Global Standards, Corporate Diagrams and Indigenous Agency: ExxonMobil in Russia and Alaska

• Author: Maria Tysiachniouk, Laura Henry, Leah S. Horowitz
• Position: Department of Geographical and Historical Studies, University of Eastern Finland, Finland/Department of Government and Legal Studies, Bowdoin College, USA/Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA
• Pages: 1-31

© 2022 Maria S. Tysiachniouk, Laura A. Henry and Leah S. Horowitz. This is an Open Access article distributed under the

terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 License. eISSN 2387-4562. https://arcticreview.no.

Citation: Maria S. Tysiachniouk, Laura A. Henry and Leah S. Horowitz. “Global Standards, Corporate

Diagrams and Indigenous Agency: ExxonMobil in Russia and Alaska” Arctic Review on Law and Politics,

Vol. 13, 2022, pp. 1–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v13.3549

Arctic Review on Law and Politics

Vol. 13, 2022, pp. 1–31

1

*Correspondence to: Maria S. Tysiachniouk, e-mail: Maria.Tysiachniouk@uef.

Peer-reviewed article

Global Standards, Corporate

Diagrams and Indigenous Agency:

ExxonMobil in Russia and Alaska

Maria S. Tysiachniouk*

Department of Geographical and Historical Studies, University of Eastern Finland, Finland

Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University, the Netherlands

Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA

Centre for Independent Social Research, Russia

Laura A. Henry

Department of Government and Legal Studies, Bowdoin College, USA

Leah S. Horowitz

Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies and School of Human Ecology, University of

Wisconsin-Madison, USA

Abstract

This paper examines how a transnational corporation (TNC) translates global standards and

corporate policies into programs at sites of extraction. We explore this question through a com-

parative analysis of ExxonMobil’s operations in two different politico-economic contexts: the

Sakhalin-1 project in Russia and the Point Thomson project on the North Slope of Alaska, with

eld work on Sakhalin Island in 2013–2015 and in Alaska in 2015–2018. Theoretically, we use

the Deleuzian concept of “diagram” as a lens through which to examine corporate policies, and

a governance generating network (GGN) approach to analyze similarities and differences in

benet-sharing programs in both localities. We show that while global commitments and cor-

porate principles contribute to a standardized approach to community engagement, Indigenous

movements and associations, the government, and other corporate actors may play important

roles in inuencing how corporate policies and global standards are implemented at sites of

extraction. Moreover, adaptation of community engagement, benet-sharing, and environmen-

tal monitoring in one location may shape how the company’s strategies are implemented in other

sites of extraction.

Maria S. Tysiachniouk, Laura A. Henry and Leah S. Horowitz

2

Keywords: Sakhalin Island, Alaska North Slope, Arctic, benet-sharing, corporate

social responsibility, governance generating networks, transnational corporations, non-

governmental organizations, global standards, Indigenous peoples

Responsible Editor: Øyvind Ravna, Faculty of Law, UiT The Arctic University of

Norway

Received: October 2021; Accepted: January 2022; Published: February 2022

1 Introduction

How do transnational corporations (TNCs) translate global standards and corporate

policies into programs at sites of extraction? TNCs, by denition, operate simultane-

ously in many countries, encountering different political, legal, and social contexts.

TNCs ostensibly are guided by corporate policies, corporate social responsibility

principles, and commitments to international conventions on issues ranging from

the environment to labor rights and Indigenous rights.1 But to what degree does the

implementation of a TNC’s international and corporate commitments vary depend-

ing on the local context? We explore these questions through a comparative analysis

of ExxonMobil’s operations in two very different political and economic contexts:

the Sakhalin-1 project in Russia and the Point Thomson project on the North Slope

of Alaska, locations where the company engages Indigenous peoples who live proxi-

mate to territories of extraction.

Over time and under pressure from non-governmental organizations (NGOs),

international nancial institutions have incorporated global social and environmental

standards into their investing and lending requirements, paying particular attention

to Indigenous rights.2 Global conventions and corporate social responsibility (CSR)

policies are meant to ensure that local communities can inuence how extraction

occurs and in some way benet from it, and also to ensure environmental protec-

tion.3 Benet-sharing represents the distribution of monetary and non-monetary

benets generated by TNCs’ resource extraction to affected Indigenous and local

communities.4 A TNC’s CSR policies are, in part, designed to avoid conict and

reputational damage through community engagement. However, a TNC’s commit-

ment to CSR principles does not guarantee effective community consultation or fair

and equitable benet-sharing arrangements with Indigenous peoples living near the

company’s operations.5 How standards and policies are implemented will depend in

part on how they are developed in corporate ofces, adapted to local conditions, and

changed over time.

This paper examines how ExxonMobil implements its global commitments and

corporate policies in Indigenous communities near sites of extraction in two very dif-

ferent political and social contexts. Specically, we investigate ExxonMobil’s policies

related to community engagement and benet-sharing -- ranging from charitable

support to resource transfers to Indigenous peoples. We use a governance generating