Wednesday, April 13, 2011
CSR – PERSONAL ASSESSMENT VS.DEFAULT PLAN
This year the students who enrolled in the CSR course had the option of choosing a default or a self defined personal assessment plan (PAP). These plans were similar as both had a mandatory mid term test and a presentation component for each individual. This is where the similarities end as the balance of the requirements are different for everyone unless the default was chosen. As everyone learns at a different speed or level it was more engaging and enjoyable knowing the workload was what we choose and not mandated to us. To me this was more beneficial as I could choose to either work in a group or on an individual setting. I felt this self defined learning option gave me more control over my time and the marks I would receive for this course. There were many varied options that one could choose from for the PAP. They ranged from case studies, journals, blogs, book reports, personal codes of conduct, and basically any other form of learning that had a direct correlation to the fundamentals of CSR. You could choose parts of one segment (case studies) and also choose the marks available for each of the projects you decided to do. The PAP was then handed into Les with our own personal plan, which included the marking scheme, what we were to complete and deadlines that we were to met. This was a form of a learning contract that we put in place with our professor. I chose to complete the book report, attendance option, and the personal code of conduct for my PAP. As I would be attending all classes I felt the attendance mark would be an easy reward for being where I was supposed to be. The book report was chosen as it was a book that would assist me in writing my code of conduct. Although these were bigger projects, I was able to work on them at regular intervals throughout the semester. These were the only projects I needed to focus on in this class. This took away the pressure of weekly deadlines with case reports, blogs etc. and allowed me to concentrate on my work. I would not be rushed with short deadlines and time restraints. I feel that completing the personal code of conduct was the most meaningful to me. As a second career student this option has allowed me to look back at the past and to really understand changes that I may need to make going forward. It is a personal challenge for me. The course was well laid out and explained many times throughout the semester. Les was always asking everyone if they had questions or had concerns about their projects. He was always available for those who needed guidance and assistance. The way Les set this course up I feel mirrored the working world, were your manager may give you a project to work on with a deadline. The manager will be expecting you to come up with ways to get the project completed. The manager will also require regular updates to ensure you are on track. The role Les was playing was that of my manager. I would recommend this course to others (faculty/students) as this teaching style will bring out the best in those who are taking the course. It will stimulate ones thinking to expand their comfort zones, think outside the box, and push one to do their best on the projects they have chosen. The PAP does create much more work for the professors from a marking perspective as there are a number of different projects being submitted with the same or different deadlines, however the caliber of the work submitted will be much higher, as this is the student’s personal work they have chosen to do. Those who are committed to the work chosen as per their contract with Les will do well; those who are not committed should not take this course. Les is passionate about his teachings as well as students challenging themselves to do their best. You get out of it what you put into it!!! TFTD – “Thrown dirt is ground lost” CONGRATS LES ON ANOTHER GREAT SEMESTER!!! Bob Mountenay
Thursday, April 7, 2011
CSR setup
As you all know we were given the option to either do the default lesson plan or a custom learning plan. This was a great idea I think. Depending on your personality we all learn differently. The option of picking your own course really makes you want to learn. You can't sit there and complain that you don't want to do it because it was your choice. It makes the course more interactive and makes it personal. It also includes all the basics that you must do. You must write the first test. You have to do a class presentation and you had to decide on an assessment plan
I thought the various options presented were great. We had a wide variety of choices. From book reports to watching videos to creative endeavors. Case studies and anything else you could think of as long as it was teacher approved. I think they were all viable options because you get decide how you learn.
I decided to do the case studies, attendance, both tests, 2 blogs, and a presentation. I did very well with this breakdown. It got rid of my usual stress associated with group work. I also got to do my class presentation on something I was interested in making a big difference in the amount of effort I put forward.
All in all I think what Les did is a great idea. I think that other courses should try this type of assessment. Although I am sure it is a lot of extra work for the instructors the quality of work you will get form your students will raise. As well if they don't do their plans they have no one to blame but themselves.
Thanks Les for another great semester
James Gimblett
I thought the various options presented were great. We had a wide variety of choices. From book reports to watching videos to creative endeavors. Case studies and anything else you could think of as long as it was teacher approved. I think they were all viable options because you get decide how you learn.
I decided to do the case studies, attendance, both tests, 2 blogs, and a presentation. I did very well with this breakdown. It got rid of my usual stress associated with group work. I also got to do my class presentation on something I was interested in making a big difference in the amount of effort I put forward.
All in all I think what Les did is a great idea. I think that other courses should try this type of assessment. Although I am sure it is a lot of extra work for the instructors the quality of work you will get form your students will raise. As well if they don't do their plans they have no one to blame but themselves.
Thanks Les for another great semester
James Gimblett
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Good Businesses? Really?
In an effort to distract myself from the unbelievable amount of horrible corporations and the people who run them, I Googled good businesses. I came across hope. I came across people who are at least attempting to treat other people fairly and who at least care.
http://www.canadastop100.com/national/
^ Canada’s Top 100 employers
This competition provides a little transparency into the companies and allows everyone to see how and why they made the list. Every company has great benefits and more applications than they will ever need. They treat their employees with respect and dignity, just how we should be treated. Interestingly enough Monsanto Canada made the list.
There is also a list of ethical companies. The World’s Most Ethical Companies by Ethisphere. Again there are 100 who made the list this year, 26 of them are new and 24 have been dropped from last year’s list. Not one Canadian company made it but Nike Inc. did.
http://ethisphere.com/wme2010/
^ Ethical Companies
If we were to dive into these companies would any make the list? Is there really a definition for Business Ethics? If there is I can’t think of a company that actually follows it, can you? More importantly, in your opinion, do you think we should give companies like Nike a second chance? I don’t, a tiger can’t change their stripes.
Emilie Leonard
http://www.canadastop100.com/national/
^ Canada’s Top 100 employers
This competition provides a little transparency into the companies and allows everyone to see how and why they made the list. Every company has great benefits and more applications than they will ever need. They treat their employees with respect and dignity, just how we should be treated. Interestingly enough Monsanto Canada made the list.
There is also a list of ethical companies. The World’s Most Ethical Companies by Ethisphere. Again there are 100 who made the list this year, 26 of them are new and 24 have been dropped from last year’s list. Not one Canadian company made it but Nike Inc. did.
http://ethisphere.com/wme2010/
^ Ethical Companies
If we were to dive into these companies would any make the list? Is there really a definition for Business Ethics? If there is I can’t think of a company that actually follows it, can you? More importantly, in your opinion, do you think we should give companies like Nike a second chance? I don’t, a tiger can’t change their stripes.
Emilie Leonard
Sunday, March 27, 2011
How Ethical Are You
I found this video on YouTube kind of by accident but I found it pretty interesting. It’s a six minute excerpt of a presentation from the AELC (Australian Experiential Learning Center). In the beginning of the video it goes through how to know if you are experiencing an ethical issue and how you might be feeling if you have got an ethical problem on your hands, such as ‘Are you losing sleep at night because of it?’ It has a lot of simple theories but I found it really made me think about how I personally make a decision that is ethics related. I probably consider some of these things but I would have to say I don’t really think that much into it. For instance it suggests you should ask yourself a series of questions like ‘How would you feel if your decision were to be exposed and if others found out?’ or ‘Is it something that I would feel comfortable telling my mother?’ Another thing that seems like it should be an obvious thing to do would be to put yourself in other peoples’ shoes and consider how it would affect the others involved. Taking a different viewpoint is an important thing to do when making any decision ethical or not because you need to look at it from all angles, consider all options as well as all outcomes. In addition to this, the presenter talks about power and how it can corrupt your moral compass. She explains how when people are in positions of power they frequently seem to think that they are ‘untouchable’ and might make unethical decisions due to that fact. Others are generally too afraid to question them or say no if they are in a lesser position. I found this rang a little too true for me because I know I have experienced people doing something that might not be right in my mind but I haven’t said anything because they are higher up than I am and I feel as though it’s either not my place to argue or I have been too nervous to stand up to them. I think this video is good to make yourself think about ethics in your own life and what you could change to become a more ethical decision maker. I think it was interesting and I would suggest watching the whole clip because it talks about other ethical topics also. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba0UjoovFFs
Can You Have No Impact?
For my video case study for CSR I ended up watching a documentary called No Impact Man. I found it very motivating and I think it would be a good film for some of you to watch if you are interested in this kind of thing as well. It follows Colin Beavan, his wife Michelle Conlin and their daughter Isabella through a project Colin came up with to cut his net environmental impact. No Impact Man entails the family making no environmental impact for one full year. The family went through phases, slowly taking things out of their life that most regular families like ours would have, such as vehicles, television, shopping, take out food and eventually electricity altogether. They also made a plan to eliminate all waste and compost any food waste created. I think this the type of film that is important to watch in order to become inspired to find ways to change regular activities we do on a daily basis that are harming the environment. Colin talks a lot throughout the project about how we as individuals need to begin taking into consideration the affects of our actions. I mentioned in my video case that in the film Colin said that he did not want people to try to be him, but instead find things that ‘we’ can do. We have the ability to try new things and see what will work for us; how we can implement new things into our lifestyle that would increase our positive impact rather than increase our negative impact. It is inspiring to watch the family go a full year and really understand how much of what they used to do in a day was hurting not only the environment but others around them. For instance, at one point in the video it talked about the health effects from living near landfills and the fact that people are dumping more and more into the garbage than is necessary. Things like this were the reason Colin and Michelle dressed their daughter in cloth diapers for the course of the year, because regular diapers are in the top three contributors to waste in landfills. Everyone is able to make a difference in their own way even if they start small. Colin created a website; www.noimpactcommunity.org for those people who want to join in or even get tips to change their ways. If people are looking to get involved, there are opportunities listed where you can learn about things you can do in your own community. The point is that anyone can make a difference if you set your mind to it and even the smallest of changes will add up and inspire others to follow suit. If you are interested in watching it you can find it on topdocumentaryfilms.com under the environment section. Or follow this link: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/no-impact-man/# Ashley Moynes
Friday, March 25, 2011
God help me...:)
here are the instructions
go to http://www.blogspot.com/
sign in with lsmith@flemingc.on.ca
the password is powercourse
pick the corporate social responsibility blog - this one you are reading:)
then click new post
add you post in the empty box
make sure the links work
then hit publish post
Please do not create any more new blogs under this account. Post on the main blog
Please do not change the settings anymore
Please just post your blog.
Thanks
Les
here are the instructions
go to http://www.blogspot.com/
sign in with lsmith@flemingc.on.ca
the password is powercourse
pick the corporate social responsibility blog - this one you are reading:)
then click new post
add you post in the empty box
make sure the links work
then hit publish post
Please do not create any more new blogs under this account. Post on the main blog
Please do not change the settings anymore
Please just post your blog.
Thanks
Les
What water crisis?
Water, what do you think about when you hear that word. Do you think, drink, shower, rain, what about conservation? Our world is slowly running out of fresh water, not only is there a water crisis in the developing countries, but we are having one right here, and we have to do something about it.
http://www.cbc.ca/andthewinneris/
This link leads you to a CBC program called “And the winner is”, to listen to the clip you are going to have to go down the page until you reach March 8th, or “Tina and Kim Pittaway's Watery Road to Hell / Kindred Spirits in Kenya.” The program is about half an hour and very informative on how much water we use in our daily lives, not just how much we drink and flush down the toilet but how much water it takes to make your t-shirts, and that sometimes being lazy and using technology is actually better for the environment.
For CSR I had read a book about the Global Water crisis, but for the most part it talked about a crisis in India, and Africa and what they should be doing to help use the water they have to its full potential. While Tina and Kim really bring home what we can do to reduce our water footprint. It doesn’t take much, and I am going to start doing things differently, such as meatless Monday’s, using the dishwasher, taking my car to the carwash, and buying a low flow shower head, because for all I say I would take a 3 minute shower… there is no way.
This link is very informative on the many ways water impacts our lives, and what we can do to save this precious resource.
- Laura Macdonald
http://www.cbc.ca/andthewinneris/
This link leads you to a CBC program called “And the winner is”, to listen to the clip you are going to have to go down the page until you reach March 8th, or “Tina and Kim Pittaway's Watery Road to Hell / Kindred Spirits in Kenya.” The program is about half an hour and very informative on how much water we use in our daily lives, not just how much we drink and flush down the toilet but how much water it takes to make your t-shirts, and that sometimes being lazy and using technology is actually better for the environment.
For CSR I had read a book about the Global Water crisis, but for the most part it talked about a crisis in India, and Africa and what they should be doing to help use the water they have to its full potential. While Tina and Kim really bring home what we can do to reduce our water footprint. It doesn’t take much, and I am going to start doing things differently, such as meatless Monday’s, using the dishwasher, taking my car to the carwash, and buying a low flow shower head, because for all I say I would take a 3 minute shower… there is no way.
This link is very informative on the many ways water impacts our lives, and what we can do to save this precious resource.
- Laura Macdonald
Canada: Trying to Build Some Muscle
A House of Commons Debate for a proposed Act.
http://frankvaleriote.liberal.ca/files/2011/01/Frank-Valeriote-Speech-Bill-C-300-September-20-2010.pdf
The Canadian Government has opened it eyes to the issue of companies going overseas and taking advantage of developing countries, in particular in mining, oil and gas sector. Francis Valeriote, a Guelph MPP, stood up in the House of Commons on September 20th, 2010 and proposed an act called ‘Corporate Accountability of Mining, Oil and Gas Corporations in Developing Countries Act”.
The numbers of companies that going overseas to developing countries is growing due to the cheap labour that can be used and abused. Canada used to be perceived as a great country but its reputation has slide down hill in the aspect that Canadian companies are doing business similar to the USA in the aspect of going into other countries and using them for their resources not caring about the repercussions.
Cutting off funding towards companies that are found guilty of violating, the act being proposed, would give a severe consequence on what else would have been disciplined by a simple slap on the wrist or a fine that is nothing compared to the millions of dollars that are being made off of the developing countries that are not receiving anything in return.
No matter how much money is donated towards a fund because someone is being mistreated does nothing in comparison towards actually doing something and making the companies accountable for their actions and to make it steep enough that they will learn a lesson to deter them from doing those actions again.
Hilary Gray
http://frankvaleriote.liberal.ca/files/2011/01/Frank-Valeriote-Speech-Bill-C-300-September-20-2010.pdf
The Canadian Government has opened it eyes to the issue of companies going overseas and taking advantage of developing countries, in particular in mining, oil and gas sector. Francis Valeriote, a Guelph MPP, stood up in the House of Commons on September 20th, 2010 and proposed an act called ‘Corporate Accountability of Mining, Oil and Gas Corporations in Developing Countries Act”.
The numbers of companies that going overseas to developing countries is growing due to the cheap labour that can be used and abused. Canada used to be perceived as a great country but its reputation has slide down hill in the aspect that Canadian companies are doing business similar to the USA in the aspect of going into other countries and using them for their resources not caring about the repercussions.
Cutting off funding towards companies that are found guilty of violating, the act being proposed, would give a severe consequence on what else would have been disciplined by a simple slap on the wrist or a fine that is nothing compared to the millions of dollars that are being made off of the developing countries that are not receiving anything in return.
No matter how much money is donated towards a fund because someone is being mistreated does nothing in comparison towards actually doing something and making the companies accountable for their actions and to make it steep enough that they will learn a lesson to deter them from doing those actions again.
Hilary Gray
Lying: Not Welcome
In February 2011, many people sighed a breath of relief when it was announced that Sun TV, would not be allowed to broadcast certain news information across Canada. Prime Minister, Stephen Harper made a request for a change in a broadcasting regulation in regards to the station, but was later denied. Why? The regulation that Harper wanted to change was allowing news stations to provide viewers with misleading and or false information. Currently and previously, Canada differs from the United States because they do not allow any type of media stations to do so. This broadcast regulation is set by CRTC, The Canadian Radio Television Telecommunication Commission.
After reading information regarding this regulation and how it is not allowed in Canada, I kept thinking about the Fox News and Monsanto case that happened in the movie The Corporation. Journalists Jane Arke and Steve Wilson lost a lawsuit and their jobs all because of the legal right in United States to broadcast false and misleading information. It is outright disturbing to know that U.S citizens do not have the same rights as Canadians when it comes to news and television. It really brings up the question, of how much news is falsified in America and how much is truthful. It seems that ethics in the news no longer exists in America, instead profit and money overrule. It is a satisfying feeling to know that CRTC denied the law change, and is more concerned with the viewers than large news corporations making an income.
Although SunTv will launch this coming April, its news report will be filled with truthful information, exposing the world of everything it has to offer. There will be no cover-ups, misleading information, or blatant lying. Canadians can sleep with ease knowing that they have the right to truthful information, and unfortunate cases similar to the one listed above cannot happen to them.
After reading information regarding this regulation and how it is not allowed in Canada, I kept thinking about the Fox News and Monsanto case that happened in the movie The Corporation. Journalists Jane Arke and Steve Wilson lost a lawsuit and their jobs all because of the legal right in United States to broadcast false and misleading information. It is outright disturbing to know that U.S citizens do not have the same rights as Canadians when it comes to news and television. It really brings up the question, of how much news is falsified in America and how much is truthful. It seems that ethics in the news no longer exists in America, instead profit and money overrule. It is a satisfying feeling to know that CRTC denied the law change, and is more concerned with the viewers than large news corporations making an income.
Although SunTv will launch this coming April, its news report will be filled with truthful information, exposing the world of everything it has to offer. There will be no cover-ups, misleading information, or blatant lying. Canadians can sleep with ease knowing that they have the right to truthful information, and unfortunate cases similar to the one listed above cannot happen to them.
The Dirty Side of Cleaning
In spring of 2010, North America experienced one of the worst oil spills known in history. It is estimated that almost five million barrels of oil leaked into the Gulf of Mexico over the three-month period. After all of the devastation and uproar, people committed themselves to help cleaning up the spill and trying to reestablish the life of the ocean and the surrounding area. The news reports glorified the work of these volunteers and criticized BP for this inexcusable series of events, but many people failed to ask what product was being used to clean the ocean.
Recently, I was browsing the Internet when I came across this video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZc9fwTAz_k&feature=player_embedded#at=34. Although this video does express or show scientific information backing up the very negative side of the products being used, it does show the emotion and physical damage that the product has on humanity. This product is known as Corexit. Corexit is used to break down oil, similar to any other detergent. However with all the “help” it is doing, it is causing extreme amounts of harm as well.
After watching the video, I became interested in researching more about the product and its use by oil company, BP, what I came across was a disturbing amount of negative information surrounding the product and its use. After the oil spill in 2010, BP was given two options in regards to cleaning up the devastating mess they left behind. The company was offered to use Corexit, or a safer alternative to the remover, one that would release fewer toxins, having less of an effect on the wildlife and the ocean. BP chose to use Corexit instead. After searching Google up and down, I found out disturbing information regarding the product. It was banned in the United Kingdom over a decade ago because of it’s harsh affects, it contains a higher amount of toxins than the alternative solutions and it is used by BP because it is a well known solution, BP was familiar with the name.
How can a company like BP, invest in creating more damage, when there are obvious alternatives to the product. There have been numerous reports on the negative side effects of Corexit, and yet the company chooses to ignore any sustainable route and opt out for what they know. After the oil spill in the gulf, the wildlife and environment suffered from extreme amounts of damage and yet it seems, BP still hasn’t stopped. Corexit is blatantly causing more harm than good. The company decided against a more sustainable product and because of it, wildlife, the surrounding environment, and humans are suffering from the repercussions.
Recently, I was browsing the Internet when I came across this video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZc9fwTAz_k&feature=player_embedded#at=34. Although this video does express or show scientific information backing up the very negative side of the products being used, it does show the emotion and physical damage that the product has on humanity. This product is known as Corexit. Corexit is used to break down oil, similar to any other detergent. However with all the “help” it is doing, it is causing extreme amounts of harm as well.
After watching the video, I became interested in researching more about the product and its use by oil company, BP, what I came across was a disturbing amount of negative information surrounding the product and its use. After the oil spill in 2010, BP was given two options in regards to cleaning up the devastating mess they left behind. The company was offered to use Corexit, or a safer alternative to the remover, one that would release fewer toxins, having less of an effect on the wildlife and the ocean. BP chose to use Corexit instead. After searching Google up and down, I found out disturbing information regarding the product. It was banned in the United Kingdom over a decade ago because of it’s harsh affects, it contains a higher amount of toxins than the alternative solutions and it is used by BP because it is a well known solution, BP was familiar with the name.
How can a company like BP, invest in creating more damage, when there are obvious alternatives to the product. There have been numerous reports on the negative side effects of Corexit, and yet the company chooses to ignore any sustainable route and opt out for what they know. After the oil spill in the gulf, the wildlife and environment suffered from extreme amounts of damage and yet it seems, BP still hasn’t stopped. Corexit is blatantly causing more harm than good. The company decided against a more sustainable product and because of it, wildlife, the surrounding environment, and humans are suffering from the repercussions.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Are You Consuming Child Labour?
Are you consuming Child Labour?
In 2004, reports surfaced of children working on sugarcane plantations in El Salvador.
Why should you care? These children were working to provide you with Coca Cola.
The Child labourers were employed by a local El Salvadorian company to chop down sugar cane. The main beneficiaries of this were said to be The Coca Cola Company. When these reports surfaced, it was estimated that there were approximately 20, 000 Salvadorian minors working without proper safety equipment to provide its employers with sugarcane. Although Coca Cola was not employing these minors, they were purchasing off the contractors, Central Izalco. In 2004, you would think that a major company such as Coca Cola would know better than to participate in the purchasing of child laboured sugarcane.
“Food” for thought
“Cutting sugar cane is back-breaking and hazardous work for a variety of reasons. The most common tools are machetes and similar sharp devices, and both the monotony of the work and the fact that it is usually conducted under direct sunlight make for frequent accidents, even among experienced workers.” - (1)
The Human Right Watch (HRW) called Coca Cola out on the findings and ordered the company to take more responsibility for what was happening. Over the years, the HRW has been responsible for many studies and investigations into child labour. It has not been the first time that Coca Cola came under the microscope. (Coca Cola Exec. Workers were investigated in Colombia for murdering employees that attempted to unionize). Furthermore, the HRW has stated that off all the agriculture work that children do in the world, cutting sugarcane is the most dangerous.
Much like the other large corporations, Coca Cola tried to deny any claims of purchasing sugarcane harvested by child labourers. They did however own up to not knowing how socially responsible their contractor Central Izalco was. Just this tidbit of information is enough to make me question my purchasing decisions. I hope it does the same for you. How do you feel about Coca Cola? Is it wrong for Coca Cola to continue to purchase the sugar?
(1) http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/coke061304.cfm
For the Record
Coca Cola has since co-founded a corporation to oversee who exactly is picking their sugar. The Corporation has many members, some of which were covered throughout “The Corporation” movie. For more information on what they are doing to combat child labour, check out:
http://www.global-business-initiative.org/
“The Global Business Initiative on Human Rights (GBI) exists because today there is a pressing need to ensure that corporations respect human rights and in turn benefit from a “level playing field” in relation to their social responsibilities.”
Did you know? In 2000, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimated that 211 million children between the ages of 5 and 14 were economically active worldwide.
Time for Chocolate?
It’s almost that time of the year, Easter! That means many of us will be bombarded by chocolate. Chocolate sales soar during this time of the year, which means there is more demand for cocoa. Do you know where the chocolate you eat comes from? Over half of the chocolate in the world comes from West Africa, where many farmers employ children. These children are often bought by the farmers and not paid. They’re only given food and shelter in exchange for long hours picking cocoa pods.
Countries like Ghana, Ivory Coast, Nigeria (West Africa) are all very dependent on cocoa as a main export. Most chocolate that are in your favourite candy bars come from this part of the world. I never really gave much thought as to what I was consuming. When you unwrap that delicious candy, the only thing going through your head is how delicious its going to it. For me, things have changed. I have recently watched a short documentary on CBC about the “Bitter Truth of Chocolate.” This documentary has had a huge impact on the way I see chocolate companies and chocolate itself. Since watching the documentary, (1 month ago) I have yet to consume any chocolate at all. The information was astounding and quite depressing.
Plot Line
The documentary was built around a journalist who looked to infiltrate the West African cocoa market in an effort to buy child labour picked cocoa. The Journalist planned on purchasing a large quantity so that he could sell it to one of the large chocolate manufacturers back in the USA. He discovered that much of the chocolate that is purchased by Cadbury, Nestle, etc has in fact been picked by children. These children ranged in age, and many had no choice other than to work. They had been sold by their family so that they could have food and shelter. These children did not get any money and were not able to attend school.
This documentary was shown on the CBC’s “The Passionate Eye”. It was entitled “Bitter Sweet: the dark side of chocolate”. This mini documentary helped to inform me of where the chocolate we consumed was coming from and who was picking it. It changed the way I see big corporations such as Nestle and Cadbury and also changed my decision when it comes to consuming chocolate. If you’d like to know more, I highly recommend watching this documentary.
For more Information check out:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/west-african-child-labour-still-feeds-the-worlds-insatiable-hunger-for-chocolate-442311.html
In 2004, reports surfaced of children working on sugarcane plantations in El Salvador.
Why should you care? These children were working to provide you with Coca Cola.
The Child labourers were employed by a local El Salvadorian company to chop down sugar cane. The main beneficiaries of this were said to be The Coca Cola Company. When these reports surfaced, it was estimated that there were approximately 20, 000 Salvadorian minors working without proper safety equipment to provide its employers with sugarcane. Although Coca Cola was not employing these minors, they were purchasing off the contractors, Central Izalco. In 2004, you would think that a major company such as Coca Cola would know better than to participate in the purchasing of child laboured sugarcane.
“Food” for thought
“Cutting sugar cane is back-breaking and hazardous work for a variety of reasons. The most common tools are machetes and similar sharp devices, and both the monotony of the work and the fact that it is usually conducted under direct sunlight make for frequent accidents, even among experienced workers.” - (1)
The Human Right Watch (HRW) called Coca Cola out on the findings and ordered the company to take more responsibility for what was happening. Over the years, the HRW has been responsible for many studies and investigations into child labour. It has not been the first time that Coca Cola came under the microscope. (Coca Cola Exec. Workers were investigated in Colombia for murdering employees that attempted to unionize). Furthermore, the HRW has stated that off all the agriculture work that children do in the world, cutting sugarcane is the most dangerous.
Much like the other large corporations, Coca Cola tried to deny any claims of purchasing sugarcane harvested by child labourers. They did however own up to not knowing how socially responsible their contractor Central Izalco was. Just this tidbit of information is enough to make me question my purchasing decisions. I hope it does the same for you. How do you feel about Coca Cola? Is it wrong for Coca Cola to continue to purchase the sugar?
(1) http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/coke061304.cfm
For the Record
Coca Cola has since co-founded a corporation to oversee who exactly is picking their sugar. The Corporation has many members, some of which were covered throughout “The Corporation” movie. For more information on what they are doing to combat child labour, check out:
http://www.global-business-initiative.org/
“The Global Business Initiative on Human Rights (GBI) exists because today there is a pressing need to ensure that corporations respect human rights and in turn benefit from a “level playing field” in relation to their social responsibilities.”
Did you know? In 2000, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimated that 211 million children between the ages of 5 and 14 were economically active worldwide.
Time for Chocolate?
It’s almost that time of the year, Easter! That means many of us will be bombarded by chocolate. Chocolate sales soar during this time of the year, which means there is more demand for cocoa. Do you know where the chocolate you eat comes from? Over half of the chocolate in the world comes from West Africa, where many farmers employ children. These children are often bought by the farmers and not paid. They’re only given food and shelter in exchange for long hours picking cocoa pods.
Countries like Ghana, Ivory Coast, Nigeria (West Africa) are all very dependent on cocoa as a main export. Most chocolate that are in your favourite candy bars come from this part of the world. I never really gave much thought as to what I was consuming. When you unwrap that delicious candy, the only thing going through your head is how delicious its going to it. For me, things have changed. I have recently watched a short documentary on CBC about the “Bitter Truth of Chocolate.” This documentary has had a huge impact on the way I see chocolate companies and chocolate itself. Since watching the documentary, (1 month ago) I have yet to consume any chocolate at all. The information was astounding and quite depressing.
Plot Line
The documentary was built around a journalist who looked to infiltrate the West African cocoa market in an effort to buy child labour picked cocoa. The Journalist planned on purchasing a large quantity so that he could sell it to one of the large chocolate manufacturers back in the USA. He discovered that much of the chocolate that is purchased by Cadbury, Nestle, etc has in fact been picked by children. These children ranged in age, and many had no choice other than to work. They had been sold by their family so that they could have food and shelter. These children did not get any money and were not able to attend school.
This documentary was shown on the CBC’s “The Passionate Eye”. It was entitled “Bitter Sweet: the dark side of chocolate”. This mini documentary helped to inform me of where the chocolate we consumed was coming from and who was picking it. It changed the way I see big corporations such as Nestle and Cadbury and also changed my decision when it comes to consuming chocolate. If you’d like to know more, I highly recommend watching this documentary.
For more Information check out:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/west-african-child-labour-still-feeds-the-worlds-insatiable-hunger-for-chocolate-442311.html
Monday, March 21, 2011
Oceans without life
Ocean without life
The End of the line: Life without fish is a documentary that explains and shows the danger of overexploitation. Until recently, humankind seemed to view the ocean as a source of infinite resources. Its vast size and depth and unexplored frontiers made the ocean appear invulnerable to overexploitation.
The truth is that the populations of many species are decreasing at an unsustainable rate, and the number of species listed as endangered from marine life families such as blue fins, whales, dolphins, manatees and dugongs, salmon, seabirds, sea turtles, and sharks to name a few, are on the rise. The threats to marine species are difficult to perceive because marine animals are not as visible as animals on land. But unfortunately, marine creatures are equally, if not more, vulnerable to problems such as habitat destruction and overexploitation. Shallow water animals that breathe air, like turtles, manatees, dugongs, and whales are often hit by boats and caught in fishing gear. Species such as turtles that lay their eggs on land often lose their nurseries due to coastal development. Animals that have taken millions of years to evolve, that are invaluable to all ecosystems, have and continue to vanish from places where they once flourished.
IUCN Red List of Threatened Marine Species
Loss of habitats, the spread of disease, pollution, and unsustainable fishing practices are directly related to the actions of humans and recovery from these problems is rarely straightforward. Many marine species live in small, specific habitats while others require protection across their migration routes that cover vast areas and include breeding and feeding grounds. Marine protected areas (MPAs) have been designated in many places worldwide, which can help protect and restore threatened species, but MPAs are limited in size and therefore, limited to the marine life that inhabits those areas. There are over 4000 of those sites exist throughout the world however; it is only 1 percent of the water.
This documentary not only explains what happened but also how it happened. As the boats got bigger and bigger and need to catch a fish became bigger as well. With the help of technology fisherman not only know where the fishes are but also the quantity as well. Therefore the fishing boats use huge nets to do a big catch all at once and by doing that they disturb the seabed along with the catch. Without seabed there is no new life because the new born needs to stay hidden to survive.
Every year the demand rises and fishermen go further and further in the ocean to catch. But the catch is getting smaller and smaller also in that process there are many species that have been extinct and there are some on endangered list. Back in 1992, fisheries minister had to put a ban in St’ John’s to stop fishing for several years in order for fishes to reproduce and become sustainable and cod fish were extinct because of overexploitation.
The life in oceans is very important because it keeps the ocean clean and alive. When fisherman use to fish on small boat there was so much fish that they didn’t even need hooks to catch the fish, they just simply scoop the surface and catch the fish. Because there was plenty and they would touch the boat surface. Now to catch the fish the fishermen spends days in ocean and put nets as deep that touch the bottom of the ocean and then scoop from the bottom of the ocean. The world wonders where all the big fish are gone, but the people are in denial they don’t know that they ate all the big ones.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/end-of-line-world-without-fish/
http://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2010/2010-08-18/html/sor-dors173-eng.html
Posted By: Ali M.
The End of the line: Life without fish is a documentary that explains and shows the danger of overexploitation. Until recently, humankind seemed to view the ocean as a source of infinite resources. Its vast size and depth and unexplored frontiers made the ocean appear invulnerable to overexploitation.
The truth is that the populations of many species are decreasing at an unsustainable rate, and the number of species listed as endangered from marine life families such as blue fins, whales, dolphins, manatees and dugongs, salmon, seabirds, sea turtles, and sharks to name a few, are on the rise. The threats to marine species are difficult to perceive because marine animals are not as visible as animals on land. But unfortunately, marine creatures are equally, if not more, vulnerable to problems such as habitat destruction and overexploitation. Shallow water animals that breathe air, like turtles, manatees, dugongs, and whales are often hit by boats and caught in fishing gear. Species such as turtles that lay their eggs on land often lose their nurseries due to coastal development. Animals that have taken millions of years to evolve, that are invaluable to all ecosystems, have and continue to vanish from places where they once flourished.
IUCN Red List of Threatened Marine Species
Loss of habitats, the spread of disease, pollution, and unsustainable fishing practices are directly related to the actions of humans and recovery from these problems is rarely straightforward. Many marine species live in small, specific habitats while others require protection across their migration routes that cover vast areas and include breeding and feeding grounds. Marine protected areas (MPAs) have been designated in many places worldwide, which can help protect and restore threatened species, but MPAs are limited in size and therefore, limited to the marine life that inhabits those areas. There are over 4000 of those sites exist throughout the world however; it is only 1 percent of the water.
This documentary not only explains what happened but also how it happened. As the boats got bigger and bigger and need to catch a fish became bigger as well. With the help of technology fisherman not only know where the fishes are but also the quantity as well. Therefore the fishing boats use huge nets to do a big catch all at once and by doing that they disturb the seabed along with the catch. Without seabed there is no new life because the new born needs to stay hidden to survive.
Every year the demand rises and fishermen go further and further in the ocean to catch. But the catch is getting smaller and smaller also in that process there are many species that have been extinct and there are some on endangered list. Back in 1992, fisheries minister had to put a ban in St’ John’s to stop fishing for several years in order for fishes to reproduce and become sustainable and cod fish were extinct because of overexploitation.
The life in oceans is very important because it keeps the ocean clean and alive. When fisherman use to fish on small boat there was so much fish that they didn’t even need hooks to catch the fish, they just simply scoop the surface and catch the fish. Because there was plenty and they would touch the boat surface. Now to catch the fish the fishermen spends days in ocean and put nets as deep that touch the bottom of the ocean and then scoop from the bottom of the ocean. The world wonders where all the big fish are gone, but the people are in denial they don’t know that they ate all the big ones.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/end-of-line-world-without-fish/
http://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2010/2010-08-18/html/sor-dors173-eng.html
Posted By: Ali M.
If the Oil runs out
If the Oil runs out
This documentary is an eyes opening experience for the whole world. How careless we have become about the environment we live in. The world has tons of resources to meet the need of everyone, plants, animals, sea life, etc. However, we humans tend to exploit every resource available to its extinction. Oil sand is one of those things that we extract from the earth and turn it into liquid oil and burn it to create millions of things. We use over 80 millions of barrel of oil daily.
Prior to using the oil the world was very sustainable and no environmental issues. The Seneca Indians, who inhabited what is now western Pennsylvania, used it for medicinal purposes. When mankind learned how to drill deep into the earth and tap vast quantities of crude oil, the world was changed forever. At first kerosene that was produced from crude oil was used as fuel for lamps. It replaced coal oil, animal fat, and vegetable oil. But once the automobile was developed, crude oil was refined into gasoline and diesel and became the fuel that drives the world. Cars, trucks, buses, trains, ships and airplanes are powered by oil, diesel, and gasoline.
There was a time when the United States actually exported oil. Of course, those days are long gone, and now the United States imports the largest percentage of its crude oil from locations around the world, but the Middle East is the principle supplier.
North American consumers use most of the oil by using large SUV’s, oil heating in their homes, etc. United States has enjoyed for years however now countries like China and India demands more oil and they have a buying power. United States is working hard to find new oil reserves up north in Alaska and areas because it is a huge problem. The barrel prices could rise easily up to $200-$300 a barrel. The world is usage increases for oil each year and this documentary show what if we are running out of the oil and what impacts will we have in the World.
In my opinion we need to use public transport, carpool as many people as possible, avoid driving alone, drive small cars, travel less, etc. In order to avoid catastrophe, this documentary show the world will need 100 million barrels a day in 2016 and there will be very limited supply of oil and there will be huge lines at the gas pumps and people will become vigilant and make irrational decisions such as riots at a gas stations, stealing gas from each other conveyance.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/if-the-oil-runs-out/
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption
http://oildepletiondebate.blogspot.com/2008/02/at-1000-barrels-of-oil-per-second.html
Posted By: Ali M.
This documentary is an eyes opening experience for the whole world. How careless we have become about the environment we live in. The world has tons of resources to meet the need of everyone, plants, animals, sea life, etc. However, we humans tend to exploit every resource available to its extinction. Oil sand is one of those things that we extract from the earth and turn it into liquid oil and burn it to create millions of things. We use over 80 millions of barrel of oil daily.
Prior to using the oil the world was very sustainable and no environmental issues. The Seneca Indians, who inhabited what is now western Pennsylvania, used it for medicinal purposes. When mankind learned how to drill deep into the earth and tap vast quantities of crude oil, the world was changed forever. At first kerosene that was produced from crude oil was used as fuel for lamps. It replaced coal oil, animal fat, and vegetable oil. But once the automobile was developed, crude oil was refined into gasoline and diesel and became the fuel that drives the world. Cars, trucks, buses, trains, ships and airplanes are powered by oil, diesel, and gasoline.
There was a time when the United States actually exported oil. Of course, those days are long gone, and now the United States imports the largest percentage of its crude oil from locations around the world, but the Middle East is the principle supplier.
North American consumers use most of the oil by using large SUV’s, oil heating in their homes, etc. United States has enjoyed for years however now countries like China and India demands more oil and they have a buying power. United States is working hard to find new oil reserves up north in Alaska and areas because it is a huge problem. The barrel prices could rise easily up to $200-$300 a barrel. The world is usage increases for oil each year and this documentary show what if we are running out of the oil and what impacts will we have in the World.
In my opinion we need to use public transport, carpool as many people as possible, avoid driving alone, drive small cars, travel less, etc. In order to avoid catastrophe, this documentary show the world will need 100 million barrels a day in 2016 and there will be very limited supply of oil and there will be huge lines at the gas pumps and people will become vigilant and make irrational decisions such as riots at a gas stations, stealing gas from each other conveyance.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/if-the-oil-runs-out/
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption
http://oildepletiondebate.blogspot.com/2008/02/at-1000-barrels-of-oil-per-second.html
Posted By: Ali M.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Industry Canada By James Gimblett
I found a web site that is published by industry Canada. On the site they talk about CSR. They are saying that the CSR movement is gaining steam not only here in Canada but around the world. On the site they describe CSR as the business role in sustainable development and the pursuit of the triple bottom line. It is an approach to doing business which integrates and balances economic, environmental and social performance with the goal to continuously improve upon all three. It talks about how consumers have an important role in encouraging businesses to adopt and advance CSR. Most companies make an effort to learn about their customer’s preferences and opinions. The site also points out the broad range of issues related to CSR that consumers care about. The economic interests, environmental problems and social concerns. It also says to stay informed. Being a sustainable consumer begins with being an informed one. It gives tips on finding information to help you on your search. It also brings up the topic of lifecycle management. It talks how some companies have already started to look at their product from beginning to end. Interface for example. It says to evaluate the source. It gives tips on things to search and the fact that it is impossible to research all purchases made. It also talks about socially responsible investing and ways to go beyond just purchasing.
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/csr-rse.nsf/eng/h_rs00164.html
This web site is very informative. I am glad that I found it and seen that our government although not involved in any sort of green house gas reduction talks is supporting good CSR practices. They are also giving us the consumers a great place to start. The site is a summary of what is going on in CSR right now and what you can do to support it. I was shocked to see that the first socially responsible index was launched in 1986. This site also provides links to other CSR related topics and as I mentioned before tips on how you can be socially responsible and force companies to change their ways. It covers most of the topics we have covered in class so far and I feel that it is current information. I have began to see many commercials for companies promoting their quest to be socially responsible. Coca-Cola being the latest one. This shows that we really do have a say in the way companies are run. If the government is involved it must be going to make money. Haha sorry my attempt at humour. Well to wrap it up I would just like to tell everyone who reads this to make sure you check out this page and keep yourself informed knowledge is power.
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/csr-rse.nsf/eng/h_rs00164.html
This web site is very informative. I am glad that I found it and seen that our government although not involved in any sort of green house gas reduction talks is supporting good CSR practices. They are also giving us the consumers a great place to start. The site is a summary of what is going on in CSR right now and what you can do to support it. I was shocked to see that the first socially responsible index was launched in 1986. This site also provides links to other CSR related topics and as I mentioned before tips on how you can be socially responsible and force companies to change their ways. It covers most of the topics we have covered in class so far and I feel that it is current information. I have began to see many commercials for companies promoting their quest to be socially responsible. Coca-Cola being the latest one. This shows that we really do have a say in the way companies are run. If the government is involved it must be going to make money. Haha sorry my attempt at humour. Well to wrap it up I would just like to tell everyone who reads this to make sure you check out this page and keep yourself informed knowledge is power.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Social Corporate Responsibility and Natural Disasters
Recently, we have seen a massive Earthquake in Japan, which got me thinking: should it be a corporate responsibility to aid in the relief and support of the countries that go through national disasters; and is the only reason these companies support the disaster stricken regions to make money?
Everyone would agree that all business is about is making money, as stated in the video “the best kind of business is where you make money by doing good.” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1OWBbVFIqY) This statement is very impacting, and after hearing this, I noticed that many of the huge corporations in North America will most always have a disaster relief fund, or aid in the destruction of the environment. After researching such companies, I found Coca-Cola’s disaster relief page: ( http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/disaster_relief.html)
The big companies of North America doing this has maybe/or maybe not saved them millions of dollars in advertising; but it has also put a face on the company that says they are here to help people, and will do anything it takes to save lives/make them better.
Of course, in sense, these companies providing relief actually ends up helping those in need – look at the help and change brought to Haiti as an example. But I guess the question remains: if these companies are actually helping, is what they are doing to make themselves look better considered wrong?
- Sarah Court
Everyone would agree that all business is about is making money, as stated in the video “the best kind of business is where you make money by doing good.” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1OWBbVFIqY) This statement is very impacting, and after hearing this, I noticed that many of the huge corporations in North America will most always have a disaster relief fund, or aid in the destruction of the environment. After researching such companies, I found Coca-Cola’s disaster relief page: ( http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/disaster_relief.html)
The big companies of North America doing this has maybe/or maybe not saved them millions of dollars in advertising; but it has also put a face on the company that says they are here to help people, and will do anything it takes to save lives/make them better.
Of course, in sense, these companies providing relief actually ends up helping those in need – look at the help and change brought to Haiti as an example. But I guess the question remains: if these companies are actually helping, is what they are doing to make themselves look better considered wrong?
- Sarah Court
Why Can't We Launch Garbage into Space?
Article:
http://www.universetoday.com/25431/why-cant-we-launch-garbage-into-space/
Why Can’t We Launch Garbage into Space?
It’s been estimated that launching material on the space shuttle costs about $10,000/pound ($22,000/kg). Even if engineers could bring down prices by a factor of 10, it would still be thousands of dollars to launch the garbage into space. Let’s imagine a wonderful dream world, where launch costs could be brought down to $1,000/kg – a factor of 1/20th the cost to launch on the space shuttle.
It has also been estimated that the United States alone produces 208 million metric tonnes of garbage per day… per day! So, to launch all that trash into space would cost the United States $208 trillion per day… per day!
My opinion:
That article briefly mentions the expensive side of why we can't launch garbage into space, but not on the ideas itself.
There are currently new inventions being made and combined in space. Where you are able to combine elements on the periodic table that normally can not be combined or fused together here on earth.
Now we know that plastic takes thousands of years to break apart; if at all. But what if we were able to take that trash into space, where the rules and laws are different; we might be able to find a way to break apart the molecules that hold the plastic soo firmly together. This might allow us to find a way of recycling with plastic in a better way rather than dumping it into the ground.
Now one certain backfiring point is that if we throw all of this garbage out into the space, that it may change the overall weight on the planet earth and then shift the orbit that earth currently follows around the sun. One possible idea, is to due a substitute program. Where you take astroids or true space debris, bring it back to earth, and then send an equal amount of garbage out of the earth to compensate for the difference.
Some other people suggest sending it out into the sun to burng the materials. Well if this were a proper suggestion for riding the world of trash, then why could we not just burn it already on our planet.
Some countries are doing just that. They burn the garbage, and then make fumes and they channel the fumes to create a heating source for the public.
I think there should be a program into research and development of creating items and taking apart items in space.
Justin Young
http://www.universetoday.com/25431/why-cant-we-launch-garbage-into-space/
Why Can’t We Launch Garbage into Space?
It’s been estimated that launching material on the space shuttle costs about $10,000/pound ($22,000/kg). Even if engineers could bring down prices by a factor of 10, it would still be thousands of dollars to launch the garbage into space. Let’s imagine a wonderful dream world, where launch costs could be brought down to $1,000/kg – a factor of 1/20th the cost to launch on the space shuttle.
It has also been estimated that the United States alone produces 208 million metric tonnes of garbage per day… per day! So, to launch all that trash into space would cost the United States $208 trillion per day… per day!
My opinion:
That article briefly mentions the expensive side of why we can't launch garbage into space, but not on the ideas itself.
There are currently new inventions being made and combined in space. Where you are able to combine elements on the periodic table that normally can not be combined or fused together here on earth.
Now we know that plastic takes thousands of years to break apart; if at all. But what if we were able to take that trash into space, where the rules and laws are different; we might be able to find a way to break apart the molecules that hold the plastic soo firmly together. This might allow us to find a way of recycling with plastic in a better way rather than dumping it into the ground.
Now one certain backfiring point is that if we throw all of this garbage out into the space, that it may change the overall weight on the planet earth and then shift the orbit that earth currently follows around the sun. One possible idea, is to due a substitute program. Where you take astroids or true space debris, bring it back to earth, and then send an equal amount of garbage out of the earth to compensate for the difference.
Some other people suggest sending it out into the sun to burng the materials. Well if this were a proper suggestion for riding the world of trash, then why could we not just burn it already on our planet.
Some countries are doing just that. They burn the garbage, and then make fumes and they channel the fumes to create a heating source for the public.
I think there should be a program into research and development of creating items and taking apart items in space.
Justin Young
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Sweatshops: Child Labor
After Watching the documentary "The Corporation" I felt very uncomfortable watching some parts through out the documentary involving sweatshops and child labour. It is devistating for me to see the conditions that these workers have to work in. They are trapped in a visious cycle of ongoing explotation. After watching the documentary I began to do further research on this issue as it upset me greatly. Corproations that are defending sweatshops feel that they are doing good by bringing in jobs to these underdeveloped countries that they wouldn't of had otherwise however the conditions that these people are working in are awful and they are never able to save enough money to improve their own home lives. Many corporations say that they are monitoring their companies in other countries however it's a lie. They are calling in advance to warn the factories that there will be a visit, this gives the managemnt team of that factory to clean up and get rid of all the children that work in that factory so when the inspector comes it meets company standards.
http://www.veganpeace.com/sweatshops/sweatshops_and_child_labor.htm
This website gave lot's of information on sweatshops that I found quite interesting.
Information that I found from this website:
- The International Labour Organization has estimated that 250 million children between the ages of 5 and 14 work in developing countries.
61%: Asia
32%:Africia
7% Latin America
Many of the children don't have an option, they are forced to work, also most of them don't have an education or a normal child hood they need to work in order to survive. The worst part of all this is that some of the children are beaten if they don't work fast enough or meet the companies demands.
Major Products that are mostly made in Sweatshops and cause the biggest problems to this industry are as followed:
1. Shoes: mostly athletic shoes (Nike)
2. Clothing: major use of child labour
3. Toys: China, Malaysia, Thialand, Vietnam. North American Toy makers make about 11 dollars an hour where the listed countries make around 30cents and hour.
4. Rugs: 1 million children are illegally employed making hand rugs worldwide. 75% of Pakistans carpet weavers are girls under 14.
5. Chocolate: Coco workers who are paid recieve wages that leave them in poverty
6. Bananas: most exploited, long hours, little pay, and also exposed to dangerous pesticides
7. Coffee: 2nd largest US importer, all coffee workers are living in poverty and dept.
What I feel that needs to change:
- Workers need to make enough money to pay for their living expenses, to atleast be able to afford basic foods
- be more educated about their rights and freedoms
- be able to have an education if thats what they choose to do.
Implementation: How do we end this?
I feel that the public doesn't know enough about this issue. It needs to be adressed globally. There needs to be violations put into place to to protect workers and their jobs. There needs to be unexpected visits to monitor these factories. We all need to become globalized thinkers to end this.
In Lecture Les mentioned that these children are as youg as five years old. Most children are exposed to hazardous work, farming, mining, exposed to noxious fumes and chemicals. This is happeneing because of Globalizaions, we are all driven by demand of products, cost savings. However it has been improving there are 28 million fewer children working than four years ago, they are being childen playing activities and going to school. There are two sides to this if we use the right side of our brain we can look at it as, is this explotation or oppurtunity, and who benefits the most? These underdeveloped countries don't know any better, they think of it as an oppurtunity for work and support for their families. The one thing that really upset me is that some parents are selling there children (80%) to work in cocoa plantations.
Thankyou
Laura Davis
http://www.veganpeace.com/sweatshops/sweatshops_and_child_labor.htm
This website gave lot's of information on sweatshops that I found quite interesting.
Information that I found from this website:
- The International Labour Organization has estimated that 250 million children between the ages of 5 and 14 work in developing countries.
61%: Asia
32%:Africia
7% Latin America
Many of the children don't have an option, they are forced to work, also most of them don't have an education or a normal child hood they need to work in order to survive. The worst part of all this is that some of the children are beaten if they don't work fast enough or meet the companies demands.
Major Products that are mostly made in Sweatshops and cause the biggest problems to this industry are as followed:
1. Shoes: mostly athletic shoes (Nike)
2. Clothing: major use of child labour
3. Toys: China, Malaysia, Thialand, Vietnam. North American Toy makers make about 11 dollars an hour where the listed countries make around 30cents and hour.
4. Rugs: 1 million children are illegally employed making hand rugs worldwide. 75% of Pakistans carpet weavers are girls under 14.
5. Chocolate: Coco workers who are paid recieve wages that leave them in poverty
6. Bananas: most exploited, long hours, little pay, and also exposed to dangerous pesticides
7. Coffee: 2nd largest US importer, all coffee workers are living in poverty and dept.
What I feel that needs to change:
- Workers need to make enough money to pay for their living expenses, to atleast be able to afford basic foods
- be more educated about their rights and freedoms
- be able to have an education if thats what they choose to do.
Implementation: How do we end this?
I feel that the public doesn't know enough about this issue. It needs to be adressed globally. There needs to be violations put into place to to protect workers and their jobs. There needs to be unexpected visits to monitor these factories. We all need to become globalized thinkers to end this.
In Lecture Les mentioned that these children are as youg as five years old. Most children are exposed to hazardous work, farming, mining, exposed to noxious fumes and chemicals. This is happeneing because of Globalizaions, we are all driven by demand of products, cost savings. However it has been improving there are 28 million fewer children working than four years ago, they are being childen playing activities and going to school. There are two sides to this if we use the right side of our brain we can look at it as, is this explotation or oppurtunity, and who benefits the most? These underdeveloped countries don't know any better, they think of it as an oppurtunity for work and support for their families. The one thing that really upset me is that some parents are selling there children (80%) to work in cocoa plantations.
Thankyou
Laura Davis
Employment in a Green Industry
As I, as well as many others in the class, prepare for graduation at the end of this semester, I decided I would look into what green jobs are available in Canada, how their advertised and what they involve. I came across a website (http://www.goodworkcanada.ca/gw.php) which advertises jobs that are considered green within Canada. From March 1-13, there have been 50 job postings in Ontario. This is not a considerable amount in comparison to other job searches I have done where I can achieve those results in a much smaller geographic area. The job titles range from 'Canoe trips guide' to 'gardeners'. One listing I was surprised to see was for a 'truck driver'. That was definitely a position I was not expecting to see on a Green Jobs website. The position is for a local company (within the GTA) that has made advancements for the local food market. I then thought this website is a great way to disguish themselves from the other thousands of trucking companies within our country. By this company advertising on this website for their open position, they know they would attract a unique kind of individual that wants to assist their organization in a positive way.
I know personally, at this point in my life I'm ready to be done school and to be working full-time. I will most likely take the best job, or first job that comes my way. I'm educated, however when you have to pay bills, how many people would choose to not work for a company that is not the most sustainable? I do think it is very attractive and would make me feel more fulfilled as a person to be employed with an organization that is making a positive impact on the world, but I doubt how realistic it is for me. I am going to strive to work for one of these types of organizations, and if our generation, as well as future ones, move more towards that way of thinking, soon we'll only have sustainable organizations to choose from.
By: Denise Bloomer
I know personally, at this point in my life I'm ready to be done school and to be working full-time. I will most likely take the best job, or first job that comes my way. I'm educated, however when you have to pay bills, how many people would choose to not work for a company that is not the most sustainable? I do think it is very attractive and would make me feel more fulfilled as a person to be employed with an organization that is making a positive impact on the world, but I doubt how realistic it is for me. I am going to strive to work for one of these types of organizations, and if our generation, as well as future ones, move more towards that way of thinking, soon we'll only have sustainable organizations to choose from.
By: Denise Bloomer
Saturday, March 12, 2011
The Rise Of Sustainable Tourism in the Dominican Republic
http://www.chemonics.com/projects/default.asp?content_id={47702E65-350E-4289-86BE-252C02B10A7C}
The article link posted above is posted on the Chemonics website. Chemonics is an international development consulting company that helps governments, businesses, civil society groups and communities advance meaningful change. Basicially, they do this so that people can live healthier lives that are more productive and more independent. They work under contract with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) as well as other foreign aid donors to design and implement development projects in developing countries around the world.
The article is titled “Sustainable Tourism Fuels Dominican Economy” and talks all about how the tourism industry in the Dominican Republic is booming and with the proper practices put into place, we can look at tourism not as something that harms the environment and takes away from local communities, but as way to expand their economy while protecting the environment.
I think that nowadays when we think of tourism we think of all-inclusive resorts, unlimited drinks, tons of food, beautiful beaches and lounging by the pool. Many people don’t take into account the local communities surrounding these huge resorts and the ways in which these people become affected. I love reading an article such as this one and learning about the positive effects of tourism and ways that associations are making a difference to protect local communities and fragile ecosystems that border the resorts.
I recently spent one week at the “Grand Paradise Resort” in Samana, Dominican Republic. The first thing that I noticed when entering my hotel room was that there was no electricity. I instantly became aggravated and headed to the front desk to find out why. The very kind, patient young man took me back to my room and once inside showed me how the room key (a plastic card) had to be inserted into a plastic slot located beside the door in order to retrieve electricity for your room. The young man explained to me that this was one of the resorts ways of conserving electricity. After he left I felt kind of stupid and a little embarrassed but then I thought to myself “Why? In Canada, we take these things for granted. We expect our lights to turn on and we use as much as we want”. It was my first bit of culture shock since arriving there.
Throughout the week, after being served by local people and getting to know them quite well from sitting down and having conversations, I couldn’t help but wonder if they resented the tourists who come into their country and use up their valuable resources. I felt like I was taking from them. I ended up talking to a young bar tender who was named Juan. He was 26 and grew up in Samana with his large family. I asked him how he felt about the resorts in the area and he just said to me (in his thick accent) “without this resort, I have no job and no support for my sisters”. I have to say, the local people were the friendliest people I have ever met in my entire life. They were appreciative, complimentary, kind and thoughtful.
When I came home and did my research on sustainable tourism in the Dominican and came across this article, it made me feel a lot better about my vacation and the ways that associations are protecting these local communities and helping them to gain from the boom in the tourism industry. The local people want their economy to grow, they want to be provided with jobs. By increasing brand value and streaming travel, the Dominican Republic is hoping to attract more tourists and generate higher returns. Yes, there are challenges because of the local rainforests and marine reserves but USAID is working hard to achieve a balance between development in tourism and environmental protection.
As Gibson states in the article, “a decline in environmental impact leads to consumer satisfaction, which in turn leads to repeat visitation and word of mouth marketing. This can create higher and more sustainable returns to local communities, spurring economic growth and reducing poverty.” I have high hopes for this theory and after visiting a developing country first hand and getting a chance to see what some of the resorts are implementing in order to try and conserve the country’s resources, I feel that a lot of good CAN come from this. Overall, I feel that there is a lot of work to be done and these things won't happen overnight but I'm happy to say that I feel confident for the future of the Dominican Republic's travel industry and the communities and environments that support it.
-Ashley Dolan
The article link posted above is posted on the Chemonics website. Chemonics is an international development consulting company that helps governments, businesses, civil society groups and communities advance meaningful change. Basicially, they do this so that people can live healthier lives that are more productive and more independent. They work under contract with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) as well as other foreign aid donors to design and implement development projects in developing countries around the world.
The article is titled “Sustainable Tourism Fuels Dominican Economy” and talks all about how the tourism industry in the Dominican Republic is booming and with the proper practices put into place, we can look at tourism not as something that harms the environment and takes away from local communities, but as way to expand their economy while protecting the environment.
I think that nowadays when we think of tourism we think of all-inclusive resorts, unlimited drinks, tons of food, beautiful beaches and lounging by the pool. Many people don’t take into account the local communities surrounding these huge resorts and the ways in which these people become affected. I love reading an article such as this one and learning about the positive effects of tourism and ways that associations are making a difference to protect local communities and fragile ecosystems that border the resorts.
I recently spent one week at the “Grand Paradise Resort” in Samana, Dominican Republic. The first thing that I noticed when entering my hotel room was that there was no electricity. I instantly became aggravated and headed to the front desk to find out why. The very kind, patient young man took me back to my room and once inside showed me how the room key (a plastic card) had to be inserted into a plastic slot located beside the door in order to retrieve electricity for your room. The young man explained to me that this was one of the resorts ways of conserving electricity. After he left I felt kind of stupid and a little embarrassed but then I thought to myself “Why? In Canada, we take these things for granted. We expect our lights to turn on and we use as much as we want”. It was my first bit of culture shock since arriving there.
Throughout the week, after being served by local people and getting to know them quite well from sitting down and having conversations, I couldn’t help but wonder if they resented the tourists who come into their country and use up their valuable resources. I felt like I was taking from them. I ended up talking to a young bar tender who was named Juan. He was 26 and grew up in Samana with his large family. I asked him how he felt about the resorts in the area and he just said to me (in his thick accent) “without this resort, I have no job and no support for my sisters”. I have to say, the local people were the friendliest people I have ever met in my entire life. They were appreciative, complimentary, kind and thoughtful.
When I came home and did my research on sustainable tourism in the Dominican and came across this article, it made me feel a lot better about my vacation and the ways that associations are protecting these local communities and helping them to gain from the boom in the tourism industry. The local people want their economy to grow, they want to be provided with jobs. By increasing brand value and streaming travel, the Dominican Republic is hoping to attract more tourists and generate higher returns. Yes, there are challenges because of the local rainforests and marine reserves but USAID is working hard to achieve a balance between development in tourism and environmental protection.
As Gibson states in the article, “a decline in environmental impact leads to consumer satisfaction, which in turn leads to repeat visitation and word of mouth marketing. This can create higher and more sustainable returns to local communities, spurring economic growth and reducing poverty.” I have high hopes for this theory and after visiting a developing country first hand and getting a chance to see what some of the resorts are implementing in order to try and conserve the country’s resources, I feel that a lot of good CAN come from this. Overall, I feel that there is a lot of work to be done and these things won't happen overnight but I'm happy to say that I feel confident for the future of the Dominican Republic's travel industry and the communities and environments that support it.
-Ashley Dolan
Friday, March 11, 2011
Oil at any Means Necessary?
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1003/1/
We as society are addicted to oil. I’m sure most of you that are reading this are aware of this, but I wanted to point out to what extremes we take to get our oil.
In Ecuador they are choosing to clear parts of the vital parts of the Amazon rainforest just to get at oil. They are going against demands of the indigenous people. The oil companies are going as far as making personal deals with the military of Ecuador in order to receive protection. In return the military receives oil, food, living quarters, and medical care. The oil companies rely on the military to crush local resistance, and after they are crushed the oil company moves in clears away the land from the indigenous people. Also in this agreement the oil companies are allowed to order the military to follow their orders, even if it breaks the Ecuador’s constitution, and their basic human rights.
This sadly this is a common trend throughout the oil producing countries of Latin America, and throughout the world. I am not one of those people that are against the use of oil, I just feel we are getting to the point that we are starting to go into withdrawal for oil. We are starting to search for oil out right dangerous areas. We are digging deeper than ever to find to find those pockets of oil that haven’t been touch by our 100 years of oil exploration. There has already been example of how this can go wrong; the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico last year.
So next time you fill up your car at the oil pumps just try to think where the gasoline came from, and What damage had to be done to the earth to get!
We as society are addicted to oil. I’m sure most of you that are reading this are aware of this, but I wanted to point out to what extremes we take to get our oil.
In Ecuador they are choosing to clear parts of the vital parts of the Amazon rainforest just to get at oil. They are going against demands of the indigenous people. The oil companies are going as far as making personal deals with the military of Ecuador in order to receive protection. In return the military receives oil, food, living quarters, and medical care. The oil companies rely on the military to crush local resistance, and after they are crushed the oil company moves in clears away the land from the indigenous people. Also in this agreement the oil companies are allowed to order the military to follow their orders, even if it breaks the Ecuador’s constitution, and their basic human rights.
This sadly this is a common trend throughout the oil producing countries of Latin America, and throughout the world. I am not one of those people that are against the use of oil, I just feel we are getting to the point that we are starting to go into withdrawal for oil. We are starting to search for oil out right dangerous areas. We are digging deeper than ever to find to find those pockets of oil that haven’t been touch by our 100 years of oil exploration. There has already been example of how this can go wrong; the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico last year.
So next time you fill up your car at the oil pumps just try to think where the gasoline came from, and What damage had to be done to the earth to get!
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Making a Difference
In seminar today we watched a video about outsourcing jobs by setting up sweatshops in Indonesia.
Benjamin Powell, author of “Making poor nations rich”; Powell believes that sweatshops are beneficial for both corporations and workers. He had said we should love sweatshops and the alternative they offer for the average worker.
I have to say I do not agree with Powell had to say, after watching a video on Nike’s sweatshops it doesn’t make it right or better to treat any human being that way.
Yes, it may be a chance for someone to live on the bare minimum, but shouldn’t wage be about people being able to earn and save so that they can have a better lifestyle and earn an education? In the video it showed Nike had signed an endorsement deal with Tiger Woods for a hundred million US Dollars just for sporting the logo and those Indonesian workers are being paid a dollar twenty-five minimum daily which is enough to pay their rent and maybe buy a little food. They do not receive benefits and they do not get the luxury of being able to use a bathroom or sleep on a pillow or buy medicine when they are feeling sick.
It just rattles me that they, (we) have the power to be the change but we’re so blinded and corrupted whether it be by greed or the social norm. I don’t think we should support the change because we’re economically advanced or industrially advanced but because we’re human beings and we shouldn’t alienate them out. We should do our part in helping them out and protecting their human rights. I know what you’re all thinking, what am I going to do that will make a difference? It starts by doing your part, whatever that may be. I, for one will do my part by refusing to be a consumer of companies who take advantage of cheap labour.
Panagiota Kioulos
Benjamin Powell, author of “Making poor nations rich”; Powell believes that sweatshops are beneficial for both corporations and workers. He had said we should love sweatshops and the alternative they offer for the average worker.
I have to say I do not agree with Powell had to say, after watching a video on Nike’s sweatshops it doesn’t make it right or better to treat any human being that way.
Yes, it may be a chance for someone to live on the bare minimum, but shouldn’t wage be about people being able to earn and save so that they can have a better lifestyle and earn an education? In the video it showed Nike had signed an endorsement deal with Tiger Woods for a hundred million US Dollars just for sporting the logo and those Indonesian workers are being paid a dollar twenty-five minimum daily which is enough to pay their rent and maybe buy a little food. They do not receive benefits and they do not get the luxury of being able to use a bathroom or sleep on a pillow or buy medicine when they are feeling sick.
It just rattles me that they, (we) have the power to be the change but we’re so blinded and corrupted whether it be by greed or the social norm. I don’t think we should support the change because we’re economically advanced or industrially advanced but because we’re human beings and we shouldn’t alienate them out. We should do our part in helping them out and protecting their human rights. I know what you’re all thinking, what am I going to do that will make a difference? It starts by doing your part, whatever that may be. I, for one will do my part by refusing to be a consumer of companies who take advantage of cheap labour.
Panagiota Kioulos
No Pressure
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfnddMpzPsM – 10:10 Video on Reducing Carbon Emissions
10:10 is a campaign that was developed by an English film director named Franny Armstrong in October of 2009 which was created to reduce carbon emissions and help to decrease global warming. The idea behind it is to get each individual to decrease their carbon emissions by 10% in the year 2010, hence the name 10:10. This video was created as an advertisement for the campaign but was later removed from all the mediums it was being played on because people thought it was too graphic to blow people up based on the fact that they were not willing to participate in the campaign. The video is somewhat flawed in my opinion. You can’t be forced into making a difference in the environment, you have to want to. The smarter way to go about it would have been to inform people of the actual issues instead of forcing them to be a part of the solution.
The method for cutting down the carbon emissions that the campaign recommended includes fewer plane rides, lower heating, replacing old fridges and freezers, turning off appliances, driving less, eating local and in season veggies (as opposed to meat and dairy), cooking only what is needed and reducing water usage. In my opinion these things are not hard to do and if the entire world went along with this I think we would see results.
They recruited many English celebrities to participate and also help to advertise the campaign that include Stella McCartney (Paul McCartney’s daughter), Ian McEwan and Colin Firth. I’m sure that Hollywood could have provided much more support in the form of celebs if the campaign is brought to North America.
I tried to look up the results of the campaign, to see if the carbon emissions in Britain were reduced at all, to see if the campaign worked. I am not sure how hard it was pushed in Britain but I know I did not hear about it until the end of last year and this is how I found out. I havn’t really asked around to see if anybody else has heard about this but it seems to me they should have tried this throughout the entire world.
Blowing people up who refuse to participate in something like this isn’t the answer, and I doubt that it was the actual point of this short video. I think the point of the video was to show people that you don’t have to put a lot into it in order to make a change. You also don’t have to do it all at once. If you make small steps and small changes in your life, and maybe tell 4 or 5 people about the small changes you have made and encourage them to make changes that maybe we can slowly take a dent out of the damage that we have done to the earth.
- Ryan Pinkerton
10:10 is a campaign that was developed by an English film director named Franny Armstrong in October of 2009 which was created to reduce carbon emissions and help to decrease global warming. The idea behind it is to get each individual to decrease their carbon emissions by 10% in the year 2010, hence the name 10:10. This video was created as an advertisement for the campaign but was later removed from all the mediums it was being played on because people thought it was too graphic to blow people up based on the fact that they were not willing to participate in the campaign. The video is somewhat flawed in my opinion. You can’t be forced into making a difference in the environment, you have to want to. The smarter way to go about it would have been to inform people of the actual issues instead of forcing them to be a part of the solution.
The method for cutting down the carbon emissions that the campaign recommended includes fewer plane rides, lower heating, replacing old fridges and freezers, turning off appliances, driving less, eating local and in season veggies (as opposed to meat and dairy), cooking only what is needed and reducing water usage. In my opinion these things are not hard to do and if the entire world went along with this I think we would see results.
They recruited many English celebrities to participate and also help to advertise the campaign that include Stella McCartney (Paul McCartney’s daughter), Ian McEwan and Colin Firth. I’m sure that Hollywood could have provided much more support in the form of celebs if the campaign is brought to North America.
I tried to look up the results of the campaign, to see if the carbon emissions in Britain were reduced at all, to see if the campaign worked. I am not sure how hard it was pushed in Britain but I know I did not hear about it until the end of last year and this is how I found out. I havn’t really asked around to see if anybody else has heard about this but it seems to me they should have tried this throughout the entire world.
Blowing people up who refuse to participate in something like this isn’t the answer, and I doubt that it was the actual point of this short video. I think the point of the video was to show people that you don’t have to put a lot into it in order to make a change. You also don’t have to do it all at once. If you make small steps and small changes in your life, and maybe tell 4 or 5 people about the small changes you have made and encourage them to make changes that maybe we can slowly take a dent out of the damage that we have done to the earth.
- Ryan Pinkerton
Diesel is Black, Not Green
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxTNZUhesZk – Audi Superbowl Commervial
In this Audi A3 commercial, which first aired during the Superbowl last year, Audi comes up with a very clever idea in the “Green Police”. The Green Police are seen placing people under arrest for such things as using a plastic credit card, using plastic water bottles, having the heat setting on a hot tub too high, throwing out batteries, and not composting an orange peel. This is a good idea and maybe the world should have something like this in place in order to cut back on the environmental damage. The irony in all of this is the fact that the Green Police arrest the real police for using styrofoam coffee cups.
The actual advertising objective is to inform the public of the new “clean diesel” that Audi has come out with for its A3 among other cars in their line up. At the end the only car that they let pass is the Audi with the clean diesel.
In reality, even the “cleanest” of diesel is still dirtier than the average gasoline engine. Although many companies have made great strides in order to make diesel as clean as possible, diesel fuels are a key fact in global warming and even if all diesels were designed to meet even the highest of standards, diesel cars would contribute more to global warming than petrol cars.
The new “clean” low sulphur diesel actually requires more crude oil then the conventional diesel and diesel engines are far more complex than gasoline engines, which means that they require more energy and more materials in order to manufacture them. So not only are they worse for the air and the environment but they use more resources and cost more money to make.
The upside to the diesel fuel is its overall fuel economy. The Audi A3 does get approximately 1000 km to the 55 litre tank that it provides. To some people, that may be worth the price that the environment is paying for them to have to fill up less often.
Another factor that is coming into play is biodiesel which can be produced by natural products such as canola or soybeans. Biodiesel can drastically reduce a vehicle’s tailpipe emissions but some may require too much production energy to make them worth the effort.
The decision is ultimately up to the consumer. Do you go with the fuel economy of the diesel engine which is producing black carbon which is contributing more to global warming? Or do you choose the gasoline car, which requires more frequent fill ups but has a healthier into the environment? Cars in general are one of the biggest contributors to the environment. Hybrid cars and electric cars are beginning to emerge stronger and stronger in the automotive industry. Can we right the wrong that we have created with the automobile? I think over time, we can!
- Ryan Pinkerton
In this Audi A3 commercial, which first aired during the Superbowl last year, Audi comes up with a very clever idea in the “Green Police”. The Green Police are seen placing people under arrest for such things as using a plastic credit card, using plastic water bottles, having the heat setting on a hot tub too high, throwing out batteries, and not composting an orange peel. This is a good idea and maybe the world should have something like this in place in order to cut back on the environmental damage. The irony in all of this is the fact that the Green Police arrest the real police for using styrofoam coffee cups.
The actual advertising objective is to inform the public of the new “clean diesel” that Audi has come out with for its A3 among other cars in their line up. At the end the only car that they let pass is the Audi with the clean diesel.
In reality, even the “cleanest” of diesel is still dirtier than the average gasoline engine. Although many companies have made great strides in order to make diesel as clean as possible, diesel fuels are a key fact in global warming and even if all diesels were designed to meet even the highest of standards, diesel cars would contribute more to global warming than petrol cars.
The new “clean” low sulphur diesel actually requires more crude oil then the conventional diesel and diesel engines are far more complex than gasoline engines, which means that they require more energy and more materials in order to manufacture them. So not only are they worse for the air and the environment but they use more resources and cost more money to make.
The upside to the diesel fuel is its overall fuel economy. The Audi A3 does get approximately 1000 km to the 55 litre tank that it provides. To some people, that may be worth the price that the environment is paying for them to have to fill up less often.
Another factor that is coming into play is biodiesel which can be produced by natural products such as canola or soybeans. Biodiesel can drastically reduce a vehicle’s tailpipe emissions but some may require too much production energy to make them worth the effort.
The decision is ultimately up to the consumer. Do you go with the fuel economy of the diesel engine which is producing black carbon which is contributing more to global warming? Or do you choose the gasoline car, which requires more frequent fill ups but has a healthier into the environment? Cars in general are one of the biggest contributors to the environment. Hybrid cars and electric cars are beginning to emerge stronger and stronger in the automotive industry. Can we right the wrong that we have created with the automobile? I think over time, we can!
- Ryan Pinkerton
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
HR and CSR
I came across an article online titled Corporate Social Responsibility: HR’s leadership role. I found it very interesting as this is the program I am in so I am going to highlight a few of the important aspects of the article and how I think I can apply them to my future employment.
The article emphasized how increasingly companies are accepting the concept of corporate citizenship and are seeing that it is no longer just a figure that affects the bottom line. A lot of consumers evaluate brands and companies by the overall contributions to society as proof in the Millennium Surveys which we studied in class. I found this interesting and I immediately linked this to the HR profession as one of the major HR functions is developing the employee citizenship and commitment to an organization. For a long time, and still to this day, HR has to constantly prove why they deserve to be their own department and how they indirectly and directly contribute to the success of an organization. The process and growth of the field has been slow, but I see a similarity in situations as CSR can be viewed as a rising concept. CSR being an upcoming topic that I think will continue to snowball with the amount of recognition it receives within organizations.
Another area of concern involves the impeding labour shortage that is expected to occur as the baby boomers retire and there is not enough skilled employees to replace them. Human Resource departments are trying to combat this is two ways: company reputation and human capital. One way to attract qualified and skilled employees is to define your competitive advantage and to use it to your advantage to retain employees. One area this could be expanded into is corporate social responsibility and demonstrating to current and future employees that social issues matter as well. A lot of companies that do well in society are generally recognized through means such as “top 100 places to work”. For a company to achieve a title such as the one above, they can utilize that to their advantage in attracting employees and they may receive recognition for the work they are doing for others.
The article outlines some creative ideas about how to either pitch or support the CSR initiatives in your organization as an HR leader. Some of the ideas include: entering into a partnership with another organization to fund a project, contact local organizations to learn of any upcoming social events that the organization could potentially sponsor, ask employee’s their opinions and what they would like to see the company doing. It is important that no matter which initiative you choose to have the policies and procedures in place to support it. It is also important that in a publicly traded company, that the organization has the support of all the stakeholders involved including owners, employees, stockholders, etc. It’s important to have a unified approach to CSR initiatives and their main goal should be to help the world become a better place.
Lockwood, Nancy R. "Corporate Social Responsibility: HR's Leadership Role | HR Magazine | Find Articles at BNET." Find Articles at BNET | News Articles, Magazine Back Issues & Reference Articles on All Topics. HR Magazine, 2004. Web. 13 Feb. 2011..
Posted by: Denise Bloomer
The article emphasized how increasingly companies are accepting the concept of corporate citizenship and are seeing that it is no longer just a figure that affects the bottom line. A lot of consumers evaluate brands and companies by the overall contributions to society as proof in the Millennium Surveys which we studied in class. I found this interesting and I immediately linked this to the HR profession as one of the major HR functions is developing the employee citizenship and commitment to an organization. For a long time, and still to this day, HR has to constantly prove why they deserve to be their own department and how they indirectly and directly contribute to the success of an organization. The process and growth of the field has been slow, but I see a similarity in situations as CSR can be viewed as a rising concept. CSR being an upcoming topic that I think will continue to snowball with the amount of recognition it receives within organizations.
Another area of concern involves the impeding labour shortage that is expected to occur as the baby boomers retire and there is not enough skilled employees to replace them. Human Resource departments are trying to combat this is two ways: company reputation and human capital. One way to attract qualified and skilled employees is to define your competitive advantage and to use it to your advantage to retain employees. One area this could be expanded into is corporate social responsibility and demonstrating to current and future employees that social issues matter as well. A lot of companies that do well in society are generally recognized through means such as “top 100 places to work”. For a company to achieve a title such as the one above, they can utilize that to their advantage in attracting employees and they may receive recognition for the work they are doing for others.
The article outlines some creative ideas about how to either pitch or support the CSR initiatives in your organization as an HR leader. Some of the ideas include: entering into a partnership with another organization to fund a project, contact local organizations to learn of any upcoming social events that the organization could potentially sponsor, ask employee’s their opinions and what they would like to see the company doing. It is important that no matter which initiative you choose to have the policies and procedures in place to support it. It is also important that in a publicly traded company, that the organization has the support of all the stakeholders involved including owners, employees, stockholders, etc. It’s important to have a unified approach to CSR initiatives and their main goal should be to help the world become a better place.
Lockwood, Nancy R. "Corporate Social Responsibility: HR's Leadership Role | HR Magazine | Find Articles at BNET." Find Articles at BNET | News Articles, Magazine Back Issues & Reference Articles on All Topics. HR Magazine, 2004. Web. 13 Feb. 2011.
Posted by: Denise Bloomer
Monday, February 28, 2011
Letting Nothing Go To Waste
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12137680
As the population worldwide increases, our natural resources continue to decrease. Some resources, such as fossil fuels, will never regenerate and slowly this reality seems to be sinking in across the globe. In the future, using alternative forms of energy and fuel won’t be a decision we can make, it will be a reality we will live. Perhaps not in my lifetime, or the lifetime of my children, but at some stage in the future, reliance on energy not harnessed from fossil fuels will be our reality.
Jernhusen, a real estate company in Sweden is taking a unique approach to lowering dependency on non-renewable resources by taking advantage of something we take for granted: body heat.
"There are about 250,000 people a day who pass through Stockholm Central Station. They in themselves generate a bit of heat.” ~ Klas Johnasson, head of Jernhusen’s environmental division.
The excess heat, which otherwise would likely be vented outdoors, is converted into hot water which is then directed to a nearby office building where it is used as a heat source.
If this same practice could be applied elsewhere, not only could businesses reduce their ecological footprints, but they could save a lot of money. Money that perhaps could be donated to charitable organizations (thus netting the company a tax break, making it a win/win proposition).
Until gas prices rise considerably or fossil fuel supplies dwindle significantly, it is unlikely that we will see innovations such as this in North America, but as emerging business people, my generation has the power to lay the foundation for new ideas such as this to become a reality.
By: Jon Craven
As the population worldwide increases, our natural resources continue to decrease. Some resources, such as fossil fuels, will never regenerate and slowly this reality seems to be sinking in across the globe. In the future, using alternative forms of energy and fuel won’t be a decision we can make, it will be a reality we will live. Perhaps not in my lifetime, or the lifetime of my children, but at some stage in the future, reliance on energy not harnessed from fossil fuels will be our reality.
Jernhusen, a real estate company in Sweden is taking a unique approach to lowering dependency on non-renewable resources by taking advantage of something we take for granted: body heat.
"There are about 250,000 people a day who pass through Stockholm Central Station. They in themselves generate a bit of heat.” ~ Klas Johnasson, head of Jernhusen’s environmental division.
The excess heat, which otherwise would likely be vented outdoors, is converted into hot water which is then directed to a nearby office building where it is used as a heat source.
If this same practice could be applied elsewhere, not only could businesses reduce their ecological footprints, but they could save a lot of money. Money that perhaps could be donated to charitable organizations (thus netting the company a tax break, making it a win/win proposition).
Until gas prices rise considerably or fossil fuel supplies dwindle significantly, it is unlikely that we will see innovations such as this in North America, but as emerging business people, my generation has the power to lay the foundation for new ideas such as this to become a reality.
By: Jon Craven
Friday, February 25, 2011
Sustainability : Lets Get Educated!
We all know how important it is to practice sustainable initiatives on a business level, but how do we ensure that the future business men and women are aware of how to build their company to have less of an ecological footprint?
Many people believe that educating the youth in secondary school is where this lesson should begin, and I agree with them. It is very important that once you’re finished secondary school, the voyage to partake in a sustainable lifestyle should not be over.
Post Secondary Institutions are realizing that they can center full courses on the idea of sustainability as well as build facilities that are eco-friendly.
Sustainability is a hot topic in colleges and universities. Schools are now incorporating sustainability plans into every decision that is made. The University of British Columbia (UBC) is a leader in post secondary institutions that are making the move to be more sustainable. UBC has made it apparent that they want to be the leader in sustainability in Canada and are now putting their money where their mouth is.
“The Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability (CIRS) will be the most innovative and high performance building in North America, serving as a living laboratory to demonstrate leading-edge research and develop sustainable design practices, products, systems and policies.” (1) Even the structural building has been centred around sustainability. Materials have been made to be eco friendly which in turn will reduce the emissions from the building. The building will also reduce energy use and water use. UBC is setting themselves up to be seen as a worldwide leader in sustainability. The immaculate building will be self reliant. CIRS will rely on natural resources such as the sun to heat its facility, the wind to power the lights and the ground that it sits on to produce energy. How cool is that!?
Check Out this Video! : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3WwTmkEXr0
More Information at:
(1) http://www.sustain.ubc.ca/hubs/cirs/about-cirs
Fleming steps up!
Fleming College is known for many things, one of which is its sustainability initiatives set forth by our Lindsay campus “Frost”. Frost campus is known for having more outdoors programs that centre around maintaining the environment and natural resources. They are also known for their FSCI (Frost Sustainable Campus Initiative). This initiative is empowering students to be the agents for change; not just in the school, but in the community.
Notable accomplishments of FSCI to date:
Hired a permanent Sustainability Coordinator
Banned the sale of Bottled Water at Frost starting on Earth Day 2011
Implemented a pilot scale Re-useable to-Go Program which has replaced throw-away wares in our cafeteria with the re-useable wares.
Opened instructional and sustainable research platforms such as the “Green Roof”, “The Living Wall”, and “The Butterfly Garden”
Instructional Community Garden, with partnership from YWCA.
This campus has shown that change does not start with just the staff; it has to encompass the students as well. Frost was the first campus to step up efforts to make Fleming College more sustainable. Sutherland campus is now in a catch up mode, but we are on the right track. In Fleming’s strategic plan (2010-2015), they have stated that “leading in sustainability” is one of their top priorities. What this does for the school is raises our profile and makes us stand out. It creates more awareness as to what were all about and brings more students to Fleming College.
Sutherland is currently undertaking major assessments as to how we can be more sustainable. We are exploring all possible avenues to ensure that our carbon footprint is reduced, and that we are seen as a premier institute when it comes to Sustainability. Sustainability is finally being embraced; it’s the hottest topic out there. Let’s not let it fall by the wayside. At this point in time, we need to get the word out and be proud that we have Frost campus doing an excellent job in reducing its impact on society and the environment. Let’s look to the future and see that we can all make a difference. We can promote change in a good way, a way that will only benefit future generations.
More Information at:
http://www.flemingc.on.ca/index.cfm/go/fleming/sub/fsci.cfm
By: Cameron Bradley
Many people believe that educating the youth in secondary school is where this lesson should begin, and I agree with them. It is very important that once you’re finished secondary school, the voyage to partake in a sustainable lifestyle should not be over.
Post Secondary Institutions are realizing that they can center full courses on the idea of sustainability as well as build facilities that are eco-friendly.
Sustainability is a hot topic in colleges and universities. Schools are now incorporating sustainability plans into every decision that is made. The University of British Columbia (UBC) is a leader in post secondary institutions that are making the move to be more sustainable. UBC has made it apparent that they want to be the leader in sustainability in Canada and are now putting their money where their mouth is.
“The Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability (CIRS) will be the most innovative and high performance building in North America, serving as a living laboratory to demonstrate leading-edge research and develop sustainable design practices, products, systems and policies.” (1) Even the structural building has been centred around sustainability. Materials have been made to be eco friendly which in turn will reduce the emissions from the building. The building will also reduce energy use and water use. UBC is setting themselves up to be seen as a worldwide leader in sustainability. The immaculate building will be self reliant. CIRS will rely on natural resources such as the sun to heat its facility, the wind to power the lights and the ground that it sits on to produce energy. How cool is that!?
Check Out this Video! : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3WwTmkEXr0
More Information at:
(1) http://www.sustain.ubc.ca/hubs/cirs/about-cirs
Fleming steps up!
Fleming College is known for many things, one of which is its sustainability initiatives set forth by our Lindsay campus “Frost”. Frost campus is known for having more outdoors programs that centre around maintaining the environment and natural resources. They are also known for their FSCI (Frost Sustainable Campus Initiative). This initiative is empowering students to be the agents for change; not just in the school, but in the community.
Notable accomplishments of FSCI to date:
Hired a permanent Sustainability Coordinator
Banned the sale of Bottled Water at Frost starting on Earth Day 2011
Implemented a pilot scale Re-useable to-Go Program which has replaced throw-away wares in our cafeteria with the re-useable wares.
Opened instructional and sustainable research platforms such as the “Green Roof”, “The Living Wall”, and “The Butterfly Garden”
Instructional Community Garden, with partnership from YWCA.
This campus has shown that change does not start with just the staff; it has to encompass the students as well. Frost was the first campus to step up efforts to make Fleming College more sustainable. Sutherland campus is now in a catch up mode, but we are on the right track. In Fleming’s strategic plan (2010-2015), they have stated that “leading in sustainability” is one of their top priorities. What this does for the school is raises our profile and makes us stand out. It creates more awareness as to what were all about and brings more students to Fleming College.
Sutherland is currently undertaking major assessments as to how we can be more sustainable. We are exploring all possible avenues to ensure that our carbon footprint is reduced, and that we are seen as a premier institute when it comes to Sustainability. Sustainability is finally being embraced; it’s the hottest topic out there. Let’s not let it fall by the wayside. At this point in time, we need to get the word out and be proud that we have Frost campus doing an excellent job in reducing its impact on society and the environment. Let’s look to the future and see that we can all make a difference. We can promote change in a good way, a way that will only benefit future generations.
More Information at:
http://www.flemingc.on.ca/index.cfm/go/fleming/sub/fsci.cfm
By: Cameron Bradley
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Are You Fracking Serious?
Hydraulic Fracturing better known as Fracking, is a natural gas extraction method that has swept our nation in the latest exploit for fossil fuel. The extraction process requires drilling some eight thousand feet into the earths platel shale’s to create seismic activity. During Fracking, drillers pump millions of litres of water mixed with chemicals and sand under high pressure into horizontal wells.
The extensive amount of water required to operate a single Frack extraction has the potential to create a very real water famine, in the near future. Once water has been used for Fracking purposes it is considered as contaminated material. Hydraulic Fracking companies have been known to strategically operate near water systems to exploit the environment, and lower costs from having to actually purchase water. What’s even more disturbing is the threat natural gas Fracking has on contaminating natural waterbeds and river systems.
The chemicals involved in fracturing have been held as proprietary trade secrets. Each company pumps their own lethal cocktail into the earth “contaminating essential life support systems - water, air, and soil- causing harm to the health of humans, wildlife, domestic animals, and vegetation” (Chemicals in Natural Gas Operations). Fracking chemical contamination has been directly linked to cancer and other serious life threatening diseases. MD Amy Freeth Antoinette Kuzminski, researched only one well and found severe health dangers from Fracking chemicals that include neurotoxins, skin irritants, carcinogens, sensitizers, and endocrine/hormone disruptors. In her study of a Wyoming well only 7 percent of the chemicals used in the Fracking operation were disclosed freely. “Her study provides a glimpse at the pattern(s) of possible health hazards posed by the chemicals being used. There are hundreds of products in current use, the components of which are, in many cases, unavailable for public scrutiny” (Chemicals in Natural Gas Operations). For more information on this study check out: http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/home.php
People living near natural gas Fracking operations have experienced sever water contamination. In some cases the water supply is not only toxic, but also flammable. Regular everyday people have been exploited by Fracking operations time and time again; and no one has been able to hold the multi-billion dollar industry accountable.
Gasland in my opinion one of the most moving documentary films I have ever witnessed explores the externalities involved in natural gas extraction. I implore anyone reading this blog to watch this documentary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0fAsFQsFAs
And as there are always two sides to a story, you can also watch the corporate response to Gasland at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1W8MnveFq8
I have vigorously researched the Fracking epidemic and in my personal opinion, I feel that the statements made in this PSA have no real validation. There have been thousands of outside studies proving the very real health concerns related to Fracking. These studies completely contradict this big business sponsored PSA. But I do feel it is worth looking into as it’s exactly the kind of green spin we need to look out for in the fight for sustainability.
-Hillary Flood
The extensive amount of water required to operate a single Frack extraction has the potential to create a very real water famine, in the near future. Once water has been used for Fracking purposes it is considered as contaminated material. Hydraulic Fracking companies have been known to strategically operate near water systems to exploit the environment, and lower costs from having to actually purchase water. What’s even more disturbing is the threat natural gas Fracking has on contaminating natural waterbeds and river systems.
The chemicals involved in fracturing have been held as proprietary trade secrets. Each company pumps their own lethal cocktail into the earth “contaminating essential life support systems - water, air, and soil- causing harm to the health of humans, wildlife, domestic animals, and vegetation” (Chemicals in Natural Gas Operations). Fracking chemical contamination has been directly linked to cancer and other serious life threatening diseases. MD Amy Freeth Antoinette Kuzminski, researched only one well and found severe health dangers from Fracking chemicals that include neurotoxins, skin irritants, carcinogens, sensitizers, and endocrine/hormone disruptors. In her study of a Wyoming well only 7 percent of the chemicals used in the Fracking operation were disclosed freely. “Her study provides a glimpse at the pattern(s) of possible health hazards posed by the chemicals being used. There are hundreds of products in current use, the components of which are, in many cases, unavailable for public scrutiny” (Chemicals in Natural Gas Operations). For more information on this study check out: http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/home.php
People living near natural gas Fracking operations have experienced sever water contamination. In some cases the water supply is not only toxic, but also flammable. Regular everyday people have been exploited by Fracking operations time and time again; and no one has been able to hold the multi-billion dollar industry accountable.
Gasland in my opinion one of the most moving documentary films I have ever witnessed explores the externalities involved in natural gas extraction. I implore anyone reading this blog to watch this documentary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0fAsFQsFAs
And as there are always two sides to a story, you can also watch the corporate response to Gasland at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1W8MnveFq8
I have vigorously researched the Fracking epidemic and in my personal opinion, I feel that the statements made in this PSA have no real validation. There have been thousands of outside studies proving the very real health concerns related to Fracking. These studies completely contradict this big business sponsored PSA. But I do feel it is worth looking into as it’s exactly the kind of green spin we need to look out for in the fight for sustainability.
-Hillary Flood
Friday, February 18, 2011
Green Management: Principles and Examples
I read an article about green management. In this article it studied 34 business in 20 different industries. It focused on 20 sustainability managers and how they all had the same common 10 principles.
Principle 1: Manager should establish their company's green values.
This principle mainly focused on companies and individuals who ran the companies values. Many ideas were implemented because of management core values. Many of them had mental models (their background; how they grew up, what they were educated in or even how they saw themselves in society). In addition these companies also had their own set of core values by their mission and action plans to help improve the environment. Companies are starting to understand that the environment is a key stakeholder in their company.
Principle 2: Managers should formulate and execute green goals.
Many companies are now becoming more environmentally friendly. They are setting goals to reduce their carbon footprint. They are planning on how to make their company's operation, products, and services more green. Some goals that have been taken into effect are, installing energy/water saving devices, renovating to LEED standard, buying products locally.
Principle 3: Managers should establish sustainability metric to ensure compliance.
Sustainability managers need to understand how to measure their progress towards their goals. They also need to understand what needs to be measured and how to measure it. Companies need to look at their product life cycle and assess their environment impact that the product has from birth to death. In addition they need to decide what can be measured and devise ways to reduce the impacts.
Principle 4: Managers should make the business case to go green.
Look at things from a cost effective perspective, install solar panels, make white roofs to keep buildings cooler. Doing so can help the business market share grow.
Principle 5: Managers should overcome resistance to change.
A strong leader can show a good example. It is a hard task to change everyone right away because you have to change their beliefs, behavior and attitudes. Influence the individuals by educating them on these procedures. Lead by example and start small. Every little bit helps.
Principle 6: Managers should reinforce sustainability practices and values within the organization.
Train employees and empower them. Let them know by reducing the lighting during daylight that they helped the company save money. Ask them for their opinion and ideas on how to be more sustainable.
Principle 7: Managers should seek buy-ins from suppliers.
Picking a supplier based on their core values as a company. Use your market power to influence your suppliers.
Principle 8: Managers should engage with customers and competitors.
Companies can get customers involved by engaging them with incentives to recycle. In addition companies can help educated the public by showing them what other life style choices there are. They can have commercials or interactive websites to help educate and train their consumers. Working with a competitor can help set industry standards and goals.
Principle 9: Managers should engage with NGOs, regulators and the general public.
Working with Non-Government Organizations such as World Wildlife Foundation can help reach strategies to solve environment issues. Working with regulators can ensure that the company is not only up to and beyond regulations but help influence future regulations. Working with the general public to help educate them and set up incentives for recycling programs that can contribute back to the community.
Principle 10: Managers should stay visible.
Sustainability managers are the face of the company's green committee. It is important for them to stay present. By creating a network with other similar companies, trade shows, speeches etc, it keeps their company's name out there with respect to sustainability.
In conclusion, all of these principles are small things that all of us can apply not only to our current or future careers but also to our lifestyle.
http://fandm.academia.edu/NancyKurland/Papers/207989/Green_Management_Principles_and_Examples
Mitisha Spaans
Thursday, February 17, 2011
“Greenwashing” Corporation’s Dirty Little Secret
The new wave of eco friendly products has invaded our shelves with a green commitment to the environment. But has this movement induced sustainability in the corporate world, or is it all calculated smoke and mirrors?
Most claims of green practices are made without any outside research or proof. Product labels have been the biggest culprit for greenwashing. It seems that while our society has moved in a green direction; clever PR strategists’ have been working tirelessly to manipulate our green perception.
We, as the public have been taken advantage of left, right, and centre by Green PR campaigns without even realizing it. Green has become the new grey; and unless you’re an environmentalist, it is almost impossible to know the difference between a legitimate green product and a cleverly placed green label. An example of this is the ever so vague eco-friendly label. People purchase eco-friendly products to feel as if they have made a conscious decision. But how can a friendship be measured or even scientifically validated?
My personal favourite in green spin, would be the completely unrelated claim. How would an average consumer know the implications or relevance of a label that states it no longer uses chemical “XY” in their product? Corporations are banking on the appeal of being green, regardless if chemical “XY” has been banned since the sixties; the label implies that it’s a healthy change and consumers are buying it without question.
TerraChoice Environmental Marketing group has been battling the greenwash epidemic by creating a standard framework for green products to be validated on. This outline was ingeniously titled “The Six Sins of Greenwashing”. In order for a product to be considered ‘Sin-Free’, it must not breach any of the following sins:
1. Sin of the Hidden Trade-Off
2. Sin of No Proof
3. Sin of Vagueness
4. Sin of Irrelevance
5. Sin of Fibbing
6. Sin of the Lesser of Two Evils
For more information on what ‘Greenwashing Sins’ entail visit: http://www.terrachoice.com/files/6_sins.pdf
Our market has been completely saturated with illegitimate green products and practices. TerraChoice studies found that 95% of green products had misleading claims. The 2010 study was conducted based on the Competition Act of Canada, ISO 14021 Standards for Environmental Labelling, and the ‘6 Sins of Greenwashing’ framework. The full details of this report can be found at: http://www.terrachoice.com/files/TerraChoice%202010%20Sins%20of%20Greenwashing%20Release%20-%20Oct%2026%202010%20-%20ENG.pdf
There is just so much Greenwashing out there; the number of offenders involved is plain startling. The environmental stakes are too high for us to just ignore this issue. Today’s consumption levels have put a lot of strain on the environment; and radical standards are what we need to start adapting in order for this green movement to make any difference. I’m not saying I have a solution to the greenwashing pandemic, and I by no means claim to- but we need to protect our consumers with a universal labelling system.
The question remains whether or not this corporate green movement will jump on the TerraChoice bandwagon or if we as consumers will simply continue to blindly buy into green spin without any validation?
Side Note:
I’ve posted a YouTube video of a Canadian PSA parody on corporate sustainability. The video is stock filled with sarcasm and definitly good for a laugh. I also attached a live feed of Scott McDougall President of TerraChoice speaking on the ‘Six Sins of Greenwashing’. This guy has so much passion, and a true gift for public speaking. It’s well worth a few minutes of your life.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLIbIdgrIaE-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fnh1Y06DGCs&feature=related
-Hillary Flood
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)