University of Vaasa - Vaasan yliopisto

533
The role of the province and district governments is mostly confined to the
implementation of and monitoring of compliance with the federal CSR-related
directives, negotiating with the commercial organisations in the process. An example
of this limited role is one Krasnoyarsk province legislative assembly representative
who was reported saying that he received most of the news about the EHES project
from Moscow and not from the local government who were “as if with their mouths
full of water” (Doktorov 2009)
The Russian Government as a Driver for CSR Policy and Practice
Judging by the CSR reports and other publicity by Rosneft and RusHydro 50 , the
influence of the federal government on their CSR activities is limited. They, for
instance, do not make use of the Ecological Doctrine. Potentially, the reason is that
the Doctrine does not make any enforceable demands of action on the part of the
firms. Rosneft and RusHydro also do not refer to the 2005 Federal Council report on
CSR in Russia.
Overall, business is consistently ahead of the government in developing CSR
initiatives. Such organisations as The Union of Russian Industrialists and
Entrepreneurs and Association of Russian Managers have been producing numerous
publications on the subjects f CSR for years. In fact, the 2005 Federal Council report
on “CSR in modern Russia” discussed above was written with the help of the
Association of Russian Managers materials.
The influence of Krasnoyarsk province government on business CSR often involves
organising projects to encourage CSR among local business. The motivations for this
are probably two-fold: fulfilment of the federal directives on one hand and plugging
in the holes in the local budget on the other. An example is the Charity Season –
2008 event organised by the Kranoyarsk government: local businesses financed
small grants for charity projects competed for by local citizen organisations
(Krasnoyarsk Province Portal 2008). Overall, it appears that while the provincial
government does not dictate the business CSR agenda, it manages to mobilize some
companies for its own projects.
Rosneft clearly lists both federal and local governments among its major
stakeholders. Is sees the government as an industry regulator and as a potential
partner development programmes. RusHydro similarly sees the government as an
industry regulator. “Realisation of the government energy policy” is the first item on
their CSR agenda in the 2007 report. However, both companies do not see the
government as a source of CSR definitions or as a force that dictates how they should
engage with their other stakeholders.
5 Both our case companies, Rosneft (parent of Vankorneft) and RusHydro produce CSR reports. Rosneft’s CSR
publicity on its official website is, however, much more extensive than RusHydro’s. Rosneft published very
extensive CSR reports in 2006 (242 pages) and 2007 (135 pages). In comparison, RusHydro only published a 33page
report in 2007. Rosneft’s also provides detailed summaries of various aspects of its CSR, very visibly, on its
website, whereas RusHydro’s presentations are limited to a few documents.