Reed Elsevier is to stop hosting arms fairs over ethical concerns about its involvement with the defence industry.
The
Anglo-Dutch multinational publishing group made the announcement in the
wake of intensified campaigning against its role as organizer of nine
large arms trade fairs around the world.
It said it would ‘exit
the defence exhibitions sector’, which accounts for 0.5 per cent of its
annual £5billion ($10bn) turnover, in response to concerns from
non-governmental organizations, investors and writers for its medical
and science journals. It will sell the operation as a going concern
rather than shut it down, although it has yet to find a buyer.
‘It
has become increasingly clear that growing numbers of important
customers and authors have very real concerns about our involvement in
the defence exhibitions business,’ said Sir Crispin Davis, the group’s
chief executive. ‘We’ve listened closely to these concerns and this has
led us to conclude that the defence shows are no longer compatible with
Reed Elsevier’s position as a leading publisher of scientific, medical,
legal and business content.’ The group intends to complete its
withdrawal ‘during the second half of 2007’.
Reed Elsevier,
which employs 36,000 people worldwide and publishes thousands of
journals, books and reference works, organizes more than 430 trade
exhibitions but recently encountered trouble over its arms trade
events. The UK-based Campaign against Arms Trade (CAAT) said it had
found cluster munitions and torture equipment at Reed Elsevier’s 2006
Shot Show in the US, to which ‘human rights abusing regimes’ such as
those in Colombia, Saudi Arabia and Sudan were invited.
F&C
Asset Management and the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust decided to
sell millions of pounds’ worth of shares in the company over the issue,
and CAAT sent a letter to institutional investors urging them to follow
suit.
One of Reed Elsevier’s publications, The Lancet, also published a letter from healthcare specialists criticizing the group’s arms trade involvement.
CAAT welcomed Reed Elsevier’s decision and praised its board ‘for recognizing the concerns of its stakeholders’.
