Oxfam Social Responsibility

Corporate Social Responsibility in the Global Food and Drink Industry
Oxfam’s “Behind the Brands” scorecard examines the top ten global food and drink companies and assesses their environmental social practices. The rankings are based primarily on public information, such as reports available on the company websites and comments and complaints people post on social networks – known as “shaming and naming.” Between the first and second years of the report, nine of the ten companies improved their scores, including Nestle, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Mars, and Kellogg’s. Nestle, for example, is cited for its focus on climate change and water; Coca-Cola’s emphasis is on women’s rights. If you were part of a corporate team charged with formulating short-and

Especially the company with the lowest score – just 13 out of 70 – was ABF. Thus, I, imagine myself as one member of ABF’s publicity team, am eager to give some suggestions responding to Oxfam’s criticism.
One of the problem for the companies which fail to achieve a high score, especially for ABF, is the failure towards the transparency of the supply chain and logistics. Critics argued that although most of the top ten global food and drink companies have been doing well in permitting basic rights and needs for their employees in headquarters, it fails to incorporate the sub-branches which are the fundamental parts of the company. Thus, to dealing with such kinds of negative influences in the short run, those companies should take actions, as soon as possible, reducing the negative impacts to the lowest possible level, to declare in different platforms, including press, social media etc. Brand name is the factor that of vital significance to food companies in today’s increasing competitive

ABF should step out and do one more step further. In fact, research indicated that, for instance, not a few company in “Big Tan” has set a target to cut down on total water use–a key first step in water conservation. Four companies, including Unilever, General Mills, Nestle, and Danone, have all made small improvements in the way they treat farmers, none are making huge strides in cutting down on production risk and ensuring that farmers receive a living wage. As a huge company wants to stand out by the others, ABF should implement adequate rules and dedicate both human resources and capital into this action, engaging beyond its