government on Russia, enforcement trends and how they affect the way the U.S. companies conduct business around the globe. This event was organized by the Committee on Eastern Europe and Committee on International Trade of the International Section of the New York State Bar Association. Distinguished panelists included Charles R. Johnston (Citi), chair of USCIB’s Trade and Investment Committee, Michael Hendrix, OFAC, U.S. Department of Treasury, Hon. Volodymyr Yelchenko, permanent representative of Ukraine to the United Nations and Robert J. Leo, chair of the Committee on International Trade. The discussion was moderated by Serhiy Hoshovsky, chair of the Committee on Eastern Europe. Participation from overseas was moderated by Oleh Beketov, chapter chair in Kiev.

The event was opened by Paul M. Frank, a former chair of the International Section and renown international law attorney who hosted the event at his law firm. Yelchenko provided a comprehensive political context for the Russian sanctions and reminded of the events that led to their initial imposition in 2014. Michael Hendrix, an enforcement officer with OFAC, summarized legal framework for the sanctions and enforcement priorities as well as discussed some recent enforcement actions. Johnston provided a great overview of the sanction regime from the perspective of the U.S. business community, explaining in detail how the sanctions are becoming a new reality and how the U.S. businesses adapt to doing business. He also shared practical experiences of what U.S. companies do to stay compliant. Leo shared a very useful handbook on sanctions and practical tips on what to do when issues arise and how to stay compliant.

“The event provided a unique opportunity for the participants, especially those from the overseas, to ask questions and hear from people who are on the forefront of the sanction policy and enforcement at the US government, business community and legal profession,” said Nancy Thevenin, USCIB’s general counsel. “All panelists and participants agreed that the event was a major success and provided a great platform for sharing views and discussing major issues affecting business and legal community not only in the U.S. but also internationally.”