A literature review on corporate social responsibility

A literature review on corporate social responsibility Corporate Social Responsibility has earned much salience over the last decades in academic literature. The literature offers various interpretations of the concept of corporate social responsiveness. The concept is understood as a process or set of processes on the way a firm approaches its environment. It is argued that business and society are interwoven: society has certain expectations regarding business and therefore the firm has responsibilities towards society. Hence, being a steward of the needs of society is deemed to be a socially responsible, appropriate, and natural act. The first book acknowledged on CSR is the Social Responsibilities of the Businessman by Howard R. Bowen in the mid 1950s. But, the term CSR came in widespread use in the early 1970s. In fact, it owes its origin due to the globalisation which took place after many multinational corporations were formed. In brief, globalisation means an increase in international transactions in markets for goods, services and factors of production and a growth in institutions that straddle international barriers. All these developments have brought in force the corporate governance mechanisms to ascertain fairness and transparency as well as social responsibility. Thus, this is how CSR was shaped and came into existence in the corporate world. 2.1.1 CSR across Countries CSR, also known as corporate responsibility, corporate citizenship, responsible business, sustainable responsible business (SRB), or corporate social performance, is all but a form of corporate self-regulation integrated into a business model where companies manage the business processes to produce an overall positive impact on society. CSR has been defined in various ways in different countries, of about being the capacity building for sustainable livelihoods from Ghana to about giving back to society from Philippines. Conventionally, in the United States, CSR has been presented in a philanthropic model whereby companies make profits and then they donate a certain share of the profits to charitable causes. It is seen as tainting the act for the company to receive any benefit from the giving. As such, according to Caroll (2003), The social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical and discretionary (philanthropic) expectations that society has of organisations at a given point in time. The European model is much more focused on operating the core business in a socially responsible way, complemented by investment in communities for solid business case reasons and voluntary interaction with the stakeholders. Ideally and broadly, the concept of CSR is a built-in, self-regulating mechanism whereby business would monitor and ensure its support to law, ethical standards, and international norms. 2.1.1 Views on CSR According to Hancock (2005), CSR can be viewed through 3 ways namely: Sceptic view According to this view, the notion of CSR is opposed to democracy and freedom, frustrating business focus on its purpose of wealth creation. Milton Friedman best defines this approach: Few trends would so thoroughly undermine the very foundations of free society as the acceptance by corporate officials of a social responsibility other than to make as much money for their stockholders as they possibly can. Utopian view A utopian view of CSR reflects the idea that companies have a prior duty to anyone touched by their activity, their stakeholders rather than their shareholders, and especially the vulnerable that may be exploited by the companys operation. This is based on the work of Evan and Freeman who are for the stakeholder theory where a corporation must recognise and respect the vital interests of each of its surrounding stakeholders. Realist view This view gathers the greatest following of an alliance model advocated by Patricia Werhane. It states that CSR is not simply about whatever funds and expertise companies choose to invest in communities to help resolve social problems. But, it is also about the integrity with which a company governs itself, fulfils its mission, lives by its values, engages with its stakeholders, measures its impacts and reports on its activities. 2.1.2 The Key Drivers CSR is seen by Porter and Van Der Linde (2000, p. 131) as a competitive driver that requires appropriate resources. CSR programmes, however, on their own, have certain main drivers which are as follow: Bottom Line Effect This is the most relevant driver of CSR programmes as it incorporates a socially responsible element into corporate practice. As John Elkington (1997) rightly underlined that many companies exhibit corporate citizenship through charity or philanthropy. Nevertheless, a new perspective evolved over time for some corporate stakeholders. Success of a corporation is now weighted and defined by evaluating businesses using a Triple Bottom Line comprised of its social, environmental and financial performance. Managing Risk An endeavour to adopt CSR programme has been the gain in market share, key personnel and investment which pioneering companies enjoy when they seriously address labour and green issues. In fact, corporations implement such a programme to manage risks and ensure legal compliance as denoted by Levine Michael A. (2008). They try to avoid investigation, litigation, prosecution, regulation or legislation. Influence of the Corporate Disasters There has been an increased perception of greed amidst senior business officials in the corporate world following corporate scandals affecting Enron, WorldCom and the like. CSR is important in counteracting allegations of corporate greed. As a result, as described by Hancock (2005) in his book, corporations are now shifting away from the philanthropic approach towards CSR and are moving towards the greater alignment of CSR with business strategy and corporate governance. Lower Equity Risk Premium Reputation Management Corporations can face economic damage when their corporate reputations and brands are assailed or sales are affected by consumer boycotts. As argued by some rating agencies, a comprehensive CSR programme will lower a companys equity risk premium. A direct correlation between reputation and financial outcome measures share price and credit rating (Hancock, 2005) has been illustrated through a model designed by the global public relations company Bell Pottinger. In fact, companies may face a variety of legal and reputational risks if they do not have adequate social compliance or corporate social responsibility/sustainability programs in place. Customer Loyalty In todays markets, companies have to focus on building and maintaining customer loyalty. As proposed by Zhou Y. (2009), this can be done through a CSR programme which builds loyalty with customers by offering a competitive advantage in a marketplace where consumers find ethically delivered or produced goods and services. Stakeholder Activism Investment Incentives As perceived by Visser, W. (2008), CSR is encouraged through the activism of stakeholder or pressure groups which often address the alleged failure of the market and government policy. The trend of socially responsible investment gives CSR an incentive where funds are screened on ethical, social and environmental criteria. Thus, this proactively encourages businesses to inform shareholders of potential risks and issues and it helps them to better understand their stakeholders, including shareholders. According to Hill Knowltown (2006), surveys have indicated that analysts place as much importance on corporate reputation as they do on financial performance. 2.2 Theoretical Review A theoretical framework can be constructed around the several theories that emerged to explain the reasons behind environmental reporting over the time. These are as follow: Operational Efficiency Theory Operational Efficiency occurs when the right combination of people, process, and technology to boost the productivity and value of any business operation, while reducing cost of routine operations to a desired level. In the context of CSR, operational efficiencies can be achieved through managing impending risks and liabilities more effectively and efficiently through CSR tools and perspectives by reducing costs; streaming information to stakeholders concerning the investment community for better transparency and by using corporate responsibility and sustainability approaches within business decision-making to result in new market opportunities, newly developed manufacturing processes that can be expanded to other plants, regions or markets. Social Contract Theory This theory dates from the classic period of history but it took its modern form between the sixteenth and eighteen centuries with the best known philosophers like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau who talk on social contract. Rousseau, in fact, conceptualised the individual-society relationship as a symbiotic situation whereby the two parties mutually confer some right to the state in order to maintain social order which makes human life and cohabitation better and to gain benefits of community and safety. In parallel to the social contract, the corporate social theory, pertaining to a firms indirect social obligations, has been advanced as a theoretical basis to explain the practise of CSR by corporations. Accordingly, businesses are bound by the social contract whereby they consent to perform various socially desired actions in return for approval of their objectives and other rewards. This ultimately guarantees its continued existence. Legitimacy Theory The theory is close to the social contract theory. Here, the corporations constantly seek to ensure that they operate within the limits and norms of their respective societies and the outside parties perceive their activities as being legitimate. Society grants legitimacy and power to business. In the long run, those who do not use power in a manner which society considers responsible will tend to lose it. This principle developed by Daviss (1973) is commonly known as the Iron Law of Responsibility. It expresses legitimacy as a societal-level concept and describes the responsibility of business as a social institution that must avoid abusing its power. Thus, this principle expresses a prohibition rather than an affirmative duty, and it applies equally to all companies, regardless of their particular circumstances. According to A.K.H. Khor, the legitimacy theory is fundamentally a system-oriented theory where organisations are viewed as components of the larger social environment within which they exist. Stakeholder Theory A key feature of CSR involves the way that a company engages, involves, and collaborates with its stakeholders including shareholders, employees, debt-holders, suppliers, customers, communities, non-governmental organisations, and governments. Companies can use stakeholder engagement to internalise societys needs, hopes, circumstances into their corporate views and decision-making. While there are many questions about how far a companys responsibilities extend into communities relative to the roles of governments and individual citizens, there is a strong argument that CSR can effectively improve a companys relations with communities and thereby produce some key features that will improve business prospects for its future. Agency Theory This theory comes to explain the relationship that exists between the owners/shareholders and the management. As such the latter is the agent which appointed by the principal (owner/subsidiary) and problems such as the potential moral hazard and conflict of interest are likely to occur. CSR comes as a middle way so that both parties can maximise their gains. As such, when CFP is strong, managers may reduce social expenditures in order to maximise their own short term private gains whereas when CFP weakens, managers will try to offset their disappointing results by engaging in conspicuous social programs, hence increasing their own wealth and that of shareholders as well, pursuant to the managerial opportunism hypothesis by Preston OBannon (1997). 2.2.1 Corporate Social Performance (CSP) In todays competitive market environment, business is confronted with a new set of challenges that are not only economics-related. To survive and prosper, firms must bridge economic and social systems. Maximising shareholder wealth is a necessary but by no means sufficient condition for financial prosperity anymore. A new performance measure called corporate social performance (abbreviated as CSP) is used to capture the performance of a business in the social realm allowing us to be more precise in thinking about corporate social responsibility. CSP defined as a business organizations configuration of principles of social responsibility, processes of social responsiveness, and policies, programs, and observable outcomes as they relate to the firms societal relationships (Wood, 1991), clearly shows that social performance is not limited to corporations only, but also applies to any firm and organisation. 2.2.2 Corporate Financial Performance (CFP) Most of the businesses operate with a view of yielding profits. The financial performance of a company is reflected through its policies and operations in monetary terms. These results are reflected through its return on investment, return on assets, value added, return on sale and growth in sales. Managers work in the best interest of shareholders to maximise profits. Financial performance is the most common, however, it cannot be considered as the only indicator used to measure a firms wealth. A broader definition of financial performance is accompanied by additional indicators such as short-term profits, long-term profits, market value, and other forms of competitive advantage, as noted by Jensen (2001). In todays world, for a firm to achieve a good and high level of CSP, it has to go beyond the limits of its own corporate strategies and adopt views of other stakeholders who may be directly or indirectly related to the company. 2.2.3 Corporate Social Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Since over the three decades, the study of the correlation between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CSF) has gained much salience. Many studies conducted in this effect have yielded positive correlation, while others produced contradictory results with negative or non-significant different causal directions being found. In effect, there are several competing theoretical models which are proposed to explain three varying findings on the CSP-CFP link. Owing to these differing relationships, I.Y. Maroam (2006) proposes a unified theory of the CSP-CFP link that explain the different relationships that may be observed between CSR and CFP, thus basing itself on the parallels between the business and CSR domains. The concept of CSR instils in corporations the moral responsibility towards society that go beyond the goal of simply making profits for their owners and shareholders (Berman et al., 1999). As Freeman (1984) rightly pointed out that corporations should be socially responsible for both moral and practical (instrumental) reasons, by reflecting a socially responsible posture, a corporation can enhance its own performance. Thus, CSR activities can, inter-alia, be rewarded with more satisfied customers, better employee, improved reputation, and improved access to financial markets, all pertaining to improving financial performance and sustain the business. However, social accomplishments may equally involve certain financial costs which can effectively reduce profits and comparative performance. Hence, Vance (1975) came up with the trade-off hypothesis to show negative linkage between CSP and CFP whereby corporations displaying strong social credentials experience declining stock prices r elative to the market average. 2.2.3.1 CSP as Business Strategic From the above, it is clear that CSP can be used as a business strategy which can contribute to the competitive advantage of firms. A study by N.A. Dentchey (2004) on the effects of CSP on the competitiveness of organisations reveals that CSP should not be thought of an innocent adventure for executives. It is rather a strategy for achieving corporate strategies, which if not carefully implemented, may harm the competitive advantage of the firm. Competitive advantage, as seen by Porter (1996), denotes the ability of a company to outperform others from successful differentiation from rivals actions. This strategic fit between the outside environment and companies internal resources and capabilities (Hoskissoon et al., 1999) results in superior financial results, as indicated by various measures of profitability. Hence, as per Burke and Logsdon (1996), a strategic implementation of social responsibility brings benefits for all since it results in strategic outcomes such as customer loyalty, future purchases, new products, new markets and productivity gains. Arguably, CSP can be a source of competitive disadvantage for firms which regard CSP as an additional cost. Business contributions to social prosperity (CSP) are seen by Keim (1978, p.33) as an investment in public good which is consumed or enjoyed by a number of individuals disregarding the cost sharing. Thus, investing in CSP is likely to bear negative effects for the fir ms which are incurring costs that might otherwise be avoided or that should be borne by others, for example, individuals or government (Aupperle et al., 1985). 2.2.4 CSP, CFP and the Stakeholder Theory Following the above arguments, a new perspective of CSP, based on the stakeholder analysis, emerges to argue furthermore that there exists a positive relationship between CSP and financial performance. As such, S.A. Waddock and S.B. Graves (1997) propose that a tension exists between the firms explicit costs (for instance, payments to bondholders) and its implicit costs to other stakeholders (for example, product quality costs, and environmental costs). Therefore, a firm which tries to outweigh its explicit costs by increasing its socially responsible actions incurs higher implicit costs, resulting in competitive advantage. Thus, high levels of CSP are seen as indicators of superior management by Alexander and Buchholz (1982) which lead to lower explicit costs and enhanced financial performance. The stakeholder theory accompanies the concept of CSR by shedding more light on the issue of social responsibility. This theory is spread over three aspects (Donaldson and Preston, 1995) namely, descriptive, instrumental and normative. While the descriptive aspect describes and explains the theory, the instrumental aspect discloses the cause-effect relationships between stakeholder management practices and improving corporate performance. The normative aspect, on the other hand, as perceived by I.Y. Maroam (2006) emphasizes on the moral imperatives for practising stakeholder management, rather than the business benefits it may provide. A parallelism between the core business domain and the CSR domain will maximise a firms profitability. The stakeholder theory provides a framework for investigating the relationship between CSP and CFP by examining how a change in CSP is related to a change in financial accounting measures. In fact, the two concepts of CSR and stakeholder share the proposition that social responsibility affects financial performance in some way or other. This subject area has been so vastly explored that this trend is now seen as a natural progression which goes associatively with developments in the industrial and business world. There is an increasing concern and emphasize on humanity, environmental preservation and enlightened social consciousness. Thus, a new area of research began to pave its way within the field of business and society where the relationship between corporate social conduct, both toward the corporations stakeholders and the wider society, and the corporations financial performance was and is still being investigated across several countries. Over environmental issues, research h as revealed that businesses which are eco-friendly and demonstrate good CSR practices enjoy increased consumer purchase preference (Gildea, 1994; Zaman, 1996) and good economic performance (Al-Tuwaijiri, et al., 2004). A stakeholder group, as identified and defined by Freeman (1984), is one that that can affect or is affected by achievement of the organisations objectives, that is, which can be harmed as well as can help it to achieve its goals. Therefore, there is a growing need for firms to address the needs and expectations of the stakeholders to avoid negative outcomes and produce positive outcomes for themselves (Donaldson and Preston, 1995; Freeman, 1984; Frooman, 1997). Pursuant to the stakeholder theory perspective, CSP can be assessed in terms of a company meeting the demands of multiple stakeholders, ranging from cost minimisation to societal maximisation. Building on the previous mentioned definition of CSP, Wood and Jones (1995) propose that stakeholder theory is the key to understanding the structure and dimensions of the firms societal relationships. This theory thereby assumes that firms are responsible for honouring all the implicit and explicit contracts they hold with their variou s constituents. Therefore, the stakeholder theory provides a system-based perspective of the organisation and its stakeholders where it acknowledges the dynamic and complex nature of the interplay between them. The various stakeholders of the firms, such as the employees, shareholders/ financers, environmentalists, government, communities, customers and even competitors should be convinced by the management that it is working harder to satisfy them. The more important the stakeholders to the firm, the more effort the firm needs to put to uphold its relationship with the former. According to Clarkson, Donaldson and Preston et al. (1995), the stakeholder theory must place shareholders as one of the multiple stakeholder groups which managers should consider in their decision-making process. However, like the shareholders, the other stakeholders may have a say upon the firm, bestowing societal legitimacy. Notably, Bernadette M. Ruf et al. (2001) asserted that firms must address these non-shareholder gro ups demands otherwise they might face negative confrontations which can ultimately result in diminished shareholder value, through boycotts, lawsuits, protests and so on. Hence, firms have a fiduciary duty relationship not only to the shareholders, but to all stakeholders (Hasnas, 1998, p.32). So far, recognising a companys contractual relationship with the various stakeholders has been instrumental in better comprehending the relationship that CSP and CFP share. Stakeholders have expectations from the organisation. Nevertheless, these expectations may conflict with the firms limited resources leading the firm to evaluate its costs and benefits tradeoffs. Firms must thus come with measures representative of the various factors of CSP and stakeholders interests. Unlike neo-classical stockholders who were only interested in financial performance (Grouf, 1994; Shapiro, 1992), the major stakeholders of today, that is, the stockholders are more interested in the firms current and future financial benefits and social performance. 2.3 Empirical Review This section reviews the works done and methods used by researchers on the relationship of CFP and CSP. Empirical results on the correlation between these are mixed whereby some yielded in positive, some in negative or some in non-significant relationships. Basing on the stakeholder theory approach, several models on the CFP-CSP relationship have been proposed, where the largest number of investigations found a positive CSP-CFP relationship. Notably, different methods to compute indexes for CFP and CSP have been used since data on both cannot be possibly obtained in absolute figures. As such, using aggregated weights assigned to K dimensions of social performance obtained through questionnaire for CSP and using change in Return of Equity, change in Return on Sales and growth in sales as financial measures on a sample of 496 firms, Bernadette M. Ruf et al. (2001) came up with a positive relationship between CSP and CFP. They, in fact, regressed change in CSP on change in CFP. The results revealed a significant positive relationship between change in CSP and change in Return on Equity and change in Return on Sales in the long term but that with the Growth of Sales to be significantly positive only in year 0 and 1. The study suggests that improvements in CSP have both immediate and continuing financial impacts. A paper by S. A. Waddock and S. B. Graves (1997) also came up with positive linkage between CFP and CSP. An index for CSP was computed using eight attributes, rated consistently across the entire Standards Poors 500 by a rating service, which were related to stakeholder concerns. The firm financial performance (profitability) was measured using three accounting variables, namely, return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE) and return on sales (ROS) used to assess CFP by the investment community. Factors such as size, risk and industry which affect both CFP and CSP were taken as control variables. Used on a sample of 469 companies and using CSP as both dependent and independent variable, the results revealed that CFP does depend on CSP and vice-versa and also indicated the importance of controlling for industry in assessing such a relationship. To bring more integrity, M. Orlitzky et al. (2003) conducted a quantitative meta-analysis on the CFP-CSP relationship building on the hypothesis that CSP and CFP are generally positively related leading to competencies, learning, efficiency and reputation-building with its external stakeholders. Taking CFP as a companys financial viability through three broad subdivisions consisting of market-based (investor returns), accounting-based (accounting returns), and perceptual (survey) measures and constructing CSP through four broad measurement strategies, namely: (a) CSP disclosures (annual reports, letters to shareholders); (b) CSP reputation ratings; (c) social audits, CSP processes, and observable outcomes; and (d) managerial CSP principles and values (Post, 1991), the study suggests that corporate virtue in the form of social responsibility and, to a lesser extent, environmental responsibility can pay off, despite the CSP-CFP operationalisations can also moderate the positive associa tion. CSP appeared to be more highly correlated with accounting-based measures of CFP than with market-based indicators, and CSP reputation indices were more highly correlated with CFP than are other indicators of CSP. This meta-analysis establishes a greater degree of certainty with respect to the CSP-CFP relationship than is currently assumed to exist by many business scholars. According to Mahoney L. and Roberts R.W. (2007), there is no significant relationship between a composite measure of firms CSP and CFP. Using four years panel data of Canadian firms, they calculated a composite measure of CSP score by summing all dimension strength ratings, such as, community relations, diversity, employee relations, environment, international, product safety, and amongst others and subtracting all dimension weaknesses ratings. As concerned the CFP, following Waddock and Graves (1997a), return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE) were used separately to measure a firms CFP. As CFP was expected to be positively related to CSP, a one-year lag between CFP and all independent variables (CSP, firm size, debt level, and industry) was used. Inconsistent with their expectation, they found no significant relationship between the composite CSP measure and either ROA or ROE. However, the use of individual measures of firms CSP regarding environmental and international act ivities and CFP resulted in a significant relationship providing mixed support for the business case for CSP. A study, using the Granger causality approach, by Rim Makni et al. (2008) reaffirms Mahoney and Roberts (2007) works on the non-significant relationship. However, there may also be a simultaneous and interactive negative relation between CSP and CFP, forming a vicious circle. Building on P. L. Cochran and R. A. Wood (1984) CSR-financial performance model where average age of corporate assets was found to be highly correlated with social responsibility rankings, D. J. Wood (1991) reformulated the CSP model to build a coherent, integrative framework for business and society research. The principles of social responsibility were framed at the institutional, organisational, and individual levels; processes of social responsiveness were shown to be environmental assessment, stakeholder management, and issues management; and outcomes of CSP were posed as social impacts, programs, and policies. The third part of the CSP model concerning the social outcomes was the only portion that was actually observable and open to assessment and any real performance, determined by stakeholders, existed. It was noted that stakeholders were likely to evaluate CSP differently, depending not only on their own interests, but also on their understanding and acceptance of social res ponsibility principles and their relationship to CSP. Building on this model, many researchers worked on finding the linkage between CFP and CSP. Using Wood (1991)s model, the results of a study conducted by P. A. and S.D. Stanwick (1998) showed that a firms CFP is indeed affetced by the size of the firm, and the amount of pollution emissions released. Where many numerous quantitative studies have been carried out to establish, largely in samples of multiple industries, the CSP-CFP relationship, M. Soana (2009) investigated this very linkage in the banking sector using a sample of national and international banks where social performance was proxied using content analysis, surveys, reputational measures, unidimensional indicators, ethical ratings and financial economic performance was proxied using market and accounting ratios. The eventual examination resulted in a no statistically significant link that could indicate any positive or negative correlation between CSP and CFP. The reason was that the majority of studies revised till now are also almost exclusively focused on the USA and UK markets. Corporate governance was also used as control variable, but it showed a non-significant and negative link with ROA and ROA. The study also confirmed the hypothesis that those banks that have the most transparent and efficient ownership st ructure are also the least profitable for shareholders.

Carpool: Automobile and Transportation Options Essay

For many Frederick County residents, commuting 1-2 hours a day to get to and from their DC area jobs is the norm. According to one Washington Post poll, â€Å"Washington-area residents spend nearly twice as long getting to work as people in the rest of the nation. They also get stuck in traffic jams three times more often than commuters in the rest of the country† (Ginsburg). Yet, most commuters in our area still prefer to drive themselves to work. When weighing the option to either drive yourself to work or carpool, it would be smart to consider the benefits and drawbacks of both, as well as to take an inventory of how each option fits your priorities, goals, and preferences. A carpool is made up of two or more people who share a ride. The obvious benefits of carpooling include reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality; while some of the more personal benefits of carpooling are: being able to relax or read while someone else drives, saving on the cost of gas, reducing wear and tear on your vehicle, and obtaining possible discounts on auto insurance (â€Å"Transportation Options†). It is also most likely to be faster, cheaper, cleaner, and less crowded than public transportation (Zimmerman). Recently, the Internet has made it easier to connect with locals that want to share a ride. Disadvantages of carpooling may include: having to ride with strangers (or putting yourself out there and making the effort to meet new people), not having the freedom to run errands on the way home if needed, and having to remember carpool etiquette (Zimmerman). People sharing rides typically live and/or work near each other and have a similar work schedule – which could be difficult to arrange (Yeager). One disadvantage of being a carpool driver is the potential legal action from passengers in the case of an accident. Although most metropolitan area carpool organizations these days offer a â€Å"guaranteed ride home† service of some sort (â€Å"Transportation Options†), you would need to find alternate transportation on a day when your carpool driver is sick or on vacation. Driving one’s own vehicle, the preferred method of getting where you need to go for decades now, has plenty of its own advantages and disadvantages of course. Advantages of driving yourself include: being in control of where you go and at what speed, the ability to have a conversation on speaker phone (hands-free, mind you) without having to worry about annoying or offending other passengers, and the ability to listen to your own music at whichever volume you desire. An article on Associated Content, a news Website for Yahoo, suggests that drivers may also choose their car over ride sharing because of conflicting schedules, unpredictable overtime, long hours, sudden demands and unexpected deadlines (Nyholm). One of the biggest disadvantages of commuting in your own car is the cost. The average cost of owning and operating a vehicle in 2009 was 54 cents per mile, or over $14,000 per year, according to AAA’s 2009 Edition of Driving Costs as listed on the Commuter Connections Website (â€Å"Transportation Options†). Even so, owning and driving a vehicle is somewhat of an American standard and a right of passage. Driving is a responsibility people take on with a sense of pride. Edward McDonagh, a Sociology professor who served as dean of the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences at Ohio State University, was once quoted as saying â€Å"The car has become a secular sanctuary for the individual, his shrine to the self, his mobile Walden Pond† (â€Å"Driving Quotes†). People love their cars so much that they are willing to keep on driving despite the expense, the high volume of traffic, and the adverse effects it may have on the planet. Carpooling is definitely more earth-friendly, while driving is obviously more self-satisfying for a multitude of reasons. It is important to think about where your priorities lie – whether or not you want to make more of an effort to go green, help reduce rush hour congestion, or save a little money and wear and tear on your car; or whether your life dictates that you have the freedom to come and go as you please. When deciding whether or not carpooling is right for you, it makes sense to explore each option, to compare all of the advantages and disadvantages of both driving yourself and carpooling, and to think about which best fits your lifestyle.

The Truth about Stories - A Native Narrative by Thomas King Free Essay Example, 1500 words

King makes it very clear throughout that one of the big problems with the Native problem is unrealistic views of Native Americans handed down from the 18th century or even earlier in a few cases. He relates the story of Edward Sheriff Curtis, a photographer who went around the USA in 1900 taking pictures of various Native peoples (King, 2003, p. 32). The problem with Curtis is that he was looking for the literary Indian, the dying Indian, the imaginative construct , so much so that he took along boxes of 'Indian' props to dress up people who did not fit that image. King compares this 'literary Indian' to the Indian of Fact , which are the real Native Americans who do not fit into people's expectations at all most of the time. The problem, then, is not who people are, but what others think they should be based on their own stereotypes. While we might like to assume this sort of thing does not happen again, King mentions a lot of current day examples, including ones that involve himself. He mentions some pointed questions he was made to answer when applying for a PhD grant from the USA government. These questions were a kind of authenticity test, a racial-reality game that contemporary Native people are forced to play . This game, even when it's started by other people who are themselves Natives, basically forces people into the roles created by this made-up 'literary Indian' that King talked about earlier. He notes that most people don't even bother asking questions, but instead simply [look] at you. If you don't look Indian, you aren't. If you don't look White, you're not . One of the things that King is most worried about is not just racism or stereotyping, but how these play into government decisions. He points out that Northern American nations have not been very good about keeping up with the treaties they made with Native nations. King says that we like to: tell ourselves about injustices and atrocities and how most of them has happened in the past. We tell ourselves that, as we have progressed as a species, we have gotten smarter and more compassionate. We will write a custom essay sample on The Truth about Stories - A Native Narrative by Thomas King or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/page

Why Is Stealing Wrong And Wrong - 934 Words

Throughout life one has to make many decisions. Many of these decisions are based on morals. The Merriam-Webster dictionary describes the word moral as â€Å"relating to principles of right and wrong behavior.† I personally believe that the moral decisions one makes are highly dependent on their life, family, and their careers (or lack thereof). Think about the single mother who is struggling to make ends meet. She can barely feed her children and can barely keep a roof over their heads. This mother works a dead end job and she has just been laid off. Her husband, and her kids’ father, passed away three months after the second child was born. It has only been a month. There is no food in the house and the baby needs pampers and wipes. Her only option is to steal the items necessary to sustain life. Although I agree that stealing is wrong and nothing can justify it, one should put thyself in this mother’s position. What would you do? In this case, I am not completely sure of whether or not I want to apply Immanuel Kant’s theory. I would apply it if it was soled based on a person making moral decision not based on â€Å"the consequences of action† but based on the â€Å"proper motive.† Although stealing would be far from a good will, the woman would be committing a crime for a higher purpose. She is doing it to keep a human being alive. Kant states, â€Å"to preserve one’s life is a duty†¦everyone has an immediate inclination to do so. (349)† Not only is it her duty as a human, but it is herShow MoreRelatedWhy Stealing Is Wrong?1147 Words   |  5 PagesKade Demuth March 11, 2017 Why Stealing is Wrong Petty Theft is the theft of goods valued at or less than $950. It is also a misdemeanor and a mandatory charge of between $50 and $1,000 and/or up to six months jail time for a first time offender of petty theft of retail merchandise. California provides parental programs to certain individuals accused of a first time offence, alternative to prosecution. Those who apply are to fulfil court mandated requirements such as community service. Upon successfulRead MoreMy Personal Experience of a Writing Situation at the Workplace705 Words   |  3 PagesI once had to write a letter to employees in my company as I worked as an assistant to someone in a high position explaining to them why a certain room that used to be a break room was now off limits to them. What had happened is that there were employees who were abusing their privileges in the break room. Some had stolen soda from a refrigerator as well as some beer that was put in there for special meetings that my boss had with individu als coming to the company. People were aware that while theyRead MoreJohn Stuart Mill And Emmanuel Kant916 Words   |  4 Pagesthe food, and walk out without paying. The wrongness of the act is practically self-explanatory. It is wrong to get away with a service that needs to be paid for. Aside from the fact that such act is illegal, because after all, Amy would technically be stealing from the restaurant, it is also morally wrong. Following the consideration of whether the act is wrong, Mill has a better explanation of why it is than Kant. Kant’s approach to morality does not seem to be as supportive as Mill’s. He beginsRead MoreCopyright Infringement is Immoral1165 Words   |  5 PagesThe average person wouldnt even consider walking into a music store and stealing a CD, however, with todays technology getting music without paying for it is so easy it barely seems illegal. Copyright infringement is a huge ethical issue going on right now. From downloading movies and music from peer-to-peer programs as well as various websites to being able to stream a movie at the click of a button without a copy ever being saved on the computer its so simple, anyone could get addicted to doingRead MoreEssay on Ethics Morality of Stealing725 Words   |  3 PagesTavian Ruffin 4/6/11 Ethics Morality of Stealing Ethics: a branch of philosophy which seeks to address questions about morality; that is, about concepts such as good and bad, right and wrong, justice, and virtue. Morale:   a state of individual psychological well-being based upon a sense of confidence and usefulness and purpose. Stealing: to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly by force In  criminal law,  theft  is the illegal takingRead MoreStealing: Debut Albums and Magnificent Idea1746 Words   |  7 PagesStealing is just plain old wrong, but still that doesn’t stop people from doing it. They don’t take the time to realize the amount of trouble that they’re getting themselves into. Or maybe they just don’t care, but they really should. Stealing has no excuses, explanations, or anything, because when you get caught that’s it. There are reasons why you shouldn’t do this, good ones, theses are the things that people should think about before stealing. First of all what would God say, do you thinkRead MoreShort Paper 1: Volkswagen And Morality. Starting In 2006,983 Words   |  4 Pageswire fraud, and a second count of violating the clean air act. Almost all agree that Liang’s actions were wrong, however depending on the ethical theory, the reasoning why it is immoral is debatable. To summarize, Kant’s moral theory states that morality is based on the intent of the action, and not the consequences. For example, the assassination attempts on Hitler would be considered wrong, per Kant. Even if one of the attempts had succeeded, the assassin would have done so with the intent ofRead MoreEssay on The Simpsons Up Close and Personal938 Words   |  4 Pagesbecause The Simpsons is a cartoon? My answer is yes! This show is able to sneak through the wormholes of TV land because it is a cartoon. People are overlooking the underlying issues conveyed through the characters because it’s only cartoons right? Wrong! The Simpsons is a satirical sitcom that makes fun of everyday issues that Americans in today’s society are faced with. In a way this is a fabulous idea. Most television shows mask the reality of life, making every conflict easy to solve and findingRead MoreThe Ethics Of Scamling Money : Giving Voice To Values968 Words   |  4 PagesWith that being said, it could be argued that pretty much everyone know that stealing money, especially through scamming people who trust you, is immoral, unethical and very much illegal. For all we know, his thought process could have been, if a take a little bit than nothing too terrible could happen, but in time realize that he needed and wanted more money so he figuratively fell down the slippery slope into stealing millions of money from the NHL players. There are cases where people think, IRead MoreEthical Relativism, The Principle Of Tolerance, And Moral Relativism921 Words   |  4 Pagesand how he sees it as a confusing, unclear moral theory. I will discuss the strongest arguments about moral relativism, the principle of tolerance, Pojman’s argument about subjectivism and how it contradicts the idea of morality, and my outlooks on why I do agree with Pojman. First off, John Ladd mentions, that â€Å"Ethical relativism is the doctrine that the moral rightness and wrongness of actions vary from society to society and that there are no absolute universal moral standards binding on all men