Coca-Cola’s Cape Town Crisis: Examining Companies’ Water Rights Obligations in a Changing Climate

IF 2.3 Q3 BUSINESS

Business and Human Rights Journal Pub Date : 2022-02-15 DOI:10.1017/bhj.2021.64

Shannon Marcoux

引用次数: 0

Abstract

While Coca-Cola portrays itself as a ‘water neutrality’ leader, its failures during Cape Town’s water crisis exemplify the changing nature of corporate human rights obligations in the face of climate change. Between 2015 and 2018, drought conditions plunged Cape Town into a crisis, leading to increasingly strict household water restrictions and depriving families of their constitutionally guaranteed water allowance.1 However, in December 2017, when Cape Town officials called for a 45% reduction in commercial water use, Coca-Cola’s local independent bottler – Coca-Cola Peninsula Beverages (CCPB) – refused to reduce its 44 million-litre monthly withdrawals.2 The city subjected households to water restrictions and price increases up to 556%, while businesses only saw a 104% price increase with no consumption restrictions.3

查看原文本刊更多论文

可口可乐的开普敦危机：在气候变化中审视公司的水权义务

尽管可口可乐将自己描绘成“水中和”的领导者，但其在开普敦水危机期间的失败表明，面对气候变化，企业人权义务的性质正在发生变化。2015年至2018年间，干旱状况使开普敦陷入危机，导致家庭用水限制越来越严格，并剥夺了家庭宪法保障的用水补贴。1然而，2017年12月，当开普敦官员呼吁将商业用水减少45%时，可口可乐当地的独立装瓶商——可口可乐半岛饮料公司（CCPB）——拒绝减少每月4400万升的提款量。2该市对家庭实施了用水限制，价格上涨了556%，而企业在没有消费限制的情况下只上涨了104%。3

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

Business and Human Rights Journal LAW-

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

13.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Business and Human Rights Journal (BHRJ) provides an authoritative platform for scholarly debate on all issues concerning the intersection of business and human rights in an open, critical and interdisciplinary manner. It seeks to advance the academic discussion on business and human rights as well as promote concern for human rights in business practice. BHRJ strives for the broadest possible scope, authorship and readership. Its scope encompasses interface of any type of business enterprise with human rights, environmental rights, labour rights and the collective rights of vulnerable groups. The Editors welcome theoretical, empirical and policy / reform-oriented perspectives and encourage submissions from academics and practitioners in all global regions and all relevant disciplines. A dialogue beyond academia is fostered as peer-reviewed articles are published alongside shorter ‘Developments in the Field’ items that include policy, legal and regulatory developments, as well as case studies and insight pieces.