Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility

Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This dissertation discusses and undertakes an analysis of some data gathered on Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility within organizations in the Fast Moving Consumer Goods Industry. The environmental social responsibility activities to be looked at within the selected companies are their water usage level, emissions, waste produced and total energy used with regard to being aware of environmental concerns. In this chapter, the aim and objectives of the study are outlined and a brief introduction is furnished. 1.1 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW OF STUDY In recent times, there has been much debate about whether corporations should be socially responsible or not and also the extent to which they should be responsible. With the global recession at the moment, the future years will show if CSR has been taking on by corporations or if it is, as critics say, merely a marketing stunt designed to make their business attractive (The Independent, 2009). The phrase social responsibility is often hard to pin down because of the fact that there are several schools of thought concerning this notion. Milton Friedman questions if companies are required to take responsibility for social issues (Kok et al., 2001, p. 286). He stressed that the sole social responsibility of any organization is to boost its profits through legal ways and that donating an organizations funds to the society is harmful to the organization as this might reduce the organizations profit or cause an increase in product price or, in exceptional cases, have both effects (Pinkston and Carroll, 1996). Some researchers on the other hand are of the opinion that because of the ever changing competitive environment in which businesses are carried out, it is essential that organizations incorporate some sort of Corporate Social Responsibility standard that will help foster its sustainability in the environment. Boynton (2002) asserts that social responsibility is â€Å"a val ue that specifies that every situation from family to firm- is responsible for its members conduct and can be held accountable for its actions†. This research work supports the notion that organizations should continually engage in corporate social responsibility activities; therefore, as a conscious strategy, corporations must endeavour to incorporate environmental CSR in their diverse functions and operations. Fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) also known as Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG) industries focus on the production of consumable goods which people require from day to day. Fast Moving Consumer Goods can be said to be â€Å"low price items that are used with a single or limited number of consumptions† (Baron et al., 1991). Examples of FMCG or CPG products are food and beverages, footwear, clothing products, tobacco and other general products. The FMCG or CPG industry is an umbrella for wholesale and retail consumer goods producing companies. A number of companies function within this industry: examples are Nestle, Procter and Gamble, Pfizer, Reckitt Benkiser, British American Tobacco, Cadbury and Smithkline just to mention a few. According to Jarvis (2003), business organizations endeavour to maximise profits as much as they can. Fast-moving consumer goods companies cannot therefore be left out in the quest for profit maximisation as the goods they produce are sold to consumers in order to make some sort of gain. FMCG companies provide humans with day to day products they require and as such one of their responsibilities is to ensure that the manufactured products meet the required quality standard. In manufacturing their products, some FMCG companies make use of some natural resources such as water, wood, soil etc., and sophisticated machineries which in some way affect the environment. Making use of the earths natural resources without any provision for replacing the resources leads to depletion, while emissions from machineries pollute the environment. Corporations implement CSR activities because they hope they will give them a competitive advantage over their rivals. Branco and Rodigues (2006) assert that CSR offers internal and external gains. The benefits are referred to as internal if engaging in social responsibility activities helps a corporation build, develop and manage its wealth and abilities, for instance: corporate culture and expertise. External benefits, on the other, are those linked to a corporations status, staff awareness and culture; these are essential indescribable assets which, though hard to easily replace or duplicate, can be developed or trashed depending on whether a corporation is socially responsible or otherwise. Moreover, because companies take from the environment directly or indirectly, it is their responsibility to ensure that the environment and society at large, and not only the stakeholders, benefit from some kind of social responsibility activities set up by the companies (Stoner and Wankel, 19 88). Speaking of the FMCG industry in United Kingdom, Bourlakis and Weightman (2004) assert that the industry, which includes the food and grocery sector, contributes immensely to the countrys economy as it provides employment to over 3.2 million people. This figure accounts for close to 17% of the countrys total workforce. The same authors also mention that the FMCG industry accounts for over  £130 billion of consumer spending yielding, representing over 9% of the GDP. 1.2 THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR The British Prime Minister, Mr. Gordon Brown, declares that â€Å"†¦for this government manufacturing not only has been, but remains and will always be, critical to the success of the British economy†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (BIS, 2008). The United Kingdom is the 6th largest manufacturing country in the world (See appendix 1 for details). It provides the economy with about  £150billion per annum. The countrys productivity has increased by about 50% since 1997. The United Kingdom attracts â€Å"more foreign direct investment than any country apart from the USA† (BIS, 2009). In UK, manufacturing accounts for 13% of the GDP; also, between 1997 and 2004, the average labour productivity grew by 4% over the United States, 5% above France and also 15% over Germany. The figure below shows a graph of the growth in productivity. Sheldons study on ‘social responsibility of management indicates that industries exist with the aim of servicing the society (Sheldon, 1923). The developments which various industries have made lately show that there is a link between the society and the industry. It can therefore be said that the purpose of creating industries is so that the society can benefit from it as well as sustain it. Sen (1999) observes that â€Å"as people who live in a broad sense together, we cannot escape the thought that the terrible occurrences that we see around us are quintessentially our problems. They are our responsibility whether or not they are also anyone elses† (Sen, 1999). The manufacturing sector is very huge and includes a range of industries such as: Aerospace, Biotechnology, Chemical, Food and beverages, Pharmaceuticals etc. The FMCG industry is one of the sub industries within the manufacturing sector. They sometimes face a lot of problems and as such struggle with critic isms from stakeholders on social responsibility matters even though they have functional CSR agendas. From the size of the British manufacturing industry, it is fair to say that it uses a huge amount of energy compared to the rest of the European Union. 1.3 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM From looking at FMCG Companys website and their social responsibility/sustainability reporting materials, it will be seen that they engage in corporate social responsibility at different levels. Looking closely at FMCG companies within the United Kingdom, it will be seen that almost all of them if not all, consider corporate social responsibility and its effect on their business operations particularly as it pertains to their corporate image, competitive advantage and even their finances. Davis (1973) in his work asserts that engaging in corporate social responsibility can improve an organizations finances and image. 1.4 AIM OF PROJECT The aim of the project is to contribute to the body of empirical data in the area of Corporate Social Responsibility by gathering information that will help in the analysis of environmental corporate social responsibility within organizations in the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods industry. The findings of this research should provide managers and the academic world some more information in the area of Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility. 1.5 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES The main objective of this study on the analysis of data gathered on environmental corporate social responsibility in some organizations in the Fast Moving Consumer Goods Industry is to critically look at the steps the corporations take in being environmentally responsible and also how they measure the progress. Also, this dissertation will be attempt to: To analyse the data from selected FMCG companies relating to their environmental CSR practices to identify the indicator/metrics used by the companies to benchmark their performance on environmental CSR in their organizations; to determine factors that encourage environmental responsibility practices. To draw some conclusions and make some recommendations about the state of environmental CSR in the selected organizations. 1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY The FMCG industry is very large and as such it may not be feasible for the researcher to report on all the companies in the industry bearing in mind the limitation of time and adequate resources. Therefore the scope of this study will be limited to environmental corporate social responsibility in selected FMCG companies. The study will take a look at the environmental corporate social activities they have embarked on with respect to water usage reduction, CO2 emission reduction, reduction of waste produced, and total energy usage of each of the companies. Owing to lack of time and resources, the researcher will not be able to conduct a survey of environment corporate social responsibility in all UK-based fast moving consumer goods companies. It is worth noting though that a lot of them carry out environmental corporate social responsibility activities and also report on them using indices to which some of them are benchmarked. 1.7 STRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION This study is structured into five chapters. Chapter one provides an introduction/background to the research study, together with a brief introduction of the sector and industry. Chapter two contains the literature review; it comprehensively and critically reviews previous work done in this research area. Chapter three highlights the research design and data collection process employed by the researcher. Chapter four contains an analysis of the data gathered together. Some findings and discussions of the research area are also furnished. The final chapter, chapter five, contains some recommendations and conclusions based on the findings in the course of carrying out this dissertation. CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY Corporate Social Responsibility has progressed from an irrelevant and often discriminated concept to one that is today well-known and established in businesses round the globe (Lee, 2008). Corporate Social Responsibility can be thought of as an umbrella phrase that takes into consideration the various ways and means a corporation embarks on in trying to act ethically and morally. In the last couple of decades, CSR has become widely well-known (Campbell, 2007). According to some researchers, the first book on CSR was written in 1953 by Howard Bowen, with the title: Responsibilities of the Businessman (Carroll, 1979; Kantanen, 2005). Defining Corporate Social Responsibility can prove to be a complex task as it has varied meanings to different people. This is due to the fact that there is no agreed definition and as such organizations that are meticulous in their goals of incorporating CSR activities into their businesses are faced with compound problems. Because of how complex CSR is, it is hard to provide a definition. Stakeholders therefore make use of different definitions that are in line with their business operations, goals and aims. The definitions are often also related to the sizes of the corporations and how they regard their officers who are responsible for CSR activities within their organisations. Thus there is no agreed definition of CSR, because different corporations translate it to suit them depending on their state of affairs (MacLagan, 1999: Campbell, 2007: Garriga Mele, 2004). Bowen (1953) defines corporate social responsibility as â€Å"†¦ the obligations of businessmen to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society†. Manakkalathil and Rudolf (1995) explain CSR as â€Å"the duty of organizations to conduct their business in a manner that respects the rights of individuals and promotes human welfare†. It is quite a weak explanation which makes it somewhat tough to actualize. Aguilera et al. (2007) emphasize that corporations should not border their CSR activities on stipulated legislation regarding such issues but should also make provision for activities not stipulated in any legislation they adhere to. Aguilera et al. (2007) assert that â€Å"corporate social responsibility is a companys considerations of and response to issues beyond the narrow economic, technical and legal requirements of the company to accomplish social and environmental benefits along with traditional economic gains†. Carroll (1991) states that CSR consists of f our aspects: legal, economic, ethical and philanthropic (discretionary) responsibility (See Appendix 1). Carroll (1991) argued that for a corporation striving to be seen as good within the society, all four aspects should be fulfilled. Carroll (1991) cites renowned economists Milton Friedmans assertion in trying to explain the relationship of the four aspects. On Friedmans part, he was only interested in the first three parts of CSR stating that corporations exist â€Å"to make as much money as possible while conforming to the basic rules of society, both those embodied in the law and those embodied in ethical custom† (Carroll, 1991) and he totally objected to the philanthropic aspect saying â€Å"the business of business is business†. In saying this, he meant that the usual economic standpoint only acknowledges legal, ethical and economic responsibility as a crucial principle while taking part in altruistic activities do not yield incentives for corporations. Levitt ( 1958) has a different approach to the CSR issue called the functional theory which considers CSR as ethically neutral. Corporations are considered to have particular tasks or organizational codes that communicate their position in the society. Corporations are expected to fulfil their social responsibilities by conforming to existing legal frameworks, as the onus of determining social good is the responsibility of the state and not that of the corporations. The reliability and character of an organization is in its sensitivity to varying conditions and demand. Organizations that react positively to financial and other varying issues will thrive, while those that do not respond adequately will die. Consequently, if the immediate situation requires that corporations be â€Å"socially responsible† then the corporations must endeavour to be so. Davis (1960) implies that social responsibility pertains to corporations â€Å"decisions and actions taken for reasons at least partiall y beyond the firms direct economic or technical interest†. Eells and Walton (1961) debate the meaning of CSR and say that it pertains to the â€Å"problems that arise when corporate enterprise casts its shadow on the social scene, and the ethical principles that ought to govern the relationship between the corporation and society†. Deakin and Hobbs (2007) assert that corporations that go ahead and carry out CSR activities which are over the minimum legal requirements stand to benefit immensely. Margolis and Walsh (2003) in the research they conducted found that most corporations, however, only focus on particular aspects of CSR: mainly the economic aspect and try to shy away from the social and environmental aspects. 2.1.1 STAKEHOLDER THEORY OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY The most spoken about theory of corporate social responsibility is the stakeholder theory. Freeman (1984) explains the basic concepts and attributes of stakeholder management in his booked entitled Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. He defines stakeholders to be ‘‘groups and individuals who can affect, or are affected by, the achievement of an organizations mission† (Freeman, 1984) or otherwise regarded as ‘‘those groups who have a stake in or a claim on the firm (Evan and Freeman, 1988). Freeman (2004) regards stakeholders as â€Å"those groups who are vital to the survival and success of the corporation†. Freeman explains that not only the owners of a corporation have genuine concerns about it but also persons and or groups of persons that might be affected or can possibly have an effect on the corporations doings and as such these groups of people have the right to be considered in any decision making process within the corporation. Kaler (2006) on the other hand refers to the stakeholder theory that supports the notion that corporations should be socially responsible. This theory states that â€Å"the shareholders value is boosted through employee commitment, customer loyalty, contractor cooperation and immense support from the community amongst other things. Some researchers are also of the opinion that the performance of organizations can be attributed to their strategies in trade and non-trade environments† (Baron, 2000). Freeman and Evan (1990) assert that corporations that embark on social responsibility activities often times do it because they trust that their managers are capable of boosting the corporations effectiveness in taking action regarding demands from external sources by handling and meeting the requests of the diverse shareholders. Stakeholder theory can be said to be a managerial activity because it expresses and directs how managers function (Freeman et al. 2006). In analyzing stakeholder theory, Donaldson and Preston (1995) proposed ethical guidelines for considering and selecting stakeholders. They made reference to this as being â€Å"instrumental† in the sense that when corporations manage their stakeholder activities accordingly, their performance will improve tremendously in relation to their stability, growth and profitability. According to Freeman (1994), the aim of stakeholder theory is conveyed in two key questions and the first is determining what the function of the firm is. This influences managers to convey the feeling of importance built within the corporation and also display activities that pull together all the major stakeholders. This propels the corporation forward and makes it possible for it to produce outstanding performance, instituted with respect to its function and economic p erformance in the open market. The second question asked by the stakeholder theory deals with the sort of responsibility owed to the stakeholders by the managers. This motivates the managers to convey the means they take in conducting their businesses and particularly the kind of relationship they yearn for and have to build with their stakeholders in order to realize their purpose (Friedman and Miles, 2006). The stakeholder theory concept can be further broken down into: normative stakeholder theory, which hinges on theories of how managers and sometimes stakeholders are supposed to behave, and also how they are supposed to view the beliefs of the corporation as they pertain to its ethical ethos (Friedman and Miles, 2006), and the descriptive stakeholder theory which is about how managers and stakeholders actually act and the perception of their responsibilities and actions. The stakeholder theory that, in fact, relates very well with corporate social responsibility is the instrumental stakeholder theory. This theory is at times associated with a corporations strategic style: where the major concern for the corporation is how its managers perform if they are allowed to put their own interests and/or the interests of the corporation forward as it relates to profit maximization or the maximization of stockholder value (Friedman and Miles, 2006). Orlitzky et al (2003) mention that several authors are of the opinion that corporate social performance might help a corporation towards acquiring new abilities, raw materials and possibilities which are apparent in a corporations culture, expertise, business and workforce. Corporate social performance is closely related to corporate social responsibility and it is sometimes assumed that it will help advance managerial abilities that boost employee contribution, organization and harmonization together with a ground-breaking management approach (Shrivastava, 1995). The reputation perspective theory on the other hand, states that â€Å"superficially, corporate social performance might encourage the development of a positive figure with a corporations customers, its investors, banks and contractors which it can in the long run benefit from through having access to capital and also possibly draw high-quality employees towards it and also enhance the good will of its current employees towards the organization which over time the corporation might benefit from in financial terms† (Orlitzky et al, 2003). In recent times, it will be seen that so many corporations and/or establishments have planned and sustained their businesses in ways that correspond to the concept of the stakeholder theory (Collins and Porras, 1994). For example, corporations like Procter and Gamble, Reckitt Benckiser, British American Tobacco, to mention a few, present an excellent example of the value managers place on the fundamentals of stakeholder theory. It is worth noting that these corporations place high importance on their stakeholders and organizational wealth but at the same time do not stress on profitability as the push factor of their business. This is because they are fully aware of the worth and relationship with stakeholders as an important factor if they are to succeed. Friedman (1970) on the other hand is of a contrary opinion. He is of the opinion that when executives take decisions it should only be for the purpose of wealth creation for its stakeholders. It is evident that Friedman does not support the concept of CSR. He holds that the principal duty of directors is towards their staff. In his opinion, a corporate executive may take decisions that directly concern himself but should never take decisions concerning, for example, price mark down of products or pollution due to carbon emission, beyond the obligations imposed on the corporation by law. Friedman states further that by doing these, the corporate executive will be spending the corporations wealth and forcing its stockholders to pay tax while at the same time taking decision on the expenditure of the corporations tax returns. Friedman (1970) asserts that governments demand taxes from corporate entities, ensuring that there are adequate governmental, legal and constitutional measures in place to force compliance. Friedman stresses that executives are selected by stockholders as representatives to protect their interest and this motivation dies gradually if the corporate executive wastes the stockholders wealth on social activities. Friedmans belief is that government instructs corporations to pay a certain amount as tax and if paid, government use the tax appropriately, thereby making it unnecessary for corporations themselves to engage in any CSR projects. In this regard, one assumes that such taxes will be adequate to ensure the effective handling by the government of CSR activities that benefit the environment and the larger society. In Friedmans perception, the corporations that pay their taxes as and when due are responsible. Jensen and Meckling (1976) assert that corporate social responsibility may have an adverse effect on corporations especially if the cost of implementing CSR projects becomes exceptionally high. There are certain contrary views that claim that many ostensibly socially responsible corporations actually benefit far more from their CSR activities than the target societies that were expected to be the main beneficiaries. For example, relying on a report by Corporate Watch (2006), more than â€Å"80% of corporate CSR decision-makers were confident in the ability of good CSR practice to deliver branding and employee benefits. To take the example of corporate philanthropy, when corporations make donations to charity, they are giving away their shareholders money, which they can only do if they see potential profit in it. This may be because they want to improve their image by associating themselves with a cause, to exploit a cheap vehicle for advertising, or to counter the claims of pressure groups, but there is always an underlying financial motive, so the company benefits more than the charity†. Paine (2002) affirms that the choice to neglect corporate social responsibility will in some way indicate the corporations disrespect for its stakeholders who include its workers, suppliers, clientele and the society at large. Quoting CIPD (2009), â€Å"When CSR is done well; it means a precious, though precarious, trust in your business. Successful CSR can bring benefits such as a distinct position in your marketplace, protecting your employer brand, and building credibility and trust with current and potential customers and employees. It can help significantly with recruitment, engagement and retention of employees†. Some academics believe that some corporations embark on corporate social responsibility projects for strategic reasons. Xueming and Bhattacharya (2008) affirm that in recent times, corporate social responsibility matches the strategic plan of many corporations. They mention that although some corporations carry out a range of socially responsible activities such as philanthropic acts, corporate responsibility and sustainability reporting, marketing and stakeholder events to mention a few, they do so not because they feel it is the â€Å"right thing to do† but regard it is a â€Å"smart thing to do†. 2.1.1 GOVERNMENT AS STAKEHOLDERS Porter and Van der Linde (1995) believe that countries impose firm directives on home organizations, and the relationship government has with organizations corporate social responsibility issues positively affects them. It encourages them to create policies pertaining to the environment, cost reduction, sustainability of their products, and also increase the organizations competitive advantage in the international marketplace. This means that the government can control organizations and ensure they adhere to its directives and policies. Even though government has great control on the way organizations operate their businesses through the use of regulatory guidelines and policies, the activities of organizations have also had a growing influence on the government. Thorne et al (2008) assert that â€Å"managing this relationship with government officials while navigating the dynamic world of politics is a major challenge for firms, both large and small†. They explain that because of the varied nature of the environment, there are several competitors and suppliers in the decision making process, and as such raising the economic risks. Being stakeholders, organizations and government are considered mutual stakeholders and as such both sides can cooperate and play a part in the decision making process. In a Questions-and-Answers session with the Chairman and CEO, Charles Holliday, of DuPont a science-based solution company, Holliday was asked on how businesses and the government can effectively collaborate on stan dards-setting and value-creation for their stakeholders. He replied as follows: â€Å"The complexities and opportunities of modern business and industry are too great to assume that regulation alone can get us where we have to go. Regulation, as we have seen historically, is not a precision tool for change. But it can overcome inertia and get things going. The landmark environmental legislation of the 1970s and 1980s set in motion the kind of change that in the U.S. has led to cleaner air and water. No one doubts that†. He further said that in regulating sustainability, â€Å"We can expect that government will identify some pressure points where regulatory instruments can advance the cause. But real progress in sustainability will come from what we build into products and services, in the way we design and operate our plants and distribution networks, in the way we think about the ultimate disposition of the things we make, even and especially in the way we direct our rese arch and development. Its hard to imagine regulatory protocols that can encompass all of that. Industry has to be imaginative and proactive and show that we can accomplish the things our stakeholders expect of us, especially those things that go beyond the letter of the law† (as cited in Freeman et al, 2006). He also mentioned that at DuPont, they have reduced their greenhouse gas emissions by 72% since 1990 and this is because it was expected of them by their stakeholders to be proactive, and that gave them the push. This further shows how corporations work on their own in accordance with government directives designed towards improving the society. Marcus (2002) and Delmas and Terlaak (2002) are quick to assert that some corporations might be discouraged if government implements regulations they consider stringent and as such corporations should be allowed to make their own decisions as they consider appropriate. 2.2 THE CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY SCHOOLS OF THOUGHTS The issue of whether corporations should be socially responsible or not, the extent to which they should be responsible, to whom they should be responsible and the context in which they should be responsible, has been a major debate amongst researchers. There are two schools of thought which have differing opinions on CSR matters. They are the restrictive and expansionist opinions. The restrictive school of thought upholds the profit maximisation stand while the other school believes that corporations should be socially responsible. 2.2.1 THE EXPANSIONIST SCHOOL OF THOUGHT The expansionists believe that environmental problems are caused by businesses and for that reason they should be liable for their externalities. Stoner and Wankel (1988) maintain that corporations should take into consideration the impact of their environmental activities on the society and for that reason they should act responsibly not only for the benefit of their stakeholders but to the general populous. Davis and Blomstrom (1975) give an account of their opinion of how a model corporation should look. They assert that it should provide an opportunity for investment, a good working condition, be ethically considerate, be a good corporation to do business with, pay their tax contributions and support governments endeavours, be good to the community they work in, contribute to social endeavours and public concerns. Crowther and Rayman- Bacchus (2004) assert that â€Å"the activities of an organization impacts upon the external environment and have suggested that such an organizat ion should therefore be accountable to a wider audience than simply its shareholders†. They also mention that the â€Å"recognition of the rights of all stakeholders and the duty of a business to be accountable in this wider context therefore has been largely a relatively recent phenomenon†. In summary, corporate social responsibility should include responsibility to the owners of the business, Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This dissertation discusses and undertakes an analysis of some data gathered on Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility within organizations in the Fast Moving Consumer Goods Industry. The environmental social responsibility activities to be looked at within the selected companies are their water usage level, emissions, waste produced and total energy used with regard to being aware of environmental concerns. In this chapter, the aim and objectives of the study are outlined and a brief introduction is furnished. 1.1 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW OF STUDY In recent times, there has been much debate about whether corporations should be socially responsible or not and also the extent to which they should be responsible. With the global recession at the moment, the future years will show if CSR has been taking on by corporations or if it is, as critics say, merely a marketing stunt designed to make their business attractive (The Independent, 2009). The phrase social responsibility is often hard to pin down because of the fact that there are several schools of thought concerning this notion. Milton Friedman questions if companies are required to take responsibility for social issues (Kok et al., 2001, p. 286). He stressed that the sole social responsibility of any organization is to boost its profits through legal ways and that donating an organizations funds to the society is harmful to the organization as this might reduce the organizations profit or cause an increase in product price or, in exceptional cases, have both effects (Pinkston and Carroll, 1996). Some researchers on the other hand are of the opinion that because of the ever changing competitive environment in which businesses are carried out, it is essential that organizations incorporate some sort of Corporate Social Responsibility standard that will help foster its sustainability in the environment. Boynton (2002) asserts that social responsibility is â€Å"a val ue that specifies that every situation from family to firm- is responsible for its members conduct and can be held accountable for its actions†. This research work supports the notion that organizations should continually engage in corporate social responsibility activities; therefore, as a conscious strategy, corporations must endeavour to incorporate environmental CSR in their diverse functions and operations. Fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) also known as Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG) industries focus on the production of consumable goods which people require from day to day. Fast Moving Consumer Goods can be said to be â€Å"low price items that are used with a single or limited number of consumptions† (Baron et al., 1991). Examples of FMCG or CPG products are food and beverages, footwear, clothing products, tobacco and other general products. The FMCG or CPG industry is an umbrella for wholesale and retail consumer goods producing companies. A number of companies function within this industry: examples are Nestle, Procter and Gamble, Pfizer, Reckitt Benkiser, British American Tobacco, Cadbury and Smithkline just to mention a few. According to Jarvis (2003), business organizations endeavour to maximise profits as much as they can. Fast-moving consumer goods companies cannot therefore be left out in the quest for profit maximisation as the goods they produce are sold to consumers in order to make some sort of gain. FMCG companies provide humans with day to day products they require and as such one of their responsibilities is to ensure that the manufactured products meet the required quality standard. In manufacturing their products, some FMCG companies make use of some natural resources such as water, wood, soil etc., and sophisticated machineries which in some way affect the environment. Making use of the earths natural resources without any provision for replacing the resources leads to depletion, while emissions from machineries pollute the environment. Corporations implement CSR activities because they hope they will give them a competitive advantage over their rivals. Branco and Rodigues (2006) assert that CSR offers internal and external gains. The benefits are referred to as internal if engaging in social responsibility activities helps a corporation build, develop and manage its wealth and abilities, for instance: corporate culture and expertise. External benefits, on the other, are those linked to a corporations status, staff awareness and culture; these are essential indescribable assets which, though hard to easily replace or duplicate, can be developed or trashed depending on whether a corporation is socially responsible or otherwise. Moreover, because companies take from the environment directly or indirectly, it is their responsibility to ensure that the environment and society at large, and not only the stakeholders, benefit from some kind of social responsibility activities set up by the companies (Stoner and Wankel, 19 88). Speaking of the FMCG industry in United Kingdom, Bourlakis and Weightman (2004) assert that the industry, which includes the food and grocery sector, contributes immensely to the countrys economy as it provides employment to over 3.2 million people. This figure accounts for close to 17% of the countrys total workforce. The same authors also mention that the FMCG industry accounts for over  £130 billion of consumer spending yielding, representing over 9% of the GDP. 1.2 THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR The British Prime Minister, Mr. Gordon Brown, declares that â€Å"†¦for this government manufacturing not only has been, but remains and will always be, critical to the success of the British economy†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (BIS, 2008). The United Kingdom is the 6th largest manufacturing country in the world (See appendix 1 for details). It provides the economy with about  £150billion per annum. The countrys productivity has increased by about 50% since 1997. The United Kingdom attracts â€Å"more foreign direct investment than any country apart from the USA† (BIS, 2009). In UK, manufacturing accounts for 13% of the GDP; also, between 1997 and 2004, the average labour productivity grew by 4% over the United States, 5% above France and also 15% over Germany. The figure below shows a graph of the growth in productivity. Sheldons study on ‘social responsibility of management indicates that industries exist with the aim of servicing the society (Sheldon, 1923). The developments which various industries have made lately show that there is a link between the society and the industry. It can therefore be said that the purpose of creating industries is so that the society can benefit from it as well as sustain it. Sen (1999) observes that â€Å"as people who live in a broad sense together, we cannot escape the thought that the terrible occurrences that we see around us are quintessentially our problems. They are our responsibility whether or not they are also anyone elses† (Sen, 1999). The manufacturing sector is very huge and includes a range of industries such as: Aerospace, Biotechnology, Chemical, Food and beverages, Pharmaceuticals etc. The FMCG industry is one of the sub industries within the manufacturing sector. They sometimes face a lot of problems and as such struggle with critic isms from stakeholders on social responsibility matters even though they have functional CSR agendas. From the size of the British manufacturing industry, it is fair to say that it uses a huge amount of energy compared to the rest of the European Union. 1.3 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM From looking at FMCG Companys website and their social responsibility/sustainability reporting materials, it will be seen that they engage in corporate social responsibility at different levels. Looking closely at FMCG companies within the United Kingdom, it will be seen that almost all of them if not all, consider corporate social responsibility and its effect on their business operations particularly as it pertains to their corporate image, competitive advantage and even their finances. Davis (1973) in his work asserts that engaging in corporate social responsibility can improve an organizations finances and image. 1.4 AIM OF PROJECT The aim of the project is to contribute to the body of empirical data in the area of Corporate Social Responsibility by gathering information that will help in the analysis of environmental corporate social responsibility within organizations in the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods industry. The findings of this research should provide managers and the academic world some more information in the area of Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility. 1.5 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES The main objective of this study on the analysis of data gathered on environmental corporate social responsibility in some organizations in the Fast Moving Consumer Goods Industry is to critically look at the steps the corporations take in being environmentally responsible and also how they measure the progress. Also, this dissertation will be attempt to: To analyse the data from selected FMCG companies relating to their environmental CSR practices to identify the indicator/metrics used by the companies to benchmark their performance on environmental CSR in their organizations; to determine factors that encourage environmental responsibility practices. To draw some conclusions and make some recommendations about the state of environmental CSR in the selected organizations. 1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY The FMCG industry is very large and as such it may not be feasible for the researcher to report on all the companies in the industry bearing in mind the limitation of time and adequate resources. Therefore the scope of this study will be limited to environmental corporate social responsibility in selected FMCG companies. The study will take a look at the environmental corporate social activities they have embarked on with respect to water usage reduction, CO2 emission reduction, reduction of waste produced, and total energy usage of each of the companies. Owing to lack of time and resources, the researcher will not be able to conduct a survey of environment corporate social responsibility in all UK-based fast moving consumer goods companies. It is worth noting though that a lot of them carry out environmental corporate social responsibility activities and also report on them using indices to which some of them are benchmarked. 1.7 STRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION This study is structured into five chapters. Chapter one provides an introduction/background to the research study, together with a brief introduction of the sector and industry. Chapter two contains the literature review; it comprehensively and critically reviews previous work done in this research area. Chapter three highlights the research design and data collection process employed by the researcher. Chapter four contains an analysis of the data gathered together. Some findings and discussions of the research area are also furnished. The final chapter, chapter five, contains some recommendations and conclusions based on the findings in the course of carrying out this dissertation. CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY Corporate Social Responsibility has progressed from an irrelevant and often discriminated concept to one that is today well-known and established in businesses round the globe (Lee, 2008). Corporate Social Responsibility can be thought of as an umbrella phrase that takes into consideration the various ways and means a corporation embarks on in trying to act ethically and morally. In the last couple of decades, CSR has become widely well-known (Campbell, 2007). According to some researchers, the first book on CSR was written in 1953 by Howard Bowen, with the title: Responsibilities of the Businessman (Carroll, 1979; Kantanen, 2005). Defining Corporate Social Responsibility can prove to be a complex task as it has varied meanings to different people. This is due to the fact that there is no agreed definition and as such organizations that are meticulous in their goals of incorporating CSR activities into their businesses are faced with compound problems. Because of how complex CSR is, it is hard to provide a definition. Stakeholders therefore make use of different definitions that are in line with their business operations, goals and aims. The definitions are often also related to the sizes of the corporations and how they regard their officers who are responsible for CSR activities within their organisations. Thus there is no agreed definition of CSR, because different corporations translate it to suit them depending on their state of affairs (MacLagan, 1999: Campbell, 2007: Garriga Mele, 2004). Bowen (1953) defines corporate social responsibility as â€Å"†¦ the obligations of businessmen to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society†. Manakkalathil and Rudolf (1995) explain CSR as â€Å"the duty of organizations to conduct their business in a manner that respects the rights of individuals and promotes human welfare†. It is quite a weak explanation which makes it somewhat tough to actualize. Aguilera et al. (2007) emphasize that corporations should not border their CSR activities on stipulated legislation regarding such issues but should also make provision for activities not stipulated in any legislation they adhere to. Aguilera et al. (2007) assert that â€Å"corporate social responsibility is a companys considerations of and response to issues beyond the narrow economic, technical and legal requirements of the company to accomplish social and environmental benefits along with traditional economic gains†. Carroll (1991) states that CSR consists of f our aspects: legal, economic, ethical and philanthropic (discretionary) responsibility (See Appendix 1). Carroll (1991) argued that for a corporation striving to be seen as good within the society, all four aspects should be fulfilled. Carroll (1991) cites renowned economists Milton Friedmans assertion in trying to explain the relationship of the four aspects. On Friedmans part, he was only interested in the first three parts of CSR stating that corporations exist â€Å"to make as much money as possible while conforming to the basic rules of society, both those embodied in the law and those embodied in ethical custom† (Carroll, 1991) and he totally objected to the philanthropic aspect saying â€Å"the business of business is business†. In saying this, he meant that the usual economic standpoint only acknowledges legal, ethical and economic responsibility as a crucial principle while taking part in altruistic activities do not yield incentives for corporations. Levitt ( 1958) has a different approach to the CSR issue called the functional theory which considers CSR as ethically neutral. Corporations are considered to have particular tasks or organizational codes that communicate their position in the society. Corporations are expected to fulfil their social responsibilities by conforming to existing legal frameworks, as the onus of determining social good is the responsibility of the state and not that of the corporations. The reliability and character of an organization is in its sensitivity to varying conditions and demand. Organizations that react positively to financial and other varying issues will thrive, while those that do not respond adequately will die. Consequently, if the immediate situation requires that corporations be â€Å"socially responsible† then the corporations must endeavour to be so. Davis (1960) implies that social responsibility pertains to corporations â€Å"decisions and actions taken for reasons at least partiall y beyond the firms direct economic or technical interest†. Eells and Walton (1961) debate the meaning of CSR and say that it pertains to the â€Å"problems that arise when corporate enterprise casts its shadow on the social scene, and the ethical principles that ought to govern the relationship between the corporation and society†. Deakin and Hobbs (2007) assert that corporations that go ahead and carry out CSR activities which are over the minimum legal requirements stand to benefit immensely. Margolis and Walsh (2003) in the research they conducted found that most corporations, however, only focus on particular aspects of CSR: mainly the economic aspect and try to shy away from the social and environmental aspects. 2.1.1 STAKEHOLDER THEORY OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY The most spoken about theory of corporate social responsibility is the stakeholder theory. Freeman (1984) explains the basic concepts and attributes of stakeholder management in his booked entitled Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. He defines stakeholders to be ‘‘groups and individuals who can affect, or are affected by, the achievement of an organizations mission† (Freeman, 1984) or otherwise regarded as ‘‘those groups who have a stake in or a claim on the firm (Evan and Freeman, 1988). Freeman (2004) regards stakeholders as â€Å"those groups who are vital to the survival and success of the corporation†. Freeman explains that not only the owners of a corporation have genuine concerns about it but also persons and or groups of persons that might be affected or can possibly have an effect on the corporations doings and as such these groups of people have the right to be considered in any decision making process within the corporation. Kaler (2006) on the other hand refers to the stakeholder theory that supports the notion that corporations should be socially responsible. This theory states that â€Å"the shareholders value is boosted through employee commitment, customer loyalty, contractor cooperation and immense support from the community amongst other things. Some researchers are also of the opinion that the performance of organizations can be attributed to their strategies in trade and non-trade environments† (Baron, 2000). Freeman and Evan (1990) assert that corporations that embark on social responsibility activities often times do it because they trust that their managers are capable of boosting the corporations effectiveness in taking action regarding demands from external sources by handling and meeting the requests of the diverse shareholders. Stakeholder theory can be said to be a managerial activity because it expresses and directs how managers function (Freeman et al. 2006). In analyzing stakeholder theory, Donaldson and Preston (1995) proposed ethical guidelines for considering and selecting stakeholders. They made reference to this as being â€Å"instrumental† in the sense that when corporations manage their stakeholder activities accordingly, their performance will improve tremendously in relation to their stability, growth and profitability. According to Freeman (1994), the aim of stakeholder theory is conveyed in two key questions and the first is determining what the function of the firm is. This influences managers to convey the feeling of importance built within the corporation and also display activities that pull together all the major stakeholders. This propels the corporation forward and makes it possible for it to produce outstanding performance, instituted with respect to its function and economic p erformance in the open market. The second question asked by the stakeholder theory deals with the sort of responsibility owed to the stakeholders by the managers. This motivates the managers to convey the means they take in conducting their businesses and particularly the kind of relationship they yearn for and have to build with their stakeholders in order to realize their purpose (Friedman and Miles, 2006). The stakeholder theory concept can be further broken down into: normative stakeholder theory, which hinges on theories of how managers and sometimes stakeholders are supposed to behave, and also how they are supposed to view the beliefs of the corporation as they pertain to its ethical ethos (Friedman and Miles, 2006), and the descriptive stakeholder theory which is about how managers and stakeholders actually act and the perception of their responsibilities and actions. The stakeholder theory that, in fact, relates very well with corporate social responsibility is the instrumental stakeholder theory. This theory is at times associated with a corporations strategic style: where the major concern for the corporation is how its managers perform if they are allowed to put their own interests and/or the interests of the corporation forward as it relates to profit maximization or the maximization of stockholder value (Friedman and Miles, 2006). Orlitzky et al (2003) mention that several authors are of the opinion that corporate social performance might help a corporation towards acquiring new abilities, raw materials and possibilities which are apparent in a corporations culture, expertise, business and workforce. Corporate social performance is closely related to corporate social responsibility and it is sometimes assumed that it will help advance managerial abilities that boost employee contribution, organization and harmonization together with a ground-breaking management approach (Shrivastava, 1995). The reputation perspective theory on the other hand, states that â€Å"superficially, corporate social performance might encourage the development of a positive figure with a corporations customers, its investors, banks and contractors which it can in the long run benefit from through having access to capital and also possibly draw high-quality employees towards it and also enhance the good will of its current employees towards the organization which over time the corporation might benefit from in financial terms† (Orlitzky et al, 2003). In recent times, it will be seen that so many corporations and/or establishments have planned and sustained their businesses in ways that correspond to the concept of the stakeholder theory (Collins and Porras, 1994). For example, corporations like Procter and Gamble, Reckitt Benckiser, British American Tobacco, to mention a few, present an excellent example of the value managers place on the fundamentals of stakeholder theory. It is worth noting that these corporations place high importance on their stakeholders and organizational wealth but at the same time do not stress on profitability as the push factor of their business. This is because they are fully aware of the worth and relationship with stakeholders as an important factor if they are to succeed. Friedman (1970) on the other hand is of a contrary opinion. He is of the opinion that when executives take decisions it should only be for the purpose of wealth creation for its stakeholders. It is evident that Friedman does not support the concept of CSR. He holds that the principal duty of directors is towards their staff. In his opinion, a corporate executive may take decisions that directly concern himself but should never take decisions concerning, for example, price mark down of products or pollution due to carbon emission, beyond the obligations imposed on the corporation by law. Friedman states further that by doing these, the corporate executive will be spending the corporations wealth and forcing its stockholders to pay tax while at the same time taking decision on the expenditure of the corporations tax returns. Friedman (1970) asserts that governments demand taxes from corporate entities, ensuring that there are adequate governmental, legal and constitutional measures in place to force compliance. Friedman stresses that executives are selected by stockholders as representatives to protect their interest and this motivation dies gradually if the corporate executive wastes the stockholders wealth on social activities. Friedmans belief is that government instructs corporations to pay a certain amount as tax and if paid, government use the tax appropriately, thereby making it unnecessary for corporations themselves to engage in any CSR projects. In this regard, one assumes that such taxes will be adequate to ensure the effective handling by the government of CSR activities that benefit the environment and the larger society. In Friedmans perception, the corporations that pay their taxes as and when due are responsible. Jensen and Meckling (1976) assert that corporate social responsibility may have an adverse effect on corporations especially if the cost of implementing CSR projects becomes exceptionally high. There are certain contrary views that claim that many ostensibly socially responsible corporations actually benefit far more from their CSR activities than the target societies that were expected to be the main beneficiaries. For example, relying on a report by Corporate Watch (2006), more than â€Å"80% of corporate CSR decision-makers were confident in the ability of good CSR practice to deliver branding and employee benefits. To take the example of corporate philanthropy, when corporations make donations to charity, they are giving away their shareholders money, which they can only do if they see potential profit in it. This may be because they want to improve their image by associating themselves with a cause, to exploit a cheap vehicle for advertising, or to counter the claims of pressure groups, but there is always an underlying financial motive, so the company benefits more than the charity†. Paine (2002) affirms that the choice to neglect corporate social responsibility will in some way indicate the corporations disrespect for its stakeholders who include its workers, suppliers, clientele and the society at large. Quoting CIPD (2009), â€Å"When CSR is done well; it means a precious, though precarious, trust in your business. Successful CSR can bring benefits such as a distinct position in your marketplace, protecting your employer brand, and building credibility and trust with current and potential customers and employees. It can help significantly with recruitment, engagement and retention of employees†. Some academics believe that some corporations embark on corporate social responsibility projects for strategic reasons. Xueming and Bhattacharya (2008) affirm that in recent times, corporate social responsibility matches the strategic plan of many corporations. They mention that although some corporations carry out a range of socially responsible activities such as philanthropic acts, corporate responsibility and sustainability reporting, marketing and stakeholder events to mention a few, they do so not because they feel it is the â€Å"right thing to do† but regard it is a â€Å"smart thing to do†. 2.1.1 GOVERNMENT AS STAKEHOLDERS Porter and Van der Linde (1995) believe that countries impose firm directives on home organizations, and the relationship government has with organizations corporate social responsibility issues positively affects them. It encourages them to create policies pertaining to the environment, cost reduction, sustainability of their products, and also increase the organizations competitive advantage in the international marketplace. This means that the government can control organizations and ensure they adhere to its directives and policies. Even though government has great control on the way organizations operate their businesses through the use of regulatory guidelines and policies, the activities of organizations have also had a growing influence on the government. Thorne et al (2008) assert that â€Å"managing this relationship with government officials while navigating the dynamic world of politics is a major challenge for firms, both large and small†. They explain that because of the varied nature of the environment, there are several competitors and suppliers in the decision making process, and as such raising the economic risks. Being stakeholders, organizations and government are considered mutual stakeholders and as such both sides can cooperate and play a part in the decision making process. In a Questions-and-Answers session with the Chairman and CEO, Charles Holliday, of DuPont a science-based solution company, Holliday was asked on how businesses and the government can effectively collaborate on stan dards-setting and value-creation for their stakeholders. He replied as follows: â€Å"The complexities and opportunities of modern business and industry are too great to assume that regulation alone can get us where we have to go. Regulation, as we have seen historically, is not a precision tool for change. But it can overcome inertia and get things going. The landmark environmental legislation of the 1970s and 1980s set in motion the kind of change that in the U.S. has led to cleaner air and water. No one doubts that†. He further said that in regulating sustainability, â€Å"We can expect that government will identify some pressure points where regulatory instruments can advance the cause. But real progress in sustainability will come from what we build into products and services, in the way we design and operate our plants and distribution networks, in the way we think about the ultimate disposition of the things we make, even and especially in the way we direct our rese arch and development. Its hard to imagine regulatory protocols that can encompass all of that. Industry has to be imaginative and proactive and show that we can accomplish the things our stakeholders expect of us, especially those things that go beyond the letter of the law† (as cited in Freeman et al, 2006). He also mentioned that at DuPont, they have reduced their greenhouse gas emissions by 72% since 1990 and this is because it was expected of them by their stakeholders to be proactive, and that gave them the push. This further shows how corporations work on their own in accordance with government directives designed towards improving the society. Marcus (2002) and Delmas and Terlaak (2002) are quick to assert that some corporations might be discouraged if government implements regulations they consider stringent and as such corporations should be allowed to make their own decisions as they consider appropriate. 2.2 THE CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY SCHOOLS OF THOUGHTS The issue of whether corporations should be socially responsible or not, the extent to which they should be responsible, to whom they should be responsible and the context in which they should be responsible, has been a major debate amongst researchers. There are two schools of thought which have differing opinions on CSR matters. They are the restrictive and expansionist opinions. The restrictive school of thought upholds the profit maximisation stand while the other school believes that corporations should be socially responsible. 2.2.1 THE EXPANSIONIST SCHOOL OF THOUGHT The expansionists believe that environmental problems are caused by businesses and for that reason they should be liable for their externalities. Stoner and Wankel (1988) maintain that corporations should take into consideration the impact of their environmental activities on the society and for that reason they should act responsibly not only for the benefit of their stakeholders but to the general populous. Davis and Blomstrom (1975) give an account of their opinion of how a model corporation should look. They assert that it should provide an opportunity for investment, a good working condition, be ethically considerate, be a good corporation to do business with, pay their tax contributions and support governments endeavours, be good to the community they work in, contribute to social endeavours and public concerns. Crowther and Rayman- Bacchus (2004) assert that â€Å"the activities of an organization impacts upon the external environment and have suggested that such an organizat ion should therefore be accountable to a wider audience than simply its shareholders†. They also mention that the â€Å"recognition of the rights of all stakeholders and the duty of a business to be accountable in this wider context therefore has been largely a relatively recent phenomenon†. In summary, corporate social responsibility should include responsibility to the owners of the business,

Attitudes Towards Love in Pre-1900 and 1990s Poetry Essay -- William

Attitudes Towards Love in Pre-1900 and 1990's Poetry â€Å"The Despairing Lover† written by William Walsh was written pre 1900 whilst the second poem â€Å"I Wouldn’t Thank you for a Valentine† by Liz Lockhead was written in the 1990’s. These poems are almost a century apart. Attitude towards love changes over time and these poems represent this. I Wouldn’t Thank you for a Valentine is about how people think about Valentine’s Day in the 1990’s, while The Despairing Lover is showing what people think and how important they see love in the 1990’s. In â€Å"The Despairing Lover† William Walsh sets out the poem like a story with a beginning a middle and an end. This narrative structure of the poem gives the poem three clear stages this making the poem clearer to the reader and enables the poets written words to portray his ideas with the poem. In the first stanza William Walsh is seen to be in ‘anguish’ over his loss of his lover. However in the second stanza his mood swings to being just unhappy to suicidal, â€Å"it’s torment projecting and sadly reflecting’. This also shows how the poet William Walsh’s mind is working. In the third stanza, the poet realizes he might get ‘a new love.’ William Walsh realises his loss and believes he can find someone else. The words used in the despairing lover shows Walsh emotions, for example the use of the word â€Å"anguish† instead of angry is used because it is more dramatic. After reading the first two stanza’s the reader is almost positive that the poet is going to commit suicide and is just leading up to a big climax where he jumps. However there is an unexpected twist where the poet just calms down and thinks he can find love again. This shows the poet’s structure of the poem and how ... ...ion and repetition. Another comparison between the two poems is we are both hearing the viewpoint from the poet not from anybody else. Both the poems also have a story behind them. I wouldn’t thank you for a valentine has a hidden story and that is about something bad happening to her on valentines day. While the despairing lover story is about the poet coping with the break up from his lover. On the other hand their are also many differences between the two poems. There structure is different while the despairing lover is set out like a story with a begging a middle and an end. I wouldn’t thank you for a valentine structure is set out like a list. Another difference is that the despairing lover has rhyming couplets while the second poem doesn’t. A final difference between the two poems is the both have different opinions on love and what love is like.

Ukraine After The Chernobyl Disaster in 1986 Essay -- neutralization pr

At the beginning of our project we considered Bertolt Brecht as a possible practitioner for our piece. By using his alienation technique we planned to create a multi-media theatre performance. As a collective, we considered doing this by examining relevant topics and implementing a mixture of verbatim theatre and devised script techniques. However, Augusto Boal is the name of the practitioner that we mainly used throughout the show. We chose Boal, because of the nature of his techniques, which allowed us to experiment with various themes and ideas throughout the performance. Our genuine idea was to create a piece that would show how the media can be used as a source of manipulation of the mass population. Furthermore, showing how the government can use this medium in their advantage, hence controlling the minds of the masses. We based this idea on Boal’s techniques that would involve the audience’s participation. A member of our group came up with the idea of luring the audience into believing that something is real, when in fact it was completely made-up by our group. By using Boal’s theatre techniques such as Forum Theatre, Joker System, Newspaper Theatre and Image Theatre we set out to convince our audience that the British government are planning to release into the atmosphere a new chemical compound called E307 that slows down cells degeneration, thus making people live longer and be healthier. The E307 compound stemmed from our initial idea to create a gas called â€Å"Anarchy Gas† that would have been used to counteract and absorb some of the nuclear radiation over Ukraine after the Chernobyl Disaster in 1986 and eventually speed up the neutralization process. As we delved into our research we divided ourselves in pairs, in or... ...-techniques.html. Last accessed 19th May 2014. David Farmer. (2010). Image Theatre. Available: http://dramaresource.com/strategies/image-theatre. Last accessed 20th May 2014. S. Leigh Thompson. (2006). What is Theatre of the Oppressed?: Image Theatre. Available: http://theforumproject.org/whatisto/imagetheatre/. Last accessed 20th May 2014. Jaqueline D. Burleson (1991). AUGUSTO BOAL’S THEATRE OF THE OPPRESSED IN THE PUBLIC SPEAKING AND INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION CLASSROOMS . Louisiana State University: The Department of Communication Studies. 17-30. The Brecht Forum. (2007). AUGUSTO BOAL & THE THEATER OF THE OPPRESSED. Available: http://brechtforum.org/abouttop. Last accessed 22nd May 2014. Alex Maccioni. (2009). AUGUSTO BOAL: THEATRE OF THE OPPRESSED. Available: http://chiaroscuromagazine.com/critique/augusto-boal-theatre-oppressed. Last accessed 22nd May 2014.

Political Philosophy and Plato Essay

Credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy, he is an enigmatic figure known chiefly through the accounts of later classical writers, especially the writings of his students Plato and Xenophon, and the plays of his contemporary Aristophanes. Many would claim that Plato’s dialogues are the most comprehensive accounts of Socrates to survive from antiquity. Through his portrayal in Plato’s dialogues, Socrates has become renowned for his contribution to the field of ethics, and it is this Platonic Socrates who also lends his name to the concepts of Socratic irony and the Socratic method, or elenchus. The latter remains a commonly used tool in a wide range of discussions, and is a type of pedagogy in which a series of questions are asked not only to draw individual answers, but also to encourage fundamental insight into the issue at hand. It is Plato’s Socrates that also made important and lasting contributions to the fields of epistemology and logic, and the influence of his ideas and approach remains strong in providing a foundation for much western philosophy that followed. As one recent commentator has put it, Plato, the idealist, offers â€Å"an idol, a master figure, for philosophy. A Saint, a prophet of the ‘Sun-God’, a teacher condemned for his teachings as a heretic. † Yet, the ‘real’ Socrates, like many of the other ancient philosophers, remains, at best, enigmatic and, at worst, unknown. Perhaps his most important contribution to Western thought is his dialectic method of inquiry, known as the Socratic method or method of â€Å"elenchus†, which he largely applied to the examination of key moral concepts such as the Good and Justice. It was first described by Plato in the Socratic Dialogues. To solve a problem, it would be broken down into a series of questions, the answers to which gradually distill the answer a person would seek. The influence of this approach is most strongly felt today in the use of the scientific method, in which hypothesis is the first stage. The development and practice of this method is one of Socrates’ most enduring contributions, and is a key factor in earning his mantle as the father of political philosophy, ethics or moral philosophy, and as a figurehead of all the central themes in Western philosophy. To illustrate the use of the Socratic method; a series of questions are posed to help a person or group to determine their underlying beliefs and the extent of their knowledge. The Socratic method is a negative method of hypothesis elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. It was designed to force one to examine one’s own beliefs and the validity of such beliefs. In fact, Socrates once said, â€Å"I know you won’t believe me, but the highest form of Human Excellence is to question oneself and others. † Philosophical beliefs The beliefs of Socrates, as distinct from those of Plato, are difficult to discern. Little in the way of concrete evidence exists to demarcate the two. The lengthy theories given in most of the dialogues are those of Plato, and some scholars think Plato so adapted the Socratic style as to make the literary character and the philosopher himself impossible to distinguish. Others argue that he did have his own theories and beliefs, but there is much controversy over what these might have been, owing to the difficulty of separating Socrates from Plato and the difficulty of interpreting even the dramatic writings concerning Socrates. Consequently, distinguishing the philosophical beliefs of Socrates from those of Plato and Xenophon is not easy and it must be remembered that what is attributed to Socrates might more closely reflect the specific concerns of these thinkers. The matter is complicated because the historical Socrates seems to have been notorious for asking questions but not answering, claiming to lack wisdom concerning the subjects about which he questioned others. Socratic Paradoxes Many of the beliefs traditionally attributed to the historical Socrates have been characterized as â€Å"paradoxal† because they seem to conflict with common sense. The following are among the so-called Socratic Paradoxes. †¢No one desires evil. †¢No one errs or does wrong willingly or knowingly. †¢Virtue—all virtue—is knowledge. †¢Virtue is sufficient for happiness. The phrase Socratic paradox can also refer to a self-referential paradox, originating in Socrates’ phrase, â€Å"I know that I know nothing noble and good†. Knowledge One of the best known sayings of Socrates is â€Å"I only know that I know nothing†. The conventional interpretation of this remark is that Socrates’ wisdom was limited to an awareness of his own ignorance. Socrates believed wrongdoing was a consequence of ignorance and those who did wrong knew no better. The one thing Socrates consistently claimed to have knowledge of was â€Å"the art of love†, which he connected with the concept of â€Å"the love of wisdom†, i. e. , philosophy. He never actually claimed to be wise, only to understand the path a lover of wisdom must take in pursuing it. It is debatable whether Socrates believed humans (as opposed to gods like Apollo) could actually become wise. On the one hand, he drew a clear line between human ignorance and ideal knowledge; on the other, Plato’s Symposium (Diotima’s Speech) and Republic (Allegory of the Cave) describe a method for ascending to wisdom. In Plato’s Theaetetus (150a), Socrates compares himself to a true matchmaker (promnestikos), as distinguished from a panderer ( proagogos). This distinction is echoed in Xenophon’s Symposium (3. 20), when Socrates jokes about his certainty of being able to make a fortune, if he chose to practice the art of pandering. For his part as a philosophical interlocutor, he leads his respondent to a clearer conception of wisdom, although he claims he is not himself a teacher (Apology). His role, he claims, is more properly to be understood as analogous to a midwife ( ? ? maia). Socrates explains that he is himself barren of theories, but knows how to bring the theories of others to birth and determine whether they are worthy or mere â€Å"wind eggs† ( ? ? anemiaion). Perhaps significantly, he points out that midwives are barren due to age, and women who have never given birth are unable to become midwives; they would have no experience or knowledge of birth and would be unable to separate the worthy infants from those that should be left on the hillside to be exposed. To judge this, the midwife must have experience and knowledge of what she is judging. Virtue Bust of Socrates in the Palermo Archaeological Museum. Socrates believed the best way for people to live was to focus on self-development rather than the pursuit of material wealth. He always invited others to try to concentrate more on friendships and a sense of true community, for Socrates felt this was the best way for people to grow together as a populace. His actions lived up to this: in the end, Socrates accepted his death sentence when most thought he would simply leave Athens, as he felt he could not run away from or go against the will of his community; as mentioned above, his reputation for valor on the battlefield was without reproach. The idea that humans possessed certain virtues formed a common thread in Socrates’ teachings. These virtues represented the most important qualities for a person to have, foremost of which were the philosophical or intellectual virtues. Socrates stressed that â€Å"virtue was the most valuable of all possessions; the ideal life was spent in search of the Good. Truth lies beneath the shadows of existence, and it is the job of the philosopher to show the rest how little they really know. Politics It is often argued that Socrates believed â€Å"ideals belong in a world only the wise man can understand†, making the philosopher the only type of person suitable to govern others. In Plato’s dialogue the Republic, Socrates was in no way subtle about his particular beliefs on government. He openly objected to the democracy that ran Athens during his adult life. It was not only Athenian democracy: Socrates objected to any form of government that did not conform to his ideal of a perfect republic led by philosophers, and Athenian government was far from that. It is, however, possible that the Socrates of Plato’s Republic is colored by Plato’s own views. During the last years of Socrates’ life, Athens was in continual flux due to political upheaval. Democracy was at last overthrown by a junta known as the Thirty Tyrants, led by Plato’s relative, Critias, who had been a student of Socrates. The Tyrants ruled for about a year before the Athenian democracy was reinstated, at which point it declared an amnesty for all recent events. Socrates’ opposition to democracy is often denied, and the question is one of the biggest philosophical debates when trying to determine exactly what Socrates believed. The strongest argument of those who claim Socrates did not actually believe in the idea of philosopher kings is that the view is expressed no earlier than Plato’s Republic, which is widely considered one of Plato’s â€Å"Middle† dialogues and not representative of the historical Socrates’ views. Furthermore, according to Plato’s Apology of Socrates, an â€Å"early† dialogue, Socrates refused to pursue conventional politics; he often stated he could not look into other’s matters or tell people how to live their lives when he did not yet understand how to live his own. He believed he was a philosopher engaged in the pursuit of Truth, and did not claim to know it fully. Socrates’ acceptance of his death sentence, after his conviction by the Boule (Senate), can also be seen to support this view. It is often claimed much of the anti-democratic leanings are from Plato, who was never able to overcome his disgust at what was done to his teacher. In any case, it is clear Socrates thought the rule of the Thirty Tyrants was at least as objectionable as Democracy; when called before them to assist in the arrest of a fellow Athenian, Socrates refused and narrowly escaped death before the Tyrants were overthrown. He did however fulfill his duty to serve as Prytanis when a trial of a group of Generals who presided over a disastrous naval campaign were judged; even then he maintained an uncompromising attitude, being one of those who refused to proceed in a manner not supported by the laws, despite intense pressure. Judging by his actions, he considered the rule of the Thirty Tyrants less legitimate than the Democratic Senate that sentenced him to death. Contributions of Socrates One: Awakened thinkers to the need to examine and reexamine their political, moral, and philosophical views in order to discover and root out errors and misconceptions that impede progress. Socrates accomplished this task by demonstrating, through cross-examination of people he encountered, that many accepted precepts, conventions, and beliefs were based on faulty logic or outright errors. A quotation attributed to him states: â€Å"The unexamined life is not worth living. † In other words, a human being must not be complacent and self-satisfied; instead, he must be ever probing, exploring, and reconnoitering his soul in order to discover ways to improve. Two: Effectively rebutted a central tenet of the Sophists, traveling teachers who charged fees for educating young men. This tenet maintained that the guiding principles of a society, such as justice and truth, were relative concepts–that is, they changed according to the needs of men in a particular time and place. What was considered right and just in Athens was not necessarily right and just in another society, the Sophists maintained. One man’s virtue could be another man’s vice. Three: Pioneered the use of inductive reasoning to draw logical conclusions. According to Aristotle, Socrates founded the â€Å"scientific method. † Four: Demonstrated that wrongdoing results from ignorance. If a man lies, Socrates might have said, he does so because he does not understand the benefits of telling the truth. Five: Inspired philosophers in his own time and in later times to pursue the truth through rigorous analysis of available, facts, opinions, and so on. Two of the most important philosophers in the history of the world, Plato and Aristotle, both esteemed Socrates as a supreme thinker and infused their philosophical systems with Socratic thought. Plato was a pupil of Socrates, and Aristotle was a pupil of Plato. Six: Showed the world the meaning of integrity and moral commitment by accepting a death sentence rather than recanting his principles. Seven: Made clear that a human being is more than his appearance. Socrates was ugly, wore old clothes, and walked barefooted through the streets of Athens. But his mind and the words he spoke were beautiful. The trial of Socrates The Trial of Socrates refers to the trial and the subsequent execution of the classical Athenian philosopher Socrates in 399 BC. Socrates was tried on the basis of two notoriously ambiguous charges: corrupting the youth and impiety. More specifically, Socrates’ accusers cited two â€Å"impious† acts: â€Å"failing to acknowledge the gods that the city acknowledges† and â€Å"introducing new deities. † A majority of the 501 dikasts (Athenian citizens chosen by lot to serve as jurors) voted to convict him. Consistent with common practice, the dikasts determined Socrates’ punishment with another vote. Socrates was ultimately sentenced to death by drinking a hemlock-based liquid. The accuser Meletus swore before the Archon, a state office-holder with primarily religious duties. Having decided that there was a case to answer, the Archon summoned Socrates to appear before a jury of Athenian citizens, to answer charges of corrupting the youth of Athens and impiety. Athenian juries were drawn by lottery from a group of male citizen volunteers. Unlike trials in many modern societies, majority verdicts were the rule rather than the exception. Neither Plato nor Xenophon mentions the number of Socrates’ judges, though Plato’s Apology 35a-b does suggest some definite boundaries: that if just thirty of the votes had been otherwise then he would have been acquitted, and that (perhaps) less than three fifths voted against him After the vote on Socrates’ guilt, Socrates and his prosecutor suggested alternative sentences. Socrates, after expressing his surprise of the little amount he needed to be have been found innocent, jokingly suggested free meals at the Prytaneum, a particular honor held for city benefactors and winners at the Olympic Games, then offered to pay a fine of 100 drachmae, which was a fifth of his property and a testament to Socrates’ poverty. Finally he settled on the sum of 3000 drachmae, put forward by Plato, Crito, Critobulus, and Apollodorus, who guaranteed the payment. His prosecutor proposed the death penalty. The jury voted for death as the penalty – the larger majority showing (Diogenes Laertius 2. 42). Perhaps Socrates had lost support by his slighting and unapologetic tone. Socrates’s followers encouraged him to flee, and citizens expected him to do so and were probably not averse to it; but he refused on principle. Apparently in accordance with his philosophy of obedience to law, he carried out his own execution, by drinking the hemlock provided to him. Socrates died at the age of 70. Most scholars see the conviction and execution of Socrates as a deliberate choice made by the famous philosopher himself. If the accounts of Plato and Xenophon are reasonably accurate, Socrates sought not to persuade jurors, but rather to lecture and provoke them. The trial and execution of Socrates produced the first martyr for free speech. PLATO Plato 428/427 BC – 348/347 BC), was a Classical Greek philosopher, mathematician, student of Socrates, writer of philosophical dialogues, and founder of the Academy in Athens, the first institution of higher learning in the Western world. Along with his mentor, Socrates, and his student, Aristotle, Plato helped to lay the foundations of Western philosophy and science. In the famous words of A. N. Whitehead: The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato. I do not mean the systematic scheme of thought which scholars have doubtfully extracted from his writings. I allude to the wealth of general ideas scattered through them. Plato’s sophistication as a writer is evident in his Socratic dialogues; thirty-six dialogues and thirteen letters have been ascribed to him. Plato’s writings have been published in several fashions; this has led to several conventions regarding the naming and referencing of Plato’s texts. Plato’s dialogues have been used to teach a range of subjects, including philosophy, logic, ethics, rhetoric, and mathematics Plato’s philosophical views had many societal implications, especially on the idea of an ideal state or government. There is some discrepancy between his early and later views. Some of the most famous doctrines are contained in the Republic during his middle period, as well as in the Laws and the Statesman. However, because Plato wrote dialogues, it is assumed that Socrates is often speaking for Plato. This assumption may not be true in all cases. Plato, through the words of Socrates, asserts that societies have a tripartite class structure corresponding to the appetite/spirit/reason structure of the individual soul. The appetite/spirit/reason stand for different parts of the body. The body parts symbolize the castes of society †¢Productive, which represents the abdomen. (Workers) — the labourers, carpenters, plumbers, masons, merchants, farmers, ranchers, etc. These correspond to the â€Å"appetite† part of the soul. †¢Protective, which represents the chest. (Warriors or Guardians) — those who are adventurous, strong and brave; in the armed forces. These correspond to the â€Å"spirit† part of the soul. †¢ †¢ †¢Governing, which represents the head. (Rulers or Philosopher Kings) — those who are intelligent, rational, self-controlled, in love with wisdom, well suited to make decisions for the community. These correspond to the â€Å"reason† part of the soul and are very few. According to this model, the principles of Athenian democracy (as it existed in his day) are rejected as only a few are fit to rule. Instead of rhetoric and persuasion, Plato says reason and wisdom should govern. As Plato puts it: â€Å"Until philosophers rule as kings or those who are now called kings and leading men genuinely and adequately philosophise, that is, until political power and philosophy entirely coincide, while the many natures who at present pursue either one exclusively are forcibly prevented from doing so, cities will have no rest from evils,†¦ nor, I think, will the human race. † (Republic 473c-d) Plato describes these â€Å"philosopher kings† as â€Å"those who love the sight of truth† (Republic 475c) and supports the idea with the analogy of a captain and his ship or a doctor and his medicine. According to him, sailing and health are not things that everyone is qualified to practice by nature. A large part of the Republic then addresses how the educational system should be set up to produce these philosopher kings. However, it must be taken into account that the ideal city outlined in the Republic is qualified by Socrates as the ideal luxurious city, examined to determine how it is that injustice and justice grow in a city (Republic 372e). According to Socrates, the â€Å"true† and â€Å"healthy† city is instead the one first outlined in book II of the Republic, 369c–372d, containing farmers, craftsmen, merchants, and wage-earners, but lacking the guardian class of philosopher-kings as well as delicacies such as â€Å"perfumed oils, incense, prostitutes, and pastries†, in addition to paintings, gold, ivory, couches, a multitude of occupations such as poets and hunters, and war. In addition, the ideal city is used as an image to illuminate the state of one’s soul, or the will, reason, and desires combined in the human body. Socrates is attempting to make an image of a rightly ordered human, and then later goes on to describe the different kinds of humans that can be observed, from tyrants to lovers of money in various kinds of cities. The ideal city is not promoted, but only used to magnify the different kinds of individual humans and the state of their soul. However, the philosopher king image was used by many after Plato to justify their personal political beliefs. The philosophic soul according to Socrates has reason, will, and desires united in virtuous harmony. A philosopher has the moderate love for wisdom and the courage to act according to wisdom. Wisdom is knowledge about the Good or the right relations between all that exists. Wherein it concerns states and rulers, Plato has made interesting arguments. For instance he asks which is better—a bad democracy or a country reigned by a tyrant. He argues that it is better to be ruled by a bad tyrant, than be a bad democracy (since here all the people are now responsible for such actions, rather than one individual committing many bad deeds. ) This is emphasised within the Republic as Plato describes the event of mutiny onboard a ship. Plato suggests the ships crew to be in line with the democratic rule of many and the captain, although inhibited through ailments, the tyrant. Plato’s description of this event is parallel to that of democracy within the state and the inherent problems that arise. According to Plato, a state made up of different kinds of souls will, overall, decline from an aristocracy (rule by the best) to a timocracy (rule by the honorable), then to an oligarchy (rule by the few), then to a democracy (rule by the people), and finally to tyranny (rule by one person, rule by a tyrant). Plato went on to study with Socrates. He learned to reason and debate through Socrates. Plato was very close to him, and when he watched Socrates’ trial and murder in 399 BC, it disillusioned him greatly. He no longer trusted the government of Greece; so he decided to open a school in Athens instead of going into politics like everyone in his family had. Plato’s school for philosophers was started so that he could train those who would some day be his leaders of cities. His most famous student was Aristotle who later tutored Alexander the Great. Plato promoted ideas that would eventually effect even Thomas Aquinas who changed Catholic Doctrine to make it conform to the works of Aristotle. Plato’s ideas have greatly influenced the thinking of modern governments such as in the founding of the American system. For example, Plato stated, â€Å"Unless philosophers bear kingly rule in cities or those who are now called kings and princes become genuine and adequate philosophers, and political power and philosophy are brought together . . . there will be no respite from evil for cities. † – Plato and â€Å"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. † From these first democratic societies of the Greeks, Plato’s teaching has not neccesarily been proven over time. The political philosopher, Hilter, for example, was democratically elected by an intelligent populace who were very concerned with public affairs. Plato’s thoughts about perceptions of reality are still of interest today. One allegory went something like this: Suppose a few men were captured when they were born, and made to live in a cave. They are chained by their neck and feet so that they cannot move at all. The men are facing a wall of stone. Behind them burns a fire. In front of that is a wall along which their captors walk with puppets in their hands. The only truth they know is that of what shadows look like and muffled sound echoing throughout the hall. They know not what a true boat looks like, just the shadow of a boat. They make words for the objects they see. One day one of the men breaks free and gets out of the cave into the world. He sees the fire and the puppets and knows that all he has known all his life was just a piece of all he knew. He got to the outdoors and was blinded by the sun. He had to re-learn what the world really was like. He learned what true boats looked like and found that they were not at all like their shadows. He decided that his friends in the cave should also know that what they saw was not real, but was just an image cast from a wavering fire. When he went down and told them, they laughed at him and told him he was wrong. They said ‘Look! Can you not see the wall? That on the wall is a boat. ’ He persisted in his story of the light, and they eventually killed him. This great analogy can apply to what we know about heavens. As it is written in 1 Corinthians 13:12, â€Å"For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. † Plato sensed that there was a reality apart from his perception as many had sensed before him. The wisest man that ever lived, Solomon, acknowledged in Ecclesiastes 1 that â€Å"there is nothing new under the sun†. Indeed, centuries before Plato, it was recorded in Job 12:22, â€Å"He [God] reveals mysteries from the darkness and brings the deep darkness into light. â€Å" The mysterious shadows of life can only be brought to the light of understanding by God as explained by the Apostle in John 1:5 â€Å"And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. † And they killed what they didn’t understand as they were afraid of the reality of their sins and crucified the Light. Plato knew of this human fear factor, â€Å"We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark. The real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. † –Plato Although Plato died in 347 BC, but his teaching continues to influence governments systems and even doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. Most philosophers from antiquity up to today have stood on Plato’s broad shoulders attempting to use what he offered and see beyond the cave’s shadows. ARISTOTLE Aristotle (b. 384 – d. 322 BCE), was a Greek philosopher, logician, and scientist. Along with his teacher Plato, Aristotle is generally regarded as one of the most influential ancient thinkers in a number of philosophical fields, including political theory. Aristotle was born in Stagira in northern Greece, and his father was a court physician to the king of Macedon. As a young man he studied in Plato’s Academy in Athens. After Plato’s death he left Athens to conduct philosophical and biological research in Asia Minor and Lesbos, and he was then invited by King Philip II of Macedon to tutor his young son, Alexander the Great. Soon after Alexander succeeded his father, consolidated the conquest of the Greek city-states, and launched the invasion of the Persian Empire. Aristotle returned as a resident alien to Athens, and was a close friend of Antipater, the Macedonian viceroy. At this time (335–323 BCE) he wrote, or at least worked on, some of his major treatises, including the Politics. When Alexander died suddenly, Aristotle had to flee from Athens because of his Macedonian connections, and he died soon after. Aristotle’s life seems to have influenced his political thought in various ways: his interest in biology seems to be expressed in the naturalism of his politics; his interest in comparative politics and his sympathies for democracy as well as monarchy may have been encouraged by his travels and experience of diverse political systems; he criticizes harshly, while borrowing extensively, from Plato’s Republic, Statesman, and Laws; and his own Politics is intended to guide rulers and statesmen, reflecting the high political circles in which he moved. Political Science in General The modern word ‘political’ derives from the Greek politikos, ‘of, or pertaining to, the polis’. (The Greek term polis will be translated here as ‘city-state’. It is also translated as ‘city’ or ‘polis’, or simply anglicized as ‘polis’. City-states like Athens and Sparta were relatively small and cohesive units, in which political, religious, and cultural concerns were intertwined. The extent of their similarity to modern nation-states is controversial. ) Aristotle’s word for ‘politics’ is politike, which is short for politike episteme or ‘political science’. It belongs to one of the three main branches of science, which Aristotle distinguishes by their ends or objects. Contemplative science (including physics and metaphysics) is concerned with truth or knowledge for its own sake; practical science with good action; and productive science with making useful or beautiful. Politics is a practical science, since it is concerned with the noble action or happiness of the citizens (although it resembles a productive science in that it seeks to create, preserve, and reform political systems). Aristotle thus understands politics as a normative or prescriptive discipline rather than as a purely empirical or descriptive inquiry. In the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle describes his subject matter as political science, which he characterizes as the most authoritative science. It prescribes which sciences are to be studied in the city-state, and the others — such as military science, household management, and rhetoric — fall under its authority. Since it governs the other practical sciences, their ends serve as means to its end, which is nothing less than the human good. â€Å"Even if the end is the same for an individual and for a city-state, that of the city-state seems at any rate greater and more complete to attain and preserve. For although it is worthy to attain it for only an individual, it is nobler and more divine to do so for a nation or city-state† (EN I. 2. 1094b7-10). Aristotle’s political science encompasses the two fields which modern philosophers distinguish as ethics and political philosophy. Political philosophy in the narrow sense is roughly speaking the subject of his treatise called the Politics. For a further discussion of this topic, see the following supplementary document: 2. Aristotle’s View of Politics Political science studies the tasks of the politician or statesman (politikos), in much the way that medical science concerns the work of the physician (see Politics IV. 1). It is, in fact, the body of knowledge that such practitioners, if truly expert, will also wield in pursuing their tasks. The most important task for the politician is, in the role of lawgiver, to frame the appropriate constitution for the city-state. This involves enduring laws, customs, and institutions (including a system of moral education) for the citizens. Once the constitution is in place, the politician needs to take the appropriate measures to maintain it, to introduce reforms when he finds them necessary, and to prevent developments which might subvert the political system. This is the province of legislative science, which Aristotle regards as more important than politics as exercised in everyday political activity such as the passing of decrees. Aristotle frequently compares the politician to a craftsman. The analogy is imprecise because politics, in the strict sense of legislative science, is a form of practical knowledge, while a craft like architecture or medicine is a form of productive knowledge. However, the comparison is valid to the extent that the politician produces, operates, maintains a legal system according to universal principles (EN VI. 8 and X. 9). In order to appreciate this analogy it is helpful to observe that Aristotle explains the production of an artifact in terms of four causes: the material, formal, efficient, and final causes (Phys. II. 3 and Met. A. 2). For example, clay (material cause) is molded into a vase shape (formal cause) by a potter (efficient or moving cause) so that it can contain liquid (final cause). One can also explain the existence of the city-state in terms of the four causes. It is a kind of community, that is, a collection of parts having some functions and interests in common. Hence, it is made up of parts, which Aristotle describes in various.