Corporate Social Responsibility and conflict in the German lignite industry

Corporate Social Responsibility and

conflict in the German lignite industry

Researching effectiveness of CSR measures used to ease tensions in the Hambach area in Germany

Thousands of people protesting in the Hambach mine on October 6th, 2018 (source: Facebook)

Research Proposal

Interdisciplinary Project

Jaap Rothuizen

Word count: 5888

09-10-2018

Pieter van Dalen - 11218606 Victor den Haan - 10118039 Sacha Masai - 11430907

Abstract 2

Introduction 2

Theoretical framework 5

Defining CSR 5

CSR as a conflict resolution mechanism 6

CSR Strategy 6 Critique on CSR 7 Problem definition 8 Complexity 9 Sub questions 9 Interdisciplinary integration 10 Methodology 12

1. What is RWE’s CSR strategy and how does it influence conflict? 12 2. What are the implementations of RWE’s CSR strategy? 13

3. What are the effects of these implementations? 13

4. How effective are these CSR measures in resolving conflict? 13

Results 15

1. What is RWE’s CSR strategy and how does it influence conflict? 15 2. What are the implementations of RWE’s CSR strategy? 16

3. What are the effects of these implementations? 16

4. How effective are these CSR measures in resolving conflict? 17

Conclusion, discussion, recommendations 18

References 20

Appendix A - Interviews 23

Interview with five students from the Conference of the Youth in Poland (Bethany, Jan,

Ireen, Lola, Tiem) 23

Interview Peter Polder (Stroomversnellers, Milieudefensie) 24

Interview Tatjana Noah (activist) 25

Interview Rik Bakker (activist) 25

Interview Jens van Hee (activist) 26

Notes PAR during action of October 26 26

Conclusions from two quick conversations with residents of Niederzier: 27

Appendix B - Data Management Tables 28

Earth Sciences 28

Anthropology 29

Abstract

Lignite extraction in the Hambach area is the cause of conflict between energy company RWE, the regional government, and civil society. Although RWE’s Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is aimed at a sustainable relationship with civil society and the environment, there is still conflict present in the Hambach area. This interdisciplinary

research aims to investigate the effects of different implementations of RWE’s CSR strategy. Qualitative data has been gathered by analysing academic literature, year reports,

newspaper articles, blogs and social media. Within the interdisciplinary framework of CSR, different disciplinary perspectives are combined in a concept model. Ultimately, through interviews with different people representing civil society, the effectiveness of RWE’s current CSR practices is examined. Finally, these findings are analysed, reflected upon and lead to recommendations regarding the future of the conflict.

Introduction

The Hambach lignite mine of the multinational company RWE in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), Germany is the largest in Europe and is situated next to Western Europe’s oldest forest (Ruiz, 2018). The opencast nature of this mine has caused the area of excavation to move across the landscape, which has led to the forest being cut down to continue the extraction for the past six years (Jansen, 2012). Furthermore, the expansion of the mine has forced multiple villages to be relocated, and plans for future development will destroy two more towns, as can be seen in figure 1. These two developments have been the cause for increasing resistance among local and (inter)national activists for a wide variety of reasons including the unique ecosystem of the forest, the structural violation of human rights, and the transformation of Hambach as a symbol for a global climate struggle. With regard to this opposition, the paper starts with the hypothesis that the stakes and values of RWE and civil society are opposed, making CSR strategies incommensurable.

Figure 1. The Hambach mine in the NRW lignite mining area. (Source: Wikimedia Commons, 2009) Activists in numbers up to tens of thousands have been protesting against RWE and its activities in the area around Hambach since 2012, with the focal point being the forest

(Jansen, 2012). This autumn however, the conflict has renewed once more when police forces were ordered by the regional government to evict activists living in tree houses. In the ensuing chaos, a journalist reporting on the situation died after falling from a tree (WDR1, 2018; Anton, 2018).

Figure 2. The Hambach lignite mine up-close. Picture taken while visiting the neighbouring villages during the protests at the end of October. (Source: Pieter van Dalen, 2018)

Companies are increasingly expected to take part in prevention and resolution of conflict, with measures taken under the name of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policies (Haufler, 2004). They are able to have significant impact on civil society when taking

responsibility for conflict mitigation (Kolk & Lenfent, 2010; Jamali & Mirshak, 2009). The idea of CSR as a way to successfully influence conflict is not without criticism, though, with disagreement about the nature and scope of CSR, and debate about the role of companies in society in general (Idemudia & Ite, 2006). This research will focus on the CSR measures taken by RWE seeking to decrease tension, in an attempt to see if CSR is an effective way to resolve this specific conflict.

We are aware of the potential limits of this specific scope; there is a chance that the conflict reconciliation lies outside of what RWE can or is willing to do. However, the shortcoming or failure of CSR as a conflict resolution mechanism is still a valuable insight, should this indeed be the outcome of the research. The multifaceted nature of the conflict presents us with a complex problem, one not easily understood from just one disciplinary angle. Although disciplinary research can provide valuable information regarding this issue, it is through the interdisciplinary nature of this research paper that true insight might be obtained. By

Anthropology, and by crossing boundaries through combining the knowledge and findings of these fields, we hope to provide insight into the conflict beyond what has already been published.

This leads us to the central question of this paper: What is the effectiveness of CSR as a

conflict resolution mechanism between the different stakeholders - RWE, regional

government, and civil society - in the Hambach area in Germany? We will first explore the

concept of CSR and relational strategies that consist of CSR approach, values and scope. The section ‘strategies’ addresses the first sub question and will be answered with academic literature. Following this, the implementations of these strategies (further called ‘tactics’) will be detailed a the second sub-question. Subsequently, the explicit -and implicit effects of these measures will be analysed in the third sub-question, after which their effectiveness on conflict in the eyes of civil society will be discussed in the last sub-question. Lastly, some concluding remarks will be given, together with some recommendations.

Theoretical framework

Defining CSR

Although there are multiple opinions on how to deploy and work with CSR, most definitions of the term overlap each other and come down to the following definition: “Corporate Social

Responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their

families as well as of the local community and society at large” (Holme & Watts, pp. 1, 1999).

To what extent this commitment goes used to be voluntary. Business models were mainly focused on stakeholders and not on the environment and society. However, with new international laws being constituted due to societal pressure, parts of this commitment are codified and therefore mandatory by regulation (Carroll, 1991).

Corporate Social Responsibility can be dissected in several aspects, and categorized in a pyramid as seen in figure 4. Ranging from most important to least important: economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities (Carroll, 1991).

Figure 4. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility. (Source: Carroll, 1991)

Economic responsibilities are mainly focused on maximizing profit, by minimizing costs and gaining the highest competitive position possible, in relation to other companies. The

economic responsibility a company has towards civil society was primarily to produce goods for the needs of consumers. Nothing else mattered more, than operating as efficiently as possible, to be as profitable as possible. The legal responsibility comes forth out of policy making formulated by different layers the regional government. To regulate a company and

adhere to wishes from civil society, codes of ethic are transformed into laws which give companies a grip on where boundaries lie in the pursuit of profit maximization. Furthermore, the ethical responsibility transcends the legal and economic responsibility, in a sense that it is a driving force behind the formation of regulations. Norms and ethics are articulated by civil society and represent the idea of a mutual respect between companies and civil society. Lastly, the philanthropic responsibility can be seen as a voluntary addition to the ethical responsibility. It resembles a healthy relationship between society and business but is not required. In other words, when companies behave unethically they are judged upon that behaviour. When companies do not act in a philanthropic way they are not looked upon negatively, since it is not required and only seen as an extra (Carroll, 1991).

CSR as a conflict resolution mechanism

Since multinational corporations (MNC) have a big impact on the society they operate in, the type of business model, e.g.: CSR, can influence the stability of that society (Kolk & Lenfant, 2010). This idea of affecting conflict through CSR measures is becoming more common, and the communities across the globe are increasingly looking at private businesses to prevent conflict, largely due to power shifts between regional government and the market caused by capitalism (Haufler, 2004). Another study, done by Jamali & Mirshak (2009), argues that corporations should acknowledge their role in civil society and take responsibility. Especially when there is conflict present in societies where the state governance is limited. The

conflicts referred to are mostly prominent in regions with developing countries who have high abundance of natural resources. In most cases of developing countries with a presence of conflict in the civil society, MNCs are situated there and in some way involved in the conflict. In a case study done by Kolk & Lenfant (2010) the presence of conflict in a country, the presence of a MNC, and the option to adopt CSR measures are being analysed. Since corporations are being held accountable for the presence of conflict, they could take their responsibility through CSR. However, although companies address multiple generic topics which are not specific for the developing regions they operate in, these same companies are reserved towards their impact on conflict mitigation. It can be quite difficult for these

companies to be acting as a conflict manager when that used to be done by the regional government. Nonetheless, as Kolk & Lenfant (2010) see occurring, corporations are appearing to look further than simply having a responsibility towards their shareholders. They are also extending their responsibility towards the society they operate in. Thus, from this point of view CSR can be seen as a business model to improve the profit of a company but also as a way of mitigating conflict in civil society.

While CSR policies often aim to influence conflicts, they themselves are also influenced by actions taken within the conflict, with economic disruption being the most effective (Berman, 2000). Therefore, there is a mutual influence between CSR and conflict.

CSR Strategy

CSR strategy has as main aim to gain acceptance of stakeholders for the corporation’s activities. The drivers of CSR strategy are the firm’s values, divided into its mission,

objectives and scope or field of impact, as shown in figure 5. Based on its values, the firm

priorities. The synthesis of these options into one plan is the strategy itself. Since big corporations often have a negative image because of scandals linked to their operations, having stakeholder dialogues is of great importance (O’Riordan & Fairbrass, 2008). In order to do this well, it is essential to study power: who is impacted by which stakeholder?

Figure 5: CSR strategy development process. (Source: O’Riordan, 2006)

Stakeholders are defined as “groups and individuals who can affect or are affected by, the

achievement of an organization's mission” (O’Riordan & Fairbrass, pp. 747, 2008). First,

each stakeholder has to be identified in its context. In the case of RWE, the company is highly contested with civil disobedience, which is a form of coercive power by the civil society. This disobedience urges RWE to change their CSR policies by making them more visible, reactive, specific, central and voluntary (O’Riordan & Fairbrass, 2008). Thus, RWE gains acceptance because they react against the civil society’s coercion by defining their CSR policies more specifically. By increasing voluntary work the firm tries to convince the civil society that their responsibility is also phylantropical (see definitions CSR). A second stakeholder aspect inherent in CSR strategy are stakeholder expectations. Similar to the firm’s values, the scope of the firm determines stakeholder expectations. Additionally, an approach and the type of governance towards stakeholders and external status are formed.

Critique on CSR

However, the role of profit-driven corporations in a societal conflict is not without criticism, and the effectiveness of this approach is disputable. Corporations cannot be seen as separate from the society they operate in, and are therefore both stakeholder and resolver within the conflict (Idemudia, 2010). The essence of the main critique on CSR is labeled as ‘corporate citizenship’. Corporations are widely regarded as actors that cause disorder in the civil society, and also the environment, due to their production. However, at the same time they are seen, especially by NGOs, as actors of advocating good citizenship and battling this

disorder. That is exactly what leads to a contradicting situation when businesses adopt CSR as a model. What is more, because corporations influence civil society with coercive power instead of concessive power, it is not so likely that these businesses do indeed want to participate in stakeholder dialogues. Also, when corporations do participate in dialogues, the distribution of power is unequal and corporations will attempt to escape corporate

accountability by means of partnerships or voluntary initiatives (Hamann & Acutt, 2003). Because this power imbalance in favour of the company, solutions are likely to be most beneficial for the company itself, with needs of other stakeholders like society being secondary. This disparity can then in turn causes distrust and lead to further or increased conflict, like in the Niger Delta in Nigeria, where conflict has lasted for over a decade despite CSR measures (Idemudia & Ite, 2006). A reaction against the civil demands that arise from corporate accountability is the justification and thus legitimation of the corporation’s practices through greening (more commonly known as greenwashing) on social media. By

accentuating public images disproportionally, the stakes and values of a corporation are then not substantiated, resulting in intentional misleading or misinterpretation (Lyon & Maxwell, 2011).

Problem definition

From the theoretical framework it has become clear that there is a possibility that CSR can help prevent and reconcile conflict, even though it is not successful in every conflict. However, all of these researched conflicts exist in developing countries (Kolk & Lenfant, 2010; Idemudia & Ite, 2006; Idemudia, 2010). In these developing countries, there have been fewer democratisation processes and power shifts towards so called articulation power, the ability of civil society to articulate common norms and values, in comparison to western nations. The societies in these countries are influenced more by (violent) conflict and less by dialogue between (legitimate) stakeholders (Jamali & Mirshak, 2009).

On the contrary, in the case of the conflict in the Hambach area, the power dynamics in play are vastly different. Legitimate stakeholders in civil society have significant power to

articulate common norms and values. This is illustrated by the paradigm shift since the 1960s from a shareholder approach to a stakeholder approach. This shift happened because of pressure from media critiques, new national and international regulation, and - most importantly for this research - newly arising environmentalists (Carroll, 1991; O’Riordan & Fairbrass, 2008). Still, even with the presence of actors capable of articulating their demands more effectively, in comparison to developing countries, conflict is continuously present in the area.

Thus, this conflict exists and seems to escalate, despite better societal conditions than in more conflict prone regions. This research attempts to bridge (part of) this gap in knowledge: why is this conflict occurring; is CSR adequate in its potential function as a vehicle for

conflict mitigation and resolution? The central question in this research is therefore: What is

the effectiveness of CSR as a conflict resolution mechanism between the different stakeholders - RWE, regional government, and civil society - in the Hambach area in Germany? In order to tackle this problem, a minor reflection on its potential complexity is

necessary. After a brief explanation of the concept of complexity, the following paragraphs aim to argue why this problem is indeed complex and thus warrants an interdisciplinary approach.

Complexity

Boulton & Allen (2007) describe the difference between the traditional worldview and the worldview of complex problems. The traditional worldview consists of determinism, and predictable, linear systems and structures. Systems, however, have many different

interconnected attributes and viewing them from a perspective of complexity allows better insight into the how and why of these attributes. Thus, the science of complex worldviews examines the characteristics of the complexity of a system in order to present an integrated picture of its behaviour, and subsequently to analyse the specific system itself. Examples of these characteristics are unpredictability, interconnectivity, emergent, unfixed,

self-organising, and co-evolving (Boulton & Allen, 2007).

One of the characteristics of a complex problem is unpredictability: a system with unforeseen developments or surprising outcomes. This concept is definitely applicable to the conflict in the Hambach forest. Although the base premise of resistance from environmentalists against RWE’s lignite extraction was to be expected, the growth of their protest in order to save the forest and the perseverance over the past years to fight for every tree was not anticipated, especially not by RWE. Since RWE is legal owner of the area and aims to continue

expanding the mine, they took measures to halt the protest through law enforcement by the regional government (Ruiz, 2012; RWE Aktiengesellschaft, 2017a). Instead of coercing these groups to concede and thus ending the conflict, however, the protests grew larger and the forest became a symbol for the international climate justice movement to rally behind. With the death of a journalist during evictions in the forest, the resistance has grown significantly once more in the past months and it is difficult to say what the future holds. Furthermore, interconnectivity becomes clear in the wide range of groups and issues related to the conflict. RWE claims that lignite extraction is necessary to provide enough energy, and stresses other economic factors like jobs for their workers. Action groups on the other hand call attention to climate change, human rights and biodiversity. The conflict is further

complicated by overlaps between different groups such as a union of RWE workers calling to preserve the forest, or local residents forced out of their homes supporting RWE.

The complex nature of this problem thus asks for an interdisciplinary approach, to go beyond merely gathering valuable information regarding the issue and obtain otherwise unobtainable insight into the conflict. By combining knowledge and findings from the disciplinary fields of Political Science, Earth Sciences and Anthropology, this research aims to answer questions regarding CSR and conflict in the Hambach area, beyond what has already been published.

Sub questions

The specific questions this research will attempt to answer follow from the rest of the

theoretical framework. First, it is important to take a closer look at the specific strategy RWE employs for its CSR: What is RWE's CSR strategy and how does it influence conflict? Out of this strategy, certain implementations develop, according to the framework described by

O’Riordan & Fairbrass (2008). The second sub-question therefore explores these

implementations: What are the implementations of RWE’s CSR strategy? Afterwards, the effects of RWE’s CSR will be examined, including but not limited to effects on the

environment and those affecting the different actors. This will be done following the third sub-question: What are the effects of these implementations? Lastly, the effectiveness of these measures in influencing conflict is analysed in order to eventually answer the main research question. This is done through the final sub-question: How effective are these CSR

measures in resolving conflict?

Interdisciplinary integration

In order to provide this interdisciplinary insight into the problem, the different disciplines have been integrated in the framework as seen in figure 6 below. The different disciplinary

concepts used are shown in the dark blue rectangles and triangles. Those that are also red indicate a concept relevant to multiple disciplines. Central to the model are the conflict and CSR, and their mutual influence. The triangle around those two concepts symbolises the three actors and their relation to each other, also seen in research by Van Marrewijk (2003). Everything inside this triangle corresponds to the central question of this research. One layer wider, the bigger ‘Strategy’ triangle is composed of the three different business approaches explored in more detail in the disciplinary paper from a Political Science perspective. The concepts and actors in these triangles divide the model into three areas, signifying the significance of the approach or actor on a concept. For example, media is used mostly by society and RWE to push their respective narratives, which is why the concept of media is roughly in between these actors. The last concept in this triangle is ‘Values & Priorities’, since both are a large part of how each actor shapes their respective strategies.

Figure 6. Conceptual integration model.

The third layer, ‘Implementation’, is a visualisation of the second phase as described by O’Riordan & Fairbrass (2008). The concepts in this circle correspond to specific

implementations of the CSR strategy: Sophienhöhe as example of recultivation, police presence as counterinsurgency, etc. These specific measures were also used to shape the gathering of data. The yellow circle of ‘Communication’ is a crucial link between the

implementation phase and the effects on the conflict. The concepts depicting the struggle for public support through both traditional and social media, and other forms of communication between the different actors, most of them described in further detail in the disciplinary paper from a perspective of Anthropology, can be seen here. Notable is the absence of

communication regarding recultivation, a deficiency detailed in the Earth Sciences disciplinary paper. The outermost layer, ‘Effects’, contains the concepts regarding explicit consequences of different measures, such as a change in water quality or the existence of an alliance meeting between different stakeholders. Furthermore, a few more implicit effects can be seen, for instance activists feeling incriminated by counterinsurgency measures and a corresponding increase in distrust towards the other actors, state and RWE.

By mapping out most used concepts in this model, it was possible to more easily identify the intersecting concepts and theories. These intersections are shown in the table below. In addition to those, the concepts of ‘Values’, ‘Priorities’, ‘CSR’ and ‘Conflict’ are touched upon by all three disciplines. In the following paragraphs, these concepts will be reviewed, and disciplinary overlap and contrast will be discussed where relevant. The corresponding discipline will be indicated with (E) for Earth Sciences, (A) for Anthropology, and (P) for Political Science.

Earth Sciences Anthropology Political Science

Earth Sciences - Reputation,

Transparency Recultivation Anthropology Greening, Volunteering - Accountability Political Science Ecosystem services / shareholder approach Stakeholder approach / societal approach -Table 1. Overview of intersecting concepts.

Rebuilding reputation is a goal for certain soft power practices like socio-economic

development projects (A), and RWE admits to prioritise good relations with local residents in the planning of Sophienhöhe (E). This is also done through volunteering with for example planting trees (A) in that park (E). Recultivation is regulated by the regional government through laws (E), touching upon the stakeholder approach (P). The lack of transparency and communication is a recurring theme (A, E) and has major implications on the conflict, and is also a cause of accusations of greening (A, E). Focus on ecosystem services instead of biodiversity (E) is typical for a shareholder approach, where society, and by extension nature, is given little consideration (P). Most of the smart power described in the

Anthropology research revolves around the struggle between a stakeholder approach and a

societal approach (A, P). These two approaches are also intertwined with different views on accountability (A, P) by different actors.

The used research methods consist of both deductive and inductive research, with the specific methods different for each sub question. In the following paragraphs, each sub question is briefly repeated for clarity, after which the corresponding approach and use of data is explained. Below these paragraphs, a table summarises the data use per question.

1. What is RWE’s CSR strategy and how does it influence conflict?

In order to answer the first sub question as shown above, deductive research is used. General concepts and theories distilled from qualitative, secondary data are utilised to explain the specific conflict and to explore RWE’s CSR strategy. CSR strategy is mainly based on the triangular relation between the stakeholder approach, the shareholder approach, and the societal approach. These concepts can be explored by using academic papers on CSR and conflict in development countries. Furthermore, Brock & Dunlap (2018) have done research on the Hambach area itself, which will be used to explore this specific conflict. Additionally, further information is requested directly from RWE staff and Dunlap via email, to gain complementary data on RWE’s CSR strategy.

2. What are the implementations of RWE’s CSR strategy?

Similar to the first sub question, qualitative secondary data will be used in order to gather information about implementations of RWE’s CSR strategy. As seen in figure 6 and described in the previous chapter, examples of specific implementations are volunteering, lobbying, recultivation, social development projects and counterinsurgency. In order to further explore these concepts, information is gathered from RWE’s year reports and other data found on the site. In order to answer this sub question, a more inductive approach is used: specific secondary data from civil disobedience actions, interviews, surveys, blogs, newspapers, and the aforementioned year reports are linked to the general concepts on CSR and conflict.

3. What are the effects of these implementations? / 4. How effective are these in resolving conflict?

As the third and last subquestion are covered by the same methodology, these will be answered together. Figure 6 shows concepts relating to the effects of RWE’s CSR policies. These effects can be divided in explicit ones like conferences, alliances, and water quality on the one hand, and more implicit ones on the other. Examples of the latter are distrust,

reputation, criminalization, and greening. Most of the more explicit effects have been documented in the disciplinary papers, which were written using both qualitative and quantitative secondary data from academic papers and grey literature.

In order to explore the more implicit effects and effectiveness, inductive, iterative fieldwork was carried out in the form of participatory action research (PAR). PAR is a collective, self-reflective research method where the researcher is actively participating in the research together with their respondents (Baum et al., 2004). Thus, respondents are not just sources of information but equal participants that influence the questions in an open dialogue. Although this research method is experimental, it could be a unique possibility to gather information from people which would otherwise be difficult or even impossible to reach. In October, from the 25th until the 29th, a mass civil disobedience action will take place around

the Hambach mine. Five thousand climate activists are expected to occupy the opencast pit mine and corresponding train rails. During this period, a ‘climate camp’ will be set up nearby to provide these people with basic logistics like food and toilets. This is where the PAR will take place, which consists mainly of participating in the action and building a trusted relation with activists. Additionally, a survey consisting of ten basic questions will be conducted with people living around the Hambach mine - in Niederzier and Duren - because it is likely that locals offer a distinctly different viewpoint than climate activists. Thus, the researched societal group does not only include activists, but also neighbours. After the action,

semi-structured interviews (see topic list appendix) were held with activists who participated in the action. With these combined experiences it should be possible to examine the more implicit effects of CSR. Additionally, it should allow for mapping of similar statements to examine effectiveness. In a nutshell, both subquestions address all the topics of subquestion one and two, with the addition of PAR and exemption of emails. (see table 2)

1 2 3 4 Academic literature x x x x Grey literature x x x x Emails x PAR x x Interviews x x x Surveys x x x Blogs x x x Newspapers x x x Year reports x x x

Figure 7. Our group, the Golden finger. (Source: Facebook, 2018)

Results

Following the format used in the methodology above, the results for each sub-question will be presented and analysed in order.

1. What is RWE’s CSR strategy and how does it influence conflict?

From documents on RWE’s website, it would seem that philanthropic responsibilities are priority for RWE, seen in statements such as “The lignite industry depends on good

neighbourly relations with the people in the region.” (RWE Power AG, pp. 5, 2005). Further

in the same documents, however, it can be seen that ultimately, the importance of

biodiversity was outweighed by other interests and economic motivations during planning procedures (RWE Power AG, 2005). This would correspond more with the base layer of the CSR Pyramid, the layer of economic responsibilities. Unfortunately, RWE declined to provide more information upon request, giving as reason the large amount of requests they receive. They did, however, point to a recent interview with RWE CEO Martin Schmitz, from which a lot of RWE’s priorities become more clear.

In this interview, Schmitz describes the unavoidable deforestation of the Hambach forest:

“Und der Hambacher Forst wäre auch dann nicht mehr zu retten, wenn wir die Bagger stoppen.” (Höning & Bröcker, 2018), and continues to put focus on economic responsibilities

by bringing up the topic of firing employees. So far, these have been avoided since RWE always attempts to find “socially acceptable” solutions. Additionally, to deal with the situation around the forest, lignite mining has to decrease with 10 to 15 million tons per year, about a third of the current production from the Hambach mine (Hecking & Schultz, 2018). However, this number does not correspond to a proposed aim by RWE to reduce their emissions with

0.62 tonnes CO2/MWh by 2020 (RWE Aktiengesellschaft, 2017a). This disparity might be a case of media manipulation to increase support from their workers.

On Facebook, RWE proudly announced an alliance with Greenpeace Energy to start phasing out coal in 2020 to reduce their CO2-emissions (RWE Facebook, 2018b). In the recent interview, however, Schmitz gives this news some nuance by explaining that there is currently no plan for an end date: “Daher sollten wir in 2033 erst mal schauen, wie weit wir

gekommen sind und dann das finale Ausstiegsdatum festlegen.” (Höning & Bröcker, 2018).

In the 2014 year report, RWE claimed to be able to drop its carbon intensity to 0.62 tonnes CO2e/MWh by 2020, while the drop between 2013 and 2014 was as small as 0.004

tonnes/MWh (RWE Aktiengesellschaft, 2014). In their 2017 year report, RWE describes their social development programs in primary schools (RWE Aktiengesellschaft, 2017b). In these programs, children are supposedly informed that coal will remain the main energy source of the 21st century.

All in all, it becomes clear that RWE’s strategy centers around the economic responsibilities of the CSR pyramid, doing what they can to continue to be as profitable as possible until they are stopped by law. Despite this focus, they spend quite some energy to make it seem like the ethical and philanthropic responsibilities have all their attention.

2. What are the implementations of RWE’s CSR strategy?

There are plenty of tactics that flow out of RWE’s CSR strategy such as social development projects and lobbying. For the next sub-question, several of these implementations receive focus because of data availability, namely: the park Sophienhöhe, and Terra Nova, and to a lesser extent volunteering and social development projects.

As an answer to the planned destruction of the Hambach forest, RWE recultivated a large area into what is known as Sophienhöhe, in an attempt to re-establish and maintain regional biodiversity (RWE, 2016). Nonetheless, the park is mostly recreational, with occasional glades and ponds within the woods. Additionally, there is a network of roads for hikers and cyclists (RWE, 2018a). This corresponds quite well with the aforementioned strategy of RWE’s CSR, where economic factors receive more attention. Part of the recultivation effort in areas such as Sophienhöhe is supported by volunteering: RWE claims over 10 million trees have been planted by volunteers (RWE Facebook, 2018c).

Terra Nova is a “viewpoint, meeting point and exhibition site” (RWE Power AG, pp. 1, 2012). built by RWE at the edge of the Hambach mine to facilitate meetings and provide information about the mine and RWE’s other activities like the recultivation projects. With a built-in restaurant and bar, there is room for lectures, parties and even weddings with full view of the excavation in the mine. Additionally, there is room for recreation on a football field and bike lanes (RWE Power AG, 2012). Terra Nova fits into the strategy of RWE’s CSR as an attempt to influence discourse and their reputation.

Lastly, RWE puts effort into realising green alliances. For that reason, RWE has a CSR council where it invites notorious environmentalists from the Germanwatch and Wuppertal Institute. Together with RWE, they launched the Better Coal Initiative that involves volunteers

(RWE Aktiengesellschaft, 2016). Similarly, RWE collaborates with environmental NGOs to work on environmental externalities (Brock & Dunlap, 2018). Comparable to Terra Nova, the main aim of efforts like these seem to be (re)building of reputation.

3. What are the effects of these implementations?

The effects of different implementations can be divided into more explicit and more implicit effects, as described in the chapter on interdisciplinary integration. In exploring these effects, it is important to note that communication, including PR and (social) media practices, play an essential role in how these implementations eventually influence the other actors and the conflict. Furthermore, RWE’s transparency is crucial.

Explicitly, it is fairly uncomplicated to assess the effects of the Sophienhöhe recultivation efforts. The area has been quickly populated by both animals and plants alike. Roughly 25 years after recultivation started, over 2200 animal species and over 800 plant species have been observed in the forests (Albrecht et al., 2005). Despite that, the actual meaning of these explicit effects are difficult to describe, since biodiversity is an complex concept of its own, not easily quantified and compared between different areas. Furthermore, the lack of transparency and communication towards society about these nuances has a negative impact on RWE’s trustworthiness (Moczek & Imboden, 2015). Additionally, the symbolic value of the Hambach Forest has grown so much in the past years that is has become virtually irreplaceable. These factors cause the implicit effect of the recultivation efforts to differ between varying groups and stakeholders, and for example makes it simple for activists to brush aside claims of success regarding biodiversity.

The response to Terra Nova is another good example of widely dissimilar reactions between different groups. While the facilities are indeed used and are apparently satisfactory to some, the reaction from activists is fiercely negative, which will be explored further in the

paragraphs of the next sub question. Another area where different groups seem to be divided further by RWE’s actions is that of counterinsurgency. RWE’s insistence of law enforcement by the regional government to remove activists from their land is indeed according to law, but the most significant effect seems to be a sharp increase in distrust towards RWE, fueled by feelings of criminalisation and stigmatisation (Ruiz, 2012).

Lastly, RWE and societal groups are involved in a struggle for public support. This happens mostly on social media, but also in traditional media as can be seen in the interview

mentioned above. In this interview, Schmitz employs several attempts at delegitimation of opposing groups, such as expressing doubt over the actual presence of an endangered bat species. Similarly, they trivialise the Hambach forest by pointing out it is only 0.002% of all German forests (RWE Facebook, 2018a). Especially on social media, because of a shift in the power balance due to its free and relatively horizontal nature, societal groups are larger in number and this allows them to successfully challenge such delegitimation and attempts at greening (Lyon & Montgomery, 2013).

4. How effective are these CSR measures in resolving conflict?

This question implies the feedback between CSR effects and the conflict itself, that is dependent from the opinion of activists. What do activists demand from RWE, why is there tension between both parties and how should RWE change its strategies and tactics? There are several common themes found in both the PAR carried out during the action, and the semi-structured interviews with climate activists conducted on Facebook. Firstly, most activists have interest in local and global issues and do not see them as necessarily separate. Rik Bakker, Jens van Hee and Tatjana Noah touch on the global urgency to stop with fossil fuel in the UN report, while Joe even goes as far as challenging RWE to address consequences they cause in other parts of the world. Also the five people travelling to the Conference Of the Youth (COY) propagate ‘glocalisation’, the merging of global networks with local people. This would be a way to prevent RWE from manipulating small groups of civil society, because they are connected through a larger network. RWE’s efforts at

greening seem ill-prepared for such an approach, which could be part of the reason they are losing public support. Terra Nova is described as “romanticizing ecocide”, “absolutely

repulsive” and “part of a myth in which RWE is seen as essential to society”.

When asked how RWE should be held accountable, most seemed to prefer a decentralised approach, in order to strengthen the process of democratisation. Noah pledged for scientific corporations that should have a stronger dialogue with RWE, while COY members prefer neighborhood assemblies. Furthermore, economic measures such as taxation and juridic measures such as lawsuits are seen to enhance accountability. Some interviewees demand non-governmental alliances within civil society that fulfill the intermediary role of conflict mitigation. Thus, there should be a shift from a shareholder approach to a societal approach, where society forms a clear network. RWE should pay for their own environmental

externalities with taxes and court cases.

Distrust is related to beliefs such as RWE’s half-heartedness to stop with coal. It requires transparent communication and accountability to gain trust, and therefore greening projects are not acceptable and increase polarisation. For example, the CSR tactic of volunteering could be seen as both a positive way for RWE to connect with society, and as a negative outsourcing of their responsibility towards society and essentially reducing CSR to a way to save money on workforces. The interviewees have more nuanced opinions on Sophienhöhe, acknowledging their insufficient understanding of ecology to judge the project, which should be done by experts instead. However, Bethany does point out the active greening happening around the park, where disproportionate attention is called to amounts of species without the proper relating information of what that means.

In order to gain insight of a more moderate perspective on RWE, we conducted a survey with two respondents. The first respondent was heavily against climate actions and accentuated his satisfaction with his work for RWE. The second respondent shared the importance of work but defended a more radical point of view by sharing the myth that it is too late to save Hambach. Thus, both respondents were in favor of RWE, which is logical for employees. Nevertheless, the research group is to limited to draw conclusions from this in

name of the entire civil society, which is the reason for restricting civil society to climate activists in this research.

Conclusion, discussion, recommendations

To conclude, RWE’s CSR strategy is focused mostly on economic stakes, something activists are aware of. This focus does not adequately address concerns of local and (inter)national stakeholders and leaves little room for integrative and flexible managing of tensions. Thus, tensions can diminish if RWE changes its CSR strategy that is unbalanced according to the triangular approach discussed in the theoretical framework. A lot of tactics, ranging from recultivation projects to public relations focus on these economic

responsibilities. As transparent communication is fundamental to ensure legitimate stakes in the application of certain tactics, explicit and implicit effects of the tactics were taken into account. Based on interviews with climate activists, these effects largely seem to create negative opinions. They are not effective because of non-ethical and non-sustainable reasons. In the larger picture, RWE’s CSR policies seem to have little positive influence on the conflict and mostly negative impact. This is due to high path-dependence of RWE, causing non-adaptive policies. However, activists demand RWE to change their CSR strategy in order to cease the conflict. Is this aim realistic or is complete ignorance of the stakes of one party the only possible solution?

Second there is a lack of alignment of values between society and business. In interviews held during a large action against RWE’s activities in the Hambach area, it became clear that a lot of people present have problems with the core business of RWE: extraction and

burning of fossil fuels. Other activities, including many CSR efforts, are seen as distractions. This is such a complete opposition of world views that CSR is not likely to have any positive impact on the conflict between them and RWE. In general, the values of climate activists from Ende Gelande are more focussed on global issues, whereas the values of RWE are more localized. Additionally, there seemed to be a general distrust towards RWE within these groups, causing them to be sceptical of any possible positive activities by RWE, and not without reason, since RWE puts a lot of effort in continuing their business as usual. In a nutshell, our hypothesis is more or less confirmed: there is a complete opposition in stakes and values of RWE and civil society, although civil society is reduced to ‘climate activists’ throughout the research because of limited -and diverging information about local inhabitants. Furthermore, the relationship between CSR and conflict is not mutual: CSR is creating conflict, but the conflict is not causing RWE to adapt their CSR policies. This may be due to strong interconnectedness within both parties and between the regional

government and RWE. Although there are alliances between RWE and activists, these are all strategical. Instead of interconnecting for the sake of framing, interconnecting with the renewable power grid is advisable.

During this research, we encountered limitations that changed the scope of the research, such as a lack of time and the difficulty of gathering data. As a consequence, the focus shifted from conflict more towards RWE’s CSR and specific implementations and effects. As stated in the introduction, there is a real possibility that conflict resolution is not possible

within CSR. Further research into other methods and theories on conflict resolution would be a valuable next step. Another critical note concerns PAR. It appeared complicated to gather data during the climate action because respondents were too emotional, tired and occupied with the action itself. Also they were ideologically opposed to RWE and lacked information about CSR, rendering some interviews useless for this research. However, this was

compensated with semi-structured interviews on Facebook. Ultimately, we were not able to gather much data from people who do not identify as activist, and the two respondents of the surveys were also biased as employees at RWE.

In order to solve the conflict, the large gap between the different actors needs to be bridged. Theoretically, if the values and priorities of all actors align, the conflict would cease to exist, because in that case strategies would align as well. A good place to start would be improved communication and transparency. This would imply more positive effects, whereas the effects of RWE’s CSR tactics are more interpreted as negative by the activists. The regional government could play a role as mediator between the other actors, although it might be too intertwined with RWE to be a good candidate for this role. Furthermore, more steps need to be taken to enforce a process of democratisation where RWE is held accountable for their externalities, in a way where the difference between local and global priorities of actors are taken into account. By extending its responsibilities to a global scale, RWE could shift the focus of their CSR strategy towards a societal approach, which would align all parties and break tensions that remain the core of conflict.

References

Albrecht, C., Dworschak, U., Esser, T., Klein, H., & Weglau, J. (2005). Tiere und Pflanzen in der Rekultivierung. 40 Jahre Freilandforschung im Rheinischen Braunkohlenrevier. Acta

Biologica Benrodis (Suppl. 10), 58-62.

Alobo, E. E., & Udungeri, K. U. Towards integrating corporate social responsibility in Nigeria environmental and social sector as a panacea for curbing infrastructural deficit.

Anton, J. (2018, September 20th). Wer ist der Verunglückte aus dem Hambacher Forst?

Frankfurter Allgemeine. Retrieved fromhttps://www.faz.net/on October 7, 2018. Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of

Epidemiology & Community Health, 60(10), 854-857.

Berman, J. (2000). Boardrooms and bombs. Harvard International Review, 22(3), 28. Bock, C. (2018, December 3), The Hambach Forest Occupation. Christian Bock

photography. Retrieved fromhttps://www.christian-bock.net/on December 4, 2018.

Title page image. Born, E. (2018). Thousands of people protesting in the Hambach mine

[photograph]. Retrieved fromhttps://www.facebook.com/on October 8, 2018. Boulton, J., & Allen, P. (2007). Complexity and strategy.

Brock, A., & Dunlap, A. (2018). Normalising corporate counterinsurgency: Engineering consent, managing resistance and greening destruction around the Hambach coal mine and beyond. Political Geography, 62, 33-47.

Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business horizons, 34(4), 39-48.

Figure 1. Rheinisches Braunkohlerevier DE. From “Tagebau Hambach”. Retrieved and

adapted fromhttps://www.wikipedia.org/on October 8, 2018.

Figure 2. Van Dalen, P. (2018). The Hambach lignite mine up-close [photograph]. Taken on

October 28, 2018.

Figure 3. Golden finger during end of October actions. Retrieved from

https://www.facebook.com/on December 4, 2018.

Figure 4. The Pyramid of Social Corporate Responsibility. From “The pyramid of corporate

social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders” by Carroll, A. B., 1991,https://cf.linnbenton.edu/.

Figure 5. CSR strategy development process. From “CSR and stakeholder dialogue: Theory,

concepts, and models for the pharmaceutical industry.” by O’Riordan, L., 2006, MRES

Figure 7. The Golden finger on Saturday, October 26. Retrieved from

https://www.facebook.com/on December 4, 2018.

Hambacher Forst: Anwälte wollen Räumung stoppen. (2018, September 13th). WDR1. Retrieved fromhttps://www1.wdr.de/on October 8, 2018.

Haufler, V. (2004). International diplomacy and the privatization of conflict prevention.

International Studies Perspectives, 5(2), 158-163.

Hecking, C. & Schultz, S. (2018, October 9), RWE will Kohleförderung um 10 bis 15 Millionen Tonnen drosseln. Der Spiegel Online. Retrieved fromhttp://www.spiegel.de/on December 4, 2018.

Holme, R., & Watts, P. (1999). Corporate social responsibility. Geneva: World Business

Council for Sustainable Development.

Höning, A. & Bröcker, M. (2018, October 13), Interview mit RWE-Chef Schmitz. “Nichts ist vorbei, der Kampf um Hambach geht weiter”. RP Online. Retrieved fromhttps://rp-online.de/

on December 3, 2018.

Idemudia, U., & Ite, U. E. (2006). Demystifying the Niger Delta conflict: Towards an integrated explanation. Review of African Political Economy, 33(109), 391-406.

Idemudia, U. (2010). Rethinking the role of corporate social responsibility in the Nigerian oil conflict: The limits of CSR. Journal of International Development, 22(7), 833-845.

Jansen, R. (2012, November 16th). Tagebau Hambach: Das Versteckspiel ist beendet.

Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger. Retrieved fromhttps://www.ksta.deon October 6, 2018.

Jamali, D., & Mirshak, R. (2010). Business-conflict linkages: Revisiting MNCs, CSR, and conflict. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(3), 443-464.

Kolk, A., & Lenfant, F. (2010). MNC reporting on CSR and conflict in Central Africa. Journal

of Business Ethics, 93(2), 241-255.

Lyon, T. P., & Maxwell, J. W. (2011). Greenwash: Corporate environmental disclosure under threat of audit. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 20(1), 3-41.

Lyon, T. P., & Montgomery, A. W. (2013). Tweetjacked: The impact of social media on corporate greenwash. Journal of business ethics, 118(4), 747-757.

O'Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility (CSR): Models and theories in stakeholder dialogue. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 745-758.

Ruiz I. (2018, August 30), Hambach: the battle between a forest and a coal mine threatens Germany's environmental image. Deutsche Welle. Retrieved fromhttps://www.dw.com/on October 8th, 2018.

RWE. (2016, February). RWE Biodiversity Policy. Retrieved fromhttps://www.group.rwe/on November 10, 2018.

RWE. (2018a, September). Hambach mine site. Facts and figures. Retrieved from

https://www.group.rwe/on October 23, 2018.

RWE Aktiengesellschaft. (2014) Annual report 2014. (pp. 101). Bochol: D+L Printpartner GmbH. Retrieved fromhttp://www.rwe.com/on November 4, 2018.

RWE Aktiengesellschaft. (2016). Annual report 2016. Powering. Reliable. Future. Bochol: D+L Printpartner GmbH. Retrieved from https://www.group.rwe/on November 28, 2018. RWE Aktiengesellschaft. (2017a). Our Responsibility 2017. (pp. 25, 50, 52). Munich: akzente kommunikation und beratung gmbh. Retrieved fromhttps://www.group.rwe/on October 13, 2018.

RWE Aktiengesellschaft. (2017b). Powering . Reliable. Future. Yesterday, today and

tomorrow. Annual report 2017. Bochol: D+L Printpartner GmbH. Retrieved from

https://www.group.rwe/on November 2, 2018.

RWE Facebook. (2018a, October 31). RWE - Waldbestand. Retrieved from

https://www.facebook.com/on December 4, 2018.

RWE Facebook. (2018b, November 22). Wir senken konsequent unsere CO2-Emissionen. Retrieved fromhttps://www.facebook.com/on December 4, 2018.

RWE Facebook. (2018c, December 7). Wir pflanzen und pflanzen und pflanzen. Retrieved fromhttps://www.facebook.com/on December 7, 2018.

RWE Power AG. (2005). The post-mining landscape. Recultivation in the Rhineland. RWE Power AG. Retrieved fromhttp://www.rwe.com/on October 23, 2018.

RWE Power AG. (2012). forum :terra nova. Gute aussichten am tagebau Hambach. RWE Power AG. Retrieved fromhttps://www.rwe.com/on December 5, 2018.

Appendix A - Interviews

Interview with five students from the Conference of the Youth in Poland (Bethany, Jan, Ireen, Lola, Tiem)

Sacha: For which responsibilities should activists hold RWE accountable and with what demands or even

sanctions (e.g. fines on conspiracies such as the ex CEO of RWE in the EG police force)? How do you want more democratization so that agenda setting is pushed and RWE would finally look outside the borders of science-lobby groups? With other words: show me what democracy looks like!

Ireen: But it’s a private company right? So how do they want more responsibility?

Bethany: No but its publicly backed, I think. The company has to pay for the externalities right? At the very minimal if a company is going to influence the environment and then they take all the influences on the environment for themselves in the form of taxes.

Tiem: Yes but I think the question is how we would hold them responsible.

Bethany: We should influence the government so that the government can influence RWE, if they’re going to be taxed and held accountable for their internalizes

board of influence of people from the province or area so not only shareholder to make it more democratic we should not reason: oh its a company so they’re out of politics.

Ireen: I think it’s just paying for the externalities.

Tiem: Well what I think if I hear this is that you could have board of people that live in the area for example that give influence and also have some power within RWE so not only the shareholders.

Bethany: And that could be like a board of representatives from the area. Ireen: I think that’s a good idea.

Sacha: What do you think of the 'greenwashing' projects of RWE such as the terra nova wellness center with a

beautiful view of a destructive lignite mine where even people get married? Or the park 'Sophienhöhe' that so to speak brings a balance in the ecosystem while it overflows with redwood trees that are invasive species which make ground-water levels decrease? With other words: are these projects rooted as a tree or not in their rightful place?

Bethany: Terra Nova: that’s not even greenwashing, that’s company bullshit, Ireen: It’s romanticizing this ecocide,

Bethany But they are also manipulating, they know what people are thinking, which process is going on, and they’re manipulating the whole thing, I think its bad

Jan: This is not greenwashing, because greenwashing is pretending that you’re a green company

Tiem: No I think that having a resort where you pretend that you’re pretending to develop the landscape whereas you’re destroying it is definitely a case of greenwashing

Bethany: I walked along Sophienhöhe and saw a panel: ‘And now the land will be restored better then it was when we began here’ something like that, like ‘now there are more species than ever before’

Tiem: Shifting baselines

Sascha: Why do you think that our fellow RWE activists express more concern for the larger picture of global

climate change, rather than for local unethical, unsustainable profit? Isn't it not more effective for a company to first listen to all stakeholders on a local scale and only then to broaden responsibilities? Or would you drastically suggest that RWE should immediately close the mines with negative consequences for all their sponsorship in the whole of Germany instead of stopping in lets say 2022 with a transition program on sustainable volunteering, etc.? With other words, you really want climate justice NOW?

Bethany: But if they have multiple mines, they have multiple localities, so then they are not local. Tiem: I think if you listen carefully to all the stakeholders than you will reach conclusions to hold global stakeholders responsible, and also the conclusion to close the whole mine. We can’t literally try to close the mines now but what they’re going to do now is trying to. Think local, act global.

Ireen: If you listen to local stakeholders than you can cherry pick the opinion you want to be heard.

Bethany: For example you can sponsor the locals in a sense that it would be profitable for them but how to find inter localities to be connected with each other?

Ireen: Local is more easy to manipulate so they have to frame that the locals do not combine their forces. Tiem: So actually we can wonder if RWE listens to local stakeholders at all.

Interview Peter Polder (Stroomversnellers, Milieudefensie)

1. How do you want more democratization to increase accountability for RWE?

Als ik je vraag goed begrijp, is de vraag kortgezegd hoe ziet een democratischer energiesysteem er uit. En dat is naar mijn mening een energiesysteem waar geen ruimte is voor machtconcentraties zoals RWE. Maar waarin energie opgewekt wordt door decentrale opwekking door burger cooperaties. dat was de droom van de SPD politicus Herman Schreer en het werd het fundament onder de Duitse enegriewet waarin energiecooperaties en duurzame voorrang krijgen op het stroomnet. Een constructie die tot op de dag van vandaag het graf graaft voor bedrijven als RWE. Wil je dat versneld doen dan zul je bedrijven als RWE van de markt moeten halen om ze langszaam en op een verantwoord tempo af te bouwen. Op dat moment ben je ook van allerlei uitwassen af zoals de verregaande verstrengeling van lokale overheden en RWE in het rheinland, hun lobby en PR campagnes en de manier waarop ze de vakbonden voor hun karretje hebben weten te spannen.

2. What do you think about the legitimation of RWE's greenwashing projects such as Terra Nova where people can marry with a view on a mine?

Tja, het is klassieke greenwash die bijna niet meer werkt. Ik denk dat ze hun softpower in de regio meer halen uit de diepe banden met lokale overheden (bijna allemaal aandeelhouders van RWE) en de vakbonden. Daar bovenop hebben ze een jarenlange campagne gevoerd binnen en buiten Duitsland over het mislukken van de Energiewende, het uitvallen van de stroom als de kolencentrales en kerncentrales dicht gaan, het hoger worden van de energieprijs en het verlies aan werkgelegenheid. Door dat jarenlang te herhalen zijn dat sterke mythes geworden waar veel mensen in geloven.

3. Isn't it not more effective for a company to first listen to all stakeholders on a local scale and only then to broaden responsibilities? Or would you suggest that RWE should immediately close all mines without any transition program?

Wil je als activist effectief zijn en je doel behalen dan zul je een strategische afweging moeten maken tussen een focus op het grote bredere verhaal (klimaat) of meer lokale issues (het bos, de gesloopte dorpen, de

luchtvervuiling uit de mijn). In de praktijk lopen die twee verhalen vaak naast elkaar, maar is er vermoed ik ik Duitsland een bewuste keuze gemaakt door Ende Gelande voor een focus op het klimaat verhaal. Dat is waarom we het doen, maar ook wat de meeste mensen op de been brengt. Wat betreft een politieke eis is de enigste optie het onmiddelijk sluiten van de bruinkoolmijnen in duitsland. Zonder dat gaan we een klimaatcrisis niet kunnen afwenden, en haalt duitsland zijn eigen klimaatdoelen niet.

4. Intrigerend hoe RWE zichzelf zo sterk heeft weten te verstrengelen met vakbonden, overheden etc. Is hun CSR beleid volgens jou dan meer gebaseerd op de shareholder approach in plaats van de 'societal approach' ? Met andere woorden, zie je de civil society dan als RWE's poppenspel dat al hun mythes simpelweg slikt? Ook vind ik het opmerkelijk hoe iedereen het erover eens is dat de mijn meteen moet sluiten. Zou dat niet tot het onmiddellijke faillissement van RWE leiden? Je spreekt toch ook over 'langzaam op een verantwoord tempo afbouwen'?

Over de strategie van RWE, ja dat is veel meer de stakeholder aanpak waarin ze bondgenoten zoeken of proberen te behouden.

En over de economische kant van de sluiting van dit mijncomplex, dat zal een forse dreun zijn voor RWE. Vergelijkbaar met de dreun die ze gehad hebben van de atomausstieg

Daarbij moet ik wel opmerken dat RWE defacto een sterfhuisconstructie is. Alle duurzame energie onderdelen zijn ondergebracht in een nieuw bedrijf, alle fossiele projecten blijven binnen RWE. Als de markt het gaat oplossen gaat RWE een keer failliet. Dat gaat grote gevolgen hebben voor de werkgelegenheid, en het oplappen van de schade die er is aangebracht. Ik zou het beter vinden als de overheid het bedrijf overneemt en en geleidelijk afbouwt. Dan kun je het bestaande kapitaal binnen het bedrijf inzetten voor de transitie en de afbouw, en voor een goed sociaal plan voor de werknemers.

Interview Tatjana Noah (activist)

1. How do you want more democratization to increase accountability for RWE?

I think RWE should be held accountable for meeting climate targets, and beyond. Since they're a leadng energy corporation in Germany, they have the responsibility for holding future energies in their minds and actions, and should channel investments towards scenarios where climate goals can be met. A plan for this should be transparent, available and understandable to all, without blackened figures. Cooperation with the scientific community should here be made to make quantification accurate and inexpensive.

2. What do you think about the legitimation of RWE's greenwashing projects such as Terra Nova where people can marry with a view on a mine?

Yes, I do find that somewhat twisted, also bordering on heretic and simply irresponsible. Here I find it is very much in the responsibility (or should be) of the municipalities/political sphere to stand against such projects in their viability. However, again here I am guessing that not enough of a stand is being made possible from the side of experts who actually know what these projects mean ecologically....

3. Isn't it not more effective for a company to first listen to all stakeholders on a local scale and only then to broaden responsibilities? Or would you suggest that RWE should immediately close all mines without any transition program?

I think it's important that activism targets specific, local and visible concerns. THat way there is most leverage. If we all attack global climate (in)justice, much efforts will be fruitless. If RWE activists focus on RWE and

elsewhere shell activists focus on shell, BP on BP and whatever else there is, and become truly experts on what these companies are doing, get to know the people, their leverage, etc, chances of concrete success are much greater I would say.... I don't think RWE should end immediately immediately because that collapses systems. However immediately won't happen anyway so pushing towards "immediate" still makes a lot of sense since transitioning still seems hapf hearted. It shouldn't be. More efforts need to be put into gearing full(est) investment to more C02 neutral forms of energy….

Interview Rik Bakker (activist)

Sascha: Why do you think that our fellow RWE activists express more concern for the larger picture of global

climate change, rather than for local unethical, unsustainable profit? Isn't it not more effective for a company to first listen to all stakeholders on a local scale and only then to broaden responsibilities? Or would you drastically suggest that RWE should immediately close the mines with negative consequences for all their sponsorship in the whole of Germany instead of stopping in lets say 2022 with a transition program on sustainable volunteering, etc.? With other words, you really want climate justice NOW?

Rik: Ja, ik wil climate justice now, maar daarmee bedoel ik vooral dat ik wens dat het klimaatprobleem eens echt als een extra factor in beslissingen meegenomen wordt, onder toeziend oog van een klimaatjustitie

Die bedrijven laten omvallen lijkt me een onhaalbaar en wellicht zelfs onwenselijk idee; ik ben geen econoom, maar ik zou graag druk zien van buitenaf (VN komt vandaag weer met een statement dat de inspanningen ver3voudigd moeten worden) van een instantie dat daadwerkelijk iets kan doen. De politiek kan dit natuurlijk bij uitstek, maar helaas is dat 100 procent onderdeel van het neoliberale systeem geworden

Ach ik denk maar hardop

Sacha: For which responsibilities should activists hold RWE accountable and with what demands or even

sanctions (e.g. fines on conspiracies such as the ex CEO of RWE in the EG police force)? How do you want more democratization so that agenda setting is pushed and RWE would finally look outside the borders of science-lobby groups? With other words: show me what democracy looks like!

Rik: Mbt deze vraag blijft het erg stil of weinig concreet in mijn hoofd. Waarvoor ze verantwoordelijk houden? Het leed hier, denk ik dan toch vooral. Zorgt dat het herkenbare claims worden voor anderen. Maar als je dat doet, moet je ook de politiek verantwoordelijk houden die het allemaal goed keurt en de hand boven hun hoofd houdt. Het 1 is volgens mij zinloos zonder het ander. Ook hier lijkt "exposen" trouwens weer heel relevant. Die beerput moet open

Interview Jens van Hee (activist)

1. How do you want more democratization to increase accountability for RWE?

Without supporting any of RWE’s actions, I don’t necessarily point them out as the culprit. Which frustrates me the most is that our economic system is putting resources in the hands of private companies. RWE is just a really good example of what goes wrong when we allow that: they have promises to keep to their stakeholders and they don’t stop digging till there’s no more profit to be made. So when I go out there, I go out there to protest against the absurdity and hypocrisy of the pollical leaders, who allow RWE to dig out that very polluting brown-coal in the first place - and, to prevent RWE from doing any more damage to the Hambach forest, of course. But to answer the question, more democratization would mean more lawsuits against RWE (based on the right on a good and healthy environment), and less damage being done to the remaining environment.

2. Isn't it not more effective for a company to first listen to all stakeholders on a local scale and only then to broaden responsibilities? Or would you suggest that RWE should immediately close all mines without any transition program?

The problem is that there is absolutely no place for a coal-giant as RWE in our future. When you look at the graphs made by IPCC’s ‘Special Report: global warming of 1.5°C’, it becomes very clear that every ton of CO2 counts, and that the more we continue letting that CO2-curve rise and the more we wait with letting it peak, the more devastating the impact will be, as it is the cumulative sum of CO2 that will be the decisive factor. So in fact, there is no single reason to let these giant companies, like RWE, still do what they are doing right now. Coal needs to stay in the ground, there is no other way around.

On the other hand, we may not forget that the ‘social-ecological transition will be socially just, or not be’. Which means that, unless all those workers find another job, or at least the time to prepare, you can’t just shutdown RWE’s projects within a day. But the shutdown will have to be taken place, sooner or later.

Notes PAR during action of October 26

Kurt: Is from the region, student, has been involved in different local groups for almost five years. Distrust towards RWE has grown over the years, feels promises for improvement are hollow and often end up going nowhere. Is angry about the strong presence RWE has in the regional government: RWE does a lot behind the scenes to impede progress towards a future free of fossil fuels, while they talk of insignificant ‘amazing’ achievements in the media (greening). Feels RWE and the state focus way to little on the wider issues of for example climate change, human rights, preservation of nature, and instead puts disproportionate focus on the small amount of jobs involved in lignite extraction (while they’re not open for a just transition towards green energy in which workers are compensated).

Joe: When talking about different CSR implementations (Sophienhöhe, Terra Nova, events for locals), remarked that he thinks RWE is missing the point. The most severe impact of their core business is not happening in the Hambach area, but in other places in the world, such as Syria and islands in the Pacific Ocean. People there are camping with severe droughts and famine, and rising sea levels threatening their existence respectively. RWE