Transparency as a Solution

Professor Jackson posed the question, and it was discussed in class, concerning holding corporations accountable. Some of the biggest offenses made by corporations internationally has to do with the environment and human rights, which could have tremendous impact on the world. As of now, there isn't a viable and effective process in place to hold corporations responsible for their actions across borders. Non-financial reporting could be part of the solution to this problem.

Transnational firms are growing in numbers and their reach is spreading. With an increase in power and global reach, more of the problem areas are coming to light like poor working conditions and complicity to human rights violations. Plenty of people are arguing about corporate accountability, but haven't provided a solution. Some have argued that non-financial or corporate social responsibility reporting is that solution, and I would have to say that I definitely see the benefits to this.

Non-financial reporting is the disclosure of a company's social, environmental, and human rights information. It could improve corporate actions and enable shareholders/stakeholders to make more informed choices by providing transparency. This type of disclosure allows governments oversight and some control over corporate abuse and the public interest.

The question then becomes how to get corporations to comply with non-financial reporting. I believe this is where social and business pressure comes a long way. Stock exchanges, investors, and fellow business partners should all mandate and demand companies to provide this form of transparency. This will help impact corporate activities that have an impact on the society and the environment.

This isn't to say that this is the final solution, and corporations will stop nefarious activities abroad. However, this is a step in the right direction to formulating a fully developed action plan on legally holding corporations responsible for their actions.

Comments

  1. AnonymousJuly 13, 2018 at 12:38 PM

    Globalization has had a negative impact on the environment especially through international trade and economic activities. It has caused air, water, and land pollution, and severely diminished our natural resources. This discovery has generated different reactions by the international community. Nations such as Denmark and the Netherlands have reacted pro-actively to scientific research claiming that anthropogenic global warming or climate change exists. Countries like the United States and China on the other hand appear to place profits before people and the planet. Their environmental regulations are weak compared to other industrialized nations. But if we want to sustain the earth then international actors must reassess the current global economic systems and institutions like the WTO that make the implementation of environmental policy more difficult. Moreover, “environmental policy can actually increase competitiveness by encouraging innovation, creating new markets, and reducing waste. (Copeland 581)” According to Copeland, “US imports are higher in industries subject to more stringent environmental policy. This is illustrated by the nordic countries exceptionalism in wealth, innovation and environmental policy, according to their high ranking positions in Business Insider, the World Economic Forum, and the Environmental Protection index. I think the solution to this dilemma means creating a global institution (ie. The World Ministry of Environment) that will act as a form of checks and balances challenging the policies of institutions like the WTO. Instead of focusing on trade and investment, however, it will address environmental issues and ensure companies respect green space.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anarchy in the USA

           While discussing realist motives and intentions, it seems that the United States is headed down a curious path worth looking at. Clearly a powerful nation, the United States should be in a unique position to latch onto globalization in order to secure a stable future. Calm, cool, collected domination is a much better look than ramping up rhetoric and perceived might, because your neighbor's interest to attack is seemingly when they are most threatened by show of force.             The United States has long taken advantage of its allies, while using economic bargaining to secure peaceful existence. The European Union is a clear ally in the spread of Democracy and Capitalism, two tenants central to the existence of the United States. It is this point that makes recent events troubling with regards to a peaceful future.             In an effort to bolster nationalism, our country has tur...
Read more

Waltz's Neorealism

The reading by Waltz points out some key points that Neorealists believe in. Neorealists view power as a possibly useful means. Neorealism contends that international politics can be understood only if the effects of structure are added to the unit-level explanations of traditional realism. It rejects the assumption that man’s innate lust for power constitutes a sufficient cause of war in the absence of of any other. Specifically, we need to look at the causal link interacting units and international outcomes. We’ve established before with Hobbes that the system we live in is anarchy. States are rational actors that at their basest level want to survive. Neorealism states that within an anarchy, states need to provide their own security to protect themselves from threats. This security dilemma is a problem, war occurs. This depends on situations and characteristics of states, not because states want to have war. The more important question then becomes what started th...
Read more

Corporations Will Run Amuck

Corporations help create domestic and global economic prosperity. However, when they grow extremely rich they can become powerful which may threaten sovereign actors’ authority, both on a national and international level. Additionally, through hefty donations their lobbying capability allows them to manipulate politicians and the political process undermining democratic processes and devaluing the voice of the people.  In order to prevent corporations from interfering with the democratic processes there needs to be an overarching system that monitors what corporations do and how they do it. To a certain extent room and flexibility may help corporations better compete against one another. Capitalist societies like the United States believe that less regulations on corporations means more incentive to be innovative. And while that may be true to some extent, there are also many abuses these companies commit in order to maximize their profits. Without strict gui...
Read more