Cover image courtesy of Coca-Cola’s Replenish Africa Initiative.
Written by Daniel Cheong, The University of Oklahoma
In this article, Coca-Cola’s Replenish Africa Initiative is examined against the backdrop of the global water crisis.
Abstract
This article is an investigation into Coca-Cola’s motivations for engaging in African development through the Replenish Africa Initiative (RAIN), a water stewardship program. Through RAIN, Coca-Cola has launched numerous water restoration projects across Africa. Due to the contributions of the RAIN program and other global water stewardship efforts, Coca-Cola touts itself as a water neutral company, as it offsets every drop of water used in its operations through water stewardship. However, given the immense size of Coca-Cola and its water-related operations, RAIN is insufficient to supplant Coca-Cola’s water usage, and Coca-Cola runs RAIN largely as a distraction from the company’s waste of water. Criticisms of Coca-Cola’s water stewardship lie within its misleading presentation of its activities and Coca-Cola’s harmful water practices elsewhere in the world.
Introduction
The urge to help Africa has inspired much foreign intervention, for better or for worse. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that endeavor to solve Africa’s problems face a dilemma where good intentions can be misguided, and the sheer complexity of the issue they try to address is either underestimated. The global water crisis ravaging Africa fails to be an exception, and the case of Coca-Cola’s water stewardship in Africa highlights the disparity between an NGO’s intentions and the effects of its contributions. With The Coca-Cola Foundation’s Replenish Africa Initiative (RAIN) as a vehicle, Coca-Cola provides solutions to many of Africa’s water problems, aiding at least forty-one African countries [1]. This benefits the Coca-Cola brand as sustainable, and the restoration of water displaced by the company can lead to a reduction in overall global water consumption. However, the total contributions of Coca-Cola’s water stewardship to alleviate the global water crisis is exceeded by the destruction the company does to local water ecosystems, and Coca-Cola hides this fact. For Coca-Cola, rather than implementing costly operational changes, the company has elected to run various water stewardship projects whose cumulative sum can outweigh the company’s water usage, so that the company can achieve a state known as water neutrality. Coca-Cola’s public relations team uses the company’s water stewardship efforts to generate positive buzz for the company, but these efforts fail to solve the core of the global water crisis. This article explores the motivations behind Coca-Cola, a profit-driven multinational corporation’s, urge to help Africa and critically assess its water stewardship on an international scale. This article contends that Coca-Cola’s water stewardship scores neglectful at best and malicious at worst, as the company touts the positive impact brought about by the Replenish Africa Initiative to conceal its negative contributions to the global water crisis, which outweigh any benefits brought by replenishing Africa. For RAIN specifically, Coca-Cola uses RAIN as a tool to garner international goodwill and to overshadow its inability to become fully water sustainable. Two major concerns will be raised regarding Coca-Cola’s water practice: the ineffectiveness of RAIN’s water displacement projects to compensate for Coca-Cola’s impact on water and the existence of water management scandals outside of Africa that dispute the company’s sincerity to mitigate its waste of water.
What is the Replenish Africa Initiative (RAIN)?
Due to the increasing consumption of water, an impending global water crisis is approaching, which carries numerous social, environmental, and economic repercussions. Water-related issues are amplified further in developing regions in Africa, which experience “severe health issues” from “a lack of proper sanitation and drinking water” [2]. Coca-Cola conducts its efforts to alleviate Africa’s water problems through a program called Replenish Africa, abbreviated RAIN. RAIN was launched in 2009 as Coca-Cola’s “flagship African community program” for “clean water and sanitation access” [3]. Prior to the establishment of RAIN, Coca-Cola took strides towards improving the global water situation, initially in 2004 when the company’s first global water efficiency progress report was created and later in 2007 when the company announced Replenish, its first water stewardship program [4]. The target of Replenish is explicit: “return to nature and communities an amount of water equivalent to what is used in finished beverages” before 2020 [5]. There is a term to describe Coca-Cola’s goal to “give” a drop of water “for every drop” it uses: water neutrality [6]. RAIN, an initiative committed to improving water access in Africa, is the product of the goals set by Replenish. Through RAIN, Coca-Cola enacts water stewardship projects to improve the state of water access in Africa. Projects range from hygienic water training in Ebola-ravaged countries to bolstering existing aquifers in South Africa [7]. RAIN aims to conduct enough water restoration projects to offset all the water filling Coca-Cola’s soda bottles, effectively replacing every drop used in its bottles.
The accomplishments of RAIN are impressive, and the organization appears reputable. Notably, RAIN has met its intended goal five years before the deadline of 2020 [8]. RAIN’s triumph in meeting Coca-Cola’s key water stewardship goal five years early resulted in a $35 million expansion of the program, further bolstering the program’s capacity to assist Africa. As of writing this article, its website lists many impressive achievements, including but not limited to reaching out to forty-one African countries, boasting a network of over three hundred partners both public and private, and positively affecting water access and sanitation for over six million Africans [1]. Furthermore, a review of RAIN shows that the organization’s achievements are not simply for show. RAIN takes on sophisticated water issues and presents solutions that address not only the scientific needs of the community but also its social needs. RAIN’s projects fall under one of three specific focus categories: water sanitation and hygiene, productive use of water, and watershed protection [1]. Furthermore, for any given project, three community-based criteria must be met before the project is greenlit: it “must enable women and youth empowerment”, “build the capacity of utilities”, and “increase water security” [1]. The specificity of the projects RAIN undergoes and the community-oriented criteria supplementing each project showcases RAIN’s social consciousness and thorough planning.
Specific RAIN projects highlight the organization’s ability to present complex solutions to complex problems. Two examples shared in this article are RAIN’s water sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions and RAIN’s watershed work in Matatiele, South Africa. The RAIN Water for Schools project, a project designed to address the first focus of RAIN, involves building water points and gender-segregated latrines for one hundred schools in South Africa, for the express purpose of “[increasing] female attendance in schools and [empowering] girls to share proper hygiene and sanitation behaviors with their communities” [9]. To assist RAIN with its efforts, the South African government’s Department of Basic Education, The Mvula Trust, and H2O for Life have partnered with RAIN. This project demonstrates RAIN’s multi-faceted approach to community development and water troubleshooting towards a multifold goal, in this case helping access to sanitary water conditions and empowering women. RAIN implements a similar multifactorial approach in its watershed project in Matatiele, complete with an NGO partner with whom to share the workload. In Matatiele, women and youth are employed to clear invasive plant species that disrupt the flow of local creeks [10]. RAIN administers similar work in the Wolseley Wetlands of South Africa, and both plant clearing projects are carried out with the partnership of the World Wide Fund (WWF) for Nature South Africa. Throughout Africa, RAIN has executed approximately one hundred and twenty projects exhibiting high levels of social and ecological awareness, marking a momentous contribution towards replenishing Africa’s water.
The Advantages of The Coca-Cola Company’s Water Stewardship
One major benefit from Coca-Cola’s operation of RAIN is that it affirms Coca-Cola’s image as a sustainable company that promotes progressive values. For most companies, branding is a crucial component for success; Coca-Cola’s brand ranks among the most recognizable internationally [11]. Coca-Cola deliberately associates its brand with promoting international human rights, global stability, and most importantly, sustainable development, which is defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the future generations to meet their own needs” [2]. To this end, Coca-Cola engages in international activities such as RAIN to strengthen Coca-Cola’s association with world peace, and every year, the company releases a sustainability report recounting its progress and ongoing activities in the pursuit of sustainability. In an exploration of sustainability reports released by Coca-Cola to the public, Jones and Comfort identified several common themes across the company’s brand of sustainability, such as climate protection, water stewardship, human and workplace rights, community development, the economic empowerment of women, and sustainable agriculture. Each of these values presented by Coca-Cola is reflected in RAIN, further reinforcing the association between Coca-Cola and sustainability. Furthermore, Coca-Cola’s work to promote peace and stability can enact long-term gains for the company upon success. By “contributing to national stability”, Coca-Cola can plant its brand into a developing nation’s culture or create new markets [12].
Coca-Cola routinely practices global sustainability efforts such as RAIN to support its brand. In an article about Coca-Cola’s international activities and their impact on Coca-Cola’s brand titled “The Business of Peace: Coca-Cola’s Contribution to Stability, Growth, and Optimism”, Coca-Cola executive Hamish Banks describes the mechanism of how Coca-Cola brands itself as the “commodity of humanity” [12]. Banks introduces the Golden Triangle model of business to describe how Coca-Cola efforts, which usually involve extensive partnership networks. In the Golden Triangle model, the government, civil society, and the private sector all cooperate to achieve a common goal. The result of a Golden Triangle relationship varies from the execution of an engineering project to the enactment of a progressive policy, and in a traditional Golden Triangle relationship, all parties involved benefit from the collaboration. The Golden Triangle model provides legitimacy and context to RAIN; in fact, Coca-Cola’s web page on the RAIN program directly mentions partnerships with “governments, the private sector and civil society” [3]. For example, in RAIN’s Water for Schools project, the partners that form a Golden Triangle relationship are named. Alongside Coca-Cola, the South African government’s Department of Basic Education and citizens who are employed for the project fulfill the other two requirements to create a complete Golden Triangle. To build its brand, Coca-Cola forms Golden Triangle relationships across the globe, boosting the company’s association with “universal human traits” [12]. These international ventures ultimately enhance Coca-Cola’s social value and branding.
Branding aside, Coca-Cola holds a vested interest in water stewardship due to the increasing scarcity of water. An existing prediction exists that “two-thirds of the world’s population” will experience “water scarcity” by 2025, provided that no change to current water consumption behavior occurs [2]. Additionally, an estimation conducted by the 2030 Water Resources Group, a collection comprised of Coca-Cola, its business partners, and the World Bank, by 2030, water demand will outstrip water supply [2]. As a beverage company, Coca-Cola relies on water to create its products. Water is the “lifeblood” of the company, as well as a critical contributor to the “safety, health and sustainability of communities and ecosystems where it operates” [2]. In order to prevent a potential water crisis, Coca-Cola began its sustainability efforts, with water stewardship efforts like RAIN becoming a vital component of the company’s strategy, and failure to achieve sustainability could result in a shortage of water for the company to use. Therefore, gains in branding and the threat of a water crisis provides business justification for Coca-Cola to participate in international outreach such as RAIN. By engaging in sustainable development efforts, both Coca-Cola and the international community benefit.
The Flaws in Coca-Cola’s Water Strategy
In 2016, an official Coca-Cola press release announced that the company had replenished all the water it uses. The crux of its claim is that Coca-Cola managed to “replenish” the water from its “global sales volume”, by restoring 115% of the water “used in Coca-Cola’s beverages” back to the communities [6]. Despite the incredulity of Coca-Cola’s claim, the press release’s description of the company’s methodology is sound. Through a collaboration with The Nature Conservancy and following verification by several third-party firms, a report over one thousand pages long was produced which concluded that Coca-Cola reached its water replenishment goal. The announcement should be cause for celebration, but there are several dubious aspects of the report that expose the underlying flaws of Coca-Cola’s water stewardship practices.
Coca-Cola’s press release unveiled deceptive practices in its water stewardship efforts and their representation. For example, never in the press release is the term “water neutrality” stated, but it is heavily alluded to in the article’s rhetoric. The callback to the original goal of Coca-Cola’s Replenish, the use of quantitative figures for readers to compare the water replenished versus water used, and the language of the article in how Coca-Cola was able to “replenish, or in other words balance, the equivalent amount of water” to meet “such an aggressive water replenishment target” all imply that Coca-Cola became water neutral, but it was never explicitly declared [6]. Still, a 2016 full-page ad for Coca-Cola in The New York Times declares “For every drop we use, we give one back” [13]. Readers are left to draw their own conclusions, but the choice of language used strongly implies water neutrality. The reason that the term is never mentioned is simple: the company was never truly water neutral. Although Coca-Cola can safely declare that they have replenished all the water that can fill its bottles, the same cannot be said for the company’s overall water use, which in comparison dwarfs the amount of water replenished by RAIN [13]. Furthermore, in some cases, RAIN actually increases water consumption, as several of their projects are geared towards improving water access, which in turn promotes more water use. Coca-Cola’s dance around the term “water neutrality” reveals a calculated PR attempt by Coca-Cola to display itself as a sustainable company that achieved water neutrality while still leaving room for plausible deniability.
Activists have criticized Coca-Cola’s water stewardship by pointing out that Coca-Cola still uses more water in its operations than it restores from water stewardship. Richard Phillips summarizes the challenge to Coca-Cola’s water neutrality claim in “Taking the fizz out of Coca-Cola’s water replenishment claims.” First, he argues that the primary method by which Coca-Cola replenishes water, water stewardship projects, distracts from the company’s own water usage practices, which are lackluster. Second, Phillips points out the “uneven distribution of the water Coca-Cola returns”, seeing as only “half” of the water Coca-Cola replenishes occurs at the water source used for its operations [14]. This is a large issue because, according to the Centre for Research on Globalization, “Water issues are mostly localized in their impact” [14]. Improving water accessibility in Africa contributes little to depleted water from “an aquifer in India” [14]. Controversies regarding Coca-Cola’s operations in India accentuate Phillips’ point; while Coca-Cola has been an excellent water steward in Africa with RAIN, the company has sparked major backlash from Indian activists for its overuse of local aquifers. Indian activist Amit Srivastava, in response to Coca-Cola’s claim of water neutrality, calls the company “misleading” and “designed”, while being “far removed from the reality on the ground” [15]. He delivers a litany of Coca-Cola’s mismanagement of water in India, including the government closure of the Kerala bottling plant in 2005 and the cessation of the bottling plant in Varanasi in 2014, both occurring because of Coca-Cola’s overconsumption of local aquifers. The closure of the Varanasi bottling plant especially reflects the hypocrisy of Coca-Cola’s water practices since it transpired after Coca-Cola committed to water sustainability. Thus, Coca-Cola fails to solve local water issues the company itself causes, and its water stewardship efforts are not the solution. Finally, Phillips’ last argument underscores the futility of Coca-Cola’s water stewardship endeavors. He notes that Coca-Cola’s reported water usage deliberately excludes the largest contributor to its total, agriculture. According to the Water Foot Print Network, 442 liters of water are required to grow the cane sugar for one liter of Coca-Cola, and 618 liters of water are required to produce one liter of Coca-Cola from High Fructose Corn Syrup [14]. Coca-Cola prides itself in restoring around 0.5 liters per bottle of Coca-Cola, a far cry from the water used for Coca-Cola’s agricultural operations. Hence, Coca-Cola’s claim of water neutrality is misrepresentative of the ongoing water crisis, and its water stewardship efforts, including RAIN, have a negligible impact on making the brand sustainable.
Perhaps one of the most biting criticisms of Coca-Cola stems from an investigation by Christine MacDonald with the aid of The Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute. MacDonald blasts Coca-Cola’s water neutrality claim along with Coca-Cola’s history of water practices, starting with the very concept of “water neutrality.” MacDonald traces the term “water neutrality” to the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, where a South African businessman coined the term. Intended as a water analog to the carbon offset program, the Water Neutral Foundation was founded to support the idea, but “struggled to earn credibility with the scientific community” due to the absence of a reliable method for “assessing water use” [13]. When, during that same year, a “water-use accounting method” known as the Water Footprint was developed, Coca-Cola saw an opportunity to improve its water sustainability efforts [13]. The Water Neutral Working Group, which was comprised of Coca-Cola, the Water Footprint team, representatives of the Water Neutral Foundation, and other companies and agencies, began discussions to address the water crisis. However, the optimism entering the Water Footprint conversations between companies and conservationists crumpled after “initial calculations” unveiled an alarming finding for the practicality of water stewardship: “there aren’t enough viable offset projects to actually balance corporate agricultural water footprints” [13]. Even if it were “clear”, that Coca-Cola could not become water neutral, its executives elected to “push on” [13]. First, the company implemented “water accounting sleight of hand” to lower their water footprint benchmarks, and later, Coca-Cola terminated its partnership with the original developers of the Water Footprint in favor of The Nature Conservancy, an organization that receives sizeable donations from Coca-Cola [13]. A “Water Footprint” for the “global enterprise” of Coca-Cola was never formally created, and the benchmark of water neutrality as conservationists intended was never set [13]. Coca-Cola’s response to the insufficiency of water stewardship projects illustrates the company’s willingness to neglect the true effort needed to effect global change while still generating good press through soft water stewardship practices.
Corporations as Water Stewards
Coca-Cola is not alone in water stewardship. Other large companies, such as Unilever, Nestle, Heineken, and Pepsi Co engage in water stewardship practices [16]. Some companies, such as Nestle, Idea, and SABMiller, were participants with Coca-Cola in the Water Neutral Working Group meetings of the late 2000s [13]. Barilla, a pasta company, offers an alternative example for a multinational corporation undertaking water sustainability activities. Like Coca-Cola, agriculture dominates much of Barilla’s water footprint, as Barilla needs to grow wheat to produce pasta [16]. However, in contrast to Coca-Cola’s utilization of international water stewardship projects to reduce its water footprint, Barilla’s focus is on optimizing its agricultural supply chain. In their steps to address the impact of agriculture on its water footprint, Barilla has implemented the Aureo Wheat Programme, a program dedicated to transitioning “the cultivation of durum wheat” into the “fully rainfed” “Aureo wheat” bringing the company freshwater savings of approximately 40 trillion liters from 2011 to 2015 [16]. Ultimately, a case study of Barilla underscores the shortcomings of Coca-Cola’s water sustainability approach through water stewardship.
Much study has been performed on the growing number of large corporations engaging in Golden Triangle-based water stewardship projects. In her article on the subject, Finnish Environmental Institute scientist Sojamo outlines the nature of corporate water stewardship. Sojamo defines corporate water stewardship as “beyond the fence-line” activities of companies that promote “socially equitable, environmentally sustainable and economically beneficial” water usage with a “stakeholder-inclusive process that involves site and catchment-based actions” [17]. This definition encompasses a variety of activities, and Coca-Cola’s activities through RAIN embody the typical example of corporate water stewardship. Despite the potential of corporate water stewardship to do good, the practice has been largely “perceived” as a “PR-stunt” or a bid for “private and foreign securitization of resources”, “worsening the situation in places with weak public institutions and regulation” [17]. Water is a lucrative and shrinking commodity, after all, but corporate intervention has strong potential to benefit “solving the pressing global water challenges”, and “governments and communities” have a “lack of capacity and resources” to handle the challenge of water on their own [17]. Furthermore, both water-using corporations and public institutions win in a successful water stewardship effort, as an increase in the availability of water worldwide benefits both parties. Thus, a so-called “prisoner’s dilemma” between corporations and government ensues over their coordination in water stewardship.
In her breakdown of the “prisoner’s dilemma” of corporate water stewardship, Sojamo determines the vulnerabilities present in the current state of corporate water stewardship and calls for action to resolve them. At its core, both local governments and corporations stand to “gain important benefits from cooperating or suffer from the failure to do so” while a cooperative partnership is “difficult or expensive” to establish [17]. Two major obstacles feed the “prisoner’s dilemma” of corporate water stewardship: the power imbalance favoring corporations over other agents in water stewardship and the ambiguous legitimacy for corporations to “engage on water” [17]. First, the “power asymmetry” between corporations and “other actors” has been “attributed to countless injustices on water” and is widely seen as the source of the “critical scholarship” on corporate water stewardship [17]. Second, legitimacy is “dynamically intertwined” with corporate power and must be accepted for a water stewardship initiative lest the corporation is faced with backlash [17]. Three recommendations are presented to “unlock” the “prisoner’s dilemma”: an open acknowledgment of power, a “need to more carefully evaluate and enhance” the legitimacy of corporate water stewardship, and support to strengthen public institutions and civil society [17]. Each of these recommendations can contribute to a future of more successful water stewardship initiatives.
Conclusion
In this article, Coca-Cola’s flagship water stewardship program, RAIN, is evaluated. Despite its corporate nature arousing suspicion for the program’s intentions, RAIN’s efforts are found to be genuine and beneficial to Africa, and both RAIN’s mission and the projects it undertakes are well developed. However, RAIN is not bereft of its corporate roots. Coca-Cola, which operates RAIN, incorporates RAIN’s accomplishments into the company’s branding as a sustainable company, but upon scrutiny, Coca-Cola’s actions show that it cares more about its image as a sustainable company than in truly becoming sustainable, as seen by water controversies in India, the relatively small impact of RAIN to address the global water crisis, and the company’s deceptive “water neutral” marketing. Finally, other efforts to combat the water crisis discussed, such as Barilla, a multinational pasta corporation that does not engage in flashy water stewardship activities, and the practice of corporate water stewardship as a trend is examined. In summary, although Coca-Cola would advertise otherwise, it is not a sustainable company and might not ever be.
This post may have been edited by admin for clarity and length.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
“About the Replenish Africa Initiative | RAIN.” Replenish Africa, 2018, replenishafrica.com/about/. Accessed 4 May 2021.
“Coca-Cola Intensifies Water Stewardship Partnerships in Middle East and North Africa.” M2 Presswire, Mar 22, 2018. ProQuest, https://login.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/wire-feeds/coca-cola-intensifies-water-stewardship/docview/2016586577/se-2?accountid=12964.
“Coke: First Fortune 500 Company to Replenish All the Water It Uses Globally | Press Release.” Coca-Colacompany.com, 2016, www.coca-colacompany.com/press-releases/coca-cola-is-the-first-fortune-500-company-to-replenish-all-the-water-it-uses-globally. Accessed 5 May 2021.
Hower, Mike. “Coca-Cola Extends Funding for Replenish Africa Initiative by $35 Million.” Sustainable Brands, Sustainable Brands, 17 Apr. 2015, sustainablebrands.com/read/leadership/coca-cola-extends-funding-for-replenish-africa-initiative-by-35-million. Accessed 5 May 2021.
Manley, Lisa. “PRESS RELEASE: Coca-Cola Helps Improve Lives of African Women and Girls.” Dow Jones Institutional News, Mar 22, 2011. ProQuest, https://login.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/wire-feeds/press-release-coca-cola-helps-improve-lives/docview/2156469862/se-2?accountid=12964.
Nine Decades of Coca-Cola in Africa. SyndiGate Media Inc, Cape Town, 2018. ProQuest, https://login.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/other-sources/nine-decades-coca-cola-africa/docview/2038157085/se-2?accountid=12964.
“Projects of the Replenish Africa Initiative | RAIN.” Replenish Africa, 2018, replenishafrica.com/projects/. Accessed 5 May 2021.
“Replenish Africa Initiative | the Coca-Cola Company.” Coca-Colacompany.com, 2021, www.coca-colacompany.com/sustainable-business/water-stewardship/replenish-africa-initiative. Accessed 5 May 2021.
Smith, Theresa. “Coca-Cola Replenishing Water Supply in South Africa.” ESI-Africa.com, 15 Jan. 2021, www.esi-africa.com/regional-news/southern-africa/coca-cola-replenishing-water-supply-in-south-africa/. Accessed 22 Apr. 2021.
Srivastava, Amit. “Never Mind the Greenwash – Coca Cola Can Never Be ‘Water Neutral.’” The Ecologist, 17 Nov. 2017, theecologist.org/2015/aug/25/never-mind-greenwash-coca-cola-can-never-be-water-neutral. Accessed 5 May 2021.
“The Coca-Cola Company.” The Nature Conservancy, 3 May 2021, www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/who-we-are/how-we-work/working-with-companies/companies-investing-in-nature1/coca-cola-company/.
“Water Stewardship & Sustainability | the Coca-Cola Company.” Coca-Colacompany.com, 2021, www.coca-colacompany.com/sustainable-business/water-stewardship. Accessed 5 May 2021.
Secondary Sources
Antonelli, Marta, and Luca F. Ruini. “Business Engagement with Sustainable Water Resource Management through Water Footprint Accounting: The Case of the Barilla Company.” Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 6, 2015, pp. 6742-6758. ProQuest, https://login.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/scholarly-journals/business-engagement-with-sustainable-water/docview/1696014615/se-2?accountid=12964, doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/10.3390/su7066742.
Banks, Hamish. “The Business of Peace: Coca-Cola’s Contribution to Stability, Growth, and Optimism.” Business Horizons, vol. 59, no. 5, Sept. 2016, pp. 455–461, reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0007681316300192?token=D5824FA36CAAC767CDD547B1BA1F0A847B654DA630D3D5964178A761EFA7C079A46D2E3143855180F4FED00BB67A4E4E&originRegion=us-east-1&originCreation=20210423023141, 10.1016/j.bushor.2016.03.018. Accessed 22 Apr. 2021.
Jones, Peter, and Daphne Comfort. “The Coca Cola Brand and Sustainability.” Indonesian Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, vol. 1, no. 1, 2018, pp. 34–46, econbiz.org/index.php/ijaber/article/view/1/3. Accessed 23 Apr. 2021.
Sojamo, Suvi. “Unlocking the “Prisoner’s Dilemma” of Corporate Water Stewardship in South Africa-Exploring Corporate Power and Legitimacy of Engagement in Water Management and Governance.” Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 6, 2015, pp. 6893-6918. ProQuest, https://login.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/scholarly-journals/unlocking-prisoners-dilemma-corporate-water/docview/1696014933/se-2?accountid=12964, doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/10.3390/su7066893.
Walsh, Heather, and Timothy J. Dowding. “Sustainability and The Coca-Cola Company: The Global Water Crisis and Coca-Cola’s Business Case for Water Stewardship.” International Journal of Business Insights & Transformation 4 (2012).
Other
MacDonald, Christine. “Inside the Bad Math That Lets Coca-Cola Say It Gives Back All the Water It Uses.” The Verge, The Verge, 31 May 2018, www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17377964/coca-cola-water-sustainability-recycling-controversy-investigation. Accessed 22 Apr. 2021.
Phillips, Richard. “Taking the Fizz out of Coca-Cola’s Water Replenishment Claims.” Corporate Citizenship, 19 Sept. 2016, corporate-citizenship.com/2016/09/19/taking-fizz-coca-colas-water-replenishment-claims/. Accessed 5 May 2021.
[1] “About the Replenish Africa Initiative | RAIN.” Replenish Africa, 2018, replenishafrica.com/about/. Accessed 4 May 2021.
[2] Walsh, Heather, and Timothy J. Dowding. “Sustainability and The Coca-Cola Company: The Global Water Crisis and Coca-Cola’s Business Case for Water Stewardship.” International Journal of Business Insights & Transformation 4 (2012).
[3] “Replenish Africa Initiative | the Coca-Cola Company.” Coca-Colacompany.com, 2021, www.coca-colacompany.com/sustainable-business/water-stewardship/replenish-africa-initiative. Accessed 5 May 2021.
[4] “Water Stewardship & Sustainability | the Coca-Cola Company.” Coca-Colacompany.com, 2021, www.coca-colacompany.com/sustainable-business/water-stewardship. Accessed 5 May 2021.
[5] “The Coca-Cola Company.” The Nature Conservancy, 3 May 2021, www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/who-we-are/how-we-work/working-with-companies/companies-investing-in-nature1/coca-cola-company/.
[6] “Coke: First Fortune 500 Company to Replenish All the Water It Uses Globally | Press Release.” Coca-Colacompany.com, 2016, www.coca-colacompany.com/press-releases/coca-cola-is-the-first-fortune-500-company-to-replenish-all-the-water-it-uses-globally. Accessed 5 May 2021.
[7] “Projects of the Replenish Africa Initiative | RAIN.” Replenish Africa, 2018, replenishafrica.com/projects/. Accessed 5 May 2021.
[8] Hower, Mike. “Coca-Cola Extends Funding for Replenish Africa Initiative by $35 Million.” Sustainable Brands, Sustainable Brands, 17 Apr. 2015, sustainablebrands.com/read/leadership/coca-cola-extends-funding-for-replenish-africa-initiative-by-35-million. Accessed 5 May 2021.
[9] Manley, Lisa. “PRESS RELEASE: Coca-Cola Helps Improve Lives of African Women and Girls.” Dow Jones Institutional News, Mar 22, 2011. ProQuest, https://login.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/wire-feeds/press-release-coca-cola-helps-improve-lives/docview/2156469862/se-2?accountid=12964.
[10] Smith, Theresa. “Coca-Cola Replenishing Water Supply in South Africa.” ESI-Africa.com, 15 Jan. 2021, www.esi-africa.com/regional-news/southern-africa/coca-cola-replenishing-water-supply-in-south-africa/. Accessed 22 Apr. 2021.
[11] Jones, Peter, and Daphne Comfort. “The Coca Cola Brand and Sustainability.” Indonesian Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, vol. 1, no. 1, 2018, pp. 34–46, econbiz.org/index.php/ijaber/article/view/1/3. Accessed 23 Apr. 2021.
[12] Banks, Hamish. “The Business of Peace: Coca-Cola’s Contribution to Stability, Growth, and Optimism.” Business Horizons, vol. 59, no. 5, Sept. 2016, pp. 455–461, reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0007681316300192?token=D5824FA36CAAC767CDD547B1BA1F0A847B654DA630D3D5964178A761EFA7C079A46D2E3143855180F4FED00BB67A4E4E&originRegion=us-east-1&originCreation=20210423023141, 10.1016/j.bushor.2016.03.018. Accessed 22 Apr. 2021.
[13] MacDonald, Christine. “Inside the Bad Math That Lets Coca-Cola Say It Gives Back All the Water It Uses.” The Verge, The Verge, 31 May 2018, www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17377964/coca-cola-water-sustainability-recycling-controversy-investigation. Accessed 22 Apr. 2021.
[14] Phillips, Richard. “Taking the Fizz out of Coca-Cola’s Water Replenishment Claims.” Corporate Citizenship, 19 Sept. 2016, corporate-citizenship.com/2016/09/19/taking-fizz-coca-colas-water-replenishment-claims/. Accessed 5 May 2021.
[15] Srivastava, Amit. “Never Mind the Greenwash – Coca Cola Can Never Be ‘Water Neutral.’” The Ecologist, 17 Nov. 2017, theecologist.org/2015/aug/25/never-mind-greenwash-coca-cola-can-never-be-water-neutral. Accessed 5 May 2021.
[16] Antonelli, Marta, and Luca F. Ruini. “Business Engagement with Sustainable Water Resource Management through Water Footprint Accounting: The Case of the Barilla Company.” Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 6, 2015, pp. 6742-6758. ProQuest, https://login.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/scholarly-journals/business-engagement-with-sustainable-water/docview/1696014615/se-2?accountid=12964, doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/10.3390/su7066742.
[17] Sojamo, Suvi. “Unlocking the “Prisoner’s Dilemma” of Corporate Water Stewardship in South Africa-Exploring Corporate Power and Legitimacy of Engagement in Water Management and Governance.” Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 6, 2015, pp. 6893-6918. ProQuest, https://login.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/scholarly-journals/unlocking-prisoners-dilemma-corporate-water/docview/1696014933/se-2?accountid=12964, doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.ou.edu/10.3390/su7066893.
