Environmental Ethics and Corporate Responsibility

Environmental ethics is becoming an important issue for many companies and businesses as there is a greater push for corporate responsibility. Leaders of organizations of all sizes and in all sectors face a growing number of issues related to ethical behavior, particularly in terms of environmental responsibility. As global understanding of the significant ecological and environmental ethics issues we face expands and moves to the forefront of debates, it is even more important for leaders to take action to both remedy the causes of the problem and to act as models for other organizations and individuals. Although there are many examples of responsible corporate and organizational environmental governance and behavior, there is yet to emerge a global initiative aimed at changing the face of environmentally ethical and responsible action that will promote further corporate responsibility. This lack of understanding of issues of environmental ethics and corporate responsibility occurs for a number of a reasons, one of which could be because of a lack of global consensus on the importance of taking the necessary steps to remedy the problem. As one scholar notes, "In our pluralistic societies, there is no uncontested common ethical ground in general and no undisputed conception of environmental responsibility in particular" (Enderle 2006) and as a result there is little unified action. If this assessment is valid then it is necessary to first define a clear set of issues and resolutions that organizations and leaders can agree upon.

One issue related to environmental ethics in the corporate and organizational sphere is that most will concur is vital for all leaders is that there cannot be any fuzzy distinctions between what is good for business versus what is good for the environment. In other words, the consensus must be that there should be a hierarchy of interests-one which places environmental and sustainability concerns at the peak. "The claim is that the various benefits and harms of development are incommensurable and not easily weighed, involving differences between global and local goods-the benefits of selling wood fiber for local populations versus the possible global benefits of a potential cure for cancer or a contribution to the reduction in greenhouse gases...Whose interests count for more?" (Light 2002). In short, the interests of the global good should always outweigh those of the short-term monetary or other gains produced by unethical or unsustainable practices and leadership decisions. Leaders in both business and civil society have focused too much on the friction between them and not enough on the points of intersection. The mutual dependence of corporations and society implies that "both business decisions and social policies must follow the principle of shared value. That is, choices must benefit both sides. If either a business or a society pursues policies that benefit its interests at the expense of the other, it will find itself on a dangerous path (Porter 2006).

The bulk of recent peer-reviewed literature on the topic of environmental ethics and corporate responsibility has granted a great deal of focus on matters of ethical behavior in the organizational context. Although there are still several debates about possible courses of action that could and should be followed at the management level, it is generally agreed that "environmental leadership is a collective dynamic, wherein the difference between leaders and followers is based more on degrees of social influence (through words and deeds) than on traditional institutional power differentials" (Egri 2006). In addition, this also suggests another popular paradigm that has emerged that insists that businesses and organizations are increasingly more accountable for their environmentally ethical behavior-both with the organization and in the view of the public at large. With growing global consciousness devoted to understanding and championing issues of environmental sustainability, companies and their practices on such a level can no longer be viewed as separate matters. "The evolution of business and societal concern has led to businesses gradually re-embracing formerly displaced social orientation for both social and environmental well-being" (Panwar 2006). What this means essentially, is that it is even more important for the overall success or failure of a corporation or organization to engage with public concerns and behave in a responsible way, particularly as far as environmental issues are concerned. As Panwar goes on to note, "When pursing [environmentally] ethical investments, individuals and organizations seek out companies with a positive reputation while avoiding companies linked to environmentally damaging practices, oppressive regimes, etc.

The increase in environmental ethical investment has encouraged companies to give attention to corporate responsibility"(Panwar 2006). How organizations give this attention, however, is contested. The problem is becoming less a matter of recognizing that environmental ethics issues are present and pressing and more an issue of what to do, leadership-wise and on a meta-organizational level to address these problems.
There are various approaches to solving the organizational (and for that matter, national and international) problems surrounding effective and environmentally ethical leadership. The main issue is, however, a lack of coherent ideology surrounding organizational and corporate responses-even if the desire to be more aware of environmental ethics matters exists. For example, according to a survey conducted in December of 2006, "198 medium-sized to large multinationals found that most said they lacked an active approach to developing new business opportunities arising from meeting citizenship and sustainability needs" (Marshall 2007). In order to remedy this crisis, many larger organizations hired corporate responsibility officers to monitor such things as environmental ethics. These individuals were charged with the task of reviewing and analyzing current policy and practices to ensure that the highest ethical standards were being met in a way that was conducive to the organization's mission statement, budget, and overall corporate culture. In short, one approach to solving the ethical demands that increasingly valued by both the public and investors is to ensure corporate responsibility through the hiring of an outside consultant. With larger organizations understanding the value of environmental ethical responsibility, it is natural to assume that smaller entities will take notice and follow suit.

Being an effective and responsible corporate leader is not simply something that is an issue in the organizational context, but it extends to the community level as well. Consider the case of Detroit and its rapidly dwindling reserve of natural areas and resources. In Detroit, an urban ecosystem analysis undertaken by American Forests revealed how land cover changes over the past 11 years have affected environmental quality in a nine-county area of southeast Michigan. "From 1991 to 2002 that region's open space declined by 10 percent while urban areas increased dramatically-21 percent. As a result, the region lost $1 billion in stormwater management services with a corresponding decline in water quality" (Kollin 2006). "The companies were rated on their ability to provide good jobs for employees, environmental sustainability, and healthy community relations" (Mirren 2006).

Egri, C. P. (2006). Leadership in the North American Environemntal sector: Values, leadership styles, and contexts of environmetnal leaders and their organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 571-604

Enderle. (2006). In Search of a Common Ethical Ground: Corporate Environmental Responsibility from the Perspective of Christian Environmental Stewardship. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(2), 173

Kollin, C. (2006). Detailing the motor city.. American Forests, 112(2), 31-31

Light, A. (2002). Contemporary Environmental Ethics From Metaethics to Public Philosophy. Metaphilosophy, 33(4), 426-449

Marshall, J. (2007). New Group Pushes 'Responsibility Officer'. Financial Executive, 23(1), 11-11

Panwar, R. (2006). Corporate responsibility: Balancing economic, environmental, and social issues in the forest products industry. Forest products journal, 56,, 4.

Porter, M. E. (2006). Strategy & Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-90