Xerox Statement on Greenpeace Report

by, Karen Arena, vice president, Global PR, Xerox

Xerox is a global company with operations in over 160 countries.  We recently learned of Greenpeace’s report concerning Asia Pulp & Paper (APP) and after completing our due diligence we wanted to share the following official executive response with our partners, suppliers, employees, and stakeholders. 

____________________________________________________________________

 

Xerox is committed to developing and acting on sustainable paper sourcing practices in in all the places around the globe where we conduct business. 

We do not currently source from AP&P, and there are no Xerox products in the marketplace coming from AP&P. While at one time AP&P was a Xerox supplier, our corporate direction has been to cease doing business with AP&P on a global basis. This direction was put in place years ago and is based on our stringent paper sourcing guidelines. We have since been working with our local operations in countries around the world to ensure that all paper suppliers for Xerox products must comply with our sustainability standards and that we’re terminating relationships with suppliers like AP&P that do not meet our standards. In working with independent affiliates around the world, we continue to educate and reinforce our sustainability standards and sourcing guidelines, so they can make the same decisions we have with respect to suppliers like AP&P.

UPDATE, March 28, 2012

ADDENDUM:  CONFIRMATION OF AP&P PURCHASING BAN

We have completed a thorough evaluation of Xerox entities around the world.  While we have confirmed that no Xerox branded products have been sourced from AP&P since implementing our ban in 2002, we have uncovered that a Xerox European entity bought and resold AP&P branded paper as recently as 2011.    This was against the company’s purchasing protocols.  The activity has since ceased, corrective actions have been taken, and we are reinforcing  our policy — banning any purchase of paper from AP&P.   We appreciate that this violation of policy was brought to our attention by GreenPeace, and hope that, in the future, the group will contact us directly when they uncover discrepancies to our stringent paper sourcing policy.

Related Posts

Receive Updates

17 Comments

  1. Calvin Beauchesne March 17, 2012 - Reply

    this is laughable. Greenpeace doesn’t lie. STOP using APP!

  2. Andrew Pope March 19, 2012 - Reply

    Firstly thanks for getting back to me on your Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/XeroxCorp, I now see where the original copy of that comment came from, so I’ll repost my questions to it here.

    It’s great that you have a commitment to sustainable paper sourcing and that this direction has been in place for a number of years.
    What’s not clear is how Greenpeace managed to source Xerox paper that has tested independently to contain a strong indication of tropical hardwood fibres (http://tinyurl.com/GreenpeaceRaminPaperBriefing on page 14)
    Is it therefore Xerox’s position that the analysis is incorrect, and the paper stock does not contain these fibres?

    You mention that your corporate direction is to cease doing business with AP&P and that this was put in place years ago.
    I wasn’t too sure from what you’ve said whether this direction is now complete, and that you currently do no further business with them directly or indirectly through other suppliers.

    You also mention that over the last week you have been working behind the scenes to cease trading with companies that don’t meet your sustainability standards.
    Is that process complete or do you know at what point that process will complete?

    And just finally, are you planning on issuing any further information or media releases at any point in response to the accusation from Greenpeace and your recent research into Xerox’s paper sourcing to confirm your position, or does this blog post constitute Xerox drawing a line in the sand on the issue.

  3. Karen Arena March 19, 2012 - Reply

    Hi Calvin, We took the report very seriously, and we are confident that Xerox paper products are not sourced from AP&P.

  4. Bruce Levitan March 20, 2012 - Reply

    Thanks for this response. I hope that you are telling the truth. If you are, that’s great (and I have left a message on Greenpeace’s blog to similar effect, asking them to update their report accordingly).

  5. Kitchell Ives March 20, 2012 - Reply

    Dear Karen: I have read the Greenpeace report and looked through the table of evidence showing that Xerox Astro copy paper sold in Greece tested positive for mixed tropical hardwood fibres. Can you tell me when Xerox Greece stopped sourcing copy paper from Indah Kiat, the mill named in the report?

  6. Kitchell Ives March 22, 2012 - Reply

    Dear Karen: I am keen to know the answer to this. Mongabay published an article yesterday with a similar observation, and noted that Xerox had proved unavailable for comment. It certainly deserves public clarification.

    http://news.mongabay.com/2012/0321-xerox_no_app.html

  7. Andrew Pope March 22, 2012 - Reply

    Hi there Karen,

    I thought I’d follow up with you on whether you’d had any more thoughts on our questions surrounding the Greenpeace report.

    Our original response is buried deep within the Facebook timeline profile http://www.facebook.com/XeroxCorp
    so I’ve reposted with a link to the original

    Looking forward to receiving a response from you soon.

  8. John Morgan March 23, 2012 - Reply

    I find your statements hard to believe – and my instinct is to trust the Greenpeace report, which seems to have more science and evidence to back their claims than your simple denial.

    Perhaps a more aggresive statement from Xerox, about how you plan to route out all APP, and rainforest products, from any of your products would convince me that you are not as guilty in rainforest destruction as APP?

    John

  9. edhiobekend March 25, 2012 - Reply

    “Greenpeace doesn’t lie”? What? You have got to be joking me. GP’s entire strategy is based on spinning or inventing science to ensure its followers keep donating. This is all about establishing an FSC monopoly in Asia. If you don’t know what that means, you’re probably not suitably informed to comment on this subject.

  10. edhiobekend March 26, 2012 - Reply

    How come Greenpeace found APP’s fibres in Xerox, Danone and National Geographic papers, when all of those companies had stopped using APP for years? It ought to remind us of when IPS (the lab Greenpeace used to test fibres) disagreed with the message Greenpeace promulgated from IPS’s results. That would be funny if there wasn’t so much at stake. Rainbow warrior? Ship of Lies. Why does Greenpeace use the term illegal logging? That’s simply not the case at all. Illegal logging would shut down a company like APP instantly. Greenpeace are experts at telling the parts of the story that attract donations. They’ve been caught out inventing “science” AGAIN.

  11. Karen Arena March 28, 2012 - Reply

    We have updated our statement today. Thanks for your comments and support as we work every day to make the right choices when it comes to the planet and our company’s responsibilities and contributions towards its health.

  12. Tigergrum March 30, 2012 - Reply

    Dear Karen

    Thanks for corrected statement – obviously Greenpeace’s evidence was obviosly valid.

    I’m intrigued to know why you think Greenpeace should report violations of your own policies in advance.

    Should the police also be given advance notice of illegal conduct rather than just arresting without warning?

  13. ID March 30, 2012 - Reply

    So edhiobekend – you accused Greenpeace of making up the evidence against Xerox – and today Xerox admits at the top of this page that it has indeed found APP in its supply chain.

    Why are you so quick to defend APP? Or perhaps you are APP?

  14. edhiobekend April 5, 2012 - Reply

    @ID. I follow the forestry sector closely as part of my studies. I am not for APP, but I am against the way Greenpeace spins facts and invents science. That’s my point. Any organisation that derails a train carrying nuclear waste because they don’t agree with nuclear power needs to be shut down if you ask me. The story they tell about APP is mostly rubbish. APP don’t log illegally. They would be shut down immediately if they did. This is about Greenpeace’s version of sustainable forestry management and the rest of the world’s. If you don’t agree with Greenpeace’s, they “derail your train”.

Post A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To see how we protect your personal data, view our Privacy Policy.