The Trinity and the Dragon: Reconciling Finance, Human Rights and the Environment in China

Fiona S. Cunningham, David Kinley
{"title":"The Trinity and the Dragon: Reconciling Finance, Human Rights and the Environment in China","authors":"Fiona S. Cunningham, David Kinley","doi":"10.4337/JHRE.2012.01.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Equator Principles experiment in forging a trinity of corporate responsibilities – financial, social and environmental – is now ten years old. By a number of measures, it has been a success. From an initial cohort of ten financial institutions, membership of the Equator Principles has expanded to 73 by late 2011, who together manage some 70% of project finance worldwide. Yet there is one major gap in their coverage, namely the lack of uptake of the Equator Principles by Chinese banks and their mixed record of respecting best practice social and environmental standards in their lending activities. In this article we focus on the importance of China’s commercial banks to the future of the Equator Principles and the obstacles that appear to be preventing them from adopting the Equator Principles. It is not only the size of China’s current and future slice of the international financial pie that makes this an important exercise (three of the world’s top ten banks are Chinese, as are no less than 15 of the top 25 fastest growing banks worldwide), it also casts a unique light on how a non-Western country of increasing significance to global affairs grapples with the vital, but extremely complex, intersections of finance, the environment and human rights.","PeriodicalId":388731,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Triple Bottom Line (Topic)","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Triple Bottom Line (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/JHRE.2012.01.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Equator Principles experiment in forging a trinity of corporate responsibilities – financial, social and environmental – is now ten years old. By a number of measures, it has been a success. From an initial cohort of ten financial institutions, membership of the Equator Principles has expanded to 73 by late 2011, who together manage some 70% of project finance worldwide. Yet there is one major gap in their coverage, namely the lack of uptake of the Equator Principles by Chinese banks and their mixed record of respecting best practice social and environmental standards in their lending activities. In this article we focus on the importance of China’s commercial banks to the future of the Equator Principles and the obstacles that appear to be preventing them from adopting the Equator Principles. It is not only the size of China’s current and future slice of the international financial pie that makes this an important exercise (three of the world’s top ten banks are Chinese, as are no less than 15 of the top 25 fastest growing banks worldwide), it also casts a unique light on how a non-Western country of increasing significance to global affairs grapples with the vital, but extremely complex, intersections of finance, the environment and human rights.
三位一体与龙:调和中国的金融、人权与环境
“赤道原则”(Equator Principles)在打造企业责任三位一体——财务、社会和环境——方面的试验,至今已有10年历史。从许多方面来看,它都是成功的。从最初的10家金融机构,到2011年底,赤道原则的成员已经扩大到73家,它们共同管理着全球70%的项目融资。然而,它们的覆盖范围存在一个重大差距,即中国的银行没有采纳赤道原则,它们在贷款活动中尊重社会和环境最佳实践标准的记录好坏参半。在本文中,我们将重点讨论中国商业银行对赤道原则未来的重要性,以及似乎阻碍它们采用赤道原则的障碍。这不仅是因为中国目前和未来在国际金融这块蛋糕上所占份额的大小(世界十大银行中有三家是中国银行,全球增长最快的25家银行中不少于15家是中国银行),还因为它为一个对全球事务日益重要的非西方国家如何应对金融、环境和人权等至关重要但极其复杂的交叉点提供了独特的视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信