Last checked at 
Jan 18 (Reuters) - Corporate philanthropy has limits when it comes to rounding up aid for civilians stuck in conflict zones, I learned from speaking with aid group leaders.
It's a tough situation for many organizations since private money can arrive more quickly than public funds. Several of the leaders said donors find it hard to contribute for aid to places like Gaza or Afghanistan, fearful their help could spark criticism or backlash.
I've written up their remarks in this week's main story below. You'll also find links to coverage of how workers prioritize work-life balance over pay, and on how anti-ESG messages did not seem to sell well in Iowa's first Republican presidential contest on Monday.
Yes this newsletter usually runs on Wednesday but Monday was a holiday, and don't even ask about my difficult week in several snowbound airports. Feel free to connect with me on LinkedIn. Or, if you have a news tip, potential content, or general thoughts you can email me at ross.kerber@thomsonreuters.com
This week's most-read
Saudi Arabia says focused on all kinds of energy, not just oil
German industry, unions, environmentalists call for better carbon management
Spirit Airlines extends slide as blocking of JetBlue merger fuels uncertainty
Workers view work-life balance as more important than pay, study finds
Corporate donations lag in wartime Corporate donors find it easier to contribute money after an earthquake than during a war. That's according to leaders of several large aid groups, speaking as they face big demands for their services in Gaza, Afghanistan and other conflict zones. Many executives worry donations could alienate clients, employees or other stakeholders with strong views on various sides, said Douglas Jackson, the CEO of Project C.U.R.E., a Denver-based nonprofit that organizes shipments of medical supplies. He said companies are especially wary in the case of Gaza, where almost two million displaced people are sheltering in tents and other temporary accommodation while a siege by Israeli forces has killed some 24,000 people, in response to massacres and hostage-taking by Hamas militants on Oct. 7.
Jackson said companies, who he declined to name because of sensitivities, fear their donations could upset people who support a particular side. “To some of these executives, donating may seem like a good idea until protesters shut down the Brooklyn Bridge,” he said, referring to actions by pro-Palestinian groups on Jan 8. "The companies that have donated say 'this is going to the conflict,' not to one side or the other," Jackson said.
Data provided by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the world’s largest humanitarian network, show a similar dynamic. Corporations and foundations provided from 5% to 8% of cash contributions after earthquakes in Morocco, Syria and Turkey, but hardly any of the cash contributed to what the federation calls the “Middle East Complex Emergency” or for its appeal for the “Bangladesh Population Movement” to help people displaced from Myanmar.
An exception is aid for Ukraine, where western businesses took public stands against Russia’s invasion of the country in 2022. Aid groups say media coverage often drives donations.
Contributions tracked by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce show many large U.S. businesses have sent money both to Israeli aid groups and organizations that help civilians in Gaza. I asked to speak with a few large companies but none made executives available including JPMorgan, PricewaterhouseCoopers, and Delta. Kari Niedfeldt-Thomas, managing director of Chief Executives for Corporate Purpose, which advises companies on community investments and contributions, said disasters like typhoons or floods can easily fit corporate decision-making tools. In contrast the length of wars can't be predicted and can divide employee opinion. For executives overseeing donations, such factors “breed uncertainty about what to do,” Niedfeldt-Thomas said. Lynn Hector, senior director for international aid agency Mercy Corps, said corporate donations are important because they often arrive more quickly than government funds. She cited fundraising, including from corporate donors, for humanitarian efforts in Syria during the country’s civil war. Over 10 years through 2022 Mercy Corps raised about $16 million in private funds for relief efforts there. In contrast, it raised $11.2 million in just two months after a 2015 earthquake in Nepal.
“This is so fraught. Companies don't want to alienate their constituencies," Hector said.
Company News
Shell faces another shareholder resolution filed by a group of 27 investors calling for it to set tighter climate targets, though a similar one got backing from only about 20% of votes cast last year.
Automakers Tesla and Volvo Car said they were suspending some production in Europe due to component shortages, signs that attacks on shipping in the Red Sea are hitting manufacturers.
France saw record demand for a new green bond that will raise 8 billion euros, sold through banks including BNP Paribas, JPMorgan and Societe Generale , according to lead managers.
On my radar The two U.S. Republican presidential candidates who ran hardest against corporate ESG considerations, Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy, both fared poorly in the Iowa caucuses on Jan 15. It's not like Nikki Haley or Donald Trump ran on pro-ESG credentials, but the results may be a sign voters aren't so concerned about the topic. A budget proposal by California Governor Gavin Newsom would pause funding to implement newly-signed laws including a pair of landmark climate measures, sparking concerns from bill sponsors. (Reporting by Ross Kerber; Editing by David Gregorio)
