this obligation into the case of W.R. Grace in Woburn, it s immediately clear that any corporation spilling toxins that later appear as birth defects in area children isn t going to be able to sustain anything with those living nearby. Any hope for cooperation in the name of mutual benefit will be drowned by justified hatred.sustainability begins from the affirmation that natural resources, especially the oil fueling our engines, the clean air we breathe, and the water we drink, are limited. If those things deteriorate significantly, our children won t be able to enjoy the same quality of life most of us experience. Conservation of resources, therefore, becomes tremendously important, as does the development of new sources of energy that may substitute those we re currently using., The case of an industrial chemical company pouring toxins into the ground that erupt years later with horrific consequences evidences this:not only are resources finite, but our earth is limited in its ability to naturally regenerate clean air and water from the smokestacks and runoff of our industries. There are, clearly, good faith debates that thoughtful people can have about where those limits are. For example, have we released greenhouse gases into the air so heavily that the earth s temperature is rising? No one knows for sure, but it s certain that somewhere there sa limit; at some point carbon-burning pollution will do to the planet what toxic runoff did in Woburn: make the place unlivable. Sustainability, finally, on this environmental front means actions must be taken to facilitate our natural world s renewal. Recycling or cleaning up contamination that already exists is important here, as is limiting the pollution emitted from factories, cars, and consumer products in the first place.these are actions that corporations must support, not because they re legally required to do so, but because the preservation of a livable planet is a direct obligation within the triple-bottom-line model of business responsibility. Together, these three notions of sustainability-economic, social, and environmental-guide businesses toward actions fitted to the conception of the corporation as a participating citizen in the community and not just as a money machine.
.2 Stakeholder VS Shareholders
Stakeholder Theory
Stakeholder theory, which has been described by Edward Freeman and others, is the mirror image of corporate social responsibility. Instead of starting with a business and looking out into the world to see what ethical obligations are there, stakeholder theory starts in the world. It lists and describes those individuals and groups who will be affected by (or affect) the company s actions and asks, «What are their legitimate claims on the business?» «What rights do they have with respect to the company s actions?» and «What kind of responsibilities and obligations can they justifiably impose on a particular business?» In a single sentence, stakeholder theory affirms that those whose lives are touched by a corporation hold a right and obligation to participate in directing it .a simple example, when a factory produces industrial waste, a CSR perspective attaches a responsibility directly to factory owners to dispose of the waste safely. By contrast, a stakeholder theorist begins with those living in the surrounding community who may find their environment poisoned, and begins to talk about business ethics by insisting that they have a right to clean air and water. Therefore, they re stakeholders in the company and their voices must contribute to corporate decisions. It s true that they may own no stock, but they have a moral claim to participate in the decision-making process. This is a very important point. At least in theoretical form, those affected by a company s actions actually become something like shareholders and owners. Because they re touched by a company s actions, they have a right to participate in managing it.are the stakeholders surrounding companies? The answer depends on the particular business, but the list can be quite extensive. If the enterprise produces chemicals for industrial use and is located in a small Massachusetts town, the stakeholders include:
· Company owners, whether a private individual or shareholders
· Company workers
· Customers and potential customers of the company
· Suppliers and potential suppliers to the company
· Everyone living in the town who may be affected by contamination from workplace operations
· Creditors whose money or loaned goods are mixed into the company s actions
· Government entities involved in regulation and taxation
