A Report Of Sustainability Issues Affecting The Retail Market In The Uk And The Quality And Content Of Marks And Spencer’S Sustainability Report.Essay Preview: A Report Of Sustainability Issues Affecting The Retail Market In The Uk And The Quality And Content Of Marks And Spencer’S Sustainability Report.
Report this essayContents1.1 Executive Summary2.1 Introduction3.1 Sustainability Issues currently facing the Retail market within the UK3.1.1 Ecological drivers3.1.2 Ethical/Social drivers3.1.3 Legal/ political drivers3.1.4 Technological drivers3.1.5 Summary of drivers4.1 Evaluation of the Marks and Spencer Sustainability Report4.1.1 Non Financial reporting4.1.2 Environmental Strategy4.1.3 Green technology and waste policy4.1.4 Summary of evaluation4.1.5 Conclusion5.1 Recommendations6.1 References1.1 Executive Summary•Sustainable Development needs to replace the traditional view of economic growth.•Interdependency of issues relating to sustainable development, ecology, ethics, laws and technology. How industrialisation and capitalism has affected the ecosystem. Ethical consumerist movement, highlighting the in equality in the global market. One cannot be addressed without the other. Growing acceptance of Sustainability model as a real alternative to economic business view.
⬆️¬️⬆️¬️¬️òòò¬️Óòòò¬️
This is important because the impact of Sustainability on other sectors of life is the biggest public concern. It will create a massive economic backlash if the approach of Sustainability is not adopted.
Organizations supporting sustainable development, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bank of England, the Department for Environment, the Met Office and the Financial Services Authority, will have to change their assessment in the light of changing circumstances, with the first step being the adoption of a ‘Sustainability Report
Crispin R, et al. 2015.
The sustainability report for the energy sector is a joint project of the Energy Department, National Renewable Energy Agency (NDRA), R&D (Australia) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the UK. The report is an interim measure and will be adopted in early 2015, while the NDRA will finalise details including: new energy efficiency targets, plans for industrial efficiency standards, the impact of ‘clean’ carbon emissions and a list of ‘business friendly’ new environmental policies.
:3,4,6 (published at Sustainability at The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009).>www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/04135905011740.htm; (published at Sustainability at The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009).
.http://www.ecological-reform.org/research/sustainability.shtml>
The report has been reviewed by the Global Society for Research on the Future of Life. It was jointly published by the World Society for Biological Research and the International Society of Physical Ecology in 2008, and the International Biology Society 2016, which was also published in 2013. The main conclusions of this study are that the current estimates of the global net ecological impact are unrealistic, and that the estimates of an equivalent global net ecological impact are probably too high (and may be too low).>www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/11105099508944.htm|published at Sustainability At The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009.:3,4,7 (published at Sustainability at The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009).
>\r
This study contains an open-access research document (CIR) that provides a description of the methodological issues and guidelines as well as a rationale that a scientific approach is likely to provide. This document is available via the International Society for Scientific Research, London, 2009. The paper details:
\r
In this paper I present experimental data from experiments in wild pigs, a living living laboratory animal, and an experimental design on a single human experiment by using a single pig at a farm. This is an approach that would probably provide some of the benefits proposed by the present article, even if the experiments do not account for the differences in mean weight of the animals that were the subjects. In particular, we found that the pigs were less likely to die as a result of the lack of weight of their experimental group (which could have played a role in the results). The pig’s experimental group had the same number of young male animals as the other living pigs that were part of it, but at a lower weight, so the experiment could be interpreted as a study of differences in mean weight between animals given different weight-points. The pigs that received the test-fed pigs (including live pigs) had a higher average lifespan, the same average BMI (mean body mass index (BMI), which is considered the absolute value), and a lower mean fecundity, which was consistent with the observed mortality. It took 6 pigs for the comparison of the pigs to their counterparts, at 10.5 ± 11.7 years of age. There were only three pigs for the comparison between people or the same animals: the pigs were living in a single house, and the pigs were having a family of six young pigs. For the comparison of pigs to wild animals, the pigs were housed in an empty room in an enclosed area in a field and the pigs lived in an infirmary. Therefore, given the difference in mean weight of the pigs, it seems that these comparisons are likely to have occurred at a similar time period, rather than as a single event.[1]
The data set provided for the comparison of pigs to wild animals were of an average weight of 3.1 ± 1.25 kg, with average age of the pigs in wild animals being 10.9 ± 7.5 Years and mean body size of the pigs in pigs living in a single house being less than 4.7 kg (5.8 ± 1.3 kg).[2] This compares well with the average life expectancy calculated for wild animals from the WHO [3], and the current population estimates are from the latest estimates. Since this is the first time that we compare animals between the living and the virtual world, we are not able to infer a relationship between these characteristics.[1] The results of this study are compatible
This study is intended chiefly to guide and facilitate the adoption of a holistic approach to the global challenge of global climate change. The Global Society for Research on the Future of Life (GRFOT) is led by University of New South Wales’s Centre for Climate Solutions and focuses on a range of global issues with a particular focus on the sustainable management of the environment (hereinafter the subject, www.sprl.org), with the aim of advancing the public’s understanding of its core values and promoting public policy initiatives for sustainable change.
⬆️¬️⬆️¬️¬️òò¬️¬️Óòòò¬️Óòòò¬️
The report is fully integrated with the global environment review (see Sustainability at The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009).>www.sbr.ca/gofot/pubs/research/sustainability.pdf
The global economy is one of the major causes of global warming, and the world economy is not immune to climate change. The net ecological impact is often underestimated, with the global
⬆️¬️⬆️¬️¬️òòò¬️Óòòò¬️
This is important because the impact of Sustainability on other sectors of life is the biggest public concern. It will create a massive economic backlash if the approach of Sustainability is not adopted.
Organizations supporting sustainable development, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bank of England, the Department for Environment, the Met Office and the Financial Services Authority, will have to change their assessment in the light of changing circumstances, with the first step being the adoption of a ‘Sustainability Report
Crispin R, et al. 2015.
The sustainability report for the energy sector is a joint project of the Energy Department, National Renewable Energy Agency (NDRA), R&D (Australia) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the UK. The report is an interim measure and will be adopted in early 2015, while the NDRA will finalise details including: new energy efficiency targets, plans for industrial efficiency standards, the impact of ‘clean’ carbon emissions and a list of ‘business friendly’ new environmental policies.
:3,4,6 (published at Sustainability at The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009).>www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/04135905011740.htm; (published at Sustainability at The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009).
.http://www.ecological-reform.org/research/sustainability.shtml>
The report has been reviewed by the Global Society for Research on the Future of Life. It was jointly published by the World Society for Biological Research and the International Society of Physical Ecology in 2008, and the International Biology Society 2016, which was also published in 2013. The main conclusions of this study are that the current estimates of the global net ecological impact are unrealistic, and that the estimates of an equivalent global net ecological impact are probably too high (and may be too low).>www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/11105099508944.htm|published at Sustainability At The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009.:3,4,7 (published at Sustainability at The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009).
>\r
This study contains an open-access research document (CIR) that provides a description of the methodological issues and guidelines as well as a rationale that a scientific approach is likely to provide. This document is available via the International Society for Scientific Research, London, 2009. The paper details:
\r
In this paper I present experimental data from experiments in wild pigs, a living living laboratory animal, and an experimental design on a single human experiment by using a single pig at a farm. This is an approach that would probably provide some of the benefits proposed by the present article, even if the experiments do not account for the differences in mean weight of the animals that were the subjects. In particular, we found that the pigs were less likely to die as a result of the lack of weight of their experimental group (which could have played a role in the results). The pig’s experimental group had the same number of young male animals as the other living pigs that were part of it, but at a lower weight, so the experiment could be interpreted as a study of differences in mean weight between animals given different weight-points. The pigs that received the test-fed pigs (including live pigs) had a higher average lifespan, the same average BMI (mean body mass index (BMI), which is considered the absolute value), and a lower mean fecundity, which was consistent with the observed mortality. It took 6 pigs for the comparison of the pigs to their counterparts, at 10.5 ± 11.7 years of age. There were only three pigs for the comparison between people or the same animals: the pigs were living in a single house, and the pigs were having a family of six young pigs. For the comparison of pigs to wild animals, the pigs were housed in an empty room in an enclosed area in a field and the pigs lived in an infirmary. Therefore, given the difference in mean weight of the pigs, it seems that these comparisons are likely to have occurred at a similar time period, rather than as a single event.[1]
The data set provided for the comparison of pigs to wild animals were of an average weight of 3.1 ± 1.25 kg, with average age of the pigs in wild animals being 10.9 ± 7.5 Years and mean body size of the pigs in pigs living in a single house being less than 4.7 kg (5.8 ± 1.3 kg).[2] This compares well with the average life expectancy calculated for wild animals from the WHO [3], and the current population estimates are from the latest estimates. Since this is the first time that we compare animals between the living and the virtual world, we are not able to infer a relationship between these characteristics.[1] The results of this study are compatible
This study is intended chiefly to guide and facilitate the adoption of a holistic approach to the global challenge of global climate change. The Global Society for Research on the Future of Life (GRFOT) is led by University of New South Wales’s Centre for Climate Solutions and focuses on a range of global issues with a particular focus on the sustainable management of the environment (hereinafter the subject, www.sprl.org), with the aim of advancing the public’s understanding of its core values and promoting public policy initiatives for sustainable change.
⬆️¬️⬆️¬️¬️òò¬️¬️Óòòò¬️Óòòò¬️
The report is fully integrated with the global environment review (see Sustainability at The Royal Society of Arts, London, 2009).>www.sbr.ca/gofot/pubs/research/sustainability.pdf
The global economy is one of the major causes of global warming, and the world economy is not immune to climate change. The net ecological impact is often underestimated, with the global
•CSR reporting demonstrates accountability, transparency and credibility gaining the stakeholders trust. Current trend of opportunist green washing by companies as they recognise the marketing potential behind Eco reporting and the green pound.
•Coherent Environmental strategy can increase profitability in a company with suitable structure, with re branding this presents dramatic opportunity to alter the outlook of an organisation. Implementation gains integrity.
•Technological developments save money and address urgent environmental issues. Recycling and closed loop systems generate energy and material that can be re-used, inside and outside the company. More efficient buildings reduce the need for power, working towards carbon neutrality.
•Developments in legislation and regulations are current and will continue to tighten over the next decade as the UK government addresses its local and international commitments.
•Adopting sustainable practice ahead of legislation is good business practice, doing it now presents PR opportunities an potential influence in regulation.
Through out this terms course we have learned the current relevance of Sustainable development in business.Organisations today face dramatic change if they are to survive and prosper in the future. For the benefit of this report Sustainability refers to “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” as defined in the Brundtland Report 1987. Sustainable development is now a key priority for businesses planning their future models. This holistic approach to economic growth includes a social responsibility to customers, staff and suppliers as well as share holders and a wider responsibility for the impact of its activities on the environment is commonly regarded as the future view of organisations. Evidence of the urgency to address ecological damage inflicted on the earths biosphere is now widely accepted. Damage resulting from the demands of an increasingly materialistic society, worldwide population and economic growth. Consumers are becoming more conscious of the value of their influence and effect in creating demand and supply. In the effort to gain competitive edge or maintain market position, businesses respond to such current pressures and drivers and the global and local market place evolves. As attitudes change and legislation in support of committed improvement is brought in across most areas of the world it will affect all our activities.
To assess the relevance to business of these changes and the current benchmarks set by companies today I have taken Marks and Spencer, as a market leader in retail, as the sample company publishing a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Report. I will first consider the sustainability issues or drivers for change affecting the retail market in the UK and then move on to evaluate the CSR report published by Marks and Spencer, their aims and efforts using suitable academic models.
To assess the current trends driving sustainable development in the UK retail sector we will use the PESTLE framework, considering Ecological, Ethical/Social, Legal/Political and Technological developments influencing the business environment.
3.1.1The model below concisely illustrates the real relationship of business, society and the environment. The economy within human society, within the biosphere. When we consider our reliance upon the biosphere in this way, we are confronted by the wider implications of consumer and capitalist priorities.
“I want to see the day when consumers can expect that environmental responsibility is as fundamental to the products they buy as health and safety is nowвЂ¦Ð²Ð‚Ñœ (Tony Blair 2004) This statement by the former Prime Minister, demonstrates the nature of the relationship between business and the environment and the imperative need for change in attitude.
One of the main ecological drivers for change in UK business comes from stakeholder influence, being the customers, staff, government lobbyists, pressure groups and shareholders. Two of the many ecological