Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

Conflict minerals: Genocide in your gadgets?

Firms try to limit conflict minerals in electronics. It's no easy task.

(Page 2 of 2)

Rather than wait for a scientific breakthrough, several tech giants, including Apple, have pushed for stronger audits and mining certifications, similar to the Kimberley Process that helps curb conflict diamonds.

Skip to next paragraph

These companies ranked highest in Enough's report.

Hewlett-Packard topped the list for publishing the names of its suppliers, the first in the industry to do so, and for carrying out regular audits. Intel pioneered on-site visits at its tantalum smelters, spurring other companies to follow suit. Motorola backed an African certification policy and helped lead an industry trade group aimed at curbing the use of conflict minerals.

While The Enough Project assigned scores, Lezhnev says he prefers thinking of the standings as tiers. Companies with 15 percent or more (see chart, above) form the top tier, those leading the industry in their efforts toward responsible change.

The middle tier – 5 to 14 percent – made initial steps, yet lacked either vigor or transparency, according to Enough.

Finally, companies in the bottom slots may not be using any conflict minerals – but, as far as Enough can tell, they have done little or nothing to find out.

The study is based on an 18-part survey, sent to each of the 21 companies. About two-thirds of them responded, says Lezhnev. Enough then used public information and corporate reports to fill in unanswered questions where possible.

By next summer, some of these details will be required by law. Last year's Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act includes a provision that requires all publicly traded American companies to disclose their suppliers.

Mr. Sterns calls the bill "very intelligent" but also flawed. The law doesn't punish companies for using conflict minerals, only fines them for not reporting it. "The punitive measures come from us – the consumers," he says. "The second flaw is with the approach. Due diligence relies on having good information. But the situation on the ground is so confusing that it's tough to find out who's in violation."

Sterns worries that the tech industry will simply cut off all shipments from Congo, rather than spend the time and effort to investigate which mines are run legitimately. Companies that really want to make a difference, he says, should agree to pay a premium for minerals proven to be conflict-free, just as Americans do with fair-trade coffee.

"None of us thinks an embargo on eastern Congo is a good idea," says Sterns. "Past efforts have failed because they failed to change the incentives."

For more tech news and reviews, sign up for the free weekly Innovation newsletter, emailed out every Wednesday morning.


Read Comments

View reader comments | Comment on this story