• Effective engagement with the extractive industry
• Capacity Building
• Citizen Advisory Councils
• 1% Earth Profit Fund
• Energy Revolution

• Membership in the SEAPRISE list automatically implies membership in the CEESP Commission.
• Membership is by invitation, which is issued by one of the SEAPRISE Chairs on behalf of the CEESP Chair, or on the recommendation of experienced SEAPRISE members.

Top

1. To study ways for conservation organisations to engage effectively with the extractive industries towards improving their policies and practice.
2. To increase the capacity of civil society and governments to work effectively with the extractive industry, particularly in countries with a low capacity of government and civil society to participate effectively in planning/managing extractive industry projects.
3. To improve corporate environmental and social accountability through developing and implementing mechanisms, notably citizens councils, that enable stakeholders to engage in a fully informed dialogue with the private sector.
4. To promote the 1% Earth Profits Fund, a newly proposed private-sector finance initiative to provide increased and sustained support to biodiversity conservation and sustainable development.
5. To promote an "Energy Revolution" that will reduce the impact of oil and gas on climate change and biodiversity. This will include the removal of all subsidies to the Oil and Gas Industry (which are currently approximately $230 billion a year (UNEP 2003)) and apply the subsidies to help the industry to engage in renewable energy and environmental and socially sound energy/transportation systems and reduce the need to negatively affect areas of high biodiversity.

1. Effective engagement with the extractive industry
In recent years there has been an explosion of voluntary initiatives intended to improve the social and environmental performance of business, including corporate social responsibility (CSR), socially-responsible investment (SRI), product certification and labelling, corporate sustainability reporting, etc. Some of these initiatives have been spearheaded by IUCN members. At the same time, other IUCN members remain sceptical of the potential of the private sector to achieve social and environmental goals voluntarily.
Many concerns were expressed by IUCN members about trans-national corporations of especially the extractive industry having succeeded in marginalising and neutralising International conservation organisations by providing relatively small sums of money for conservation work. Many advocacy organisations label funding from the extractive industry to environmental organisations as greenwashing.

At the Third World Conservation Congress in Bangkok it also became apparent to CEESP members that some conservation organisations who accept funding from the extractive industry are ill informed about the negative impacts of these industries on the environment and people. Greenwashing is likely to take place when organisations are both strapped for resources and poorly informed.

Other well-known interactions between the extractive industry and International conservation organisations are high-level dialogues and partnerships such as, for example, the IUCN-ICMM dialogue or the EBI (Energy and Biodiversity Initiative). These interactions generally aim to develop voluntary codes of good environmental and social conduct and to integrate considerations of biodiversity in the development of extractive industry projects. The organisations involved generally recognise that the extractive industries cause environmental degradation, but are convinced that the industry, as being a part of the problem, could also become a part of the solution.

Many SEAPRISE members, affected people, indigenous people groups and advocacy organisations are deeply concerned about these high-level partnerships. Many are having second thoughts about the effective and fair engagement of all stakeholders, especially indigenous and affected peoples groups, in such partnerships/dialogues. Others believe that these dialogues do not generate tangible results in the field, because discussions are too theoretic and the terminology that is used, such as "biodiversity" or "sustainable development" is too broad and too vague. Private sector and the environment movement often differ fundamentally in their actual idea of what these terms actually mean in practice. Others label high level dialogues as deep greenwashing. They believe that these efforts are part of a political strategy of the industry to convince civil society and national governments of the "self-regulating" capabilities of companies with the ultimate aim to weaken and prevent the development of binding legislation and regulation.

SEAPRISE members will study the driving forces behind good environmental and social conduct of the private sector. SEAPRISE will make conservation organisations better aware of the impacts of the extractive industry on people and the environment. SEAPRISE will investigate the limits of voluntary codes of good conduct and study the respective roles governments and civil society should play in making markets and business more sustainable. Real life cases will be taken under the loop in the analysis.

SEAPRISE will advocate for more concreteness in high level dialogues. Our Commission is furthermore committed to provide affected communities with a voice in the high-level dialogues between the conservation community and the extractive industry.

In order to realise our goals we are especially interested in hearing from those communities most impacted by the extractive industries. Please visit the CEESP page on Mining and Biodoveristy.

Top

2. Capacity building
CEESP members have been active over the past years to enhance the capacity of civil society groups and governments to enter in a more equitable dialogue with the extractive industry. Many stakeholders in the prospect of oil, gas and mining exploitation expressed a need for independent advice and capacity building activities.

SEAPRISE members assist civil society groups and government institutions with decision making procedures regarding oil, gas and mining exploitation. They give advice about Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEA), the identification of "no go zones" and on how to fit extractive industry projects within National Sustainable Development plans, Poverty Reduction Plans, Energy and Transport Strategies.
Advice is also provided on a project level. SEAPRISE members work with stakeholders during especially the critical early planning phases of extractive industry projects, when awareness of stakeholders about best practices and undesirable side effects is low. Especially during these early planning phases, it is important that stakeholders have a thorough understanding about best practices and potential impacts because crucial decisions about social and environmental safeguards are taken in this period. Stakeholders mostly become aware about negative impacts only when undesirable side effects start to appear and when it is too late to put necessary safeguards in place. In this common scenario, violent conflicts between companies and their stakeholders may arise (see scheme below (Geert van Vliet, 1998)). (Complete PPT presentation downloadable here).