Search results

This chapter deals with global sustainability, in its old and modern concepts, typologies, and theories. Most concepts of sustainability, we contend, are anthropocentric, a self-serving attitude that believes in the utmost superiority of man over the rest of the nonhuman universe, which seemingly privileges humans to use, extract, and exploit planetary resources for industrialization and infrastructure development and presumably lead to human growth and prosperity (the Anthropocene). The cost of this however is terrestrial depletion, deterioration, degradation, and decadence that manifest in the current global phenomena of global warming, global climate change, Arctic meltdowns, ocean acidity, massive deforestation, and global carbon footprints, which have collectively rendered human habitability on this earth drastically reduced and jeopardized. In this context, we review the timeline (1992–2022) of the United Nations' sustainability negotiations and accords, several nonanthropocentric and nonanthropomorphic conceptualizations of global sustainability such as Leopold Aldo's land ethic, deep ecology of Naess and associates, Thomas Berry's ecozoic ecology (updated by Spethmann). Combining the best nonanthropocentric developments, we propose a holistic concept of “natural sustainability,” more consonant with critical thinking, which mandates reduced or disciplined use of planetary resources such that Nature can regenerate and renew herself.

Natural sustainability advocates a more fruitful integrative ecozoic paradigm of “sustainability centrism,” which seeks cosmic sustainability of Mother Nature for herself as an end in herself, and we spell out its implications for organizational science and corporate responsibility as an extended global community.

This chapter runs into three parts. Part I: Major Sustainability Types versus Ecozoic Worldview of Cosmic Sustainability; Part II: Conceptualization of Natural Sustainability and Its Justification based on Environmental Ethics, Ecozoic Sustainability, and Deep Ecology; and Part III: Capturing Nature as Nature and Her Moral Imperatives for Understanding Natural Sustainability. Toward the end of this chapter, we also discuss managerial implications and directions for future research.

This chapter is an examination of what is meant by the term ‘Good Farmer’ and whether or not this is compatible with being a good businessperson. The term ‘Feckless Farmer’ is introduced to describe someone who is the opposite of a Good Farmer. And all of this is considered with reference to the farmers of the village of Ambridge in the West Midlands, with special emphasis on the practices of Brian Aldridge and his recent issues with contamination of his land and neighbouring watercourses. This work starts by defining key terms before moving on to consider the similarities and differences between farms and other types of businesses. The different philosophical paradigms that can underlie different definitions and practices of a Good Farmer are also explored. The ways that the economies of farms differ from most businesses will also be discussed. With some conclusions being drawn as to whether Mr Aldridge is a Good Farmer or a Feckless one, and if he deserved to be lauded as an award-winning businessperson.

Cyril Coffin, Director‐General of the Food Manufacturers' Federation was highly critical in a recent issue of RDM of the Monopolies Commission Report “Discounts to retailers”. Brian Thomas considers that his judgment is unnecessarily harsh and gives us his alternative view.

Considers the rise in trade with the Asian nations of the Pacific Rim and the increase in their economic strength. Provides some examples of this growing strength. Looks at the opportunities and threats from this phenomenon. Considers the potential for export and opportunities for financing growth. Concludes that there are benefits and concerns from this growing power and new strategies will be required by business to ensure future success. Suggests that many future graduates may work for companies who have foreign headquarters and new cultures.

Suggests that many methods of effective coaching are available to top management. Sets out a number of techniques for coaching employees and maximising their potential in the organisation. Examines motivation techniques, reward schemes and compensation, training and discipline. Concludes that it is up to management to choose their own coaching methods.

Health care financial management is not significantly different from financial management in other industries. The one area of financial management that is unique to health care, and thus requires additional expertise to be effective, is the accounts receivable and billing/collection function. With health care costs in the United States rising faster than inflation, there is considerable pressure on many fronts to reduce or at least contain costs. This pressure requires significant management expertise and attention focused on the accounts receivable (A/R) cycle of a for‐profit health care concern. To be effective, a financial manager must not only stay knowledgeable on the current reimbursement environment, but must anticipate and plan for continued significant changes in reimbursement rates, the method and timing of payment. In addition, the pressure on the volatility of the A/R cycle places significant importance on the other areas of financial management.