Case STUDY : NGOs Challenge RWE on Coal Withdrawal RWE AG is a large Germany-based electric utility in Europe with ancil
Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2022 5:50 pm
Case STUDY : NGOs Challenge RWE on Coal Withdrawal RWE
AG is a large Germany-based electric utility in Europe with
ancillary operations throughout the world (rwe.com). Over the past
decade RWE has made significant strides in shifting from a
hydrocarbon-based generation to renewables, including a significant
reduction in coal-fired generation. (See rwe.com sustainability
report) RWE has pledged to be free of coal-fired generation in
Europe by 2030. However, according to the NGO coalexit
(coalexit.org), as of the end of 2020, RWE still had over 14,000
Megwatts of installed coal-burning generating capacity,
constituting 41% of its total electrical generating capacity and
23% of its revenue. As a result, coalexit, reclaim finance
(reclaimfinance.org), ember (ember-climate.org), and other climate
change-focused NGOs are pressing RWE and other utilities to
accelerate the closing of their coal-fired plants. Actors in the
Case: RWE, EU, and European National Governments, Media, Anti-Coal
NGOs, Coalexit, Reclaimfinance, Ember, Urgewald, Global Energy
Monitor Financial Institution Banks,Equity Investors,World Bank
SUPPORTING REFERENCES GIVEN IN THE CASE STUDY: RWE History of
Electrical Generation The following excerpts are from the RWE
website: https://www.rwe.com/en Cutting other emissions: See
https://www.rwe.com/en sustainability report EMBER: Focus on OECD
Countries and Governments Worldwide: The following are excerpts
from the EMBER website: (www.ember-climate.org Urgewald: Focusing
on Public Campaigning and the Media: https://urgewald.org/english
STRATEGIES: Business Strategy for Dealing with NGOs The most
effective business strategy for dealing with NGOs begins with
avoiding strategic surprise. This is most easily accomplished by
means of a careful monitoring of cultural and social change,
emerging social movements, and ongoing NGO activities. Many firms
accomplish this by simply maintaining subscriptions to NGO
publications and, wherever possible, direct interaction with NGO
leadership. The latter strategy--interaction with NGOs--is not
always an option, since many NGOs (1) believe business cannot be
trusted; (2) do not want to reveal their plans; (3) believe their
power is weakest in direct negotiations with business; and (4) fear
of losing their credibility with other NGOs if they "break bread
with the enemy." Nevertheless, if it can be achieved the value of
face-to-face contact with NGO leaders is considerable. The
scorecard on business efforts to deal with NGOs since the late
1960s was abysmal to start, but has improved in recent years as
managers have learned more about NGO agendas, strategies and
tactics, and accepted that they are inevitable factors in the
business environment. Having One's "Ducks in a Row": Many
businesses in the past have underestimated the professional
technical knowledge of NGOs. Those movements which have strong
support in the middle and upper-middle classes--e.g., the
environmental, consumerism, and animal rights movements--have been
able to marshal highly knowledgeable professional personnel to
staff the NGOs and serve in various voluntary capacities as expert
witnesses and lobbyists in the public policy process. Faced with
formidable adversaries, business managers have found it essential
to have "all their ducks in a row," viz., to have a strong,
thoroughly researched, and, supportable position. The days when a
business could present a poorly presented argument and carry the
day, if they ever existed, are surely past today. If nothing else,
NGOs have forced business to confront their plans and actions in
detail before presenting them publicly. This has had the advantage
of leading business away from policies and actions which could not
stand the test of scrutiny to which NGOs are certain to put them.
In certain rare instances, the business has been able to play an
important role in countermovements that develop in opposition to
specific or general social movements. In recent years a large
number of countermovements have developed in opposition to Climate
Change. The Life Cycle of Social Movements: Social movements and
NGOs can be described as having a life-cycle similar to the
life-cycle of living organisms, or, in business experience,
products. In the early stages of growth, social movements and NGOs
are often brought into being by leaders who are agitators, and led
by other leaders who have charismatic qualities, sometimes focused
on a very narrow issue or set of issues. A good example would be
the Union of Concerned Scientists, which began in opposition to the
spread of nuclear weapons, but since has broadened its focus to a
wide range of issues with high scientific content. As they mature,
social movements and NGOs become more bureaucratic and
conservative, and their leadership needs shift to skills possessed
by administrators and statesmen. The challenge is to keep activist
members and financial supporters (both individual small
contributors and foundations), engaged. This often results in the
NGO broadening its focus well beyond its initial agenda. World
Wildlife Fund is a good example; it now deals with issues well
beyond protecting wildlife.
CASE QUESTION 1. Is cooperating with any of the NGOs a good
strategy or a waste of time? If a good strategy, which NGO would be
most useful to RWE? (maximum 60 words)
AG is a large Germany-based electric utility in Europe with
ancillary operations throughout the world (rwe.com). Over the past
decade RWE has made significant strides in shifting from a
hydrocarbon-based generation to renewables, including a significant
reduction in coal-fired generation. (See rwe.com sustainability
report) RWE has pledged to be free of coal-fired generation in
Europe by 2030. However, according to the NGO coalexit
(coalexit.org), as of the end of 2020, RWE still had over 14,000
Megwatts of installed coal-burning generating capacity,
constituting 41% of its total electrical generating capacity and
23% of its revenue. As a result, coalexit, reclaim finance
(reclaimfinance.org), ember (ember-climate.org), and other climate
change-focused NGOs are pressing RWE and other utilities to
accelerate the closing of their coal-fired plants. Actors in the
Case: RWE, EU, and European National Governments, Media, Anti-Coal
NGOs, Coalexit, Reclaimfinance, Ember, Urgewald, Global Energy
Monitor Financial Institution Banks,Equity Investors,World Bank
SUPPORTING REFERENCES GIVEN IN THE CASE STUDY: RWE History of
Electrical Generation The following excerpts are from the RWE
website: https://www.rwe.com/en Cutting other emissions: See
https://www.rwe.com/en sustainability report EMBER: Focus on OECD
Countries and Governments Worldwide: The following are excerpts
from the EMBER website: (www.ember-climate.org Urgewald: Focusing
on Public Campaigning and the Media: https://urgewald.org/english
STRATEGIES: Business Strategy for Dealing with NGOs The most
effective business strategy for dealing with NGOs begins with
avoiding strategic surprise. This is most easily accomplished by
means of a careful monitoring of cultural and social change,
emerging social movements, and ongoing NGO activities. Many firms
accomplish this by simply maintaining subscriptions to NGO
publications and, wherever possible, direct interaction with NGO
leadership. The latter strategy--interaction with NGOs--is not
always an option, since many NGOs (1) believe business cannot be
trusted; (2) do not want to reveal their plans; (3) believe their
power is weakest in direct negotiations with business; and (4) fear
of losing their credibility with other NGOs if they "break bread
with the enemy." Nevertheless, if it can be achieved the value of
face-to-face contact with NGO leaders is considerable. The
scorecard on business efforts to deal with NGOs since the late
1960s was abysmal to start, but has improved in recent years as
managers have learned more about NGO agendas, strategies and
tactics, and accepted that they are inevitable factors in the
business environment. Having One's "Ducks in a Row": Many
businesses in the past have underestimated the professional
technical knowledge of NGOs. Those movements which have strong
support in the middle and upper-middle classes--e.g., the
environmental, consumerism, and animal rights movements--have been
able to marshal highly knowledgeable professional personnel to
staff the NGOs and serve in various voluntary capacities as expert
witnesses and lobbyists in the public policy process. Faced with
formidable adversaries, business managers have found it essential
to have "all their ducks in a row," viz., to have a strong,
thoroughly researched, and, supportable position. The days when a
business could present a poorly presented argument and carry the
day, if they ever existed, are surely past today. If nothing else,
NGOs have forced business to confront their plans and actions in
detail before presenting them publicly. This has had the advantage
of leading business away from policies and actions which could not
stand the test of scrutiny to which NGOs are certain to put them.
In certain rare instances, the business has been able to play an
important role in countermovements that develop in opposition to
specific or general social movements. In recent years a large
number of countermovements have developed in opposition to Climate
Change. The Life Cycle of Social Movements: Social movements and
NGOs can be described as having a life-cycle similar to the
life-cycle of living organisms, or, in business experience,
products. In the early stages of growth, social movements and NGOs
are often brought into being by leaders who are agitators, and led
by other leaders who have charismatic qualities, sometimes focused
on a very narrow issue or set of issues. A good example would be
the Union of Concerned Scientists, which began in opposition to the
spread of nuclear weapons, but since has broadened its focus to a
wide range of issues with high scientific content. As they mature,
social movements and NGOs become more bureaucratic and
conservative, and their leadership needs shift to skills possessed
by administrators and statesmen. The challenge is to keep activist
members and financial supporters (both individual small
contributors and foundations), engaged. This often results in the
NGO broadening its focus well beyond its initial agenda. World
Wildlife Fund is a good example; it now deals with issues well
beyond protecting wildlife.
CASE QUESTION 1. Is cooperating with any of the NGOs a good
strategy or a waste of time? If a good strategy, which NGO would be
most useful to RWE? (maximum 60 words)