Business Critical: Understanding a Company’s Current and Desired Stages of Corporate Responsibility Maturity

It’s been a while since the Corporate Responsibility profession took stock of its collective wisdom on where we have been, and where we are going on running businesses responsibly. Meanwhile hardly a week goes by without a helpful suggestion from the outside world on how an organisation should improve its economic value, social usefulness and environmental efficiency; and it is very easy to spot businesses that get their social, environmental and economic decisions out of balance: these organisations hit the headlines seemingly within nanoseconds. On the upside, businesses are increasingly taking an approach that builds an Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) premium into the core economic valuation. This is achieved by those organisations which bring in a diverse set of views to inform risk and reputation management activities, and to build a research and development pipeline for the future. This is managing both the negative and the positive social, environmental and economic impacts

Rebuilding Corporate Leadership: How Directors Can Link Long-Term Performance with Public Goals

This report examines how efforts to build public trust and long-term value have coalesced to encourage many large, global corporations to pay greater attention to their longer-term interests by striking a balance between short-term commercial pursuits and such societal concerns as the environment, labor standards, and human rights. Many companies have also found ways to turn such concerns as the effects of climate change and other environmental damage into profitable commercial opportunities. This report also explores how all corporate boards could take a more active part in considering such issues and improving the reporting of financial and non-financial measures of corporate performance broadly conceived. In our view, directors could do more with their current authority to motivate managements to greater innovation, and to support managements in finding long-term value solutions to the numerous economic and societal pressures they face

Synthesising co-management for Lake Victoria: discussions on models relating to concepts of sustainability and participative management

This book section aims to synthesise the results of the surveys related to the LVFRP by developing different strategies to implement a sustainable and participative co-management model

The European Regulatory Framework and its implementation in influencing organic inspection and certification systems in the EU

The report presents a review of the most important European and international legislation that set the framework for organic certification, of reports prepared by international agencies working with organic standard setting and certification, and of relevant scientific literature. It discusses problems, future challenges of the organic control systems in Europe leading to suggestions for improvement. Food quality assurance is of key importance for the future development of the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU. A large number of mandatory and voluntary assurance and certification schemes exist for agriculture and in the food industry leading to the risk of increased costs for producers and confusion of consumers. Such schemes include the setting of requirements and bodies that undertake control and provide certificates. Requirements can be divided into statutory regulations regarding food safety and good agricultural practice and standards for voluntary attributes. Basic requirements of food safety, animal health and animal welfare are controlled by the Official Food and Feed Control (OFFC) systems, governed by Council Regulation (EC) 882/2004. Third party certification provides credibility to claims related to voluntary standards and is communicated to the consumers through the use of certification marks. The EU has developed a legislative basis for quality claims in relation to geographical indications, traditional specialities and organic farming and considers introducing labelling rules in relation to animal welfare, environmental impact and the origin of raw materials. Organic certification is one of a number of overlapping and competing schemes. The development of organic standards and certification in Europe started with private standards and national rules, leading to Regulation (EEC) 2092/1991. The requirements for competent authorities, control bodies and operators in this regulation regarding the control systems are reviewed. The discussion highlights the low level of knowledge among consumers of the requirements of organic certification, a weak emphasis of the control system on operator responsibility for organic integrity, issues of competition and surveillance of control bodies, a lack of consideration of risk factors in designing the inspection systems and a lack of transparency. A total revision of the European Regulations on organic production began in 2005. One important change introduced by the new Council Regulation (EC) 834/2007 for Organic Food and Farming is that the organic control system is placed under the umbrella of Council Regulation (EC) 882/2004 on Official Food and Feed Controls. Regulation (EC) 834/2007 also requires that control bodies have to be accredited according to general requirements for bodies operating product certification systems (ISO Guide 65/EN 45011). From July 2010 packaged organic products will have to carry the new EU logo as well as the compulsory indication of the control body. The report reviews the requirements for competent authorities, control bodies and operators from the various legal sources. The discussion highlights a lack of clarity on the impact of the OFFC regulation on the organic control system including how risk based inspections are to be implemented and the potential for in-consistencies in the enforcement of the regulation. A number of international initiatives concerned with the harmonisation of organic standards and to a lesser extent certification are reviewed, such as the International Task Force on Harmonisation and Equivalence (ITF)1 Two main alternative guarantee systems for organic production have been developed and researched by a number of organisations including IFOAM, ISEAL, FAO and the EU Commission. Smallholder Group Certification based on an Internal Control System (ICS) and Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) could also represent ways to minimize certification costs also for European farmers, in particular for operators that market directly or through very short supply chains. Both systems also illustrate examples of certification systems with a focus on system development and improvement. , the European Organic Certifiers Council (EOOC), the International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling Alliance (ISEAL) and the Anti-Fraud Initiative (AFI). The multilateral initiatives have led to a better understanding of current problems and the scope and limitations for harmonisation. They have also contributed to the sharing of tools and methods and the identification of best practice. Apart from organic farming the European Union has two other food quality schemes: Regulation (EC) 510/2006 on geographical indications and Regulation (EC) 509/2006 on traditional specialities. The report explores the potential for combining these with organic certification, and draws lessons for organic certification based on Italian experience. The final chapter summarises problems and challenges from the previous chapters. Suggestions for improvements of the organic control system focus on two issues: the need for further harmonisation of the surveillance of control bodies and enforcement of the regulation and how operators’ responsibility for further development of organic systems could be supported in the control and certification system

Criminal intent or cognitive dissonance: how does student self plagiarism fit into academic integrity?

The discourse of plagiarism is speckled with punitive terms not out of place in a police officer's notes: detection, prevention, misconduct, rules, regulations, conventions, transgression, consequences, deter, trap, etc. This crime and punishment paradigm tends to be the norm in academic settings. The learning and teaching paradigm assumes that students are not filled with criminal intent, but rather are confused by the novel academic culture and its values. The discourse of learning and teaching includes: development, guidance, acknowledge, scholarly practice, communicate, familiarity, culture. Depending on the paradigm adopted, universities, teachers, and students will either focus on policies, punishments, and ways to cheat the system or on program design, assessments, and assimilating the values of academia. Self plagiarism is a pivotal issue that polarises these two paradigms. Viewed from a crime and punishment paradigm, self plagiarism is an intentional act of evading the required workload for a course by re-using previous work. Within a learning and teaching paradigm, self plagiarism is an oxymoron. We would like to explore the differences between these two paradigms by using self plagiarism as a focal point

Measuring Up: A Study on Corporate Sustainability Reporting in Canada

In response to the growth in corporate sustainability reporting in Canada, CGA-Canada commissioned a sustainability reporting survey in the fall of 2004. The survey sought to advance understanding of sustainability reporting, advocate for business value and transparency in reporting, and look to enjoin participation by all stakeholders. The results of the survey show the growing trend towards sustainability reporting in Canada. Some 18% of all companies produce a dedicated sustainability report, while approximately 5% spend more than $100,000 annually to report on sustainability issues. Regulatory requirements, stakeholder pressure, and corporate image objectives influence the most the decision to adopt a corporate sustainability reporting practice. In turn, added cost and potential information overload were two of the main reasons why organizations have not adopted a comprehensive sustainability reporting function. Concerns regarding the credibility and the vagueness of reporting practices and guidelines were also expressed.sustainability reporting, corporate social responsibility, reporting practices, sustainable development, socially responsible investment

Corporate social responsibility:reviewed, rated, revised

Purpose: Critical literature review of CSR research in both general management and hospitality management literature. Discusses trends,commonalities, and inconsistencies to better understand the state of contemporary scholarship, and calls for a context-specific conceptual engagement with the phenomenon.Design/Methodology/Approach: Systematic literature review, noting and critiquing a general tendency towards measurement of financial and other internal benefit impacts.Findings: Hospitality management is well-positioned to evaluate the opportunities and challenges of CSR, yet research has uncritically adopted the instrumental emphasis on assessing processes, perceptions, and private profitability from the general management literature, without engaging on a contextually-specific and/or theoretical level.Research limitations: CSR research is abundant and therefore difficult to summarise in one article.The primarily Anglo-American and Asian contextual bias is reflected in this review.Practical implications: Consistently inconsistent results challenge the portability of financial impact studies.Studies are needed to re-evaluate the concept of CSR as it pertains to hospitality, and measure the effectiveness of CSR activities relative to context and resource availability.Social implications: Further research into the scope of CSR in hospitality management, with an emphasis on recuperating social value, would lead to widespread positive social implications.Originality/value: This critical review offers a new perspective on CSR in the hospitality literature and industry, calling for a reconsideration of the concept in context, and formulates a working definition

Evaluating Collaborative Strategy for Local Partnerships in Urban Regeneration in England

The main argument in this paper is that collaboration as a means of involving different agencies into a common purpose can be the main ‘ingredient’ for the formation of a framework of a strategy, the so-called ‘collaborative strategy’. The utility of such a framework is given through the action of Citywide and Local Strategic Partnerships, which are the recent formations of partnership arrangements within the local government context. In particular, the applicability of the framework is examined in the context of urban regeneration based on policy initiatives that have been introduced over the last years. The paper also introduces a type of evaluation of collaborative strategy that is based upon specific aspects of partnership action. Despite its lack of empirical evidence it could be argued that the paper sets the scene for a framework that would be the base for partnership functioning. In this respect the testing of its applicability becomes apparent either in relation to potential fruitful policy outcomes or from the point of view that recognises significant dysfunctional elements at the operational and implementation level