Lecture 4 Current issues, future challenges

pptx

School

Yorkville University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1010

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

pptx

Pages

44

Uploaded by EarlMetal12264

Report
“Exploring the Functions of Business” ADMS 1010 Petrenko Anton , PhD Office Hours: By appointment E-Mail: petrenko@yorku.ca
The focus of today's lecture is on the understanding of and evaluation of evidence for in an argument. We will proceed to consider two papers dealing with issues in Social Corporate Responsibility and Disaster Management. Course Objectives 1) Evidence 2) Types of Arguments (Deductive and Inductive) 3) Strengths and Weaknesses of Deductive and Inductive Arguments 4) Social Corporate Responsibility 3) Milton Friedman: The Responsibility of Business is to Maximize Profit 4) Disaster Management 5) Homer-Dixon: Tectonic Stresses
Midterm preview. Written answer Q. Read the newspaper article below and then respond to the following questions in the exam booklet provided: a) Using your own words, state the primary claim that is being made in the article and identify any secondary or related claims. (≈5 marks) b) Then critically evaluate the evidence provided by the author using the terms and criteria taught in this course. (≈10 marks) c) Next, describe the author’s underlying values and identify any assumptions they may have made. (≈5 marks) d) Finally, discuss whether you think the author’s claims are valid and convincing and use your critical analysis above to defend your response. (≈5 marks) Write your answer as a single, holistic response, but provide indicators for the different sections in the column (e.g. a), b), etc.). The approximate mark values for the various sections are indicated but your response will be assessed as a whole.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
What is Evidence? A response to the question: Why is the conclusion true? Accuracy Precision Sufficiency Representativeness Authority Evidence for the claims (premises for the conclusions) can be evaluated on a number of criteria. Is the premise true (accurate)? Is it sufficiently precise (or vague, ambiguous)? Does it provide enough foundation for drawing the conclusion? If it is based on induction, is the sample representative of the population? Otherwise, is there a variety of sources? If we are asked to trust the source, does it have credible authority?
Categories of Arguments All arguments fall into two main categories: Deductively valid arguments and non- deductively valid arguments. Deductively valid (demonstratively valid) (non-demonstratively valid) Inductively Strong Not on the Test!
Strengths and Weaknesses of Deductive Arguments All humans are mortal beings Socrates is human Socrates is a mortal being The strength of deductive arguments is that if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true with absolute certainty. The weakness is that they do not provide new information in the conclusion.: Demonstrable (can prove) Certain (absolute certainty) The strength of inductive arguments is that they do provide new information in the conclusion. The weakness is that it is not 100% certain. Don’t provide new knowledge If you can show in a deductive argument that one of the premises is false (inaccurate) then the whole argument fails. 90 out of 100 surveyed people support Trudeau Therefore, 90% of all people support Trudeau Not on the Test!
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Inductive Arguments There are different types of inductive arguments: hypothesis to the best explanation (scientific theories), generalizations (statistics), causal arguments, analogies, appeal to expertise. For example, we have encountered a number of inductive generalizations: 36% of all Torontonians polled support the mayor Therefore, 36% of all Torontonians support the mayor All observed things dropped off a height fall down Therefore, all things dropped off a height fall down In all these cases, the conclusion about the whole group is made based on the observations of some smaller sample of that group. In all observed instances, high government spending is followed by inflation Therefore, high government spending causes inflation Notice that the conclusion is NOT certain (it is possible that premises are true, but the conclusion turns out false.) All science—almost all knowledge about the world, apart from mathematical knowledge– is based on generalizations like that. Physics, biology, chemistry, psychology, medicine, etc…
Inductive Generalizations Therefore, all managers work at a unrelenting pace … 56 UK foreman work at unrelenting pace… (UK study) 160 UK top and middle managers work at unrelenting pace… Therefore, following the logic of managerial enterprises causes industrial success 200 largest manufacturing companies succeeded by following logic of managerial enterprise (in US, UK, Germany) Notice that we have encountered these arguments in the past articles. The study of four presidents shows that some were reader- learners and some were listener-learners… Therefore, all people are either reader-learners or listener- learners In all these cases, the conclusion kind of jumps to a generalization over based on a smaller number of cases…
Induction Inductive inference involves taking a description of some group (sample) and extending that description to items outside the sample (target population). For example: Observed water boils at 100C All water boils at 100C The property ‘boils at 100C” was observed only of some water ( sample ), but it was extended to all water (the target population ) . The property true of the observed sample was extended beyond that sample, to all members of the target population. sample relevant property target population
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Strength and Weaknesses of Inductive Arguments The problem of course is that it is always possible (even with a huge number of observations) that the generalization is wrong. There is no guarantee. Still. This does not mean such arguments are bad (our science is based on them). An inductive argument is strong when its conclusion is more or less acceptable (probable) relative to its premises. Let’s look at this inductive generalization: All dogs I have encountered are aggressive. Therefore, all dogs are aggressive So, what makes inductive generalizations strong or weak? Why is this a weak argument? This argument is weak for two reasons: 1. There are millions of dogs, but you probably encountered a couple of hundreds—which means you missed a lot that could be different ( small sample size ). 2. Even if you did encounter a large number, it is likely that they come from the same environment, where you live. This means your sample lacks is unrepresentative.
Sufficiency and Representativeness 2. Representativeness of Sample : the more random the sample, the more representative it is of the population, the more reliable is the conclusion. In such case, you draw your inference about all dogs on the basis of a sample that is too small and that fails to represent the variability (e.g. different breeds, sizes) of dog temperaments and the frequency (e.g. ratio of different breeds) of the occurrence of such temperaments among dogs. Your sample is biased! You need to walk around more and sample dogs randomly. population It is possible that you live in an area that has a lot of guard dogs, and you have encountered only dogs trained to be aggressive. sample 1. Sample Size : the greater the sample size, the stronger the support for the conclusion.
Inductive Generalizations Therefore, all managers work at a unrelenting pace … 56 UK foreman work at unrelenting pace… (UK study) 160 UK top and middle managers work at unrelenting pace… Notice that we have encountered these arguments in the past articles. The study of four presidents shows that some were reader- learners and some were listener-learners… Therefore, all people are either reader-learners or listener- learners Ask yourself. How big is the sample of 4 presidents to generalize across all people? Very small. How representative are presidents of all learners? Not very. Although Mintzberg argument is stronger, sample size is still too small and biased (unrepresentative)
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Hasty Generalization In logic, when you draw a conclusion on evidence that is either unrepresentative or has small sample size you make a hasty generalization. When the observations (sample) is too small we say it is insufficient evidence. When the sample does not reflect the variability and frequency, we say the evidence is unrepresentative. The French are snobby and rude. Remember those two high-and- mighty guys with really bad manners. They are French. I rest my case. When the observations (sample) is too small we say it is insufficient evidence. When the sample does not reflect the variability and frequency of the population, we say the evidence is unrepresentative.
Criteria for Assessment of Evidence/Reasons Now, lets have a look at applying the criteria explained in the textbook to the assessment of reasons/evidence in arguments: Accuracy Precision Sufficiency Representativeness Authority Simple. Evidence has to be true (accurate or correct) in order to support the conclusion. False evidence is useless. (Might need to use proxies.. spelling errors… expertise…) Evidence should be sufficiently precise to draw the conclusion. To say “election was marked by violations therefore it is illegitimate” is weak because we need to know precisely how significant and widespread violations were (as well as what counts as a legitimate election). Evidence should be sufficient (relatively big sample size, repeated experimental confirmations of a hypothesis, true premises in a valid deductive argument) Evidence should be representative (this is a technical term that means that sample reflects variability and frequency in the population). In our textbook, it is also connected to the variety of the sources of evidence. If the argument makes an appeal to authority, the authority must have legitimately recognized relevant expertise. The objectivity of this expertise should not be in doubt.
Social Corporate Responsibility
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The backstory A brief history of business & sustainability • 1953: Howard Bowden authors Social Responsibilities of The Businessman • 1962: Rachel Carson authors Silent Spring. Linked pesticide use (ddt) to widespread animal & human harm. Launches the environmental movement • 1965: Ralph Nader authors Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed in Dangers of the American Automobile. Accused auto manufacturers of prioritizing cost concerns over human safety • By the late 1960s the term “corporate social responsibility” was being increasingly used by business leaders. A response to increased social pressure for corporate reform and activist stockholders aiming to influence corporate goals • In 1971, Nobel Prize winning, Chicago School economist Milton Friedman, writes his famous rebuttal of the concept in the New York Times • 1984. Ed Freeman authors Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Argues that firms will perform better if they focus broadly on stakeholders, versus a narrow stockholder focus. Stakeholder = Any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives. Mainstream approach today!
Milton Friedman (1912-2006) Who is Milton Friedman? Milton Friedman, winner of the John Bates Clark Medal, is the author of the permanent-income hypothesis (“A Monetary History of the United States”) and the proposal of a natural rate of unemployment. These works revolutionised the conduct of central banks around the world. But to non- economists Mr Friedman's great achievement is not his challenge to Keynesian demand management but the popular writings that challenged a consensus favouring ever-greater state intervention in the economy. It is another mark of his greatness that so many of the ideas that seemed crazy when he came up with them—from blaming the Depression on bad central- bank policy, to school vouchers and the volunteer army—have gained mainstream acceptance. Even outside his homeland, his ideas continue to make inroads. He was pilloried for briefly advising the Pinochet regime in Chile, where his students, “the Chicago boys”, ran economic policy. Thirty years later that oppressive government is gone but his free-market reforms have made Chile the economic star of Latin America. The World Bank and IMF continue to push for stable financial systems and market-based reforms around the world. But despite Mr Friedman's work, thickets of regulation thrive in most countries, particularly his homeland. Nor has he succeeded in trimming back the state, which is still growing in many places, including America. Not on the Test!
Topic: Social Corporate Responsibility Issue: Should CSR aim at social good or owners interests? Position: CSR should extend only to owner’s interests.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Friedman argues that the meaning of corporate social responsibility must be made analytically precise. Argument for Duty to Owner: Agent / Principal Milton Friedman (1912-2006) What does it mean to say that "business" has responsibilities? Only people can have responsibilities. Businesses are not moral agents--they cannot have duties. Only individuals composing them can have duties. Friedman focuses on executives (rather than owners). As individuals, executives can pursue social good, as long as they do it with their own money (act as principals). But as employees (agents), executives are hired to represent the interest of the property owners (principal). They owe the responsibility to them to generate profit (what they normally wish). In a free-enterprise, private-property system, a corporate executive is an employee of the owners of the business. He has direct responsibility to his employers. That responsibility is to conduct the business in accordance with their desires, which generally will be to make as much money as possible…
To make sense, CSR must mean that managers must make decisions (investment, costs, prices, etc...) that go against the interests of the owners to generate profit although they benefit the public. Two Argument Against CSR Milton Friedman (1912-2006) If this statement is not pure rhetoric, it must mean that he is to act in some way that is not in the interest of his employers. For example, that he is to refrain from increasing the price of the product in order to contribute to the social objective of preventing inflation, even though a price increase would be in the best interests of the corporation. This would mean that the executive is spending someone else’s money in a way that they would not want to spend it. But if he does this, he is in effect imposing taxes, on the one hand, and deciding how the tax proceeds shall be spent, on the other. This process raises political questions on two levels: principle and consequences. This raises problems on two levels: 1. Principle 2. Consequences
Argument for Duty to Owner: Agent / Principal Milton Friedman (1912-2006) 1. An individual has a responsibility to do what they promise to do. 2. In employment, the corporate executive promises to look after the interest of the owner. Therefore, the corporate executive has a responsibility to look after the interest of the owner. 1. An individual has an obligation not to use other people’s property against their wishes. . 2. Corporate funds are the property of the stockholders Therefore, the corporate executive has an obligation not to use the corporate funds against stockholder’s wishes. Private Property Argument Fiduciary Promise Argument
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
When executive spends the owner’s money for the public good against their wishes, it is similar to an imposition and an expenditure of tax. But imposing taxes is a government function—we have established controls (e.g. elections, oversight etc...) to ensure that money is collected and spend in the public interest. Problems: (1) Principle Level Argument Milton Friedman (1912-2006) The political principle that underlies the market mechanism is unanimity . In an ideal free market resting on private property, no individual can coerce any other, all coopera tion is voluntary, all parties to such coopera tion benefit or they need not participate. 1. If executives become basically public servants, they should be subject to the same controls (political process, etc...), which they are not. 2. In principle, this means accepting the socialist idea that resources should be allocated by political rather than market mechanisms. However, if political process is based on conformity (where outvoted minority is forced to conform to majority), the market process is essentially based on unanimity (where both parties voluntarily agree to a transaction) Extending this political principle to market process takes away the freedom at the foundation of it —this is socialist idea. The political principle that underlies the political mechanism is conformity . The individual must serve a more general social interest whether that be determined by a church or a dictator or a majority. The individual may have a vote and say in what is to be done, but if he is overruled, he must conform. But the doctrine of "social responsibility" taken seriously would extend the scope of the political mechanism to every human activity .
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Argument for Duty to Owner: Agent / Principal Milton Friedman (1912-2006) 1. When individuals are forced to make involuntary transactions, the market system is no longer free. 2. Social corporate responsibility forces business owners to make involuntary transactions Therefore, social corporate responsibility makes the market system not free. The first premise uses a vague term “freedom”. It is unclear whether some coercion makes the whole of the market unfree. Is it all or nothing affair? This is PRESCISION problem. Because of lack of precision, it is not clear that premise 1 is accurate (true). Why? Because it is vague—its unclear how many involuntary transactions make an entire system unfree…this is ACCURACY problem… due to lack of precision… This is a fairly close rephrasing of Friedman's argument. What if we applied the criteria to this argument?
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
(2) Consequences Level Argument Milton Friedman (1912-2006) …suppose he could get away with spending the stockholders' or customers' or employees' money. How is he to know how to spend it? One might also questions the consequences of the CSR approach. 1. If the executive could get away with spending other’s money, how does he/she know how to spend it so it leads to public good and at whose expense? They are not trained for it. 2. The other problem is that he/she is unlikely to get away with spending this money—the owners will fire him/her (e.g. unions example) And, whether he wants to or not, can he get away with spending his stockholders', cus tomers' or employees' money? Will not the stockholders fire him?
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
One might object that making a difference to the public good (unemployment, pollution, etc...) is an urgent issue—waiting for the legislative process to make the appropriate changes is long and irresponsible. Objection 1: CSR is Urgent! Milton Friedman (1912-2006) What it amounts to is an assertion that those who favor the taxes and expenditures in question have failed to persuade a majority of their fellow citizens to be of like mind and that they are seeking to attain by undemocratic procedures what they cannot attain by democratic procedures. But this just means that the advocates of changes failed to convince the majority through a democratic process. So, they try to do it by pressure.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Some might argue that CSR is often in the interest of business. Contributing to the community from which one draws resources generates good will and serves the business interest of the firm. Objection 2: CSR is in Self-Interest of Business Milton Friedman (1912-2006) This might be so in the short run, but in the long run this will harm business. It will generates costs without corresponding benefits. …the use of the cloak of social responsibility, and the nonsense spoken in its name by influential and prestigious businessmen, does clearly harm the foundations of a free society… This may gain them kudos in the short run. But it helps to strengthen the already too prevalent view that the pursuit of profits is wicked and immoral and must be curbed and controlled by external forces.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Tax Analogy—government can take private property (tax) for social ends, why not executives? Fiduciary Promise Argument Private Property Argument Expertise Argument Impractical Argument Freedom Argument Conclusion: Social Responsibility of Business should be to pursue profit Not explicitly stated. Author proceeds as if answering this objection Principle Argument Why should we not put in place political mechanisms to distribute goods in society? Not explicitly stated. Author proceeds as if answering this objection Not on the Test!
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
1. The responsibility of corporate executives is to maximize profit within the law 2. Executives must do what they promise to do 3. When execs are hired, they promise to maximise profit 4. An individual has an obligation not to use other people’s property against their wishes. 5. Corporate funds are property of stockholders 6. But civil servants are individuals who use other people’s money against their wishes (taxes) (hence Pr. 4 not true) 8. If we do the same with corporate funds, execs become civil servants 7. If we allow taxes to be spend for social causes, we can do the same with corporate funds. (hence Pr.1 is false) 9. Civil servants can use funds legitimately only subject to democratic controls 10. But executives are not subject to democratic controls (hence not legitimate) 11. Executives are not competent to calculate social good 12. Incompetent people should not direct funds 13. Executives would not be able to do this because they will be fired (or lose customers) 14. Unions conflict of interests example 15. We can introduce political controls, making it legitimate (hence 10 is false) 16. If we use political process to distribute resources in society, we replace voluntary market mechanism with coercive political mechanism 17. But this will extend coercion to the entire society, which is unacceptable (hence 15 is false). + + + + + + + Not on the Test!
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Conceptual Models
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
: a set of ideas or beliefs that are taught or believed to be true : a statement of government policy especially in international relations • “…a codification of beliefs or a body of teachings or instructions, taught principles or positions, as the body of teachings in a branch of knowledge or belief system…. In some organizations, doctrine is simply defined as "that which is taught", in other words the basis for institutional teaching of its personnel internal ways of doing business.” DOCTRINE word of the day…..
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Conceptual models help us make sense of the world, and where business fits in it. They can also help explain different perspectives on the CSR/Sustainability debate. What is the relationship between business, society, and nature? b n s The disparate view Consistent with Friedman’s perspective, this traditional view sees business as separate from nature and society and as one of the most important systems The Intertwined view b s n The dominant conception of CSR /Sustainability: Doing Well by Doing Good. Social & environmental initiatives make more $$. Win-Win-Win b n s The embedded view On this view, the business is the most dependent system: Without nature and society, business can’t exist. Finite systems have limits
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Eric Posner: Milton Friedman Was Wrong
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
“this new philosophy will not likely change the way corporations behave. The only way to force corporations to act in the public interest is to subject them to legal regulation” - The Business Roundtable (CEOs of big corporations) changed its mind about the “purpose of a corporation.” - That purpose is no longer to maximize profits for shareholders, but to benefit other “stakeholders” as well, including employees, customers, and citizens. - Friedman argued that CEOs have a duty only to maximize profit for the shareholders. Otherwise, they are imposing a costs (like a tax) on others (shareholders, workers, customers) for social causes, in which they have no expertise. Friedman is wrong for two reasons: Wrong—Reason 1 : He complained that business supported wage and price controls. Friedman believed these controls would harm the economy. Businessmen became short-sighted and muddle-headed Explanation is simpler: business executives saw price and wage controls as benefiting their business and did not care if this would harm economy. This was predictable—business would try eliminate competition. So, if business’s purpose is to increase profits, then it is clear-headed (dismantling the free-market). “Big Corporations are islands of socialism within our market economy. … Because investors of capital benefit when product and labour markets are monopolized, CEOs are only too happy to accommodate them.” Eric Posner: Milton Friedman Was Wrong
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
“Nor was Friedman correct that business executives are the employees of the shareholders. Legally, business executives are employees of the corporation, which— crucially—they, not the shareholders, control. The shareholders have a contractual relationship with the corporation…” ““When an employer says “jump” to an employee, the employee jumps. When shareholders say “jump” to the CEO, the CEO sues them .” Wrong—Reason 2: Business executives are employees of corporation, not shareholders. Friedman’s Strongest point : Business leaders are rarely qualified to determine the best public use of funds, so there is no guarantee of ethical behaviour from switch to shareholder theory. To guarantee stopping them is to punish them through the law. “The only proven way to stop corporations from polluting, defrauding, and monopolizing is to punish them through the law.” Eric Posner: Milton Friedman Was Wrong
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility by Michael E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer Not on the Test!
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility by Michael E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer Many firms’ CSR efforts are counterproductive, for two reasons: They pit business against society, when the two are actually interdependent. CSR can be much more than just a cost, constraint, or charitable deed. Approached strategically, it generates opportunity, innovation, and competitive advantage for corporations—while solving pressing social problems. “Strategic CSR also unlocks shared value by investing in social aspects of context that strengthen company competitiveness. A symbiotic relationship develops: The success of the company and the success of the community become mutually reinforcing.” Efforts to find shared value in operating practices and in the social dimensions of competitive context have the potential not only to foster economic and social development but to change the way companies and society think about each other… NGOs, governments, and companies must stop thinking in terms of “corporate social responsibility” and start thinking in terms of “corporate social integration .” Not on the Test!
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Sustainable Development
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The backstory A brief history of business & sustainability themes • 1970. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is born – First government department with specific mandate for the natural environment. Environment Canada est. 1971 • 1973. OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) initiates an oil embargo. Creates a global energy shock. – Introduction of fuel efficiency standards • 1984. Ed Freeman authors Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Argues that firms will perform better if they focus broadly on stakeholders, versus a narrow stockholder focus. Stakeholder = Any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives • 1987. The WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) releases report entitled Our Common Future. Defines Sustainable Development: development that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The backstory A brief history of business & sustainability themes • 1996. The ISO 14000 environmental management system is created – First major environmental standard for industrial firms • 1997. John Elkington coins the term “Triple Bottom Line” (TBL) – TBL = Economic, Social, Environmental performance. Typically depicted as three-legged stool or venn-diagram. Becomes the dominant conception for thinking about business & sustainability • 2001. Energy company Enron collapses amidst massive corporate fraud, along with Arthur Andersen. Brings renewed focus on business ethics and corporate governance • 2008. U.S. housing bubble bursts causing a global financial crisis – Kicks off “the great recession” – Global financial instability continues until….
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
IPCC 5 th assessment • Findings/Claims: – Warming of average earth temperature is unequivocal, largely due to human activities – Despite measures to combat climate change, GHG emissions from 2000-2010 were highest in history • Contribution of population growth roughly same as preceding 3 decades • Contribution of economic growth rose sharply – GHG emissions growing at an accelerated rate primarily from energy and industry sectors. Two major forces: • Growing economic output • Population growth – Most emissions now are from emerging economies (selling goods to developed economies) – International cooperation essential to address climate change • Primary claim: Human activities are changing the earth’s climate and threatening the livability of the planet.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
• Warming of average earth temperature is unequivocal, largely due to human activities • Despite measures to combat climate change, GHG emissions are at their highest level in human history • Immediate action, is needed to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 – 2 degrees C • Energy is responsible for 1/3 and industry ¼ of GHG • 10% of world population contributes 40% of GHG • Climate change disproportionally affects low-income areas and exacerbates existing inequalities • Major impacts include: – Increasingly variable water cycles – Long lasting changes in sea levels and frozen regions – Increased extreme weather events IPCC 6 t h a s s e s s m e n t : f i n d i n g s / c l a i m s
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
A s s e s s i n g t h e e v i d e n c e 1.Accuracy... – Cannot do independent research – Infer from other aspects 2.Precision... 3.Sufficiency... – >800 authors, 3 working groups, 5,000 pages, assessing >30,000 scientific articles 4.Representativeness... – Global data, representation from all regions – Expertise: Atmospheric science, natural science, engineering, social science, philosophy 5.Authority... – World renowned scientific experts – Under auspices of the UN
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Roger Pielke Jr Professor of Environmental Studies Roger has been a Distinguished Fellow of the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan since 2016. From 2019 he has served as a science and economics adviser to Environmental Progress. Roger was a Fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences from 2001 to 2016. He served as a Senior Fellow of The Breakthrough Institute from 2008 to 2018. In 2007 Roger served as a James Martin Fellow at Oxford University’s Said Business School. Before joining the faculty of the University of Colorado, from 1993 to 2001 Roger was a Scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. “ Anyone advocating a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030 is engaging in a form of climate theater, full of drama but not much suspense. But don’t just take it from me, do the math yourself” IPPC: to limit global worming to 1.5°C would require “Global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) to fall by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching ‘net zero’ around 2050.” In 2018 the world consumed 14,000 million tonnes of oil equivalent (mtoe). Energy consumption grows on average 2.2% per year. Assuming this rate, in 2030 consumption will be 18,200 (14,000+4200). To meet IPCC target for 2030 --45% reduction from 2010 level--the consumption should fall to 5,950 mtoe. World must reduce not only below 2010 level (reduce 5800 mtoe) but also replace future energy growth (4,200 mtoe) Total to reduce by 2030 is 5800 + 4200= 10,000 mtoe We must add 1,000 mtor each year for 10 years . Can this be done? Not on the Test!
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Not on the Test! How much do we add and replace a year now? On average we add 64 mtoe of green energy a year (114 in 2018) Fossil fuel consumption increases annually on average of about 150 mtoe (not even enough to keep replace additional emissions). Green energy production must increase by 15 times. To reach 2050 target, we need to produce equivalent of 1 nuclear power station a day (more than one nuclear power station a day for 2030 target) Roger Pielke Jr Professor of Environmental Studies We must add 1,000 mtoe each year for 10 years. Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2019/10/27/the-world-is-not-going-to-reduce- carbon-dioxide-emissions-by-50-by-2030-now-what/?sh=6aee23f37940 Despite the overwhelming evidence on the unlikelihood of meeting the 2030 target, such realism has yet to take hold in climate policy discussions. Some even go so far as to claim that presentation of this type of analysis amounts to climate denial. For those making such claims, I’ve got news for you – the world is going to miss the 2030 target whether we talk about that reality or deny it, so we had better get to work on rethinking climate policy.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help

Related Documents

Presidential Cabinet.docx - kenna montes.docx
Phil Final Essay.docx
IMG_7278.jpeg
homework 2 New.pdf
Polygamy by Andy Cazier.docx
ChineseEthics.pdf
EthicalandMoralIssueswithAI.pdf
2-1 Discussion Exploring Subcultures.docx
BuddhistEthics.pdf
Birchley2017_Article_SmartHomesPrivateHomesAnEmpiri.pdf
lit applacation of bloom tax.docx
SOAO CHAPTER 3.docx

Browse Popular Homework Q&A

Q: A 1.0 cm tall light bulb is placed 50 cm from a convex lens that has a focal distance of 40 cm.…
Q: 2. If you were tasked to design compounds which will prevent viral attachment and entry into a host…
Q: What happens if liability exceeds assets? What will happen and what does it mean?
Q: All of the following classes of enzymes catalyze the Fatty acid synthesis except  a. synthetase b.…
Q: Your desk lamp draws a current of 0.20 A for 500 s. How much charge fows through the lamp in this…
Q: A gas expands from I to F along the three paths indicated in the figure below. Calculate the work…
Q: onist throws a sandbag downward at 24 feet per second from an altitude of 720 feet. Its height (in…
Q: An RC circuit consists of a 32.5 Ω resistor and a 5.5 μF capacitor. (a)  Find its impedance Z at 65…
Q: You are considering a $75,000, 30-year mortgage to purchase a new home. The bank at which you have…
Q: Alexis wrote the sum of 14 and 42 using the distributive property in two different ways. Only one of…
Q: A pension fund manager is considering three mutual funds. The first is a stock fund, the second is a…
Q: Find the indicated derivative. Then find an equation of the tangent line at the indicated point on…
Q: Decisions where relevant cost analysis might be used effective is Keep or replace decision. Explain…
Q: Which of the following statement regarding enzymes is false?
Q: log_b x=4 log_b y=2 solve log_b(x^4y^5) log_b(x^b/y^4)
Q: An exercise physiologist used skinfold measurements to estimate the total body fat, expressed as a…
Q: Which of the following can hydrogen bond with another molecule of itself? Select all that apply. A A…
Q: 4. How many edges does a graph have if its degree sequence is 5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1? Draw such a graph.…
Q: Arrange the elements according to atomic radius.
Q: For Question 5, it says it is one word?
Q: Moora Inc. Due to the increasing energy costs in the US, Jackie Moora is anxious. The old machine…
Q: After given a push, a 1.0-kg box slides down a slope that is inclined by 30◦ relative to the…
Q: The graph of y = f(x) is shown below. -2 6 Find f f(x)dx. -4 02 y 4 2 -2 -4 0 2 f(x) 4 6 x
Q: A sphere of copper has a radius of 8.00 cm and is compressed uniformly by a force of 5.00 × 108 N.…
Q: respective 2-scores. Which player had the better year relative to their peers, Ron or Rita? (Note:…