engleski

The Word for World is Not Forest

It is the purpose of this paper to use the metaphor provided by the work of Le Guin (1972), together with a consideration of current corporate activity, to show that a sustainable future is neither exploitative (and so the corporate leaders have got it wrong) nor confrontational (and so the anti-globalisation movement is equally wrong). The ambition of this paper is to raise three bottom line questions: First, how counter-productive the conflict between the proponents and opponents of globalisation can be? ; Second, the opponents of globalisation are hard to identify ; they seem to be an amorphous streams of fragmentated debate groups rather than being a distinctive or alternative paradigm, providing an alibi for a new conservative move of the corporate sector. What we need here is to connect various opinions inside the critical thinking instead of leading endless fetishists battles for our own unique concept of truth ; Third, there is an urgent need for the new concept of citizenship. Owing to the concept of limited liability, managers are enabled to delegate responsibility for their actions outside the business. Organisations are accountable through their financial reporting but they are accountable only to those stakeholders with sufficient power to influence activity. Hence, a new concept of citizenship which implies a concern for all stakeholders and not just those with power at the present time is a very important way of resolution the conflict between the pro and anti-globalists. British concept of a third way may be a fruitful way of transcending the tensions between the economic liberalism of the New Right, on the one hand, and the Old Left with its commitment to more direct forms of state intervention, on the other hand.

Sustainable future; Third way; Corporate activity

nije evidentirano