Managers as drivers of CSR in state-owned enterprises

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is increasingly required not only of private sector companies, but also of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), whose main function is to provide services to society and not principally to obtain financial reward. The important role played by managers in implementing CSR has been demonstrated by prior research. The objective of this paper is to examine how managers of SOEs perceive the concept of CSR, the reasons for their involvement and how it is integrated into everyday business practices. In addition, we examine whether managers' attitudes towards CSR policies are influenced by their personal profiles and by the sector in which the SOEs work. We find that, although these managers are aware of the importance of the CSR principles underlying their activities and understand the meaning, scope and dimensions of CSR, there remains an evident need to enhance the application of CSR policies among the strategies of SOEs. The manager profile and the sector in which the SOEs work both have a strong influence on their behaviour regarding CSR issues.     

Urban agriculture,civil interfaces and moving beyond difference: the experiences of plot holders in Dublin and Belfast

Recent literature suggests that a “shared politics of place” attained through joint activities fosters social integration and provides people with a means to practise co-operation [Baumann, G., 1996. Contesting culture: discourses of identity in multi-ethnic London. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Sanjek, R., 1998. The future of us all: race & neighbourhood policies in New York City. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; Sennett, R., 2012. Together: the rituals, pleasures and politics of cooperation. UK: Penguin]. Such a “shared politics of place” is most likely to occur in the context of public space conceptualised broadly as “the setting for everyday spatial behaviour of individuals and communities, emphasizing ordinary activities of citizens” [Lownsbrough, H. and Beunderman, J., 2007. Equally spaced? Public space and interaction between diverse communities. London: Demos, p. 8]. Here we explore one element of such public space – urban agriculture sites – with a view to identifying the extent to which a “shared politics of place” can be created and nurtured among the cultivating citizenry. The paper draws on data collected on allotment gardening sites in two urban contexts: Dublin (Ireland) and Belfast (Northern Ireland) over the period 2009–2013. We demonstrate the centrality of allotment cultivation to the generation of solidarity, mutuality and trust among participating citizens. Individuals engaging in allotment gardening in both Dublin and Belfast create and sustain civil interfaces – dismantling barriers, exchanging knowledge, challenging stereotypes, generating empathy and getting on with the business of simply getting on with their lives. The modus operandi of allotment gardening is predicated on a willingness to disregard social and ethno-national categorisations while on site. This is not to deny that such differences exist and persist, but allotments offer a “space of potential” where those differences are, at least for a time, rendered less salient.     

Considering the needs of indigenous and local populations in conservation programs

Local rural and indigenous communities have assumed increasing responsibility for conservation within and between areas buffering the impacts of agricultural or resource‐extraction zones and protected areas. Empowering local communities as central partners in conservation and climate‐change mitigation has allowed many people to gain access to land and citizenship rights but has provided limited improvements in access to social services and economic opportunities even as expectation about their role as environmental stewards grows. These expectations, however, are inconsistent with reality. We conducted multiple field studies in Brazil since the mid‐1980s to illustrate the discrepancies between conservation programs and local conditions and expectations. We suggest that public policies and conservation programs should not delegate responsibility for managing protected areas to local and indigenous communities without considering local needs and expectations and locals’ attitudes toward conservation. In other words, behavior that maintains or improves the environment should not be treated as traditional based on the expectations of outsiders. Framing local populations as traditional environmentalists creates contradictions and frustrations for local populations and for conservation professionals and policy makers.     

Why social values cannot be changed for the sake of conservation

The hope for creating widespread change in social values has endured among conservation professionals since early calls by Aldo Leopold for a “land ethic.” However, there has been little serious attention in conservation to the fields of investigation that address values, how they are formed, and how they change. We introduce a social–ecological systems conceptual approach in which values are seen not only as motivational goals people hold but also as ideas that are deeply embedded in society's material culture, collective behaviors, traditions, and institutions. Values define and bind groups, organizations, and societies; serve an adaptive role; and are typically stable across generations. When abrupt value changes occur, they are in response to substantial alterations in the social–ecological context. Such changes build on prior value structures and do not result in complete replacement. Given this understanding of values, we conclude that deliberate efforts to orchestrate value shifts for conservation are unlikely to be effective. Instead, there is an urgent need for research on values with a multilevel and dynamic view that can inform innovative conservation strategies for working within existing value structures. New directions facilitated by a systems approach will enhance understanding of the role values play in shaping conservation challenges and improve management of the human component of conservation.     

退耕还林工程与农业生态经济社会系统协同性研究——以安塞县为例

针对黄土丘陵区退耕还林工程与农业生态经济社会协同性研究滞后的现实,在构建退耕还林工程与农业生态经济社会协同性表征体系的基础上,通过建立耦合度模型分析了二者的协同性及相关问题,将退耕还林工程与农业生态经济社会系统协同关系划分为4个阶段：（Ⅰ）协作推进与发展阶段,（Ⅱ）相悖阶段,（Ⅲ）无序失衡阶段,（Ⅳ）抑制发展阶段。其中阶段Ⅲ只是理论结果,在实际政策约束和农户行为的影响下一般不会出现;而阶段Ⅱ和阶段Ⅳ可能会短期出现。以安塞县为例,系统分析了不同阶段协同性演变过程：1995—2014年,安塞县先后经历了相悖阶段和协作推进与发展阶段,目前处于协作推进与发展阶段的下降时期。基于此,需要进一步优化产业结构提高区域内资源的有效利用率,通过林种结构的合理布局,提高退耕林分质量,推进退耕还林工程与农业生态经济社会系统的协同发展。     

Economic development and environmental protection: an ecological economics perspective

This paper argues on both theoretical and empirical grounds that, beyond a certain point, there is an unavoidable conflictbetween economic development (generally taken to mean 'materialeconomic growth') and environmental protection. Think for a moment of natural forests, grasslands, marine estuaries, salt marshes, and coral reefs; and of arable soils, aquifers, mineraldeposits, petroleum, and coal. These are all forms of 'natural capital' that represent highly-ordered self-producing ecosystemsor rich accumulations of energy/matter with high use potential (low entropy). Now contemplate despoiled landscapes, eroding farmlands, depleted fisheries, anthropogenic greenhouse gases,acid rain, poisonous mine tailings and toxic synthetic compounds.These all represent disordered systems or degraded forms of energy and matter with little use potential (high entropy). The main thing connecting these two states is human economic activity. Ecological economics interprets the environment-economyrelationship in terms of the second law of thermodynamics. The second law sees economic activity as a dissipative process. Fromthis perspective, the production of economic goods andservices invariably requires the consumption of available energy and matter. To grow and develop, the economynecessarily 'feeds' on sources of high-quality energy/matter first produced by nature. This tends to disorder and homogenizethe ecosphere, The ascendance of humankind has consistently been accompanied by an accelerating rate of ecological degradation, particularly biodiversity loss, the simplificationof natural systems and pollution. In short, contemporary political rhetoric to the contrary, the prevailing growth-oriented global development paradigm is fundamentally incompatible with long-term ecological and social sustainability. Unsustainability is not a technical nor economic problem as usually conceived, but rather a state of systemic incompatibilitybetween a economy that is a fully-contained, growing, dependent sub-system of a non-growing ecosphere. Potential solutions fly inthe face of contemporary development trends and cultural values.     

Understanding the Lessons and Limitations of Conservation and Development

Abstract: The lack of concrete instances in which conservation and development have been successfully merged has strengthened arguments for strict exclusionist conservation policies. Research has focused more on social cooperation and conflict of different management regimes and less on how these factors actually affect the natural environments they seek to conserve. Consequently, it is still unknown which strategies yield better conservation outcomes? We conducted a meta‐analysis of 116 published case studies on common resource management regimes from Africa, south and central America, and southern and Southeast Asia. Using ranked sociodemographic, political, and ecological data, we analyzed the effect of land tenure, population size, social heterogeneity, as well as internally devised resource‐management rules and regulations (institutions) on conservation outcome. Although land tenure, population size, and social heterogeneity did not significantly affect conservation outcome, institutions were positively associated with better conservation outcomes. There was also a significant interaction effect between population size and institutions, which implies complex relationships between population size and conservation outcome. Our results suggest that communities managing a common resource can play a significant role in conservation and that institutions lead to management regimes with lower environmental impacts.     

Mapping Human and Social Dimensions of Conservation Opportunity for the Scheduling of Conservation Action on Private Land

Abstract Spatial prioritization techniques are applied in conservation‐planning initiatives to allocate conservation resources. Although typically they are based on ecological data (e.g., species, habitats, ecological processes), increasingly they also include nonecological data, mostly on the vulnerability of valued features and economic costs of implementation. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of conservation actions implemented through conservation‐planning initiatives is a function of the human and social dimensions of social‐ecological systems, such as stakeholders’ willingness and capacity to participate. We assessed human and social factors hypothesized to define opportunities for implementing effective conservation action by individual land managers (those responsible for making day‐to‐day decisions on land use) and mapped these to schedule implementation of a private land conservation program. We surveyed 48 land managers who owned 301 land parcels in the Makana Municipality of the Eastern Cape province in South Africa. Psychometric statistical and cluster analyses were applied to the interview data so as to map human and social factors of conservation opportunity across a landscape of regional conservation importance. Four groups of landowners were identified, in rank order, for a phased implementation process. Furthermore, using psychometric statistical techniques, we reduced the number of interview questions from 165 to 45, which is a preliminary step toward developing surrogates for human and social factors that can be developed rapidly and complemented with measures of conservation value, vulnerability, and economic cost to more‐effectively schedule conservation actions. This work provides conservation and land management professionals direction on where and how implementation of local‐scale conservation should be undertaken to ensure it is feasible.     

Soft systems thinking and social learning for adaptive management

The success of adaptive management in conservation has been questioned and the objective-based management paradigm on which it is based has been heavily criticized. Soft systems thinking and social-learning theory expose errors in the assumption that complex systems can be dispassionately managed by objective observers and highlight the fact that conservation is a social process in which objectives are contested and learning is context dependent. We used these insights to rethink adaptive management in a way that focuses on the social processes involved in management and decision making. Our approach to adaptive management is based on the following assumptions: action toward a common goal is an emergent property of complex social relationships; the introduction of new knowledge, alternative values, and new ways of understanding the world can become a stimulating force for learning, creativity, and change; learning is contextual and is fundamentally about practice; and defining the goal to be addressed is continuous and in principle never ends. We believe five key activities are crucial to defining the goal that is to be addressed in an adaptive-management context and to determining the objectives that are desirable and feasible to the participants: situate the problem in its social and ecological context; raise awareness about alternative views of a problem and encourage enquiry and deconstruction of frames of reference; undertake collaborative actions; and reflect on learning.     

Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management

Despite its necessity, integration of natural and social sciences to inform conservation efforts has been difficult. We examined the views of 63 scientists and practitioners involved in marine management in Mexico's Gulf of California, the central California coast, and the western Pacific on the challenges associated with integrating social science into research efforts that support ecosystem-based management (EBM) in marine systems. We used a semistructured interview format. Questions focused on how EBM was developed for these sites and how contextual factors affected its development and outcomes. Many of the traditional challenges linked with interdisciplinary research were present in the EBM projects we studied. However, a number of contextual elements affected how mandates to include social science were interpreted and implemented as well as how easily challenges could be addressed. For example, a common challenge is that conservation organizations are often dominated by natural scientists, but for some projects it was easier to address this imbalance than for others. We also found that the management and institutional histories that came before EBM in specific cases were important features of local context. Because challenges differed among cases, we believe resolving challenges to interdisciplinary research should be context specific.