The Werribee Residents Against Toxic Dump - Essay Example

Introduction The Werribee Residents against Toxic Dump (WRATD) was formed in 1996. It sought to protect the welfare of the locals against a perceived threat from the construction of a dumping site in the area. Colonial Sugar Refining (CSR) Company had proposed to fill part of its quarry in Werribee with prescribed toxic waste. This nature of waste is the most hazardous kind of waste and has significant negative impact on the environment and health of the public if not properly taken care of. Colonial Sugar Refining (CSR) argued that the facility would be well protected by a double clay liner to ensure that it did not pose danger to the environment. It was further argued that the development planning of the facility had met all the guidelines and regulations of EPA. Thus, CSR believed that the development was legal and met all the stipulated regulations. However, the local residents were of the opinion that the project would be detrimental to the area’s economy. The region had also been previously compelled to accommodate unwanted developments such as Melbourne’s major sewerage treatment works. The residents formed Werribee Residents Against Toxic Dump (WRATD) in order to fight the proposal by CSR. The group was a grassroots organization with representation from various disparate parts of the community. One of the key issues that hindered the implementation of development of the waste facility was due to ineffective involvement of the local community. There was inadequate publicity about the proposal and the local residents were not properly appraised concerning the project. The process was highly secretive. In a nutshell, there was minimal community involvement in regards the proposal by CSR. The reservations of the local community, whether real or perceived, need to be addressed in order for a project to be accepted. This paper analyzes the role of community engagement to the society and its social impacts. The paper also discusses the pertinent issue of ethics in relation to the society and the role that community engagement can play in order to tackle the ethical problems associated with communications from organizations. The case study of Werribee Residents Against Toxic Dump (WRATD) is critically analyzed in order to assess the proper methodology of public involvement in projects and the approaches that should be used in handling publicity for contentious projects. Stakeholder Theory According to Freeman and Harrison (2001), stakeholders comprise of the entire ecosystem that support an organization. From a business perspective stakeholder comprise of shareholders, customers, suppliers, government agencies, lenders and lobby groups. This implies that any successful organization has to build mutually beneficial relationships with its stakeholders. Previously, the stakeholder theory was applied as strategic management tool. However, the establishment of social agenda for businesses has increased its value. Cooper (2004) states that in the recent times the stakeholder theory has become a normative approach has great acceptability in terms of ethics and morals. At the heart of the stakeholder’s theory is a focus on the interaction between the stakeholders and an organization. However, it is difficult to differentiate between moral responsibility and calculated responsibility in the present day context of business. It has become commonplace for organizations to take corporate social responsibilities that are ideally geared towards improving their revenue. The stakeholder’s theory makes it possible for business strategy to coexist with ethics in a dynamic and overly competitive environment. In the context of Werribee Residents Against Toxic Dump (WRATD), it should be noted that CSR failed to take into consideration the concerns of the public as stakeholders. The local community had legitimate concerns that their town was being used for unwanted developments. The Melbourne sewerage treatment plant had been constructed at the town and it was simply unbearable for another waste disposal facility to be put up in the same town. The residents feared that such kind of constructions would lower the property values in the town and place their investments at a disadvantage. The residents were also concerned about the possible spills from the disposal facility. The Werribee gardening farms were a source of livelihood for the locals and the sale of their produce would decline due to a possible public perception that the crops were contaminated by the toxic waste. If CSR had properly engaged the local community in dialogue, their concerns would have been addressed. Community engagement leads to enhanced sense of trust and appreciation which fosters cooperation. For instance, the safety issues of the locals would have been fully handled by showcasing the measures and standards that CSR was going to employ to ensure no spillages would occur. The residents should have been also motivated by the prospects of the introduction of the proposed project. According to Svendson (1998), the benefits of effective stakeholder engagement have a direct implication on the overall performance of an organization. He further states that successful business strategies are only possible through continuous dialogue with stakeholders. The social performance of a business has direct implications on the financial performance of a business. Therefore, every organization should strive to facilitate the input of interested parties in deciding what it does. The consequence of ignoring stakeholders is indeed grave for any organization. CSR was a major company in Australia with operations in several countries worldwide. However, it could not surmount the pressure by the local lobby group that was against its proposal to construct a waste disposal facility in the locality. Essentially, stakeholders are inclined to hit back whenever they feel sidelined in decision making processes that have an impact on their lives. The Werribee Residents Against Toxic Dump (WRATD) was formed due to the perception by residents that their interests were not being addressed and that they were not involved in the development of waste disposal facility proposal. Lack of community engagement can lead to community outrage as was the case of Werribee residents. The group initially begun as a small team of about six people but grew exponentially to reach over 15,000 residents within one year. The residents felt that the fight against the proposal by CSR was a war of ‘us versus them”. This means that the stakeholders felt the need to fight back in order to assert their position on the matter. According to Birch (2002), symmetric based communication that is dialogue based is critical in the effective engagement of stakeholders. It should be expected that the stakeholders may have divergent views. Organizations should seek to bridge the interests and concerns of stakeholders in order to harness their contributions. The other advantage of stakeholder concept is that it leads to mutually beneficial relationships. Ethical business addresses the interests of the community and consequently leads to a much more productive business environment. A business should consider the stakeholders views in a way that accommodates the pertinent concerns raised. Suffice to say, it is not sufficient for an organization to engage in publicity stunts and claim to effectively tackle ethical problems arising from its business projects (Savitz and Webber, 2006). Stakeholders are very keen and any attempt to hoodwink them may lead to further contempt for the proposed project. In the case of CSR, the organization was committed to constructing the waste disposal facility despite the opposition from the community. The company claimed that the proposal met all the regulatory requirements and therefore there was no reason why it should be halted. However, the will of the community as the stakeholders held sway even though it seemed like a battle against a giant. Ethical Theory Ethics can be defined as a systematic and conscious reflection on what is moral. Morality is essentially what the society considers to be right or wrong. Descriptive ethics deals with a general description of existing morality and is more of a question on morals based on facts. On the other hand, normative ethics deals with the judging of morality. Moral values form a critical part of normative ethics. Values are convictions that an individual or organization strives for. These are a set of believes that are set to provide guidelines on the path that a business has to follow. Moral norms are the actual rules and regulations that clearly define the essence of the values chosen to be attained. Norms are the means through which values are attained. Moral virtues are the inherent qualities that make a person or organization to be good or bad. According to Jones (2004), normative ethics can be classified broadly as based on either relativism or absolutism. The relativism theory states that individual morals may not necessarily be equal among people or in different regions. Paradoxically, this theory leads to a fundamental ambiguity in the definition of normative ethics. Absolutism implies that there are norms that can be applied universally. This implies that there are norms and values that are applicable to everyone, everywhere and at whichever time. However, this theory is deficient considering the fact that it not possible to have absolute values that transcend geographic and cultural boundaries. The utilitarianism ethics theory proposes that the major focus should not be on the actions but rather on the consequences. This means that an organization needs to focus mainly on implications of its decision and not necessarily the decisions themselves. Utilitarianism is based on the utility principle whereby something is considered right if its outcomes satisfy one or more needs. In the case of CSR, the company did not conclusively evaluate its consequences on the Werribee community. For instance, the company did not consider the fact that the proposed project would negatively impact on the farms and market gardens of the locals. Duty ethics is majorly based on choosing the right actions. This kind of ethics is also referred to as deontological ethics. In this context, the actor, the intention and consequences are ignored and prominence is given to the action itself. The Werribee case illustrates clearly that the action by CSR was not morally right. This is because the company discreetly announced the project without giving the local community an opportunity to study it. Also, the action of putting up a waste disposal facility in an area that already has a major sewerage treatment plant is ethically wrong. Virtual ethics lays emphasis on the nature of the person of organizations doing the action. The person or organization should base its actions on the appropriate virtues. Essentially, the onus is upon the individual to exercise ethically correct judgment before undertaking any action. The virtues of CSR were questioned by the Werribee Residents Against Toxic Dump (WRATD) due to the fact that the organization was not looking for means to reduce toxic waste. The lobby group argued that if CSR was allowed to construct a waste disposal facility, the action would be retrogressive in respect to advances towards technologies that minimized toxic waste generation. The company also failed the ethical test in other regions where it had engaged in such projects due to negligence and lack of commitment to the environment and the surrounding communities. Communicative Theory This theory proposes that the fundamental component of meaningful engagement among parties is effective communication. This means that an organization has to put in place structures that allow for easy and smooth communication among all the stakeholders. As outlined by Tuchman (2003), communication is simply the production and exchange of information. This is basic aspect of any community and therefore organizations have no choice but to embrace it. Colonial Sugar Refineries (CSR) had a systematic failure in its communication policies. First, the company published the proposal for the project on a small and rather inconspicuous newspaper advert. This implied that the company was not keen on notifying the public about its plans. Consequently, the perception of the public is that they were sidelined on matters concerning the project. It would have been wise to have prominent adverts and notices concerning the proposed project. This would have been perceived by the local community as an act of openness and thus eliminate any form resentment. The other communicative failure by CSR was on the aspect of direct engagement with the local people. CSR failed to be sensitive to the pertinent concerns of the local community and chose to drum down ‘expert advice’ on the residents. The company inherently assumed that the local people were not knowledgeable enough on the proposed project and therefore opted for expert advice from elsewhere. The local community needs to be consulted on projects in their area since they are the ones to be most affected by the project. In any case, the residents might have some insight on local issues which might not within the realm of knowledge of outsiders. Thus, it should be noted that CSR made a grave mistake by not involving the local community to make contributions on the issue of the proposed project. Conclusion Community engagement is critical in order to ensure that the concerns and interests of all stakeholders are addressed in any project. Involvement of the community leads to decisions that are acceptable and fair to both parties. It should be noted that the backing of the local community is a critical factor in the determination of success prospects of a project (Turrow 1992). Indeed, community engagement helps to solve the ethical problems that arise due to ‘spin’ by media agencies. By involving the community, the final decision is reached after negotiations and therefore the local residents do not feel sidelined or arm twisted. By allowing the local residents to participate in the decision making process, organizations show that they value the communities in which they operate in. This goes a long way to establish a trust based relationship between the stakeholders and an organization. However, the engaging the community invariably leads to delayed decision making mechanism. This is because the process of collecting the views of various stakeholders takes time and also the analysis of the views is cumbersome. It also leads to divergent views and a lot of time may be wasted in the process of arguing which idea or concern is of most importance. Nevertheless, community engagement is essential especially in the free democratic society where every community has a right to have a say on how their region is run. Woks Cited Barbaro,Garry. ‘Defining Realities: Why community consultations needs to start with the problem, not the solution’, Journal of Communication Management, vol. 10, no.1, pp.44-54. Freeman, Raymond. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Harper Collins, 2001. Print. Freeman, Raymond and Harrison, Jeff. Stakeholder Theory. New York: Pearson, 2001. Print. Hawkins, Richard, Weimann, Michael and Pingree, Sally., eds. Advancing Communication Science: Merging Mass and Interpersonal Processes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1998. Print. Jones, Chris. Community Engagement in Decision Making. New York: McGraw Hill, 2004. Print Turow, James. Media Systems in Society: Understanding Industries and Power. New York: Longman, 1992. Print. Tuchman, Garry. Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. New York: The Free Press, 2003. Print. Wallack, Longman & Dorfman, Jernigan. Media Advocacy and the Environment: Power for Prevention. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 2001. Print. Read More