Green Capitalism and Leadership - Research Paper Example

?The world is confronted with rapid ecological decline. Mountains are deforested, water and rivers are silted, minerals/ores are extracted at a disastrous open-pit mining operations, pollution has reached an intolerable level, mixture of consumerism and confusion engulfed human beings, climate has become devastatingly unpredictable and our values are eroded that we lose sense of environmental stewardship. Welcome to the century characterized by climatic changes—where reports feature flood, disasters, nuclear radiation threats, sudden emergence of sink holes, hurricanes, biowarfare, genetically modified vegetations and ecological devastations. You think this is a post-modern world and our survival in the next century is to live in other planets? Such mindless anthropocentrism dramatically blind human beings from realizing their interrelatedness with nature. This researcher perceived that the millennium require all human beings to reevaluate the state of environmental situation and join the green advocacy to heal the world from depletion of natural resources for sustainable development for children’s and its succeeding generation’s future. It is also assailed that United States of America can lead the world to adopt green economy for genuine sustainability. To elucidate these, researcher will explore green economy and argue that USA is capable to lead this advocacy for worldwide ecological transformation. Advocates of 350.org, the figure of which relate to the tolerable threshold of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, professed that the world has reached a threatening ecological imbalance. World Watch also reported that the Arctic ice cap melted by 42 % and coral reefs, home of our fishes, were destroyed and filled with garbages (Mindfully.org, 2011). They also reported that about $608 billion-worth of natural resources within half of the century were destroyed with ruthless extraction, logging, fast-tract maximization of aquamarine and extreme emission of pollutions in land, seas, air and water (Mindfully.org, 2011). This calls the government leaders, civil society, private sectors and the public to take part in reexamining world’s development framework or philosophical worldviews, systems and lifestyles that embrace ecological protectionism. Industrialism and capitalism only proved that skyscrapers enriched the few but have caused poverty to about 1.2 billion (Mindfully.org, 2011). Many nations are complaining poor access to potable water and urban communities are inhaling unhealthy air. Poverty have ill-motivated people to do and adopt measures beyond standards that caused calamities and disasters. World Watched documented about 120,000 people killed and unaccounted millions of people pushed in the margin of displacement, by war or by disasters (Mindfully.org, 2011). In Asia, Japan recently suffered the devastation caused by tsunami after a magnitude of earthquake hit them while India and Pakistan complained of hunger and poor access to resources after they experienced political marginalization and floodings respectively. The inability of some government to develop land use plan and to enforce population control forced people to live in flood-prone valleys and vulnerable sites of the hills sides (Mindfully.org, 2011; WorldWatch, 2011). World Watch also cited that climate change and consequential disasters incurred economic losses of $8.5 billion in Central America in 1998, an amount perceived commensurate to the combined gross national products of Honduras and Nicaragua (WorldWatch, 2011). There were however positive actions that motivated hundred of nations to partake ecological protection and measures for rehabilitation, reconstruction and rebuilding of affected communities. United Nations bodies have also started advocating for the use of renewable energies, organic farming, reforestration, vegetarianism as well as of green policy development (WorldWatch, 2011). It called all diverse nations to take part in healing nature and lessen the impact of global warming. This prospect challenge United States to lead or not to harnessing a world consensus toward an environmentally sustainable economy in the 21st century (WorldWatch, 2011). The Green Economy Table 1 Green Economics distinctive methodology and basic concepts (Source: M. Kennet and V. Heinemann, 2006 ) Problem/Issue Green Economics methodology Green Economics unique insights Ecological/Economic Resources of the planet being annihilated, (Goldsmith) carrying capacity of the earth compromised (Georgescu Rogen) Species extinction (Boswimmer, Wilson) Limits to growth (Meadows) Ecology and Nature (Goldsmith) Emphasis on appropriate size or scale of production (Schumacher) Manage over-consumption downwards. Reuse, reduce, recycle, repair. Transparency of supply chain. Population issues (Malthus, Ehrlich) Change in behaviour, appropriate consumption (Brown, World Watch Institute). Focus on education and value of all people. Needs, right and equity met for all people. Access to economic opportunities and choice. Diversity of economic policies. Lack of dogma and domination by structures, ideologies and institutions. Growth equals abundance as in nature. Sees people and biosphere as beneficiaries not inputs Inclusive of people, planet, biosphere Intellectual Discipline of mainstream economics seen as out of touch with reality, (Kitson, Medena and Samuels) Inability to act on climate change, selection of nuclear power over renewables, industrialisation of the food chain (GMO) Reformulation of supply, demand and growth Long termism Holism Economics embeddied in nature New relationship to science/natural sciences and technology Specificity in examination of issues temporally and spatially Broader philosophical base Enlightenment (Rousseau, Diderot, Locke, Voltaire) Critical theory (Habermas, Marcuse, Adorno, Horkheimer) Post modernism (Derrida, Soja, Salleh, Kriestevas) Management of commons (Hardin, Lord) New mix of needs, rights, well-being and happiness (Neef) Social and environmental justice Equity (Albert), democracy, participation (Robertson, Rawls, Harrisson, Chong, Alderson) New attitudes to economics as part of nature Techno fixes inappropriate Uses planet wide scope and real world setting and complexity for research and observations. But what is green economy? The Green Economics Institute (GEI) espoused the world movement dubbed as Green Economics & the Green Economy with the purpose of introducing green agenda for all transnational institutions and governments. It perceived that this political position offers an innovative assessment of the problems, and comprehensive solutions to world’s political economy (Peters & Britez, 2010). . Advocates thought that green economy is the best alternate for this vulnerable physical and social environments and reasonable framework to address increasing problems on climate, loss of biodiversity, extinction of species extinction and economic inequities toward environmental justice (Kennet, Heinemann, Oliveira & Black, 2010). Table 2 Green Economics distinctive methodology and basic concepts (Source: M. Kennet and V. Heinemann, 2006 ) Problem/Issue Green Economics methodology Green Economics unique insights Political Undemocratic, untransparent power of multinationals, global institutional power, weak local economies One-half of all work not valued or included in GDP Progress in the economy measured by new indicators, well-being, quality of life, sustainability, long termism etc., examination of power structures Reform/replace of global institutions to provide global governance. Deconstructing power relationships Increased role of regional/local economies, communities, access Inclusive approach Intergenerational equity Re-embeds the economy in nature and the social system No longer axis of worker versus owner Moral Problem of world poverty (1.3bn out of 6.3bn global population in extreme poverty) (Sachs) Inadequate markets, corruption and crime. Non-beneficial trades: arms, prostitution, drugs Regional and locally diverse and democratic solutions Using analysis of power relations and institutions (Veblen, Foucault, Gramsci) Feminist analysis of patriarchy and accumulation. (Mies, Mellor, Kuiper, Salleh) Critique of trickle down theories. Wealth creation locally with local power and decisions. Priority given to ending poverty and enabling equity rather than through same patterns of industrialisation and development or conventional growth. Reform of global institutions to reflect specific local conditions, requirements and individual choices by people and communities. Social and environmental justice (Lord, Sen) Poverty as unfreedom. Reform of aims of economy, continued inequality problems with human happiness directly addressed. Green economy is an emerging environmental philosophy focused on climate change issues and about green career challenges (Lawson, 2006). Green Economics, as a political framework, provides a holistic context of reality that human beings are part of nature and thus must recognize our difference, diversity, equity and inclusiveness as a community (Lawson, 2006). It debunked the concept of anthropocentrism and liberal capitalism as a system. Its philosophy is founded on managing economy for nature and manage the environment ‘as business as usual (Wall, 2006).’ This is a new discipline with practical and multidisciplinary approaches range that appeal to 'eco', intellectual, political and morality for sustainable and healthy living (Wall, 2006). As a philosophical precept, it thoroughly evaluated the inconsistencies, deficiencies, conventions, and other normative thoughts amongst neo-classical economists (Kennet & Heinemann, 2006). Green economy values ecological foundations and its relations with resources, work, wealth and money. It proposes a discourse that questions the conventional market viz-a-viz ecological sustainability, social justice, and peace (Kennet & Heinemann, 2006). It establish an agenda by examining global political economy; regulating market and the state; and evaluate the transition to an alternative economy with special concern of ensuring habitable planet for the next generations (Kennet & Heinemann, 2006). Profit, prices, market and competition are not regarded in the ecology philosophy. Its basic precept is to meet needs and not to increase powers of the capitalists in the market. (Source: M. Kennet and V. Heinemann, 2006 ) Green Economy and Obama Administration The Obama administration is perceived promising for ecologists around the world especially when its thrust and policies are driven to the development of infrastructure for $100 billion –worth of renewable and alternative sources of power to lessen the country’s reliance to foreign oil supplies. Shapiro and Lutzy (2009) of GreenOrder pointed these: a. Smart Grid ($11B) to start the "smart meter" investment projects which will cover reengineering and repair of transmission technologies (Shapiro and Lutzy, 2009); b. Renewable Energy ($20B in tax credits; up to $80B in loan guarantees) to explore power generation through the use of wind. Production tax credit (PTC) extension for three years ($13B) will accordingly help manufacturers and associated businesses. Other explored potential sources of power are biomass, geothermal, hydropower, landfill gas, waste-to-energy, and marine energy (Shapiro and Lutzy, 2009); c. Loan guarantees amounting to $80B will be available for renewable energy generation and transmission projects that begin in the next two years (Shapiro and Lutzy, 2009); and, d. Weatherization amounting to $6B+ and Energy Efficiency of $4B in credits for existing homes is also allocated (Shapiro and Lutzy, 2009); e. Legislative policies relating to climate change management, ecological protectionism and reduction of gas emission through Clean Air Act is judiciously crafted (Shapiro and Lutzy, 2009); These will also motivate energy utilities to reevaluate their market positions to be attuned with emerging green economy. With resource-based conflict being experienced worldwide and the impact of oil and energy’s prices fluctuation to the market and to the purchasing power of every citizens, the Obama government perceived that its necessary for the administration to partake ‘green capitalism’ to address problem of U.S. energy consumption and its economy (Kennet, 2007). As such, US government must pursue developmental framework or systems that integrate eco-politics, eco-education and prospects for green capitalism which must be instituted to inculcate profound socio-cultural changes (Doran. 2011). This means that the leading country must develop policies and institutions seeking to foster pro-sustainable behavior to imbibe ecological citizenship. It must also persuade and educate people that current practices of mainstream eco-politics are increasingly becoming irrelevant (Doran. 2011). Moreover, with the threat of nuclear meltdown in Japan, there is an increasing worldwide awareness that nuclear-based generated power can pose gigantic disaster worldwide. The realizations actually do not only illustrate or reflect people’s fears but also of radical awareness to put an end to the nuclear-based source of energy. Further, the increasing statistics of poverty and increasing marginalization of people from freely accessing their natural resources justify demand for more equitable access to opportunities and redistribution of resources and wealth. It is noted that America’s leadership is looked upon either of cynicism and trust. Its social and political movements have ripple effects worldwide because its influences have powerful impacts to diplomatic communities and within the halls of United Nations. It has vast colonized and neo-colonized countries. Poor countries are indebted to it, thus its voice can be immediately heard worldwide. With such expanse of power, through its allied forces word wide, United States can indeed help influence the world to adopt Green Economy to transform capitalism with eclectic and diverse green governance to lead in the establishment of planetary equilibrium (Kennet and V. Heinemann, 2006 ) and for the campaign on environmental justice. In leading the world, USA must develop certain level of competence that mixed transactional and transformative system that will inspire revolutionary and radical change in favor of environmentalism. As ecologists working within a complex society, leaders of the world must provide multifaceted ideation specially in practicing “cross-cultural leadership in managing nations” by delving into varied values of the society and organizations based on commonly adhered practices that are influencing leaders behavior, practices, effectiveness, and performance (Jacobson and Koch, 2004). USA As leaders of nations, it must advocate ecology-sensitive advancement that recognize distinct national culture that are influential in shaping ecology consciousness and green economy. This means that leaders ought to be sensitive to environmental plans, actions, decisions and style of management attune to distinct cultural make-up of each nation. This is because “cultural values and practices also affect or impact to organizational culture and practices” (p. 68) and that these customary organizational practices influence broader societal culture. USA’s leadership acceptance and effectiveness cold be measured by the interaction between strategic organizational contingencies (not shown) and leader attributes and behaviors (p. 68).” This means global acceptance of USA’s leadership for green capitalism and green economy require that it must illustrate to nations its competence and effectiveness as part of strategic global leadership and management in persuading other nations to adopt the same advocacy and policy. USA leaders must exhibit this level of efficacy by practicing the values of integrity, charisma, and team-oriented management. This is because it is commonly perceived that leader’s performance and its regard to future outcomes are motivated or determined by competitiveness and in carrying economic development. USA is therefore challenged to lead in planning, organizing, direction, coordination and control (Fayol, 1916, pp 145-152) toward ecological development. However, beyond policies, leaders must adapt value system, customary beliefs and practices that are often confluence of one’s cultural consciousness. The manners on how their interactions transpire are still rooted from their cultural foundations. As global leader, USA must inspire transformation that has profound impact to followers by transcending self-interests in a purpose-driven and goal-oriented (Bass,1985) advocacy. It should motivates followers’ by either expanding follower’s portfolio of needs, increasing confidence, elevate expectations, heighten the value of the leader’s intended outcomes; encourage behavioral change and motivate higher levels of personal achievement (Maslow’s ‘self-actualisation’) (Bass & Avolio, 1994). It is about role modeling based on strategic goals without disregarding values and principles (Yammarino, 1993) and by focusing on strategies, mission and unleashes human potentials. It must rewrite ecological policies and build new structures to make collaborative actions in reducing or mitigating impacts of environmental problems including structures to make performance meaningful based on overarching values and goals (Price, 2003). Leaders therefore will start thinking out of the box and look at issues in multi-pronged perspectives. As managers of change, it must also have a good deal of understanding causes of persons and industrialists would resist ecological advocacies. Resistance are results of ambiguity on emerging change; disagreement due to disruption of comfort zones; fear of loss of power, authority, networks and convenience; and lack of capacity for adaptability to change. Leaders must be imbued with peoples’ pulse and must have an alternate approach on how to manage them (Lippitt, Watson, and Westley, 1958) and must be able to articulate advocacies based on evidences, data, analysis and validated information to vivify matters and to choose options and contingencies for actions while broadening political support to increase the momentum on resolving an issue (Lippitt, et.al., 1958). In reducing potential resistance to change, leaders should utilize approaches to articulate and communicate intentions and desired outcome to stakeholders (Kritsonis, 2005). Leaders must engage peoples and nations to participate in decision-making; facilitate consensual agreements; and utilize negotiation skills. In case these processes wouldn’t work, manipulation or co-optation and coercion can also be another strategy but only as a last recourse option. Quinn (2008) explicated that desired changed is culturally practiced and can be adopted by the community as a lifestyle (Quinn, 2008). Sociologists however believed that there are conditions that can help facilitate transformation such as resurgence of environmental and climatic crisis and the disastrous impacts it gave to civilizations. In this situation, managers ought to have a concrete cultural, social and environmental analysis to ascertain practices that need to be changed (Robbins, Bergman, Stagg, Coulter, 2006). As part of the approaches, transformational leaders should work for reorganization to shift the socialization and improve value system among nations (Robbins, 2006). USA can initiate changes if it bears the capacity to relate organizational history and future plans; sustains interest on the learning processes; advocate positive improvements; appreciate diversity and teamwork; encourage nonconformists; encourage breakthroughs; utilize innovative technologies and build on trust for harmonious relations. This can be possibly done if leaders and members thrive on innovation and creativity. Robbins, et. al. (2006) explained that innovations are achieved if proper structural, human resource and cultural variables are holistically observed. Partner nations can illustrate innovativeness if stimulated well and if members are supported, minimally pressured, enjoying spaces for open communication, relatively enjoying its resources and understand the flow of the structures (Robbins, et.al 2006). Innovation can also be encouraged if the organization has certain acceptance of uncertainty, tolerance to impractical acts, risk management, output-orientation, focus in an open system, and promote constructive feed-backing (Robbins, et.al. 2006). Conclusion With the worldwide condition of our ecology, there indeed a need for all human beings to re-strategize in managing our planet’s natural resources. All nations ought to be part in the endeavor of rehabilitating the earth, stop wanton destruction and depletion of our forests and other natural resources, adopt organic methods of farming, engage in the process of reducing risks and vulnerabilities, work for the establishment of a world order that is attuned to green economy, reduce poverty by adopting socialism in world economy, and invest for integrated ecological protection programs. To effect all these, the world must establish a green framework that enforce more accountability for people to preserve the earth; awareness of our interrelatedness and deconstruct all dogmas of liberal capitalism for poor people to regain access and control to their lands, resolve issues of our survival and appreciate our diversity as we partake toward green economy. Hence, working on multi-disciplinary and innovative systems, the world can reform structures, governance and systems for an alternative economy with redefined concepts on growth, development, and empowerment that is integrative and sensitive to climate justice. All these ecological advocacies, relate to sustainability to maintain a system without major trade-offs. Brundtland (1987) called this a wholesome continuity without radical changes that may disrupt a system, a norm or a process. This require people to work hard to balance and its sources—the environment. This is because human beings are dependent to nature for its survivability, hence this advocacy to preserve ecology and maintain it by regulating a healthy environment to live. Brundtland (1987) pointed that this is about maximizing resources without compromising the needs of future generations. Sustainability is a broad universal concept that is applicable to many theoretical model: politically, economically, socially, culturally or organizationally. It is also recognizing that nature is limited and that to sustain resource; people should be stewards of ecology. Harwood (1990) explicates that sustainability relates to agriculture where production of farm be done in methods or processes that ensures balanced utilization of resource and environment. Its should be complemented with social and economic design that upholds the standard of quality life (Pearce, Makandia & Barbier,1989) This is illustrated with organic method of farming to preserve the fertility of the soil against commercial fertilizers and pesticides because under the context of genuine sustainability in agriculture, preservation of ecosystems is essential to prolong life. As global leaders, USA must exercise leadership with desirable characteristics leadership behavior: charismatic, team-builder and motivator. Global leadership precepts are centered on the person about how culture influences his performance. Transformative leadership on the other hand shows positive behavioral attributes for role modeling and to gain leverage in advancing organizational vision, mission and goals. As future oriented, transformative leadership invest hope on what future could bring too, by adhering effective leadership attributed of vision, foresight, motivation, trustworthiness, dynamism, positiveness, and pro-activeness. However, cultural adaptation on leadership styles may be based on vision but are communicated differently based on the distinctiveness of culture. REFERENCES Richard Lawson (2006). An overview of green economics. International Journal of Green Economics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 23-36, January. Michael A. Peters & Rodrigo Britez (2010). Ecopolitics Of Green Economy, Environmentalism And Education. Journal of Academic Research in Economics, Spiru Haret University, Faculty of Accounting and Financial Management Constanta, vol. 2(1 (May), pages 21-36. Derek Wall (2006). Green economics: an introduction and research agenda. International Journal of Green Economics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 201-214, January. Miriam Kennet & Volker Heinemann (2006). Green Economics: setting the scene. Aims, context, and philosophical underpinning of the distinctive new solutions offered by Green Economics. International Journal of Green Economics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 68-102. Miriam Kennet, Volker Heinemann, Michelle S. Gale de Oliveira & Katie Black (2010). The Green Economics Reader. Green Economics Institute. Quentin Duroy (2011). The path to a sustainable economy: sustainable consumption, social identity and ecological citizenship. International Journal of Green Economics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd. Vol 5:1 pp 1-14 Peter Doran (2011). Is there a role for contemporary practices of askesis in supporting a transition to sustainable consumption? International Journal of Green Economics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd. Volume 5, Number 1 pp 15-40. Miriam Kennet (2007). Progress in Green Economics: ontology, concepts and philosophy. Civilisation and the lost factor of reality in social and environmental justice. International Journal of Green Economics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3), pages 225-249, January. Mindfully.org (Feb 14, 2011). Global Environment Reaches Dangerous Crossroads: State of the World 2001 Worldwatch Institute Press Release. http://www.mindfully.org/Air/Environment-Dangerous-Crossroads.htm Silverstein, Ken (2008) Renewable Energy World Network for News and Information. Renewable Energy World. USA. http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2008/12/obamas-green-economy-54326 Andrew Shapiro and Rebecca Lutzy (January 31, 2009). Get Stimulus Ready: How to Win in the Obama Green Economy. Leading Green. Harvard Business Review. http://blogs.hbr.org/leadinggreen/2009/01/get-stimulus-ready-how-to-win.html Accessed April 22, 2011. Gro Harlem Brundtland(1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Development and International Economic Cooperation: Environment. United Natiosn World Commission on Environment and Development. New York. Pearce, D. Barbier, E and Markandya, A (1990). Sustainable Development: Economic and Environment in the Third World, London: Earthscan Publications Fayol, Henri (1916) (in French), Administration industrielle et generale; prevoyance, organisation, commandement, coordination, controle, Paris, H. Dunod et E. Pinat. Marsha B. Jacobson and Walter Koch (2004). Organizational Behavior and Human Performance Volume 20, Issue 1, October 1977, Pages 149-157 William Quisenberry (2006) Organizational Behavior and Motivation: Psychological and sociological Insights. Helium Psychology. Andover, MA, USA http://www.helium.com/items/82955-organizational-behavior-and-motivation-psychological-and-sociological-insights. Accessed: March 10, 2011. Bass, B. (1985) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press. Bass, B.M.& Avolio, B.J. (1994) Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Terry L. Price (2003). The ethics of authentic transformational leadership Original Research Article The Leadership Quarterly, Volume 14, Issue 1, February 2003, Pages 67-81 Kritsonis, Alicia. 2005. "Comparison of Change Theories." International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity. California: 8 (1) Quinn, James Brian (2008). Managing Strategic Change. In: Managing Change. 2nd Ed. Eds. Christopher Mabey and Bill Mayon-White. London: The Open University, Paul Chapman Publishing: 65-85. Lippitt, R., Watson, J. and Westley, B. (1958). The Dynamics of Planned Change. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World. Robbins, Stephen (2003). Organizational Behavior. 10th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Robbins, Bergman, Stagg, Coulter 2006. Management. Pearson Education Australia. Read More