Just to let you all know that the second edition of Strategic CSR has now been printed by Sage. Bill and I received our copies earlier this week. The photos on the front cover are intended to represent the five driving forces of CSR—globalization, growing affluence, ecological sustainability, the free flow of information, and brands (Chapter 4). If you ordered a review copy, Sage will be distributing them shortly. Review copies can also be requested at the book’s website:
http://www.sagepub.com/textbooksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book233918
or
http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/
We are also working on the book’s password-protected Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/
In addition, in conjunction with the publication of the second edition, we have created a blog to archive the Newsletters in a way that makes them freely accessible: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/
We are still in the early days of working with the software (the search function, in particular, is not doing what we would like it to do), but the goal is to post all the Newsletters from here onwards to the site, as well as adding all the past Newsletters over the summer.The completed library should serve as a useful resource both for teachers looking for supplemental material for their classes, as well as for students writing semester papers or simply interested in understanding more about some of the topical themes being debated within CSR.As always, your thoughts and comments are welcome.
Have a good weekend.
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)
© Sage Publications, 2011 http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/
Friday, July 9, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
Strategic CSR - Feedback
This will be the last CSR Newsletter of the Spring semester.
Have a great summer and I will see you in the Fall!
I have been producing the CSR Newsletters since January, 2006 and there has been a considerable evolution in terms of style and content, as well as readership.
To coincide with the publication of the second edition of Strategic CSR, I thought it would be useful to solicit some feedback to see how the Newsletters currently add value and how they can be improved.
Below are two straightforward questions that will help me produce Newsletters that are better suited to supporting the book’s content and assisting your work in the classroom (and/or general interest in CSR). There is also space for any general feedback you may have:
1. What do you like about the Newsletters and how do they assist your work in the classroom?
2. What should I change about the Newsletters to make them better?
3. Do you have any additional feedback or thoughts about the Newsletters?
As always, feedback is not limited to this e-mail and you can contact me at any time.
Many thanks for your continued interest in Strategic CSR.
Have a good summer!
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)
© Sage Publications, 2011
http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Strategic CSR - Graffiti
I think the article in the url below is a great example of art with a social activist message:
“Using stencils, water, and scrubbing brushes, British “reverse graffiti” artist Paul Curtis comments on runaway consumerism—and shows us how dirty we really are.”
urtis cleans away patterns on walls covered in dirt and other pollution in ways that make art forms:
“He strips away years of accumulated soot, dust, dirt, and atmospheric detritus to make pieces like these, which were part of a celebration of street art.”
The overall effect is dramatic and, I think, very attractive. The irony in the form that he uses to convey his message is what really adds value, however:
"When Curtis puts his brush down, his commentary has only begun: Within days, the patterns begin to fade as the pollution reclaims its territory, a statement about how hard it is to clean things up and how easy it is to mess them up again.”
Have a good weekend.
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
"Reverse Graffiti" Artist Paul Curtis Shows Us How Dirty We Really Are
Issue: 139
Date: October, 2009
By: Jeff Chu
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/139/subliminalism.html
“Using stencils, water, and scrubbing brushes, British “reverse graffiti” artist Paul Curtis comments on runaway consumerism—and shows us how dirty we really are.”
urtis cleans away patterns on walls covered in dirt and other pollution in ways that make art forms:
“He strips away years of accumulated soot, dust, dirt, and atmospheric detritus to make pieces like these, which were part of a celebration of street art.”
The overall effect is dramatic and, I think, very attractive. The irony in the form that he uses to convey his message is what really adds value, however:
"When Curtis puts his brush down, his commentary has only begun: Within days, the patterns begin to fade as the pollution reclaims its territory, a statement about how hard it is to clean things up and how easy it is to mess them up again.”
Have a good weekend.
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
"Reverse Graffiti" Artist Paul Curtis Shows Us How Dirty We Really Are
Issue: 139
Date: October, 2009
By: Jeff Chu
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/139/subliminalism.html
Strategic CSR - BP
The articles in the two urls below present interesting perspectives on the ecological disaster currently unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico. On a negative note (among many negatives in this story), the first article argues that the disaster undermines President Obama’s move to forge a bipartisan coalition in support of the climate change legislation currently working its way through Congress:
“Last month, Mr Obama sacrificed much of his support among environmental groups when he lifted the US ban on new offshore drilling in an attempt to win Republican support for a climate change bill. … Barring the already-declared support of Lindsey Graham, a senator from South Carolina, the move had little effect on a Republican party that sees any attempt to cap carbon as a new tax. The BP spill is likely only to crystallise that divide. But Mr Obama’s decision to lift the moratorium makes it much harder for him to exploit those divisions.”
On a slightly more positive note, the second article suggests the oil spill can help the environmental debate. In short, the pollution in the Gulf is pollution that the public finds harder to ignore because it is “highly visible”:
“Environmentalism began as a response to pollution that everyone could see. … It wasn't that hard, under the circumstances, to mobilize political support for action. The Environmental Protection Agency was founded, the Clean Water Act was enacted, and America began making headway against its most visible environmental problems. Air quality improved: smog alerts in Los Angeles, which used to have more than 100 a year, have become rare. Rivers stopped burning, and some became swimmable again. And Lake Erie has come back to life, in part thanks to a ban on laundry detergents containing phosphates.”
Yet, the author argues that the cost of this success was waning public support for the environmental movement and many of the legislative and regulatory restrictions that were initially introduced:
“For one thing, as visible pollution has diminished, so has public concern over environmental issues. According to a recent Gallup survey, ''Americans are now less worried about a series of environmental problems than at any time in the past 20 years.'' This decline in concern would be fine if visible pollution were all that mattered -- but it isn't, of course. In particular, greenhouse gases pose a greater threat than smog or burning rivers ever did. But it's hard to get the public focused on a form of pollution that's invisible, and whose effects unfold over decades rather than days.”
Nevertheless, at best, this optimistic perspective on a disaster that will likely be America’s worst since the Exxon Valdez in 1989, is only “a small silver lining to a very dark cloud.”
One reaction I have had to the crisis concerns the issue of where ‘blame’ ultimately lies. BP says “It wasn’t our accident” (see BP’s official response at: http://www.bp.com/productlanding.do?categoryId=40&contentId=7061696). The firm states that, although it will take responsibility for the clean-up, the rig that sank was owned and operated by its partner, Transocean. As such, BP claims it was Transocean’s systems and procedures that failed, rather than its own. The more I think about this, however, the more I see a parallel with the debate in the CSR community over the responsibility of a firm for its extended supply chain. When an Indian sub-sub-sub-contractor of GAP was found to be employing children in 2007, GAP was dragged over the coals, even though the guilty supplier was several degrees removed from the firm (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/16/business/worldbusiness/16gap.html):
“… the vendor that got the Gap order for the children's clothes had employed a rural community center to do the embroidery work but that this entity had subcontracted the work to a Delhi workshop where children were employed. While auditing in factories is relatively straightforward, checking conditions in the informal workshops where hand embroidery is done is harder because large contracts are often divided up among dozens of small workshops.”
If GAP can be held responsible for a transgression committed at such a distance, and given BP’s recent safety issues in Texas (2005) and oil spills in Alaska (2006), what conclusions can we draw about the quality control systems BP has in place for its partner firms that are extracting the oil that it ‘owns’?
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
From tragedy can come a new direction for US energy
By Edward Luce
743 words
4 May 2010
Financial Times
London Ed1
08
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/19769bf6-56d8-11df-aa89-00144feab49a.html
Drilling, Disaster, Denial
By PAUL KRUGMAN
803 words
3 May 2010
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
25
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/03/opinion/03krugman.html
“Last month, Mr Obama sacrificed much of his support among environmental groups when he lifted the US ban on new offshore drilling in an attempt to win Republican support for a climate change bill. … Barring the already-declared support of Lindsey Graham, a senator from South Carolina, the move had little effect on a Republican party that sees any attempt to cap carbon as a new tax. The BP spill is likely only to crystallise that divide. But Mr Obama’s decision to lift the moratorium makes it much harder for him to exploit those divisions.”
On a slightly more positive note, the second article suggests the oil spill can help the environmental debate. In short, the pollution in the Gulf is pollution that the public finds harder to ignore because it is “highly visible”:
“Environmentalism began as a response to pollution that everyone could see. … It wasn't that hard, under the circumstances, to mobilize political support for action. The Environmental Protection Agency was founded, the Clean Water Act was enacted, and America began making headway against its most visible environmental problems. Air quality improved: smog alerts in Los Angeles, which used to have more than 100 a year, have become rare. Rivers stopped burning, and some became swimmable again. And Lake Erie has come back to life, in part thanks to a ban on laundry detergents containing phosphates.”
Yet, the author argues that the cost of this success was waning public support for the environmental movement and many of the legislative and regulatory restrictions that were initially introduced:
“For one thing, as visible pollution has diminished, so has public concern over environmental issues. According to a recent Gallup survey, ''Americans are now less worried about a series of environmental problems than at any time in the past 20 years.'' This decline in concern would be fine if visible pollution were all that mattered -- but it isn't, of course. In particular, greenhouse gases pose a greater threat than smog or burning rivers ever did. But it's hard to get the public focused on a form of pollution that's invisible, and whose effects unfold over decades rather than days.”
Nevertheless, at best, this optimistic perspective on a disaster that will likely be America’s worst since the Exxon Valdez in 1989, is only “a small silver lining to a very dark cloud.”
One reaction I have had to the crisis concerns the issue of where ‘blame’ ultimately lies. BP says “It wasn’t our accident” (see BP’s official response at: http://www.bp.com/productlanding.do?categoryId=40&contentId=7061696). The firm states that, although it will take responsibility for the clean-up, the rig that sank was owned and operated by its partner, Transocean. As such, BP claims it was Transocean’s systems and procedures that failed, rather than its own. The more I think about this, however, the more I see a parallel with the debate in the CSR community over the responsibility of a firm for its extended supply chain. When an Indian sub-sub-sub-contractor of GAP was found to be employing children in 2007, GAP was dragged over the coals, even though the guilty supplier was several degrees removed from the firm (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/16/business/worldbusiness/16gap.html):
“… the vendor that got the Gap order for the children's clothes had employed a rural community center to do the embroidery work but that this entity had subcontracted the work to a Delhi workshop where children were employed. While auditing in factories is relatively straightforward, checking conditions in the informal workshops where hand embroidery is done is harder because large contracts are often divided up among dozens of small workshops.”
If GAP can be held responsible for a transgression committed at such a distance, and given BP’s recent safety issues in Texas (2005) and oil spills in Alaska (2006), what conclusions can we draw about the quality control systems BP has in place for its partner firms that are extracting the oil that it ‘owns’?
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
From tragedy can come a new direction for US energy
By Edward Luce
743 words
4 May 2010
Financial Times
London Ed1
08
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/19769bf6-56d8-11df-aa89-00144feab49a.html
Drilling, Disaster, Denial
By PAUL KRUGMAN
803 words
3 May 2010
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
25
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/03/opinion/03krugman.html
Monday, May 3, 2010
Strategic CSR - Newsweek
Last September, Newsweek launched its first “Green Rankings” of the largest U.S. firms:
“For more than a year, the magazine worked with leading environmental researchers KLD Research & Analytics, Trucost, and CorporateRegister.com to rank the 500 largest U.S. companies based on their actual environmental performance, policies, and reputation.”
Given the research support Newsweek assembled to compile the rankings, there is a good chance these data represent a meaningful effort to evaluate actual sustainability performance, rather than greenwash:
“Ranking companies based on sustainability is a huge challenge. That's largely because comparing environmental performance across industries is a bit like analyzing whether Tiger Woods or LeBron James is the world's greatest athlete—there's an inevitable apples-and-oranges element.”
The methodology used to compile the rankings, with three components (a firm’s environmental impact score, its green policies score, and its reputation score) is explained on the Newsweek website (http://www.newsweek.com/id/215522). It will be interesting to see how these rankings evolve and whether they can make more of a mark than the multitude of other attempts to measure firms’ CSR or sustainability profiles.
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
The Greenest Big Companies in America
By Daniel McGinn
NEWSWEEK
Published Sep 21, 2009
From the magazine issue dated Sep 28, 2009
http://www.newsweek.com/id/215577
“For more than a year, the magazine worked with leading environmental researchers KLD Research & Analytics, Trucost, and CorporateRegister.com to rank the 500 largest U.S. companies based on their actual environmental performance, policies, and reputation.”
Given the research support Newsweek assembled to compile the rankings, there is a good chance these data represent a meaningful effort to evaluate actual sustainability performance, rather than greenwash:
“Ranking companies based on sustainability is a huge challenge. That's largely because comparing environmental performance across industries is a bit like analyzing whether Tiger Woods or LeBron James is the world's greatest athlete—there's an inevitable apples-and-oranges element.”
The methodology used to compile the rankings, with three components (a firm’s environmental impact score, its green policies score, and its reputation score) is explained on the Newsweek website (http://www.newsweek.com/id/215522). It will be interesting to see how these rankings evolve and whether they can make more of a mark than the multitude of other attempts to measure firms’ CSR or sustainability profiles.
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
The Greenest Big Companies in America
By Daniel McGinn
NEWSWEEK
Published Sep 21, 2009
From the magazine issue dated Sep 28, 2009
http://www.newsweek.com/id/215577
Friday, April 30, 2010
Strategic CSR - HBR
This month, Harvard Business Review is conducting an online forum titled ‘What Does Business Owe the World?’:
http://blogs.hbr.org/what-business-owes-the-world/
The forum is designed to complement the lead story in the April, 2010 issue of HBR titled ‘Leadership in the Age of Transparency’:
“We believe managers need to think about social responsibility in terms of externalities. Externalities is an economics term which, as the link above tells you, is "an effect of a purchase or use decision by one set of parties on others who did not have a choice and whose interests were not taken into account. We believe companies that want to be seen as responsible should begin by addressing their externalities. They should take ownership of their impact. And, because attempting to so will put quite a lot on their plates, their efforts should probably end there as well.”
In conjunction with the publication of the second edition of Strategic CSR, Bill and I were approached to write something for the forum. I thought you might be interested to see what I came up with and how it was received on the site:
http://blogs.hbr.org/what-business-owes-the-world/2010/04/why-arent-we-stressing-stakeho.html
Have a good weekend.
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Strategic CSR - Gas Tax
Everything intelligent that I have seen written about the ill-fated cap-and-trade legislation that is weaving its way slowly through Congress and will likely be watered down even further (How is it possible to water down something that is already very weak?) says that a gas tax would be a far more effective and efficient way to alter consumer behavior. The arguments against cap-and-trade are numerous and are outlined in an interview with Thomas Crocker, who first thought up the idea (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125011380094927137.html).
The challenge, of course, is to make a tax politically viable, because attaching the word ‘tax’ to any policy proposal in the U.S. is equivalent to killing it off. One of the best answers I have seen in terms of how to make such a tax palatable is to offset any revenue raised with a rebate of some form to consumers. If consumers understand that the net effect of the tax is zero, then the case against the tax loses much of its potency.
The article in the url below presents a comprehensive approach to achieving these goals. It is innovative, flexible, and a good start, which, of course, is why no-one in Washington is likely to pay any attention to it.
Take care
DavidBill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
How to make a petrol tax politically viable
By Michael Levine and Mark Roe
991 words
7 July 2009
USA Ed1
09
or
Monday, April 26, 2010
Strategic CSR - Microfinance
The article in the url below discusses some of the problems that have resulted from the recent explosion in growth of the microfinance industry (Issues: Loans, p188). To some degree, microfinance is becoming a victim of its own success.
In general, the microfinance industry has been altered by the influx of for-profit firms that have learnt from successful nonprofits to develop a business model that relies on the high repayment rates that are typical within the sector. With profit as a stronger focus, however, these new microfinance lenders are increasing interest rates and introducing much more liberal criteria for extending credit.
The primary focus of this article, however, is on the continued success of traditional moneylenders in India (who charge much higher interest rates), who are flourishing in spite of the success of microfinance. It turns out that the source of the high repayment rates for microfinance is also the source of the microlenders’ ongoing success:
“Some microfinance borrowers say they need village moneylenders to help them pay their debts on time. … Peer pressure to pay back microfinance loans is intense, because microlenders almost always require borrowers to join small, tightknit groups. If one member defaults, none can get another loan. Microloans have a stellar repayment rate -- close to 100% -- and some analysts believe a hidden reason is the stopgap provided by moneylenders.”
Borrowers are willing to put up with higher interest rates in order to get easier access to credit and avoid the social ramifications of failing to meet their microfinance commitments:
“… the moneylenders are virtually indistinguishable from the microlenders. They distribute knock-off versions of the microlenders' passbooks. Some use the same weekly repayment structure and door-to-door service as the microlenders do. The difference, however, is that the moneylenders give loans faster, without asking the women to form groups and serve as each other's guarantors, as microfinance lenders do in order to ensure a higher repayment rate. They also charge significantly more than the four microlenders serving the neighborhood.”
Take care
DavidBill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
Microfinance grows along with rivals --- Small credit lines were supposed to trim use of high-interest loans in India's rural areas, but moneylenders flourish
By Ketaki Gokhale1386 words
16 December 2009
The Wall Street Journal Asia
8
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126055117322287513.html
Friday, April 23, 2010
Strategic CSR - Flash Mobs
In Strategic CSR, we use the phenomenon of flash mobs (http://www.flashmob.com/) as an example of why the revolution in global communications makes CSR a more immediate concern for firms today than ever before because it enables like-minded people to communicate and mobilize (Chapter 3: Environmental Forces Propelling Greater CSR, p56). Wikipedia defines a flash mob as:
“a large group of people who assemble suddenly in a public place, perform an unusual and pointless act for a brief time, then quickly disperse. The term flash mob is generally applied only to gatherings organized via telecommunications, social media, or viral emails.”
I am not normally a fan of Oprah (J), but, this video is one of the best examples of a flash mob I have seen. The key is to keep your eyes on the crowd, rather than the band, and watch as the mob spreads. It begins with the woman in blue in the middle at the front and slowly moves out to encompass the whole crowd. Oprah’s face is fun to watch as she gradually realizes what is happening:
Here's how they did it:
Have a great weekend.
DavidBill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Strategic CSR - Earth Day
It is Earth Day tomorrow (BTW: on Monday, PBS aired a great American Experience program on the history of Earth Day and the environmental movement in the U.S., http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/earthdays/).
With Earth Day in mind, I saw a very good article in yesterday’s NYT that presents “7 New Rules [for the environmentalist] to Live By’:
1. It's the climate, stupid.
2. You can never not do just one thing.
3. “Let them eat organic” is not a global option.
4. Frankenfood, like Frankenstein, is fiction.
5. “Green” energy hasn't done much for greenery -- or anything else.
6. “New Nukes” is the new “No Nukes.”
7. We are as gods and have to get good at it.
The author makes insightful, scientifically-grounded arguments with each point that are designed as reality checks for the more idealistic green advocates. Regarding organic food, for example, the author states that:
“For affluent humans in industrialized countries, organic food is pretty much a harmless luxury. Although there's no convincing evidence that the food is any healthier or more nutritious than other food, if that label makes you feel healthier and more virtuous, then you can justify the extra cost. But most people in the world are not affluent, and their food budgets are limited. If they're convinced by green marketers that they need to choose higher-priced organic produce, they and their children are liable to end up eating fewer fruits and vegetables.”
Stewart Brand’s work is referenced throughout (he of the 10,000 year clock, http://www.longnow.org/clock/) and it is his quote that is #7 on the list—essentially a call for humans to master the natural environment or perish as a result of what we have done to it:
“Technological progress, not nostalgia or asceticism, is the only reliable way for greens’ visions of “sustainability” to be sustained. Wilderness and wildlife can be preserved only if the world's farmers have the best tools to feed everyone on the least amount of land. Solar power will be widely adopted only if there are breakthroughs that make it more efficient. Greenhouse gases will keep accumulating unless engineers build economical sources of low-carbon energy or develop techniques for sequestering carbon. And if those advances aren't enough to stop global warming, we'll want new tools for directly engineering the climate.”
Take care
DavidBill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
For Earth Day, 7 New Rules to Live By
By JOHN TIERNEY1195 words
20 April 2010
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
1
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/science/20tier.html
Monday, April 19, 2010
Strategic CSR - Teaching Ethics
The article in the url below is a series of opinions in response to a problem posed at the top of the column:
“THE PROBLEM: Last week Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of The Black Swan, said: "I don't believe that ethics can be taught in class." He was speaking after the arrest of Raj Rajaratnam, the head of hedge fund Galleon Group, and two other alumni of his MBA class at Wharton. Have business schools paid enough attention to ethical questions? Or are ethics a personal matter?”
Responses from four experts from four different business schools are posted. The most insightful, I think, and the position I found to be the most persuasive, was expressed by Roger Martin, Dean of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto:
“Anything we know can be taught, but nothing can be learned without desire. Therein lays the business school dilemma. The academic world knows plenty about ethics and it is eminently teachable in a business class or any other class - as teachable as finance or strategy. But the magnitude of habit change following any course will be a function of the desire to learn and to integrate that learning into subsequent actions.”
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
Is it possible to teach ethics to business school students?
938 words28 October 2009
Financial Times
London Ed1
14
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/571d5ee8-c34b-11de-8eca-00144feab49a.html
or
http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/rogermartin/FT_CanYouTeachEthics.pdf
Friday, April 16, 2010
Strategic CSR - Google
The article in the url below discusses the relative environmental impacts of using paper versus distributing information via the web:
“Many opinion formers argue that the trend towards greater use of electronic media can only bring environmental benefits. By cutting down fewer trees, creating less paper waste and through increased use of on-line media the world can only be a better place. I am not sure that I buy all of these arguments.”
While it is true that the manufacture of paper involves significant tree loss, and printing on that paper consumes energy and poisons (ink), online information exchange does not necessarily involve a lower environmental impact:
“Electronic media require massive global infrastructure not least to support access to the world-wide web and to appropriate technology to view information. The industry hasn't exactly raced to be transparent about the energy profile of the technology behind the internet.”
Ultimately:
“How can we compare, for example, the carbon profile of unique users viewing a web page with the carbon burden of a print run of equivalent reports?”
The author illustrates this issue with a lot of data regarding the energy usage of “massive data warehouses,” but also finds a way to make the issue accessible:
“Recent research has also highlighted that performing two Google searches from a desktop computer can generate about the same amount of carbon dioxide as boiling a kettle for a cup of tea.”
Google’s response to this debate is posted on the firm’s “official Google blog” at (http://www.googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/powering-google-search.html):
“We thought it would be helpful to explain why this number is *many* times too high. Google is fast — a typical search returns results in less than 0.2 seconds. Queries vary in degree of difficulty, but for the average query, the servers it touches each work on it for just a few thousandths of a second. Together with other work performed before your search even starts (such as building the search index) this amounts to 0.0003 kWh of energy per search, or 1 kJ. For comparison, the average adult needs about 8000 kJ a day of energy from food, so a Google search uses just about the same amount of energy that your body burns in ten seconds.”
Have a good weekend.
DavidBill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
Paper versus the web – Is there a clear winner?
Leading consultant calls on the print industry to fight its 'green' cornerMark Line
August 21, 2009
The Guardian
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Strategic CSR - Bribery
The article in the url below contains some shocking (to me, at least) figures from a report by Transparency International (http://www.transparency.org/), widely regarded as the leading source of global data on bribery and corruption, regarding the extent to which bribery is an integral aspect of business in some parts of the world:
“Did you know that a global poll of business executives found two in five have been asked to pay a bribe when dealing with business institutions? Half of these estimated that corruption raised project costs by at least 10 per cent. One in five of the executives claimed to have lost business because of bribes by a competitor. More than a third felt that corruption was getting worse. Moreover, politicians and officials in emerging economies are estimated to receive bribes of between $20bn and $40bn annually - equivalent to some 20-40 per cent of official aid.”
The article also addresses the paradox that, while the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (1977) is “the gold standard” for anticorruption legislation, the US is ranked only at 18th on Transparency International’s list of least corrupt nations:
“… in which 180 countries are ranked "in terms of the degree to which business people and country analysts perceive corruption to exist among public officials and politicians".”
Take care,
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Worse evils exist than corruption
By Samuel Brittan
838 words
18 September 2009
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
09
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/85e294c4-a3d3-11de-9fed-00144feabdc0.html
or
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001028972/en
“Did you know that a global poll of business executives found two in five have been asked to pay a bribe when dealing with business institutions? Half of these estimated that corruption raised project costs by at least 10 per cent. One in five of the executives claimed to have lost business because of bribes by a competitor. More than a third felt that corruption was getting worse. Moreover, politicians and officials in emerging economies are estimated to receive bribes of between $20bn and $40bn annually - equivalent to some 20-40 per cent of official aid.”
The article also addresses the paradox that, while the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (1977) is “the gold standard” for anticorruption legislation, the US is ranked only at 18th on Transparency International’s list of least corrupt nations:
“… in which 180 countries are ranked "in terms of the degree to which business people and country analysts perceive corruption to exist among public officials and politicians".”
Take care,
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Worse evils exist than corruption
By Samuel Brittan
838 words
18 September 2009
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
09
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/85e294c4-a3d3-11de-9fed-00144feabdc0.html
or
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001028972/en
Strategic CSR - Shareholder Rights
The article in the first url below reports a recent SEC rule change that reflects the growing powers the U.S. regulatory authorities are willing to grant to firm owners (shareholders) over managers. This rule, in particular, allows a greater say for shareholders in terms of CEO succession. The reforms:
“… will force companies to provide more information on the pay of executives and the background of boards. The decisions underscore a regulatory agenda by the SEC's new management, led by the chairman Mary Schapiro, that is increasingly moving towards empowering shareholders.”
The article in the second url below reports that the country often cited as most progressive on shareholder rights is the UK:
“The reason is that, unlike in the United States, British takeover law essentially handcuffs the board of a target company from doing anything to block a deal. No poison pills. No staggered boards. No changing the shareholder vote date. The potential for a C.E.O. or entrenched board to block a deal -- or otherwise act in its own self- interest -- is virtually nil. In other words, England is as close as any country gets to a true shareholder democracy. Any bid gets put to a vote, and all the board can do is offer an opinion.”
Although often championed by CSR advocates, however, this article makes a compelling argument that greater shareholder rights do not necessarily lead to optimal stakeholder outcomes:
“If the board lacks power to weigh in on the deal, that also means nobody with any clout is looking out for other stakeholders, like employees. Most mergers never live up to their hype, resulting in lower values and fewer jobs. So the question worth asking is: Shouldn't someone be looking further into the future?”
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Activist targets CEO succession
By Francesco Guerrera and Joanna Chung in New York
434 words
18 December 2009
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
15
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/184ef728-eb4e-11de-bc99-00144feab49a.html
or
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/activist-targets-ceo-succession-ftimes-6cb070848b0b.html
Do Stockholders Really Know What's Best?
By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN
975 words
17 November 2009
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
1
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/business/17sorkin.html
“… will force companies to provide more information on the pay of executives and the background of boards. The decisions underscore a regulatory agenda by the SEC's new management, led by the chairman Mary Schapiro, that is increasingly moving towards empowering shareholders.”
The article in the second url below reports that the country often cited as most progressive on shareholder rights is the UK:
“The reason is that, unlike in the United States, British takeover law essentially handcuffs the board of a target company from doing anything to block a deal. No poison pills. No staggered boards. No changing the shareholder vote date. The potential for a C.E.O. or entrenched board to block a deal -- or otherwise act in its own self- interest -- is virtually nil. In other words, England is as close as any country gets to a true shareholder democracy. Any bid gets put to a vote, and all the board can do is offer an opinion.”
Although often championed by CSR advocates, however, this article makes a compelling argument that greater shareholder rights do not necessarily lead to optimal stakeholder outcomes:
“If the board lacks power to weigh in on the deal, that also means nobody with any clout is looking out for other stakeholders, like employees. Most mergers never live up to their hype, resulting in lower values and fewer jobs. So the question worth asking is: Shouldn't someone be looking further into the future?”
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Activist targets CEO succession
By Francesco Guerrera and Joanna Chung in New York
434 words
18 December 2009
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
15
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/184ef728-eb4e-11de-bc99-00144feab49a.html
or
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/activist-targets-ceo-succession-ftimes-6cb070848b0b.html
Do Stockholders Really Know What's Best?
By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN
975 words
17 November 2009
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
1
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/business/17sorkin.html
Strategic CSR - Carbon Sequestration
There is a lot going on in the informative article in the url below about climate change and carbon emissions reduction:
“The chief goal of European environmental policy is to curb fossil energy consumption. … These programmes cost billions - and probably achieve the exact opposite of what policymakers intend: the global extraction of coal, gas and oil shoots up instead of sinking.”
For this Newsletter, however, I want to focus on what the author has to say about carbon capture and sequestration. This is one of the areas scientists are working on to minimize the carbon emitted into the atmosphere from the consumption of fossil fuels (see the U.S. Department of Energy for an overview: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/sequestration/overview.html). I knew the technology was still underdeveloped and, intuitively, the idea seems too good to be true, but I had no idea the barriers to progress were as seemingly insurmountable as the author suggests:
“Burying carbon is easier said than done. The process of capturing CO from a chimney and turning it into a liquid consumes a third of the energy generated by burning the fuel in the first place. On top of that, the amount of storage volume required would be gigantic, as each carbon atom is joined by two oxygen atoms upon combustion - and they all need to be stored. Carbon captured from anthracite coal would occupy five times as much space underground as the coal itself; in the case of crude oil, three times the volume would be needed. According to estimates by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the earth's depleted coal mines, oil and gas deposits, and natural caves will offer room for barely a 10th of the CO that would be generated by all the recoverable carbon resources.”
Take care,
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
How to resolve the green paradox
Hans-Werner Sinn
932 words
27 August 2009
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
07
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2992000e-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feabdc0.html
“The chief goal of European environmental policy is to curb fossil energy consumption. … These programmes cost billions - and probably achieve the exact opposite of what policymakers intend: the global extraction of coal, gas and oil shoots up instead of sinking.”
For this Newsletter, however, I want to focus on what the author has to say about carbon capture and sequestration. This is one of the areas scientists are working on to minimize the carbon emitted into the atmosphere from the consumption of fossil fuels (see the U.S. Department of Energy for an overview: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/sequestration/overview.html). I knew the technology was still underdeveloped and, intuitively, the idea seems too good to be true, but I had no idea the barriers to progress were as seemingly insurmountable as the author suggests:
“Burying carbon is easier said than done. The process of capturing CO from a chimney and turning it into a liquid consumes a third of the energy generated by burning the fuel in the first place. On top of that, the amount of storage volume required would be gigantic, as each carbon atom is joined by two oxygen atoms upon combustion - and they all need to be stored. Carbon captured from anthracite coal would occupy five times as much space underground as the coal itself; in the case of crude oil, three times the volume would be needed. According to estimates by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the earth's depleted coal mines, oil and gas deposits, and natural caves will offer room for barely a 10th of the CO that would be generated by all the recoverable carbon resources.”
Take care,
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
How to resolve the green paradox
Hans-Werner Sinn
932 words
27 August 2009
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
07
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2992000e-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feabdc0.html
Strategic CSR - Greenwash
Green Options (http://www.greenoptions.com/), “a community of individuals striving to protect the environment and live well,” has compiled a set of examples of how firms should not do environmental sustainability advertising:
http://www.greenoptions.com/wiki/great-greenwashed-advertising
All of these ads are by organizations or industry representative groups with dubious sustainability track records, yet who are trying to benefit from increased consumer interest in the environment and related issues.
‘Greenwash,’ which is defined by the environmental marketing organization Terrachoice (http://www.terrachoice.com/) as “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service,” is an important part of the CSR debate. While firms increasingly try and benefit from growing consumer interest in this area, however, this phenomenon also reinforces the important role that stakeholders play in holding firms to account for their actions. Greenwash will only continue while it benefits firms to do so. To the extent that stakeholders (especially consumers) remain vigilant, educate themselves about specific issues, and are willing to act against firms that fail to meet expectations, then Greenwash will become more of a threat to survival, rather than an opportunity for profit.
Have a good weekend,
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
http://www.greenoptions.com/wiki/great-greenwashed-advertising
All of these ads are by organizations or industry representative groups with dubious sustainability track records, yet who are trying to benefit from increased consumer interest in the environment and related issues.
‘Greenwash,’ which is defined by the environmental marketing organization Terrachoice (http://www.terrachoice.com/) as “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service,” is an important part of the CSR debate. While firms increasingly try and benefit from growing consumer interest in this area, however, this phenomenon also reinforces the important role that stakeholders play in holding firms to account for their actions. Greenwash will only continue while it benefits firms to do so. To the extent that stakeholders (especially consumers) remain vigilant, educate themselves about specific issues, and are willing to act against firms that fail to meet expectations, then Greenwash will become more of a threat to survival, rather than an opportunity for profit.
Have a good weekend,
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Strategic CSR - Mattel
The article in the first url below presents an interesting effort by the toy company, Mattel, to profit from human misery and economic hardship:
“American Girl dolls are expensive and extremely popular - among the most sought-after toys among girls from ages four and up. Each doll comes with its own storyline, and a relatively new doll is causing quite a stir. "Gwen," which debuted this year, is portrayed as being homeless.”
The ironies flow freely: First, the oxymoronic question posed in the blog in the second url below:
“How can a doll be homeless if you play with it in your home?”
Second, the price for the doll and its friends and accessories included in the article in the third url below:
“At almost $100 - Gwen's hairbrush costs an additional $7, or owners can get her hair done at the salon for $20 - the doll is hardly a bargain. Gwen's friend Chrissa has accessories including a $25 pet llama and a $78 craft studio.”
Mattel, of course, presents the doll as an attempt to educate children about a difficult, real-world issue:
“American Girl says the doll is meant to open girls' eyes to life's harsher realities. "Our singular goal with these stories is to help girls find their inner star by becoming kind, compassionate and loving people who make a positive and meaningful difference in the world around them," it said.”
In spite of Mattel’s efforts, however, it is hard to imagine the conversation that took place in deciding to develop this product and the logic used to proceed with its launch (other than motivated by crass commercialization).
Take care,
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
CBS News
Flap Over "Homeless" American Girl Doll
Some Observers See It as Awareness-Raising, Others Fear It Sends Wrong Message; And Where Do Proceeds Go?
LOS ANGELES, Sept. 26, 2009
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/26/earlyshow/saturday/main5343132.shtml
The Atlantic
Controversy Over American Girl's $95 "Homeless" Doll
Sep 30 2009, 9:30am
by Megan Hupp
http://business.theatlantic.com/2009/09/outrage_and_sympathy_for_american_girls_homeless_doll.php
$95 downturn doll sleeps in a car
By Anna Fifield in Washington
437 words
3 October 2009
Financial Times
London Ed1
07
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96e2eea4-afb3-11de-ba1c-00144feabdc0.html
“American Girl dolls are expensive and extremely popular - among the most sought-after toys among girls from ages four and up. Each doll comes with its own storyline, and a relatively new doll is causing quite a stir. "Gwen," which debuted this year, is portrayed as being homeless.”
The ironies flow freely: First, the oxymoronic question posed in the blog in the second url below:
“How can a doll be homeless if you play with it in your home?”
Second, the price for the doll and its friends and accessories included in the article in the third url below:
“At almost $100 - Gwen's hairbrush costs an additional $7, or owners can get her hair done at the salon for $20 - the doll is hardly a bargain. Gwen's friend Chrissa has accessories including a $25 pet llama and a $78 craft studio.”
Mattel, of course, presents the doll as an attempt to educate children about a difficult, real-world issue:
“American Girl says the doll is meant to open girls' eyes to life's harsher realities. "Our singular goal with these stories is to help girls find their inner star by becoming kind, compassionate and loving people who make a positive and meaningful difference in the world around them," it said.”
In spite of Mattel’s efforts, however, it is hard to imagine the conversation that took place in deciding to develop this product and the logic used to proceed with its launch (other than motivated by crass commercialization).
Take care,
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
CBS News
Flap Over "Homeless" American Girl Doll
Some Observers See It as Awareness-Raising, Others Fear It Sends Wrong Message; And Where Do Proceeds Go?
LOS ANGELES, Sept. 26, 2009
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/26/earlyshow/saturday/main5343132.shtml
The Atlantic
Controversy Over American Girl's $95 "Homeless" Doll
Sep 30 2009, 9:30am
by Megan Hupp
http://business.theatlantic.com/2009/09/outrage_and_sympathy_for_american_girls_homeless_doll.php
$95 downturn doll sleeps in a car
By Anna Fifield in Washington
437 words
3 October 2009
Financial Times
London Ed1
07
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96e2eea4-afb3-11de-ba1c-00144feabdc0.html
Monday, March 8, 2010
Strategic CSR - Climate Change
The article in the url below argues that, while those who take a stand against the science behind climate change risk their credibility, those who believe the current paradigm will result in substantive change are also “in denial”:
“The first UN agreement on climate change was struck in Rio back in 1992. But in the intervening years, the rate of CO emissions has risen steadily.”
There is a good argument to be made that economic development in the West got us into this mess and, as a result, the West carriers a higher burden to sort it out:
“The Indians and Chinese point out that the vast bulk of the CO already in the atmosphere has been put there by the industrialised countries of the west. China is now probably the largest emitter of CO in the world. But, on a per capita basis, emissions in China are still well below western levels. Why, ask the Indians and Chinese, should Americans and Europeans assume the right to continue using energy at levels that they seek to deny to poorer countries? It is a fair question.”
The odds of that happening any time soon, however, are not great:
“The proposed deal is that rich countries essentially bribe poorer countries to cut emissions and adopt cleaner technologies. China has proposed that developed nations should all agree to contribute 1 per cent of gross domestic product to help poorer nations fight global warming. Now imagine that you are Mr Obama trying to sell a deal like that back home.”
The numbers involved in enacting the level of change necessary are staggering:
“As Oliver Morton, the science writer, points out - "Building two terawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050 - enough to supply 10 per cent of the total carbon-free energy that's needed - means building a large nuclear power station every week; the current worldwide rate is about five a year. A single terawatt of wind - 5 per cent of the overall requirement - requires about 4m large turbines."”
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Climate activists are also in denial
By Gideon Rachman
941 words
28 July 2009
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
07
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/37c9c748-7adf-11de-8c34-00144feabdc0,s01=1.html
or
http://www.salaam.co.uk/news/displaynews.php?news_id=255946
“The first UN agreement on climate change was struck in Rio back in 1992. But in the intervening years, the rate of CO emissions has risen steadily.”
There is a good argument to be made that economic development in the West got us into this mess and, as a result, the West carriers a higher burden to sort it out:
“The Indians and Chinese point out that the vast bulk of the CO already in the atmosphere has been put there by the industrialised countries of the west. China is now probably the largest emitter of CO in the world. But, on a per capita basis, emissions in China are still well below western levels. Why, ask the Indians and Chinese, should Americans and Europeans assume the right to continue using energy at levels that they seek to deny to poorer countries? It is a fair question.”
The odds of that happening any time soon, however, are not great:
“The proposed deal is that rich countries essentially bribe poorer countries to cut emissions and adopt cleaner technologies. China has proposed that developed nations should all agree to contribute 1 per cent of gross domestic product to help poorer nations fight global warming. Now imagine that you are Mr Obama trying to sell a deal like that back home.”
The numbers involved in enacting the level of change necessary are staggering:
“As Oliver Morton, the science writer, points out - "Building two terawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050 - enough to supply 10 per cent of the total carbon-free energy that's needed - means building a large nuclear power station every week; the current worldwide rate is about five a year. A single terawatt of wind - 5 per cent of the overall requirement - requires about 4m large turbines."”
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Climate activists are also in denial
By Gideon Rachman
941 words
28 July 2009
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
07
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/37c9c748-7adf-11de-8c34-00144feabdc0,s01=1.html
or
http://www.salaam.co.uk/news/displaynews.php?news_id=255946
Monday, March 1, 2010
Strategic CSR - Water
The article in the url below is one in a series of in-depth reports by the NYT into the state of water quality throughout the U.S. In particular, this article looks at reporting requirements for companies and the extent to which they comply, as well as pollution levels, state-by-state. The article also focuses on the actions (or inactions) taken by state regulators in response to abuses where they are identified. The article is long and too detailed to summarize here. Needless to say, however, it does not make for uplifting reading. I’ll spare you the gory anecdotes (of which, there are many) to focus on the numbers:
“Records analyzed by The Times indicate that the Clean Water Act has been violated more than 506,000 times since 2004, by more than 23,000 companies and other facilities, according to reports submitted by polluters themselves. … [However] fewer than 3 percent of Clean Water Act violations resulted in fines or other significant punishments by state officials.”
The overall tone and underlying message of the article can be summarized as follows: Polluter firms get away with what they can and the few regulators who try to act decisively to enforce the law are thwarted (and eventually fired if they persist) by well-financed lobbyists and the politicians they support.
The detailed data obtained by the NYT through Freedom of Information Act requests, along with the complete set of articles in the series, are posted on the newspaper’s website:
http://projects.nytimes.com/toxic-waters
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Clean Water Laws Neglected, at a Cost
By CHARLES DUHIGG; Karl Russell contributed reporting.
5394 words
13 September 2009
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
1
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html
“Records analyzed by The Times indicate that the Clean Water Act has been violated more than 506,000 times since 2004, by more than 23,000 companies and other facilities, according to reports submitted by polluters themselves. … [However] fewer than 3 percent of Clean Water Act violations resulted in fines or other significant punishments by state officials.”
The overall tone and underlying message of the article can be summarized as follows: Polluter firms get away with what they can and the few regulators who try to act decisively to enforce the law are thwarted (and eventually fired if they persist) by well-financed lobbyists and the politicians they support.
The detailed data obtained by the NYT through Freedom of Information Act requests, along with the complete set of articles in the series, are posted on the newspaper’s website:
http://projects.nytimes.com/toxic-waters
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
Clean Water Laws Neglected, at a Cost
By CHARLES DUHIGG; Karl Russell contributed reporting.
5394 words
13 September 2009
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
1
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html
Friday, February 26, 2010
Strategic CSR - Arctic Sea Ice
This animated series of graphics, unfortunately, needs no commentary:
http://nsidc.org/sotc/sea_ice_animation.html
I saw similar graphics from the National Arctic Ice Data Center in an article in the FT that is in the url below:
“September 2007 was the first time in living memory that the entire Northwest Passage was open water from east to west. In 2008, despite slightly more ice, a record six private yachts transited the historic waterway, and this year's traffic could beat that number.”
It is all quite somber reading:
“Scientists, some of whom predict the Arctic could be ice-free in the summer of 2037, warn there is a multiplier effect at work. Much of the ice that melted in recent years was thick ice that had accumulated over many years. But while much of the ice-free area this summer will freeze over in winter, that ice will be fragile and break up more easily next summer.”
Have a good weekend.
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
COUNTDOWN TO COPENHAGEN
Oil quest heats up in Arctic Canada
By Cameron Dueck on the Bering Sea,
904 words
16 July 2009
Financial Times
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4f5858ba-7153-11de-a821-00144feabdc0.html
or
http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2009/07/melting-ice-threatens-polar-life.html
http://nsidc.org/sotc/sea_ice_animation.html
I saw similar graphics from the National Arctic Ice Data Center in an article in the FT that is in the url below:
“September 2007 was the first time in living memory that the entire Northwest Passage was open water from east to west. In 2008, despite slightly more ice, a record six private yachts transited the historic waterway, and this year's traffic could beat that number.”
It is all quite somber reading:
“Scientists, some of whom predict the Arctic could be ice-free in the summer of 2037, warn there is a multiplier effect at work. Much of the ice that melted in recent years was thick ice that had accumulated over many years. But while much of the ice-free area this summer will freeze over in winter, that ice will be fragile and break up more easily next summer.”
Have a good weekend.
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther/
COUNTDOWN TO COPENHAGEN
Oil quest heats up in Arctic Canada
By Cameron Dueck on the Bering Sea,
904 words
16 July 2009
Financial Times
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4f5858ba-7153-11de-a821-00144feabdc0.html
or
http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2009/07/melting-ice-threatens-polar-life.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)