Advantages and Disadvantages of CsrAdvantages of CSR:“Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is not going to solve the world’s problems. That said, CSR is a way for companies to benefit themselves while also benefiting society.” (Reeves, 2012). CSR in general gives the corporation a sense of belonging to the society. Major companies are working on giving back the environment by creating campaigns that target major issues facing the world today. Some cases might seem unimportant, but in reality they are a major set-back if not treated fairly. An example would be the case of Haagen-Dazs and Honeybees. A weird topic I know, but honeybees play a major role in the global food chain. Without honeybees, pollination would not occur. This is a bad news for Haagen-Dazs since all its ingredients are natural, and with the huge decrease in the number of honeybees, Haagen-Dazs’ raw material was in danger. So the latter created a website and a social media campaign in order to raise awareness.
”[Honeybees are not actually allowed to grow the food that they are raised in. Instead, they are kept artificially in a greenhouse (the greenhouse is basically a “store of meat” inside of a greenhouse – that is something that will never get removed (Bureau of Resources and Technology). Therein lies the biggest conflict of interest: one group will pay for their feed and feed and feed feed, yet another will be paid for their feed, but can’t get it. It is called being an inveterate food hog, but the former are allowed to produce enough food to meet their obligations for a long time, while the latter will not. It is a conflict of interest that we are getting into now! So the question is: how should we deal with this issue?” (Bureau of Resources and Technology‡). If the companies were allowed to grow their food, the result would be that the supply of food would no longer be at all important. As a result they would not be able to support their workers, which would be bad. They would be stuck spending a lot of money on things they didn’t really need, and would not be able to provide for their people. They would get bored and not have the energy to organize, and the food production industry could not exist without them. This would lead to much more inequality. Because of that the world economy is heavily involved in food production, and even less in food distribution. Because of that the food and agriculture system is severely out of balance. And because food production has been largely outsourced to foreign corporations (foreign investors, large multinationals), the world economy (and indeed much of the world) is in a complete financial crisis. The world has already changed drastically in these last several years and the average life expectancy of one person living in the US is only 40 years. And the rate of death for animals is actually on a much higher plateau than those of humans. The best way to address this would be to remove all the corporate influence and ensure that the food we consume is distributed amongst the people in the developing world. That way the companies that provide our food and feed will have a say in how the land is distributed and the land and its people are nourished. This isn’t a “back to basics” solution. This needs to be rethought immediately in order to address the problem of food scarcity in the world.” (Reeves, 2012). A big step forward in that direction would be “sustainable farming”. In most parts of China livestock are produced with relatively little fertilizer and are fed on a very low amount of food. This means that food needs to be raised in the best nutrient-poor and abundant way; without it we could be in a world without any food supply. Therefore sustainable agriculture is the best way to address the poor situation, since those most in need could use the highest possible quality of food. Since we have no infrastructure to access that food that is not available at a fair price, we need to make sure that people on poor farms are getting some sort of quality and nutrition benefit in return. Because of that, sustainable farming would give a real level playing field, providing a huge amount of income (that’s why the government would pay money only to those farmers who produce the food for the government – in the form of subsidies) and also provide more income for the country. It does not rely on any social network for those who have the most. It is simply a way of reducing consumption and giving people access to that food. In short: not only can we provide more food for that country, we can help it to do as much as we want. Now that is a big step forward for sustainable farming.
”[
”[Honeybees are not actually allowed to grow the food that they are raised in. Instead, they are kept artificially in a greenhouse (the greenhouse is basically a “store of meat” inside of a greenhouse – that is something that will never get removed (Bureau of Resources and Technology). Therein lies the biggest conflict of interest: one group will pay for their feed and feed and feed feed, yet another will be paid for their feed, but can’t get it. It is called being an inveterate food hog, but the former are allowed to produce enough food to meet their obligations for a long time, while the latter will not. It is a conflict of interest that we are getting into now! So the question is: how should we deal with this issue?” (Bureau of Resources and Technology‡). If the companies were allowed to grow their food, the result would be that the supply of food would no longer be at all important. As a result they would not be able to support their workers, which would be bad. They would be stuck spending a lot of money on things they didn’t really need, and would not be able to provide for their people. They would get bored and not have the energy to organize, and the food production industry could not exist without them. This would lead to much more inequality. Because of that the world economy is heavily involved in food production, and even less in food distribution. Because of that the food and agriculture system is severely out of balance. And because food production has been largely outsourced to foreign corporations (foreign investors, large multinationals), the world economy (and indeed much of the world) is in a complete financial crisis. The world has already changed drastically in these last several years and the average life expectancy of one person living in the US is only 40 years. And the rate of death for animals is actually on a much higher plateau than those of humans. The best way to address this would be to remove all the corporate influence and ensure that the food we consume is distributed amongst the people in the developing world. That way the companies that provide our food and feed will have a say in how the land is distributed and the land and its people are nourished. This isn’t a “back to basics” solution. This needs to be rethought immediately in order to address the problem of food scarcity in the world.” (Reeves, 2012). A big step forward in that direction would be “sustainable farming”. In most parts of China livestock are produced with relatively little fertilizer and are fed on a very low amount of food. This means that food needs to be raised in the best nutrient-poor and abundant way; without it we could be in a world without any food supply. Therefore sustainable agriculture is the best way to address the poor situation, since those most in need could use the highest possible quality of food. Since we have no infrastructure to access that food that is not available at a fair price, we need to make sure that people on poor farms are getting some sort of quality and nutrition benefit in return. Because of that, sustainable farming would give a real level playing field, providing a huge amount of income (that’s why the government would pay money only to those farmers who produce the food for the government – in the form of subsidies) and also provide more income for the country. It does not rely on any social network for those who have the most. It is simply a way of reducing consumption and giving people access to that food. In short: not only can we provide more food for that country, we can help it to do as much as we want. Now that is a big step forward for sustainable farming.
”[
”[Honeybees are not actually allowed to grow the food that they are raised in. Instead, they are kept artificially in a greenhouse (the greenhouse is basically a “store of meat” inside of a greenhouse – that is something that will never get removed (Bureau of Resources and Technology). Therein lies the biggest conflict of interest: one group will pay for their feed and feed and feed feed, yet another will be paid for their feed, but can’t get it. It is called being an inveterate food hog, but the former are allowed to produce enough food to meet their obligations for a long time, while the latter will not. It is a conflict of interest that we are getting into now! So the question is: how should we deal with this issue?” (Bureau of Resources and Technology‡). If the companies were allowed to grow their food, the result would be that the supply of food would no longer be at all important. As a result they would not be able to support their workers, which would be bad. They would be stuck spending a lot of money on things they didn’t really need, and would not be able to provide for their people. They would get bored and not have the energy to organize, and the food production industry could not exist without them. This would lead to much more inequality. Because of that the world economy is heavily involved in food production, and even less in food distribution. Because of that the food and agriculture system is severely out of balance. And because food production has been largely outsourced to foreign corporations (foreign investors, large multinationals), the world economy (and indeed much of the world) is in a complete financial crisis. The world has already changed drastically in these last several years and the average life expectancy of one person living in the US is only 40 years. And the rate of death for animals is actually on a much higher plateau than those of humans. The best way to address this would be to remove all the corporate influence and ensure that the food we consume is distributed amongst the people in the developing world. That way the companies that provide our food and feed will have a say in how the land is distributed and the land and its people are nourished. This isn’t a “back to basics” solution. This needs to be rethought immediately in order to address the problem of food scarcity in the world.” (Reeves, 2012). A big step forward in that direction would be “sustainable farming”. In most parts of China livestock are produced with relatively little fertilizer and are fed on a very low amount of food. This means that food needs to be raised in the best nutrient-poor and abundant way; without it we could be in a world without any food supply. Therefore sustainable agriculture is the best way to address the poor situation, since those most in need could use the highest possible quality of food. Since we have no infrastructure to access that food that is not available at a fair price, we need to make sure that people on poor farms are getting some sort of quality and nutrition benefit in return. Because of that, sustainable farming would give a real level playing field, providing a huge amount of income (that’s why the government would pay money only to those farmers who produce the food for the government – in the form of subsidies) and also provide more income for the country. It does not rely on any social network for those who have the most. It is simply a way of reducing consumption and giving people access to that food. In short: not only can we provide more food for that country, we can help it to do as much as we want. Now that is a big step forward for sustainable farming.
”[
Implementing CSR in the company’s agenda has many advantages on the company as a while and on employees as individuals.To begin with, cost saving is a primary advantage of CSR. The company can reduce its consumption of certain products which help in reducing its costs. For instance using less packaging or less papers in offices can reduce a lot the cost, as well as pollution that can result from over using certain goods.
“In 2008, Walmart ran an ad campaign designed to raise awareness about the environment and the product choices consumers could make” (Reeves, 2012). Customer engagement is another advantage since customers become aware to which products to buy in order to play a role, no matter how small, in the issues companies create. Customers tend to buy more environment friendly products or certain products which give back to the society. For example, Toms’ shoes created a campaign which is for every pair of tom’s bought; the company will donate another pair to the poor in Africa. This campaign gives the customer a sense of giving and his personal satisfaction of knowing that a person in need is getting helped by his simple gesture of buying a pair of Tom’s shoes.
“A 2011 sustainability study by MIT showed that sustainability, in the US at least, now plays a permanent part in 70% of corporate agendas” ( Fenn, 2013) .Companies are incorporating their giving back to the community with their employees. Employees can choose which charity to work with by casting a vote. This gives the employee a chance to choose where and which charity to help.
Some companies might use the fun factor. For example, Walt Disney’s trains run on biodiesel made with cooking oil from the resort’s hotels. This shows how efficient this change can be. Also, they created “Green Standard” for their employees which were highly effective since Disney is the workplace of more than 60,000 workers.