9.23.2005 ET

(CSRwire) The results of the 2005 Accountability Rating®, a corporate accountability rating of FORTUNE global 100® companies, were announced today by international think tank AccountAbility and consultancy csrnetwork. The rating, to be published in the 3 October international editions of FORTUNE magazine, scores companies on how seriously their future decisions will consider non-financial issues.

Topping the survey is BP, followed by Royal Dutch Shell Group (No. 2); Vodafone (No. 3); HSBC Holdings (No. 4); Carrefour (No. 5); Ford Motor (No. 6); Tokyo Electric Power (No. 7); Électricité de France (No. 8); Peugeot (No. 9); and Chevron (No. 10).

According to AccountAbility CEO Simon Zadek, The Accountability Rating® is a business, not a moral, rating and seeks to identify the smart rather than label the good or the bad.

'The rating shows which companies recognise that implementing accountable management and addressing social and environmental issues today will build business value tomorrow,' he said.

BP tops the list for the second year running with a score of 78 out of 100. The top ten scored an average of 63, almost double the 32 point average across all 100 companies.

The AccountAbility Rating reviews published reports from FORTUNE Global 100® companies to measure how seriously they consider non-financial factors in running their businesses.

Points are awarded for stakeholder engagement, governance and business strategy. Other criteria include performance management, non-financial reporting and independent assurance.

'The Accountability Rating is the only index that assesses and compares the world's 100 biggest grossing companies,' said Mark Line, director of CSRnetwork. 'Most other indices look only at the companies which have volunteered to be scrutinised and therefore expect or hope to do well.'

The rating shows an improvement in corporate accountability among the 100 companies. The average score has risen by eight points since last year and this year, one third achieved a "pass mark" of 40 points, whereas only one in ten did so in 2004.

However, according to Zadek, the figures are still disturbingly low for the world's largest companies. 'The gap between the leaders and laggards raises important questions about the latter's ability to manage underlying risks and exploit emerging opportunities,' he said.

The biggest gain was made by HSBC which soared 41 places to be fourth in the 2005 ranking. In the past two years HSBC has named a subcommittee of its board to oversee corporate responsibility and make it its number one strategic goal. This year, its decision to use the World Bank's Equator Principles in deciding whether to lend to dam and forestry projects contributed to its success in the ranking, as did its use of the international AA1000 standard to assess its own governance structures.

Europe continues to lead the field, with European companies scoring an average of 40 and accounting for seven of the top ten. US corporations have an average score of 24 - an improvement over last year's rating of 16, but lagging behind Asian competitors on an average of 28.

US corporations generally score poorly on stakeholder engagement, non-financial reporting and third-party assurance. They are also far less likely than European counterparts to comply with internationally recognised labour, human rights and environmental standards such as the UN Global Compact's Ten Principles.

For the full ranking of the FORTUNE Global 100®, visit www.accountabilityrating.com

For more information please contact: