 |
 |
January 31, 2007
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
Davos is over, some thoughts remain and most importantly, a call to action. I briefly go into some of the problems in the Davos’ agenda shared by Tony Blair:
• World Trade
• Climate Change
• Africa
Businesses must engage in these conversations not only for a moral cause but for a strategic interest, which goes way beyond corporate responsibility.
"Once we work out what is at stake, we need a multilaterism which translates the will into action, since it requires sustaining the global purpose, requiring global instruments of effective multilateral action."
Several thoughts on interdependency and intervention capabilities within existing institutions and perhaps new ones were addressed. As an example, a UN without Germany, Japan, Brazil and India as permanent members will not only loose legitimacy but it will also inhibit action; the need of giving greater power to the UN Secretary General; merging the IMF and the World Bank; the G8 metamorphosis to the G8+5, to name a few.
But most interestingly, the Concept of Nation-Building (that is, the capacity for effective self government within a country) as it still being in its infancy was brought to the table. It is when seeing issues like corruption play such a pivotal role in the Africa conversation for example, that nation-building is core in order to bring change about.
Proper infrastructure of governments; functioning commercial and legal systems; health and education ministries; economic authorities; and police and military which perform the tasks they should under proper rules of governance, which are a given in many developed countries, are still a must in other countries. These are the life blood of true progress for nations struggling to be nations.
These, acording to Blair, are the new skills the international community must develop. To some like The Guardian or the Herald Tribune, it seemed as though he was looking for a job. But what’s wrong with politicians like Blair, Clinton or Gore focusing on the global agenda?
J.Pozuelo-Monfort, MSc candidate in economic development at LSE.
The recent regulation approved by the CNMV in Spain that triggered the expected marketing of hedge funds and funds of hedge funds, has also fostered some innovation and enabled the offering of alternative products.
A particular hedge fund that is as unusual as it gets is currently marketed by BBVA. It is a hedge fund that invests its proceeds in microcredits in Latin America. BBVA in cooperation with Codespa and a third-party conform the structure of the instrument.
The third-party is an auditing company that monitors the four institutions in Latin America that grant the microcredits to relatively poor individuals. The third-party, through its due-diligence process and reports, is able to signal which organisations do what and how. This enables BBVA to have the know-how to lend the proceeds to organisations that will, again, grant the microcredits in the field.
This is a relatively small hedge fund with a principal of EUR 20 MM. It is an instrument with a clear social impact that may also diversify the portfolio of a high net worth individual, with a clear social return. The upside is however not obvious... to what extent will this hedge fund offer attractive returns able to beat the market is questionable. The return is linked to the interest rates charged by the four institutions that grant the microcredits.
I am curious to know how this instrument is being marketed. If anyone reading this post has the time to ask at a BBVA branch, I would be happy to hear what they say in regards to this product, and how they compare it with other standard hedge funds that invest in the well-known strategies.
Products like this one will indeed have a clear impact on the developing world if they become popular.
Links to articles in spanish on the hedge fund:
Cinco Dias: El primer 'hedge fund' español es de BBVA y es solidario
El Pais:. BBVA lanza junto a Codespa el primer fondo de inversión libre.
El Mundo: Los Hedgefunds hablan español.
Yahoo Finanzas: El BBVA lanza los primeros fondos solidarios para Latinoamérica.
January 29, 2007
Dr. Javier Carrillo Hermosilla, Executive Director of the Centre for Eco-Intelligent Management
The Centre for Eco-Intelligent Management at the Instituto de Empresa, in collaboration with the PwC & IE Centre for Corporate Responsibility, has recently published a report entitled The competitive environment of the European electricity sector in the post-Kyoto scenarios. This study shows how the uncertainty associated to the absence of a post-Kyoto regime regarding Greenhouse Gas mitigation is affecting investments in mitigation activities in the EU electricity sector and, thus, future emissions levels. Based on a wide survey of EU power companies, the paper identifies the most likely post-Kyoto scenarios considered by these firms and how they are coping with such uncertainty in their current investment decisions. The major conclusion is that the non-existence of a post-Kyoto regime is having a negative effect on current business investment decisions in mitigation activities, increasing risk premiums and financing costs. All in all, the companies surveyed foresee post-Kyoto compliance regimes with emissions trading systems that would guarantee the continuity of the value of the reductions made beforehand, although they differ in their perceptions of the form that a post-Kyoto regime could take.
The authors are grateful to PricewaterhouseCoopers Spain for providing financial support for the project on which this paper is based.
Download a preliminary report here
January 26, 2007
J.Pozuelo-Monfort, MSc candidate in economic development at LSE.
A unique academic and urban environment surrounds me in the cafeteria of the London School of Economics while typing these few words and drinking a hot capuccino. On my left two Chinese girls talk to each other in mandarin and an apparently Brit reads the university paper ‘Beaver’. A truly cosmopolitan and international environment of a truly global institution that talks about globalization and its discontents, as Stiglitz names one of his last books.
A school that is leader in the social sciences, a school led by top-notch researchers that develop leading academic literature that is input to the economic and political policies developed by the political class of this unequal world. Apparently an institution that teaches some of the future leaders of this society, that will bring about new thinking, new ideas, innovation in the realms of politics and public administration.
Never further from reality. The corporate world leads recruiting at this and other top institutions. The McKinseys and Goldmans of the world where most of the pool of talented future graduates want to work. The current constructors of the system absorb young, high-potential graduates that could, on the long run, make a difference. They absorb the talent because there is no alternative structure that can competitively fight for the same pool of talent. The World Bank, the IMF, the United Nations, and some other International Organisations do hire, one may argue, but not as significantly and at a rather advanced-degree level (mostly doctorates).
Come to a world-class institution, ask your fellow students. If you are better off and have access to a competitive degree, chances are that you will decide to turn your talent to that prestigious consulting firm or that well-known investment bank. Ask your fellow students why they do not consider working for a developing economy, ask your fellow students why they do not consider working for the public administrations in their home countries. The answer is not surprising. Politics are rather disliked on this side of the Atlantic. Politicians have earned a deserved bad reputation. It is not so much a matter of corruption, literally absent in the first world, but a tendency to maintain the same style, set in place the persistent policies, and a stick to a clear lack of innovation.
The world needs talented individuals to move forward, to demand changes. There are currently no alternative structures able to hire from the pool of talent out of some of the best graduate schools. Corporations have the power to attract the talent, and it seems that nothing can do about it.
January 25, 2007
Want an insiders view of Davos? Visit Loic Lemeurs' blog. Interviews to participants like Mel Young, from Homeless Football World Cup, Yann Arthus-Bertrand, photographer and environment Activist and many others...
Much better, read Loic and many others at the official forumblog.
Other blogs include:
The Davos' conversation.
The FT in Davos Blog.
The WSJ in Davos.
How's your french? Try Le Monde.
The BBC in Davos.
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
FT just before Davos: “Few would have predicted at the start of 2006 that a slide show lecture on the science of climate change would become a cinema blockbuster.” Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth, is now the third most profitable documentary of all time. FT says it was a measure of how far the issue of global warming had invaded public consciousness.
The cost of reducing emissions is according to experts of 1% of global GDP while the cost of not doing anything about it is of 5-20%. David Miliband, the UK’s environment minister, said: “The scientific argument is settled, and the Stern review has answered the economic argument against action.” He said all that was left was the collective action problem, that no country wanted to be the first to reduce emissions for fear of being put at a competitive disadvantage if other governments did not follow suit.
Yet as the FT clearly states on their article, several businesses have seen a competitive advantage in taking early action on climate change. General Electric’s Ecomagination revenues has risen from $6.2bn in 2004 to $10.1bn in 2005.
Wal-Mart has promised emissions reductions recently at The Clinton initiatve, just as Virgin. Marks & Spencer has also just announced it will become “carbon neutral” by 2012.
So how did Davos’ call to action go? Here’s a brief summary. To follow the whole conversation click here.
In regards to climate change, the “wait and see” is not a valid solution under any circumstances. Just bringing into account risk management which is part of the day to day CEOs’ responsibility.
In regards to biofuels, we have to get more serious: US corn based biofuel is not economic; sugar cane fuel in Brazil is. Let’s not confuse energy security with actually energy replacement of the sources.
We can not afford to effectively kill the growth protection of the pension funds (China, India, etc.) All Europe are aging and the world needs to facilitate the growth of these regions. The tipping point is unclear.. However, there is a social responsibility to act with preemptive measures, which means planning, building laws, that is not put all people into the highest danger.
The world biggest reserves of Coal are in the US, China, India and Russia (In this order). Unless we can develop a technology which takes the carbon dioxide from coal, we have an immense problem. We need to sequester billions of tons of carbon in order to bring change in global warming. We also need to increase our nuclear fission capabilities, having in mind that the US, China and India can’t build them fast enough. Finally, renewables have a chance at the 20% level (although at the end of the conversation this percentage found its way to the 50% level); yet it is important to increase transporting distances of electricity over several thousand miles, not hundreds like it is done now.
As a final conclusion, which by the way makes sense since Kyoto’s revision does not happen until 2008, global agreements are best to get nowhere. Let’s take concrete steps which are implementable. This is far better than trying to come to a world agreement. However, the Industry does need a signal, giving the industry time, a decade. Create incentives in order to have technologies developed. Yet, as Martin Wolf concludes, “We are still in a very messy transitional place in dealing with this challenge.“
January 24, 2007
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
Don't miss the chance that technology has brought in enabling you to follow conversations which make a difference. How about sharing the table and most importantly, the conversation on The Shifting Power Equation with E. Neville Isdell, Angela Merkel, Sunil Bharti Mittal, and Eric Schmidt...
Here are some conversations which might also interest you:
Climate Change: A Call to Action with Montek S. Ahluwalia, John McCain, Zhang Xiaoqiang, and Martin Wolf
Billions in Development Aid: What Are the Results? with William Easterly, Jakaya M. Kikwete and Maria Ramos
Sustainable Energy Consumption: Does Anyone Care? with Fatih Birol, Emanuel Höhener, C. S. Kiang and Christine Maier
A Business Manifesto for Globalization with Lord Browne of Madingley, Patrick Cescau, Ian E. L. Davis, James Dimon, Carlos Ghosn, James J. Schiro and Joseph E. Stiglitz
Scaling Innovation in Foreign Aid with William Easterly, William H. Gates III, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Paul D. Wolfowitz and Fareed Zakaria
A Conversation with the President of Mexico, Felipe Calderón-Hinojosa (this is of personal nature, forgive my partiality on internal affairs...)
Delivering on the Promise of Africa with Tony Blair, Bono, William H. Gates III, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Thabo Mbeki, Kumi Naidoo and Sadako Ogata
Frozen Trade Talks and the Need for Progress with Pascal Lamy, Doris Leuthard, Peter Mandelson, and Susan Schwab
Don't miss the opportunity. I have as many of you a quite busy agenda. Despite of this, I would have gone to Davos if invited, perhaps next year... but for this year, missing these conversations which help build speakers and attendants’ accountability certainly has a stake at setting this years global agenda.
Join the conversations here.
January 23, 2007
J.Pozuelo-Monfort, MSc candidate in economic development at LSE.
The Financial Times of last January 16th, 2007 features an article with the following headline: "An onus on retailers to keep hands clean". The article raises the issue of large retailer's sense of responsibility when picking suppliers. Large retailers such as Walmart, Carrefour or Tesco have a huge purchasing power and are able to impose working conditions on their suppliers in exchange of a selling spot in their large retail centers. Players such as Walmart and Carrefour can therefore negotiate with their global suppliers a set of conditions under which the merchandise has to be manufactured and delivered. If the set of conditions is not met, the large retailers could turn a supplier down. Therefore a retailer has the option, and must exercise it, to motivate suppliers to adopt a set of ethical principles vis a vis the working conditions of their employees. Usually it has more often been the case, that a large retailer will exercise pressure on the prices, so that it can purchase bargains, ignoring the conditions under which certain products are manufactured. Inexpensive clothing coming from Asia is not necessarily manufactured in fair conditions. How do we make sure Bangladeshi women do not work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, manufacturing clothing that the rich world can purchase at bargain prices? Either the consumer must decide not to purchase at a certain retailer that does not guarantee its suppliers fulfill a set of ethical principles, or the retailer itself must guarantee that all of its suppliers fulfill a set of ethical principles.
The effort seems to be coming from the retailers' front. In an initiative called "Ethical Trading Initiative" a set of retailers, coupled with trade unions and NGO's is pushing towards global standards in a supplier's assessment. Ethical Trading Iniative exists "to promote and improve the implementation of corporate codes of practice which cover supply chain working conditions". Their ultimate goal is "to ensure that the working conditions of workers producing for the UK market meet or exceed international labour standards".
Autoregulation in a particular industry is not necessarily a bad thing, but does not always lead to the elimination of the problems that caused its creation. Imagine public corporations auto-auditing their financial statements on behalf of their good faith. If Auditing Companies are necessary in the financial arena, why aren't there Auding Companies confirming whether or not a retailer, in this case, fulfills an ethical set of principles when incorporating suppliers to their global supply chain?
Two other organisations that are working in the direction of measuring the working conditions of a retailer's supplier are the French NGO Verite and the American Fair Labor Association.
Let's demand retailers to be accountable for their supplier's miserable working conditions. The third world, in the end, does not deserve to be imposed 19th century working conditions in a globalized world that presumes to be reducing the gap between the rich and the poor. The third world cannot continue working day and night so that consumers in the first world have access to bargain products.
January 22, 2007
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
IE Business School is hosting a Workshop on Corporate Governance to be celebrated on Friday, Februrary 16th. As part of our firm commitment to excellence in academic research, IE Business School, jointly with Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, CEMFI and IESE, brings together reputed scholars from overseas and local researchers in the field of corporate governance. This is a unique opportunity to interact with leading experts in corporate governance as well as with other colleagues working in this area.
This conversation include experts such as Milton Harris (University of Chicago, GSB), John Kose (NYU, Stern), Colïn Mayer (Oxford University, Saïd), Juan Santaló (IE Business School), Miguel Cantillo (IESE), Javier Suárez (CEMFI), María Gutiérrez (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid), among others. If you are interested in the content and conclusions of these conversations do let me know.
All relevant information about the Workshop is now available here.
January 19, 2007
Antonio López de Ávila, Director, Executive Master in Tourism Management
La Fundación Entorno acaba de publicar su informe "Entorno 2006". Es la cuarta entrega bienal de un trabajo de investigación que pretende dar a conocer la situación actual y las últimas tendencias en la gestión de la sostenibilidad de la empresa en España.
Entorno 2006 analiza, entre otras muchas cosas, los beneficios obtenidos por las empresas españolas debido a la adopción de políticas de sostenibilidad. Separan, acertadamente, los beneficios intangibles de los tangibles, incluyendo en estos últimos:
* Mayor eficiencia en el uso de materiales y energía
* Disminución de gastos de gestión de residuos, emisiones y/o vertidos
* Incremento de producción
* Incremento de ventas
* Incremento de productividad
* Acceso a subvenciones y ayudas
* Atracción de inversores y/o acceso a cartera/fondos de inversión
* Incentivos fiscales
* Disminución de prima de seguro
* Condiciones preferentes de crédito
* Mejora de la satisfacción del cliente
Este estudio tiene un apartado sectorial particularmente interesante. Según explican, al analizar los datos por sectores de actividad se ve que, en prácticamente todos los casos, el porcentaje de empresas que declara haber obtenido algún beneficio de carácter intangible es mayor que el de empresas que han obtenido uno tangible.
Continue reading 'Informe en Gestión Sostenible'
Celia de Anca, Director of the Centre for Diversity in Global Management
On January 10th, at IE Business School in Madrid, ONA Foundation, Morocco and the IE Foundation, Madrid organized the second meeting of the ‘Cross-cultural Think Tank on Corporate Diversity ’ in a Spanish- Moroccan context.
The Cross-Cultural Think Tank on Corporate Diversity is a process designed to develop and implement innovative ideas for the analysis and understanding of corporate diversity, with a practical focus on the Hispano-Moroccan business context.
Hosted by Mr. Rafael Puyol Vice President of the IE Foundation and Mr. Rachid Slimi, President of the ONA Foundation, the think tank aims to adopt an integrating approach by bringing together a small group of key players from diverse cultural, geographic and professional backgrounds who can contribute to making a significant difference to the environments in which they operate.
The think tank held last week in Madrid featured personalities from different academic disciplines including philosophy (Prof. Ali Benmakhllouf, Université de Nie Sophia-Antipolis, France); Antropology (Prof. Robert Rydell, Montana State University USA); Marketing (Prof. Bill Carney, IE Business School, Madrid); Intl Economics (Prof. Jose Collado, UNED, Spain); and finance (Prof. Eduardo Oliveira, IE Business School). The business world was also represented by Ms. Carmen Rodriguez, President, Expansion Exterior, Spain; Ms. Boutheyna Iraqi, President, AFEM (Association des femmes chefs d’entreprises du Maroc); Mr Bassim Jai Hokimi, President, Atlamed; and member of the board of directors of ONA /SNI Group Morocco. Important figures from the Media also lent their views to the discussion, including Ms. Nadia Salah, Editor in Chef, L’Economist Morocco, and Ms. Angeles Espinosa Middle East editor, EL País, Spain. Representatives of international institutions also contributed with their expertise in the field, including HIRH Archiduke George von Habsboug, Ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of the Republic of Hungary and member of the International Advisory board of IE Business School, and Mr. Ramon Enciso, Coordinator of the Hispano-Moroccan Comité Averroes.
Continue reading 'Cultural Diversity at work'
January 18, 2007
Antonio López de Ávila, Director, Executive Master in Tourism Management
Air Pollution, this topic is on newspapers almost everyday in the last weeks: "Air companies are also responsible for climate changing". Is it new? Not at all.
The 3 days closing of the USA air space after September 11th, showed how aircraft emmissions have an important role in climate changing. From midday September 11 to midday September 14, the days had become warmer and the nights cooler, with the overall range greater by about two degrees Fahrenheit (see The Contrail Effect).
But, not flying is a valid answer? or more taxes? Of course, not.
I think aerospace companies (like Airbus and Boeing) should invest more in I+D related to environment (less emmissions, less noise, etc.) and do people know about its efforts as the car manufacturers have being doing since the 80s.
Innovation, not restrictions, I think that's the right answer. What do you think? Are more taxes the right answer?
See more related...
Is global dimming masking the full impact of global warming?
Plane Pollution
Transport - Aviation
January 17, 2007
J.Pozuelo-Monfort, MSc candidate in economic development at LSE.
One of the privileges and benefits of being a student at the London School of Economics is the possibility of hearing experts of such high caliber as Branko Milanovic, who today lectures on issues concerning inequality.
Dr Milanovic is Lead Economist of the Research Department at the World Bank headquartered in Washington DC, and a world authority on inequality measures. He has recently written a book titled ‘Worlds Apart’ (click here for more information in regards to Milanovic & Inequality).
Dr Milanovic quotes: “In the world, depending how you decompose it, 2/3 of overall inequality is due to the differences in mean incomes of the countries. The differences between countries are contributing much more to inequality than the differences within countries. The poorest people in Germany are richer than 77% of the population in the world”.
Inequality is a hot topic. Its objective measure is vital to trace back investment in developing economies and funding of sustainable projects. Dr Milanovic with his knowledge and expertise contributes to the global debate of whether the world is witnessing an increase or decrease in the poverty gap between the world’s richest 20% and the bottom 80%.
A few more interesting points from Dr Milanovic’s presentation include some of the following:
• For each percentile level, Sri Lanka is better off than rural India.
• The richest people in Brazil are as rich as the richest in the developed country: this is a reflection of the world, and Brazil’s wealth distribution says a lot about how wealth is distributed on a worldwide basis.
• Only 17% of the population in OECD countries has seen its per-capita income decrease between 1980 and 2002. This figure contrasts with 33% in developing countries and 43% in Least Developing Countries.
• China and India are pulling global inequality down, but inequality between states in China and India are pushing global inequality up, and inequality between other poorer and richer countries is also pushing global inequality up.
• First to fourth world according to Dr Milanovic: Spain vs Morocco, Greece vs Albania.
• First to third world according to Dr Milanovic: United States vs Mexico.
• China is at the median world income.
In a global debate that questions whether globalization as a phenomenon is increasing or decreasing global inequality, Dr Milanovic’s work is fundamental vis a vis a major understanding of the income trends. His analysis does not only impact the World Bank’s policies, but should also touch the political class of the rich world, and sensitize the public administrators, so that they set up policies focused on reducing global inequality, be it measured by the Gini coefficient or otherwise.
For a more thorough discussion of some of these issues, as from our last post, CGD also recommends the work of Branko Milanovic (see, e.g., his figure on p 17 of this paper) and the 2005 WIDER Lecture by CGD president Nancy Birdsall, The World is not Flat: Inequality and Injustice in our Global Economy.
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
The Center for Global Development has just written in regards to two very interesting subjects which relate to Africa and a different way of picturing world income distribution.
The first is in regards to Entrepreneurship in sub-Saharan Africa, with an interesting paper called "Why Are There So Few Black-Owned Firms in Africa?", which analyzes survey data showing among other things, that most of the growth in this African region in the past decade has come from extractive industries, rather than from private, entrepreneurial activity. Moreover, these entrepreneurial activities are led by ethnic minorities such as Chinese, Middle Easterners or Caucasians--not black Africans. The paper focuses on domestic firms in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Senegal and Benin.
The Center also offers a quite visual way of picturing global inequity in regards to income distribution, which compares the number of people living on less than $500 per year against those living with more than $120,000. CGD senior fellow Todd Moss and research assistant Sarah Rose take average income and distribution data to get a rough sense of what global income distribution looks like. It is a different way of picturing the more than 4 billion people at the bottom of the pyramid who live with less than $2 a day.
If you're interested in entrepreneurship and Africa, take a look at Timbuktu Chronicles.
January 16, 2007
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
Marks & Spencer has just announced "Plan A", a business-wide £200m "eco-plan" which will have an impact on every part of M&S' operations over the next five years. The 100-point plan means that by 2012 M&S will:
• become carbon neutral
• send no waste to landfill
• extend sustainable sourcing
• set new standards in ethical trading
• help customers and employees live a healthier lifestyle
There are strong arguments which in the best of cases put into debate some of their initiatives, as an example that of ethical food. The Economist looks further into this issue and brings a well developed and challenging position in regards to voting with your trolley; at the same time, third parties offer a counter version of the subject, which the New York Times has carefuly brought together.
Whatever the assessment made, and the conversation is still an ongoing one, it is clear that M&S bet in regards to corporate responsibility and sustainability is a strong one, one through which their customers will differentiate them from the rest. Some remarks made by Stuart Rose, CEO of M&S are the following:
“We will become carbon neutral, only using offsetting as a last resort; we will ensure that none of our clothing or packaging needs to be thrown away; much of our polyester clothing will be made from recycled plastic bottles instead of oil and every year we will sell over 20 million garments made from Fairtrade cotton.
"We will clearly label the food we import by air; UK, regional and local food sourcing will be a priority and we will trial the use of food waste to power our stores. We will do this without passing on the extra cost to our customers."
"We will also help our suppliers and customers to change their behaviour. Because we are own-brand our influence extends to over 2,000 factories, 10,000 farms and 250,000 workers, as well as millions of customers visiting over 500 stores in the UK."
"This is a deliberately ambitious and, in some areas, difficult plan. We don't have all the answers but we are determined to work with our suppliers, partners and Government to make this happen. Doing anything less is not an option."
Marks & Spencer is making a clear move towards what on their own words, their customers are asking them to do. It is not only the right thing to do, but the only way to do business.
“If every retailer in Britain followed Marks & Spencer's lead it would be a major step forward in meeting the challenge of creating a sustainable society." Blake Lee-Harwood, Campaign Director, Greenpeace UK
Continue reading 'Customers care more than ever how products are made'
January 15, 2007
Dr. Javier Carrillo Hermosilla, Executive Director of the Centre for Eco-Intelligent Management
El País publicó ayer domingo un artículo titulado “La UE penalizará a los países que incumplan la aplicación de las energías renovables”, en el que se destacan las esperanzas puestas en las diferentes normativas venideras con respecto a la mitigación de las emisiones europeas de GHG. En el citado artículo estas esperanzas se argumentan de algún modo por oposición a la supuesta ineficiencia mostrada por el Protocolo de Kyoto en la consecución de los objetivos globales fijados hasta el momento, y en los más exigentes que la UE acaba de imponerse para el año 2020.
Merece la pena hacer una breve reflexión sobre los diferentes instrumentos de política medioambiental al alcance los policy makers y sobre su eficiencia relativa.
Los gobiernos disponen de muy diferentes mecanismos para enfrentar las presiones medioambientales que genera la actividad productiva y consumidora de la sociedad actual. La complejidad de la mayor parte de estas presiones y la naturaleza interdependiente de sus causas y efectos, junto a nuestra limitada comprensión de las mismas, hace necesaria una cuidadosa combinación de políticas para alcanzar los objetivos medioambientales del modo más eficiente posible. Como complicación adicional, la elección de estos instrumentos se enfrenta en ocasiones a unos excesivos costes administrativos asociados con su uso, a barreras políticas contra su puesta en marcha, a posibles efectos regresivos, o a impactos negativos sobre la competitividad de ciertos sectores.
Una tipología básica de los instrumentos de política ambiental podría ser la siguiente:
En comparación con el creciente número de instrumentos utilizados en las políticas ambientales de las naciones, son pocas las evaluaciones realizadas que permitan obtener conclusiones válidas sobre los resultados de estos esfuerzos. A la escasa tradición existente en la evaluación de la eficiencia de las políticas gubernamentales en todos los ámbitos, se añade en el medioambiental la dificultad que provoca la dispersión de estas responsabilidades entre diferentes autoridades y, sobre todo, la complejidad de distinguir la contribución específica de cualquiera de estos instrumentos a la consecución de sus objetivos.
El plan europeo recientemente anunciado se apoya en medidas de tipo normativo (command & control) para el impulso de las energías renovables, la reducción del consumo aumentando la eficiencia energética, y la promoción de nuevas tecnologías limpias. La implantación práctica de esta nueva legislación europea en los Estados miembros será el resultado de la trasposición, más o menos fluida, de una serie de directivas en los diferentes ámbitos de actuación propuestos por la Comisión.
Sin discutir su evidente conveniencia, estas medidas normativas se deben entender como complementarias, y no como alternativas, a los compromisos de la UE en el marco del Protocolo de Kyoto. Es ampliamente aceptado en la literatura científica sobre políticas de mitigación de GHG que el establecimiento de un sistema de comercio de permisos de emisión (junto al de impuestos al carbono) es el instrumento que permite el cumplimiento más coste-eficiente de unos determinados objetivos de reducción. Dicho de otro modo, cualquier instrumento alternativo al comercio de emisiones impondría costes mayores e innecesarios a las empresas de los países comprometidos en unos determinados objetivos de reducción de emisiones, frente a las empresas y economías de los países que eluden esos compromisos, sobre todo si estos últimos son numerosos.
January 12, 2007
Were very happy to welcome J.Pozuelo-Monfort contributions to this blog. He is MA in financial economics from Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, MSc in financial engineering from the University of California-Berkeley and is currently pursuing an MSc in economic development at the London School of Economics. He will be writing in regards to several subjects, focusing in the interaction between financial economics and economic development.
With DECEM: FINANCIAL ALTERNATIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT AID , Jaime starts a series of articles fundamentally innovative that aim at the proposal of alternative financial mechanisms to considerably raise the amount of funds available for development in the third world. Throughout the series of 10 articles, the author will stress the implementation aspects of the suggested ideas and will propose arguments for and against.
The world’s economic and financial system is articulated around a series of multilateral institutions that oftentimes set the direction of the economic policy at the national administration level. These institutions receive the name of Bretton Woods2 and their origin goes back in time towards the period just before the end of World War II in 1944. At the time the British economist John Maynard Keynes proposed the creation of institutions of global scope, able to contribute to the economic stability and progress of the nations of the world.
The well-defined role played by both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund has, over the years, become less specific and oftentimes their intent, raison d’etre and goals partially overlap. Historically the World Bank has played a more notorious role against the extreme porverty of many nations, proposing economic policies that foster the growth and lending to sustainable development projects. However the International Monetary Fund proposes, grosso modo, austere macroeconomic policies to highly-endebted countries (external debt), so that the latter do not incur in fiscal deficits leading to the failure to service the debt owed to the first world, at the same time that it “rescues” countries in economic crisis from their bankruptcy situation, using abundant monetary resources with the condition of imposing ex-post (excessively) austere macroeconomic policies.
Continue reading Decem 01 Download file
January 10, 2007
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
Dell, The Conservation Fund and Carbonfund.org have just announced a joint, global carbon-neutral initiative to offset the carbon dioxide produced when customers power their computer systems. Called “Plant a Tree for Me,” the program allows customers to make a donation that will be used by the two nonprofits, The Conservation Fund and Carbonfund.org, to plant trees in sustainably managed forests.
Through the program, a customer donation of $2 for a notebook and $6 for a desktop computer will offset carbon dioxide emissions equivalent to powering the average computer for three years. Dell will remit 100 percent of the donations received from the “Plant a Tree for Me” program to The Conservation Fund and Carbonfund.org to be used to plant trees.
The “Plant a Tree for Me” program is available now to Dell customers making new computer purchases. It will be available in February to U.S. consumers and in April to global consumers for any brand of computer.
After being pointed our by activists in regards to their environmental footprint, it is an interesting example to see how Dell is aligning CSR to their strategy, bringing together initiatives such as their Energy-Saving product strategy or their free recycling of products. Will this have an impact on your computer purchasing decision? Whatever the answer it might be, the negative impact would certainly affect your decision, plus, it certainly offers a differentiating factor which easily enables the customer to reduce his/her CO2 footprint with the click of a button.
January 09, 2007
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
Time's Person of the Year is YOU. The tool that makes this possible is the World Wide Web. And we didn't just watch, we also worked. Its also time to take part on conversations that matter and to engage in actions that make a difference.
The World Economic Forum, which will take place January 24-28th, will use new web applications which will extend the discussions at the Annual Meeting 2007 to a much wider audience. The debates and discussions at Davos will be open to the general public via traditional broadcast channels, but also via webcasts, podcasts and for the first time, vodcasts.
The Forum will webcast over 50 of the 220 sessions. 31 of the sessions will be webcast live and a further 20 will be available for download once the session is over. All webcasts will be available also as pod- and vodcasts for download from Google video. All webcasts and vodcasts can be accessed here.
If you can physically join the event don’t miss the chance. If you were not invited, do join the conversations, it will definitely be worth your while.
…Still’s never been a time when both private citizens and public officials had the potential to shape a world of peace and prosperity. Could we screw it up if we let AIDS eat us alive? Yes. Could we go back to an ice age if we don’t do something about global warming? Absolutely.
…we’re building something we never had to build before so, don’t be discouraged and don’t use your political disappointments as an excuse to avoid personal commitment. Bill Clinton
Need to capture the essence of the annual meeting?
Plan your schedule in accordance to the Programme.
Join the Davos Conversation.
January 08, 2007
Max Oliva, Associate Director, Social Impact Management
The Union of Concerned Scientists has just released a report which offers the latest in the ExxonMobil disinformation tactics in regards to global warming, comparing it to that which the tobacco industry took decades ago. According to the report, ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.
"ExxonMobil has manufactured uncertainty about the human causes of global warming just as tobacco companies denied their product caused lung cancer," said Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists' Director of Strategy & Policy. "A modest but effective investment has allowed the oil giant to fuel doubt about global warming to delay government action just as Big Tobacco did for over 40 years."
Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco's Tactics to "Manufacture Uncertainty" on Climate Change details how the oil company, like the tobacco industry in previous decades, has:
• raised doubts about even the most indisputable scientific evidence
• funded an array of front organizations to create the appearance of a broad platform for a tight-knit group of vocal climate change contrarians who misrepresent peer-reviewed scientific findings
• attempted to portray its opposition to action as a positive quest for "sound science" rather than business self-interest
• used its access to the Bush administration to block federal policies and shape government communications on global warming
A company’s reputation takes decades to build and can easily be destroyed. Is this the case of ExxonMobil? How strong repercussions will these misinformation tactics have in the company, in regards to their employees, consumers, shareholders, congress and society in general?
Read the ExxonMobil Report.
Take action by the USC.