The Corporation and the Environment

E-ISSN： 2153-3326|5|4|661-673

ISSN： 1052-150x

Source： Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol.5, Iss.4, 1995-10, pp. : 661-673

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

The Inuit in Alaska speak eloquently of their “rights” to be granted larger quotas for whale hunting, so that they might compete more fairly with Japanese business interests. The Jari Corporation in the Amazonia in Brazil, struggles to cut trees in the rain forest and provide employment, in a sustainable way, without importing exotic species and without exploiting all the land they own. Yet they still use chlorine in their manufacturing operation, and still need to cope with the problems the previous management left for them. In the Great Lakes Basin, the U.S./Canada Joint Commission demands a chlorine ban for the Basin, citing abundant scientific evidence about habitat and wild-life devastation in the area, as well as mounting evidence of a link between chlorine in water and breast cancer. The meeting is attended by thousands of citizens supporting the ban, but the industry’s representatives protest the “emotionalism” of the presentations, and counter it with the so-called “hard facts”: veiled threats of unemployment and higher prices, due to a “premature ban.”