Industrial ecology inspired puzzle and an ex-ante position

Assignment one: industrial ecology inspired puzzle and three alternatives

Industrial ecology is a field that combines different aspects from the economical, social and natural field. It is in search of comprehensive prevention and strategies to solve problems concerning the ecological systems (O’Rourke, Connelly & Koshland, 1996: 89). These can range from the natural resource exploitation to climate changes and pollution. Pollution prevention is a topic that is quite often discussed in industrial ecology. The underlying idea is that by analyzing and using new production methods, factories can save money and at the same time protect the environment. It is assumed that as it has benefits both in economical and environmental areas, industries do the rational thing and use these new methods. This pollution prevention however seemed to be not too successful as industries choose not to implement this policy. The causes that are given are lack of rewards for successful waste reduction and the difficulty of simultaneously spending resources on regulatory compliance and waste reduction (O’Rourke et al., 1996: 102). The industrial ecology inspired puzzle is therefore:

Why do industries choose not to implement pollution prevention when it has both economical and environmental benefits?

1.      The first alternative explanations can be the lack of resources to invest in searching for new production methods. Although eventually the policy will result in economical benefits, the industries first need to invest money, time and people in finding the new production methods that fits their way of working. Some factories choose not to implement this policy because even though they see the end results, they cannot afford or choose not to invest and continue their production as it is.

2.      The second alternative is that industries can neglect the problems concerning pollutions. Perhaps some factories think they are already doing the most they can to prevent pollution and therefore do not considerate looking to other ways of working. It could also be the case that factories know that they are causing heavy pollution, but choose to neglect it because they for example do not think that it is their problem or that they are convinced that changing their way of working will not be enough and therefore continue their production methods.

3.      The last alternative is that a factory has a short-term planning budget. To implement pollution prevention, it can take up to years before it is finally executed. People thus also have to be accountable for their investments and performance during that time. If managers do not see any progress or results immediately, they will question the employee who is being held accountable for their work. This person can therefore choose not to implement this policy.

Assignment two: developing an ex-ante position on the proposition: ‘The business of business is to increase its profits’

According to Simon (1979), the formulation and decisions of humans is dependent on knowledge, experience and organizational environment (Simon, 1979: 500). The business of the business can therefore not be only increasing profits as this is formulated through one perspective. There are many other things that need to be accounted for, for example alternatives. Decision making takes place in a wide variety of situations (Simon, 1979: 510), people working in the business can thus decide to not increase profits, but to have another goal. When looking at Friedman (1970) it is evident that there is no such thing as a business with  responsibilities, in this case to increase its profits. It is eventually the manager of a firm who is making the decisions, thinking about strategies and the goal. Furthermore, businesses can have other goals like creating workspaces. The proposition is therefore false, it depends on the perspectives of people and the way they are making decisions, but the question is also about whether there is a business at all or that it is mostly the people working in the business.    

Bibliography

·         Friedman, M. (1970). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. The New York Times Magazine. September 13, 1970.

·         O’Rourke, D., Connelly, L. & Koshland, C. (1996). Industrial ecology: a critical review. International Journal of Environment and Pollution. Volume 6, Nos. 2/3. Pages 89-112.

·         Simon, H. (1978). Rational decision-making in business organizations, Nobel Memorial Lecture.  December 8, 1978.