Tài liệu Sustainability Communications A Toolkit for Marketing and Advertising Courses doc

LINK DOWNLOAD MIỄN PHÍ TÀI LIỆU "Tài liệu Sustainability Communications A Toolkit for Marketing and Advertising Courses doc": http://123doc.vn/document/1046064-tai-lieu-sustainability-communications-a-toolkit-for-marketing-and-advertising-courses-doc.htm

5

About UNEP Division for Technology, Industry and Economics


The UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (DTIE) helps governments, local authorities and
decision-makers in business and industry to develop and implement policies and practices focusing on
sustainable development.

The Division works to promote sustainable consumption and production, the efficient use of renewable
energy, adequate management of chemicals and the integration of environmental costs in development
policies.

The Office of the Director, located in Paris, coordinates activities through:

• The International Environmental Technology Centre - IETC (Osaka, Shiga), which implements
integrated waste, water and disaster management programmes, focusing in particular on Asia.
• Production and Consumption (Paris), which promotes sustainable
consumption and production patterns as a contribution to human development through global markets.
• Chemicals (Geneva), which catalyzes global actions to bring about the sound management of
chemicals and the improvement of chemical safety worldwide.
• Energy (Paris), which fosters energy and transport policies for sustainable
development and encourages investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency.
• OzonAction (Paris), which supports the phase-out of ozone depleting
substances in developing countries and countries with economies in transition to ensure implementation
of the Montreal Protocol.
• Economics and Trade (Geneva), which helps countries to integrate
environmental considerations into economic and trade policies, and works with the finance sector to
incorporate sustainable development policies.

UNEP DTIE activities focus on raising awareness, improving the transfer of knowledge and
information, fostering technological cooperation and partnerships, and implementing international
conventions and agreements.

For more information, see
www.unep.fr

About UNESCO

UNESCO was created in 1945 to contribute to peace and security by encouraging collaboration between
countries through education, science, culture and communication. UNESCO is the lead agency for the
promotion of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014).
UNESCO first demonstrated its concern for sustainable development in the Science Sector. Today, that goal
is present in all UNESCO fields of competence – education, the social and human sciences, science, culture
and communication.

About the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development

The United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014) aims to integrate the
values inherent in sustainable development into all aspects of learning to encourage changes in behaviour
which will enable a more viable and fairer society for everyone.
During this decade, education for sustainable development will contribute to preparing citizens better
prepared to face the challenges of the present and the future, and decision-makers who will act responsibly
to create a viable world.
Five kinds of fundamental learning have been identified: learning to know, learning to do, learning to be,
learning to live together, and learning to transform oneself and society.



6

About IAU

Founded in 1950 under the aegis of UNESCO, the International Association of Universities (IAU) is a
worldwide association of higher education institutions. IAU brings together universities, institutions of higher
education and national and regional associations of universities from around the world for reflection and
action on common concerns. It aims to promote debate, reflection and action on key issues in the field of
higher education.

IAU actively supports higher education for sustainable development as one of its thematic priorities.
Sustainable development initiatives include developing partnerships (eg. with UNEP and UNESCO), holding
international conferences and meetings, and producing and sharing information online or through
publication. The Association provides input to the agenda and objectives of the UN-DESD, and is a founding
member of the Ubuntu Alliance, a consortium of the foremost educational and scientific organizations
working together towards a “new global learning space for sustainable development”.

7

Module I


Sustainable development: the ethical and practical issues


1 - Introduction to the principles of sustainable development

a) The sustainable development debate: reviewing some familiar and controversial
principles


The merits of debate


Ever since it became a public issue at both the national and the international levels, the concept of
sustainable development has been a subject for debate (M-C. Smouts (dir.) 2005). Its applicability to a
wide range of situations accounts for its popularity, but also for the scepticism with which it is often
viewed.


From a pedagogic point of view, then, any introduction to sustainable development also deserves to take
the form of an organized debate in which the issues at stake are clearly analysed and different ideas
compared.


An introductory discussion will provide an opportunity for open-minded debate about the different subject
areas of sustainable development while bringing in the critical angle that is essential to proper analysis.
By giving free expression to students’ thoughts and feelings about the principles and practicalities of
sustainable development, this will serve to isolate commonplaces and lay the groundwork for an
informed dialogue.



THE MAIN CHALLENGES FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT


THE CHALLENGES

o
Environmental challenges: depletion of natural resources (non-renewable energies), waste, air pollution, water and
soil, destruction of the ozone layer, global warming (or “greenhouse effect”) and climate change, loss of biodiversity.

o
Social challenges: poverty, unhealthy living conditions (housing, drinking water access), inequality, child labour, lack
of basic services (health, education, transport, communication), chemical pollution, food hazards, obesity, high-risk
practices, discrimination, marginalization, political instability.

o
Economic challenges: unfair competition (in opposition to fair trade), working conditions, unemployment, responsible
production (subcontracting chains), over-consumption.

o
Challenges of communication: conveying sustainable development values in advertising, public relations, marketing
and all other forms of public or corporate communication.

THE GOALS

o
Advance technological progress to reduce the environmental impact of human societies.

o
Change behaviour in the North and create new development models in the South. Technological progress is a
priority, but it is not enough. Global consumption is growing much faster – particularly in certain sectors such as cars
and energy – than the kind of scientific know-how that might alleviate the impact of human societies on the
environment. In addition, technology is unlikely to be able to neutralize certain planetary phenomena such as climate
change.

DOCUMENT TO BE CONSULTED
The United Nations Environment Programme “Resource Kit on Sustainable Consumption and Production”
(http://www.unep.fr/pc/sustain/10year/SCP_Resource_Kit.htm)

8



THE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT

The ecological footprint is a way of measuring human pressure on the natural environment. Created by two researchers
at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver (Canada - M. Wackernagel & W. Rees 1995), the concept was very
quickly popularized by numerous environmental NGOs such as the WWF (http://www.wwf.org).
“The ecological footprint of a population is the biologically productive land and water areas required to produce the
resources consumed and assimilate the wastes generated by that population using prevailing technology.” (WWF,
UNEP, WCMC et Global Footprint Network : 2004)

According to the WWF “Living Planet Report 2002”, humanity’s global ecological footprint has almost doubled over the
last 35 years. It is now 20% in excess of the biological capacity of the earth. The study also shows profound inequalities
between countries: on average, the footprint per person is six times as great in high-income countries as in low-income
ones. In 10 years, the ecological footprint per person has grown by 8% in rich countries and diminished by 11% in the
poorest.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

o
Ducroux A-M (dir.) (2002) Les nouveaux utopistes du développement durable, Paris : Éd. Autrement
o
Elliott J. A. (1999) An introduction to sustainable development, London ; New York : Routledge
o
Smouts M-C. (dir.) (2005) Le développement durable. Les termes du débat, Paris, Editions Dalloz
o
Wackernagel M. & Rees W. (1995), Our Ecological Footprint : Reducing Human Impact on Earth, New Society
Publishers
o
WWF, UNEP, WCMC and Global Footprint Network (2004) – Living Planet 2004 / Rapport Planète vivante 2004



 See the bibliography on sustainable development

9

Some background concepts


Future generations
o
According to the accepted formula, the term “sustainable development” means “development that
meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs” (Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common
Future, 1987, known as the “Brundtland Report”).


A three-pillared approach
o
While respect for future generations is the main thrust of sustainable development, it also denotes a
shift in outlook and methods in favour of more transversal approaches. By contrast with the narrowly
economistic conception of development that prevailed until the early 1990s, sustainable
development entails “the balanced integration of societies’ economic, social and environmental goals
in a spirit of equity and with a concern to preserve the interests of future generations” (M.C. Smouts,
D. Battistella & P. Vennesso 2003).


The interdependence principle
o
Recognizing the social and environmental factors of development alongside the economic ones does
not mean simply juxtaposing these three dimensions; attention also needs to be paid to the
interdependence between them in the evolution of human societies.


Pluralism and communication
o
The interdependence of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of development also
implies the interdependence of actors. Consequently, sustainable development has often been seen
as having a fourth pillar, frequently designated by the term “governance”. The concept is both
prescriptive and functional (J.N. Rosenau & E.O. Czempiel (eds.) 1992; M.C. Smouts (dir.) 1998),
and it is now a strong feature not only of public initiatives but of corporate activities as well. It
ascribes a central role to communication and the involvement of a plurality of legitimate actors
(“stakeholders”) in environmental and development policy inputs and decision-making.

Although it has been defined in many ways, sustainable development has a single aim: a shift in the social
and environmental practices of development so that this can be framed within a logic of security, balance
and continuity - in other words, “sustainability”.




BIBLIOGRAPHY

o
Badie, B. & Smouts M-C. (1999) Le retournement du monde, Paris, Presses de Sciences Po et Dalloz
o
Cox R. (2006) Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere, Sage Publications
o
Freeman R.E. (1984) Strategic Management : A Stakeholder Approach, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice Hall.
o
Gendron C. 2006. Le développement durable comme compromis. La modernisation écologique de l’économie à
l’ère de la mondialisation, Collection Pratiques et politiques sociales et économiques, Presses de l’Université du
Québec (Québec), 284 p.
o
Keohane R. & Nye J. Jr. (2002) “Governance in a globalizing world.” In Robert Keohane, Power and Governance in
a Partially Globalized World. Routledge, London.
o
Rosenau J.N & Czempiel E.O. (eds.) (1992) Governance without government : Order and Change in World Politics,
Cambridge University Press
o
Sachs I. (1997) L’écodéveloppement : stratégies pour le XXe siècle, Paris, Syros.
o
Smouts M-C. (dir.) (1998) Les nouvelles relations internationales. Pratiques et théories, Presses de Sciences Po,
Paris
o
Smouts M-C., Battistella D. & Vennesson P. (dir.) (2003) Dictionnaire des Relations Internationales. Paris, Editions
Dalloz
o
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our Common Future, Oxford: Oxford University Press
o
Young O.R, Demko G.J. & Ramakrishna K. (1996) Global Environmental Change and International Governance,
Hanover, University Press of New England



 See the bibliography on sustainable development


10


Areas of disagreement


The public authorities, citizens and businesses are broadly agreed about the ethical dimensions of
sustainable development. There is disagreement, however, when it comes to the best way to go about
turning values into realities. Many criticisms have been levelled at the very notion of “sustainable
development”, and some are essential to the debate.

o
The furthest-reaching of these criticisms identifies an insoluble contradiction between the economic
objectives inherent in the development principle and the environmental or social concerns
encapsulated in the notion of “sustainability”. A number of questions are raised in this respect, for
example:
 Is sustainable development possible in a consumer society?
 Does today’s global economic system allow businesses to incorporate objectives of
collective interest into their activities?


In this dispute, two broad schools of thought confront each other:

o
The first tends to argue that sustainable development is utopian given the way the global economic
system operates today, driven first and foremost by the imperatives of profit. Even when they try to
organize themselves in such a way as to reduce the environmental or social consequences of their
activities, therefore, economic actors are operating within a framework that hinders these efforts:

 The underlying structures of a capitalist business enshrine individual and not collective
interests. The fact is that the “shareholder value” of a business (the level of reward for
shareholders) remains the chief criterion for evaluating activities and performance.
Businesses therefore find it functionally impossible to incorporate the pursuit of the common
good into their activities (S. Pollard ; C. Gendron, A. Lapointe & M.F. Turcotte 2004).

 The amount of products/services sold – and not their social or environmental qualities –
remains the chief criterion for evaluating them in terms of social relevance. In other words, a
product whose economic performance is judged inferior to its social and environmental
performance is not always perceived as relevant. PB: There is two comas here. This attitude
is evolving in some very specific cases, such as when society identifies high-risk practices,
tobacco being one example.

 At the global level, a lack of transparency and pluralism in deliberative or decision-making
mechanisms within institutions such as the World Trade Organization are often among the
arguments used to make the case that sustainable development lacks the means to subsist.

o
The second school of thought maintains that the concept of sustainable development is relevant in
the existing world economic system and defends the idea of “moral capitalism” (S.B. Young 2004).
The case is made that existing economic models are compatible with a system of responsible
production and consumption:

 While private interests are generally seen as inimical to the general interest, some authors
and actors argue that contributing to the general interest tends to generate private benefits
(J. Andreoni 1988 ; H. Höllander 1990 ; WBCSD 2001).

 The social relevance of private interests is not challenged by the sustainable development
project but is associated with the notion of service to the community.

 Social pressure on economic actors seeking to preserve their legitimacy in society
encourages them to incorporate general-interest goals into their activities.


11


BIBLIOGRAPHY


o
Andreoni J. (1988) « Privately Provided Public Goods in a Large Economy: The Limits of Altruism », Journal of
Public Economics 35, 57-73
o
Andreoni J. (1990) « Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving », The
Economic Journal 100, 464-477
o
Friedman M. (1970) « The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits », New York Times Magazine,
September 13 : 32-33, 122, 124, 126
o
Gendron C. (2004) « Entre responsabilité sociale et entreprise, une éthique d’intérêts? », Entreprise Éthique, Paris,
p. 100-104
o
Gendron C., Lapointe A & Turcotte M F. (2004) « Responsabilité sociale et régulation de l’entreprise mondialisée »,
Relations industrielles, 2004, vol 59, No 1
o
Haufler V. (2001) A Public Role for the Private Sector: Industry Self-Regulation in a Global Economy. Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, Washington, DC
o
Höllander H. (1990) « A Social Exchange Approach to Voluntary Cooperation », American Economic Review 80(5),
1157-1167
o
Jones M.T. (1996) « Missing the Forest for the Trees: A Critique of the Social Responsibility Concept and
Discourse », Business & Society, vol. 35, n
o
1, 7–41
o
Pollard S. « Creating the Future: Citizenship, Business and the Ethics of Sustainability », Just Business
http://www.jusbiz.org
(2006)
o
Stark A. (1993) « What’s the matter with Business Ethics ? », Harvard Business Review, vol.3, mai-juin, 38-48
o
WBCSD (2001) Sustainability Through the Market. Seven Keys to Success
o
Young S. B. (2004) « The Search for Moral Capitalism and the Holy Grail of Business Valuation », Ivey Business
Journal, March/April 2004



 See the bibliography on Sustainable Development and Corporate Social Responsibility

12

The motivations and commitments of economic actors


Many domestic and multinational companies now devote a significant part of their efforts to sustainable
development. This is accounted for in various ways:

o
Utilitarian initiatives
 A utilitarian interpretation of sustainable development initiatives sees them as being
principally intended to serve companies’ economic and commercial interests in a social
setting that is highly sensitive to their values. In corporate communication, sustainable
development thus becomes a “marketing tool” like any other, the main aim being to increase
market share by appealing to the “responsible consumer” niche (M. Friedman 1970; M.T.
Jones 1996; R. Cox 2006) or to diversify product ranges. It should be remembered, though,
that not all “sustainable development” initiatives are systematically publicized.

o
Social integration strategies
 A second interpretation, which places companies’ intentions in a markedly less critical light,
is that economic actors are now having to respond to new branding imperatives by showing
a commitment to sustainable development (J. Himmelstein 1997; E. Champion: 2003).
These initiatives are thus seen as a response to the social pressure on businesses, whose
fundamental objective is to secure and consolidate a legitimate place in society. They are a
manifestation, it is argued, of a more cooperative attitude towards the public authorities, who
are liable to bring in restrictive regulations, but also towards civil society actors
(associations, NGOs, pressure groups).

o
The need for self-regulation
 Some authors (J. Brabet 2003; C. Gendron, A. Lapointe & M-F. Turcotte 2004) view
corporate sustainable development initiatives as examples of the kind of self-regulation that
is needed in the economic sphere in the absence of institutions with real authority at the
level of the globalized world economy.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

o
Brabet J. (2003) « Responsabilité sociale et gouvernance de l’entreprise : quels modèles ? », in Entreprise éthique,
Ethique Editions
o
Braithwaite J. & Drahos, P. (2000) Global Business Regulation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
o
Champion E. (2003) « De la responsabilité sociale corporative à la citoyenneté corporative : l’entreprise en quête de
légitimité sociale pour assurer un nouveau rôle social », Symposium international organisé par le Centre de
recherche inter-universitaire sur la mondialisation et le travail (HEC Montréal, 30 avril au 2 mai)
o
Cox R. (2006) Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere, Sage Publications
o
Gendron C. (2000) « Enjeux sociaux et représentations de l’entreprise », La Revue du MAUSS, n
o
15, 320–325
o
Gendron C., Lapointe A. & Turcotte M F. (2004) , « Responsabilité sociale et régulation de l’entreprise
mondialisée », Relations industrielles, 2004, vol 59, No 1
o
Haufler V. (2001) A Public Role for the Private Sector: Industry Self-Regulation in a Global Economy. Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, Washington, DC
o
Himmelstein J. (1997) Looking Good and Doing Good : Corporate Philanthropy and Corporate Power, Bloomington :
Indiana University Press
o
Jones M.T. (1999) « The Institutional Determinants of Social Responsibility », Journal of Business Ethics Vol. 20 pp.
163-179
o
Laville E. (2002) L'entreprise verte : le développement durable change l'entreprise pour changer le monde, Paris :
Village mondial : Pearson education



 See the bibliography on Corporate Social Responsibility

13

b) Defining the theory, illustrating the practice



The terms of the debate can be defined more accurately when considered in the light of practice. Concrete
examples exist and can be used to analyse the long-term results and benefits of integrating sustainable
development principles into both the public policy domain and economic and commercial activities. They also
provide insights into the problems that might be posed by this new method of “calculation”.


The social role of business

While the public authorities are undertaking more and more sustainable development initiatives, society at
large has been aware for many years now of the influence that business has on natural resource use,
technological development, modes of production and consumption, and lifestyles. This influence implies
major responsibilities for these actors in their development, management, marketing and communication
activities, especially in sectors that produce a major social and environmental impact (energy, cars, textiles,
food). For example, the development of any sustainable product/service needs to meet new evaluation
standards and take into account the environmental, social and economic effects it will produce over its whole
life cycle: the impact of manufacturing in terms of natural and human resources, the specific characteristics
of the product/service (polluting? reusable? recyclable? etc.), methods of use, and whether it encourages
rational consumption.

In this context, governments and civil societies recognize the importance of concretely supporting and
helping companies to engage on the path towards sustainable development.

Some businesses have been quick to introduce environmental management and rationalization procedures
into their activities. This was the case in the food industry in the late 1980s following complaints about tuna
fishing methods and their dramatic consequences for dolphin populations (M.F. Teisl, B. Roc & R.L. Hicks
2002). Likewise, it was in response to the breadth of concerns expressed about the production of
polystyrene and the destruction of the ozone layer in the early 1990s that McDonald’s took the initiative of
using new materials in the manufacture of its packaging (B. Gifford 1991; S. Hume 1991; M.J. Polonsky
1994).




BIBLIOGRAPHY

o
Gifford B. (1991) "The greening of the golden arches – McDonald′s teams with environmental group to cut waste",
The San Diego Union , No.August 19, pp.C1
o
Hume S. (1991) " McDonald′s: case study", Advertising Age, Vol. 62 No.5, pp.32
o
Polonsky M.J. (1994) « An Introduction to Green Marketing », Department of Management, University of Newcastle,
Australia
o
Teisl M.F., Roc B. & Hicks R.L. (2002) « Can Eco-Labels Tune a Market? Evidence from Dolphin-Safe Labeling »,
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 43(3), 339-359




 See the bibliography on sustainable development and on Communications and Sustainable Development

14

Public and private actors: responding to the challenges

Social and political incentives apart, public-sector and business actors have progressively identified the
issues of legitimacy and performance associated with the environmental and social conditions of their work.
Failure to consider these conditions involves risks that are now the subject of constant attention:


For public-sector actors, overlooking sustainable development issues can have major political and social
consequences. The obligation to lead by example requires institutions to adopt sustainable development
principles in their projects and operating methods while encouraging citizens and users to take individual
responsibility for the environment and society at large. It has also become crucial for these actors to
support companies’ engagement and progress.


For businesses, the consequences in terms of legitimacy and financial performance can be substantial
as well. In the long run, companies whose activities result in destruction of the environment or the social
fabric expose themselves to social and commercial risks that can no longer be ignored. This is the case,
for example, when the depletion or degradation of natural resources exploited by a business results in
additional production costs or, in some cases, major changes in production methods (M.
Tsoutsoura 2004).




BIBLIOGRAPHY

o
Férone G., d’Arcimoles C H., Bello P., Sassenou N. (2001) Le développement durable : des enjeux stratégiques
pour l’entreprise, Editions d’Organisation
o
Tsoutsoura M. (2004) « Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance », Centre for Responsible
Business, Working paper no. 7, University of California, Berkeley




 See the bibliography on Corporate Social Responsibility and on Communications and Sustainable
Development




Analysing good and bad practices


In the public domain, examples of “good” practice include numerous policies to raise public awareness of
the need for waste sorting and recycling and energy-saving measures.


In business, the development of more environmentally friendly packaging or products can be profitable
for companies and for society as a whole.


Attention also needs to be paid to practices that have been questioned and criticized. In the public
domain, certain environmental disasters resulting from management or communication failures provide
interesting material for analysis: the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 and its very severe consequences for
human health, the environment and the socio-economic fabric of many regions.


What is often perceived as “bad” practices can also have severe consequences for economic actors: the
financial penalties imposed on Coca-Cola in India following campaigns against the firm by the
inhabitants of Kerala and the criticized environmental consequences of its activity in that region
.