Consider the nine principles of sustainability and the corporate sustainability model described in Chapter 1 (as well as in Figure 7.1). Think about the workplace (EPA) you have been describing in the previous discussions. Imagine that you are formulating a sustainability strategy for that organization, which would of course be aligned with the organizational mission and goals.
• Pick three of the sustainability principles that you would like to see measurable improvement in.
• What outcomes would you be working towards?
• For each outcome, identify specific measurable leading indicators and specific measurable lagging indicators that you feel would accurately monitor whether or not improvements were being made in those areas. Identify which indicators are leading and which are lagging.
Note: You can't measure and report about everything, so be discerning. Explain your rationale. Feel free to focus your work on a specific subset of the organization.
The three sustainability principles that I would like to see measurable improvement in are ethics, governance, and transparency. Improvement in these three principles will make Environmental Protection Agency sustainable. I want the EPA to set, promote, and monitor ethical standards and practices. Also, the EPA should manage all its resources conscientiously, and effectively recognizing the fiduciary duty of an important government agency, and there should be adequate and timely disclosures about its products, services, and activities, allowing its stakeholders to make informed decisions.
The first outcome that I am working towards is that each Environmental Protection Agency inspector should uphold the highest ethical standards when he walks into the premises of business. I ...
This solution of 452 words explains how the performance of EPA should be tracked in three well-defined steps. The sources used are also included in the solution.
Take a position on public policy, global sustainability, and global economics. Be able to support your position with evidence. Opinion may be required.
It is argued that many environmental regulations are too costly. Do the economic effects of environmental public policy outweigh the costs?
Some policies have little or no direct monetary costs. These policies remove subsidies to special interests and restrict or deny access to national resources. Many environmental policies involve some very real costs that must be paid by some segment of society. In general, states with the strictest environmental regulations also had the highest rates of job growth and economic performance. Nations with the highest environmental standards also had the most robust economies and rates of job creation. Only 0.1% of job layoffs were attributed to employers to environment-related causes. In summary, we can draw several conclusions from our examination of the impact of environmental policy on the economy. Environmental public policy does not diminish the wealth of a nation; rather, it transfers wealth from polluters to pollution controllers and to less polluting companies. The environmental protection industry is a major job-creating, profit-making, sales-generating industry. The argument that environmental protection is bad for the economy is unsound. Not only is it good for the economy but environmental public policy is responsible for a less hazardous, healthier, and more enjoyable environment.
While this is certainly one view of environmental public policy, there are certainly rebuttals to this position, also based on notions of sound science and economic evidence.
Take a position on public policy, global sustainability, and global economics. Be able to support your position with evidence.
I am looking for ideas and opinions to get my thoughts flowing that is supported by research. Thank you.View Full Posting Details