Environmental Law And Business Ethics

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my gratitude to all those who gave me the possibility to complete this thesis we deeply indebted to my supervisor Prof. Mr. S.N. Ghosh from the IIPM,NEW DELHI whose help, stimulating suggestions and encouragement helped me in all the time of research for and writing of this thesis.

Contents 1. Abstract 2. Environmental law 3. Environmental law in INDIA 4. Description of Environmental law 5. Purpose of Environmental Law 6. International environmental law 7. India treaty obligations 8. Business Ethics 9. Business Culture Of India 10. Why Study Ethics? 11. Business Ethics Covers 12. Code of Ethics 13. Seven steps for implementing the code 14. Business Ethics Leadership Alliance 15. References

ABSTRACT Laws and regulations are a major tool in protecting the environment. To put those laws into effect, government agencies create and enforce regulations. The talk will review three Supreme Court cases and theirn unintended consequences: The Sriram Food and Fertilizer Case of 1986, which the Court used to attempt to control the Bhopal Gas Leak litigation; the Delhi Pollution Case of 1985-2002, which disempowered executive authority; and the still ongoing Godavarman Case of 1996, which has brought the Court full scale into the field of forest protection, empowering certain institutions and disempowering others. Talk will also point out that the Supreme Court has NEVER stopped a large project, E.g. Narmada, despite its rhetoric about concern for the human rights of project-

affected people. And Prof. Rosencranz will raise the question of what happens when an activist Supreme Court turns to the right, as it has done recently. In this section, you'll find a basic description of how laws and regulations come to be, what they are, and where to find them The Indian constitution is amongst the few in the world that contains specific provisions on environment protection.

What is environmental law....? Environmental law is a complex and interlocking body of statutes, common

law, treaties, conventions, regulations and policies which, very broadly, operate to regulate the interaction of humanity and the rest of the biophysical or natural environment, toward the purpose of reducing or minimizing the impacts of human activity, both on the natural environment and on humanity itself. Environmental law draws from and is influenced by principles of environmentalism, including ecology, conservation, stewardship, responsibility and sustainability. From an economic perspective it can be understood as concerned with the prevention of present and future externalities. Areas of concern in environmental law include air quality, water quality, global climate change, agriculture, biodiversity, species protection, pesticides and hazardous chemicals, waste management, remediation of contaminated land and brownfields, smart growth, sustainable development, impact review, and conservation, stewardship and management of public lands and natural resources.

Environmental laws in INDIA: In the Constitution of India it is clearly stated that it is the duty of the state to ‘protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country’. It imposes a duty on every citizen ‘to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife’. Reference to the environment has also been made in the Directive Principles of State Policy as well as the Fundamental Rights. The Department of Environment was established in India in 1980 to ensure a healthy environment for the country. This later became the Ministry of Environment and Forests in 1985. The constitutional provisions are backed by a number of laws – acts, rules, and notifications. The EPA (Environment Protection Act), 1986 came into force soon after the Bhopal Gas Tragedy and is considered an umbrella legislation as it fills many gaps in the existing laws. Thereafter a large number of laws came into existence as the problems began arising, for example, Handling and `Management of Hazardous Waste Rules in 1989. ‘Environmental law in India’ is an exhaustive study of the growth of the law relating to environment in India. The third edition highlights the various aspects of environmental regime law of public nuisance and civil remedies, protection of forest habitat, natural resources and coastal zones, control of pollution, liability for environmental torts, constitutional mandate for environmental protection, judicial review of decisions affecting environment and environmental impact assessment processes. It contains a qualitative analysis of the laws pertaining to the field, reference to relevant international conventions and comments on recent and updated case law, making it an indispensable tool for legal practitioners, decision makers, environmentalists and students of law and environment

Description of Environmental Laws: In the Constitution of India it is clearly stated that it is the duty of the state to ‘protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country’. It imposes a duty on every citizen ‘to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife’. Reference to the environment has also been made in the Directive Principles of State Policy as well as the Fundamental Rights. The Department of Environment was established in India in 1980 to ensure a healthy environment for the country. This later became the Ministry of Environment and Forests in 1985. The constitutional provisions are backed by a number of laws – acts, rules, and notifications. The EPA (Environment Protection Act), 1986 came into force soon after the Bhopal Gas Tragedy and is considered an umbrella legislation as it fills many gaps in the existing laws. Thereafter a large number of laws came into existence as the problems began arising, for example, Handling and Management of Hazardous Waste Rules in 1989.

Following is a list of the environmental legislations that have come into effect:

General 1986 - The Environment (Protection) Act authorizes the central

government to protect and improve environmental quality, control and reduce pollution from all sources, and prohibit or restrict the setting and /or operation of any industrial facility on environmental grounds. 1986 - The Environment (Protection) Rules lay down procedures for setting

standards of emission or discharge of environmental pollutants. 1989 - The objective of Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules is

to control the generation, collection, treatment, import, storage, and handling of hazardous waste. 2001 - The Batteries (Management and Handling) Rules, 2001 rules shall apply

to every manufacturer, importer, re-conditioner, assembler, dealer, auctioneer, consumer, and bulk consumer involved in the manufacture, processing, sale, purchase, and use of batteries or components so as to regulate and ensure the environmentally safe disposal of used batteries. 1999 - The Environment (Siting for Industrial Projects) Rules, 1999 lay down

detailed provisions relating to areas to be avoided for siting of industries, precautionary measures to be taken for site selecting as also the aspects of environmental protection which should have been incorporated during the implementation of the industrial development projects. 2000 - The Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000

apply to every municipal authority responsible for the collection, segregation, storage, transportation, processing, and disposal of municipal solid wastes. 2002 - The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) (Amendment) Rules lay

down such terms and conditions as are necessary to reduce noise pollution, permit use

of loud speakers or public address systems during night hours (between 10:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight) on or during any cultural or religious festive occasion 2002 - The Biological Diversity Act is an act to provide for the conservation of

biological diversity, sustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the use of biological resources and knowledge associated with it

Forest and wildlife 1927 - The Indian Forest Act and Amendment, 1984, is one of the many

surviving colonial statutes. It was enacted to ‘consolidate the law related to forest, the transit of forest produce, and the duty leviable on timber and other forest produce’. 1972 - The Wildlife Protection Act, Rules 1973 and Amendment 1991 provides

for the protection of birds and animals and for all matters that are connected to it whether it be their habitat or the waterhole or the forests that sustain them. 1980 - The Forest (Conservation) Act and Rules, 1981, provides for the

protection of and the conservation of the forests.

Water 1956 - The River Boards Act enables the states to enroll the central government

in setting up an Advisory River Board to resolve issues in inter-state cooperation. 1970 - The Merchant Shipping Act aims to deal with waste arising from ships along the coastal areas within a specified radius. 1977 - The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act provides for

the levy and collection of cess or fees on water consuming industries and local authorities. 1978 - The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Rules contains the

standard definitions and indicate the kind of and location of meters that every consumer of water is required to affix. 1991 - The Coastal Regulation Zone Notification puts regulations on various

activities, including construction, are regulated. It gives some protection to the backwaters and estuaries.

Air 1948 – The Factories Act and Amendment in 1987 was the first to express

concern for the working environment of the workers. The amendment of 1987 has sharpened its environmental focus and expanded its application to hazardous processes. 1981 - The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act provides for the control

and abatement of air pollution. It entrusts the power of enforcing this act to the CPCB . 1982 - The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules defines the

procedures of the meetings of the Boards and the powers entrusted to them. 1982 - The Atomic Energy Act deals with the radioactive waste. 1987 - The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act empowers

the central and state pollution control boards to meet with grave emergencies of air pollution.

1988 - The Motor Vehicles Act states that all hazardous waste is to be properly

packaged, labelled, and transported.

Purpose of Environmental Law A significant challenge for jurists, for public policy makers, and for the public in general is the degree to which economic development is to be curtailed in the interests of environmental preservation. A Utopian model might offer a scenario of collective reduction in consumerism and a global redistribution of assets, as a means toward reversing the current pattern of human impact on the physical environment. However, realities of human nature and current perceptions of quality of life and standard of living necessitate development of models reflecting modern realities. Subsequently increasing tensions exist between competing interests in terms of the approach to be taken in economic development and interaction with the physical environment. Environmental law has moved from the realm of individual protection, tort and negligence-based law to the statutory, public policy arena in which case law has deemed that the interests of economic development will coexist with the interests of environmental protection. The challenge for law makers is achieving the appropriate balance of competing interests.

Why do we need to protect the environment? Our new Constitution says that everyone has the right to a safe and healthy environment. The quality of our environment affects all of us no matter where we live. The environment is our home. If it is not healthy, nor are we. When people abuse the environment, this affects us all. If water is polluted, if the air is full of smoke and chemicals, if food contains poisons, people (and plants and animals) get sick. All people also have a responsibility to protect and use the environment in a way that will protect it for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren. Many people don't understand why we need to worry about the environment. They think people's needs and environmental needs cannot both be looked after, and that people are more important than the environment. They say that our major aim must be creating economic growth and jobs, and that the green (environmental) agenda must take second place. Some people feel hurt or insulted when others show concern over endangered species like rhinos when children do not have enough to eat.

INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: In international law, a distinction is often made between hard and soft law. Hard international law generally refers to agreements or principles that are directly enforceable by a national or international body. Soft international law refers to agreements or principles that are meant to influence individual nations to respect certain norms or incorporate them into national law. Although these agreements sometimes oblige countries to adopt implementing legislation, they are not usually enforceable on their own in a court. Only nations are bound by treaties and conventions. In international forums, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), countries must consent to being sued. Thus, it is often impossible to sue a country. The final question in the jurisdictional arena is who may bring a suit. Often, only countries may sue countries. Individual citizens and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) cannot. This has huge repercussions. First, the environmental harm must be large and notorious for a country to notice. Second, for a country to have a stake in the outcome of the subject matter, some harm may have to cross the borders of the violating country into the country that is suing. Finally, even if transboundary harm does exist, the issue of causation, especially in the environmental field, is often impossible to prove with any certainty. CORE ISSUES RELATING TO INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW Consider for a moment why any law is enacted -- domestically or internationally. Some would maintain that it is a moral statement about behaviour that a society cannot tolerate. Some would argue that certain conduct is outlawed to deter that conduct, which is why we also attach a penalty. Some would argue, especially in light of the inefficiencies in enforcement, that laws socialize society's members to behave in a certain way by defining a code. What is the purpose of international environmental law -- is it a moral statement, a deterrence, or a socializing tool? If it is a moral statement, which many of the framework conventions seem to be, is it merely aspirational? Do we honestly believe that all nations will achieve all the ideals expressed in all the agreements? Or do we, as a global community, simply like to think of ourselves as the kind of people who believe in these things? If it is intended as deterrence, why are there not more international forums for dispute resolution, more international bodies empowered to enforce agreements, more substantive requirements, and more 'hard law' self-executing agreements? If there were, would any nation sign them? If it is intended as a socialization technique, is it working? Are nations more environmentally aware? INDIA'S INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS India has obligations under numerous international treaties and agreements that relate to environmental issues. As a contracting party, India must have ratified a treaty, that is, by adopting it as national law before it came into force, or by acceding to it after it has come into force. For a treaty to enter into force, the requisite number of countries must ratify the treaty, which then has the force of international law. Specific obligations under any treaty vary, depending on the treaty itself. The nature and degree of compliance and implementation depend on a number of factors, among them: (1) the capabilities and staff of an international institution

charged with coordinating national compliance efforts, if there is one; (2) the willingness of other state parties to enforce or comply with the treaty; (3) the political agenda of the government and popular support; (4) trade and diplomatic pressures brought to bear by other countries; and (5) sometimes, judicial or NGO involvement through court cases and publicity.

INDIA'S TREATY OBLIGATIONS 1. The Antarctic Treaty (Washington, 1959) 402 UNTS 71. Entered into force 23 June 1961. India ratified with qualifications, 19 August 1983. 2. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar, 1971). 11 I.L.M. 963 (1972). Entered into force 21 December 1975. India acceeded, October 1, 1981. 3. Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (Paris, 1972). 11 I.L.M. 1358 (1972). Entered into force 17 December 1975. India signed, 16 November 1972. 4. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Washington, 1973) 12 I.L.M. 1055 (1973). Entered into force 1 July 1975. India signed, 9 July 9 1974; ratified 20 July 1976. 5. Protocol of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 (MARPOL) (London, 1978). Entered into force 2 October 1983. India ratified with qualifications, 24 September 1986. 6. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn, 1979) 19 I.L.M. 15 (1980). Entered into force 1 November 1983. India signed, 23 June 1979; ratified 4 May 1982. 7. Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (Canberra, 1980). 19 I.L.M. 841 (1980). Entered into force 7 April 1982. India ratified, 17 June 1985. 8. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay, 1982). 21 I.L.M. 1261 (1982). Entered into force 16 November 1994. India signed, 10 December 1982. 9. Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 1985). 26 I.L.M. 1529 (1987). Entered into force 22 September 1988. India ratified, 18 March 1991. 10. Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal, 1987). 26 I.L.M. 1550 (1987). Entered into force 1 January 1989. India acceded, 19 June 1992. 11. Amendments to the Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer (London, 1990). 30 I.L.M. 541 (1991). Entered into force 10 August 1992. India acceded, 19 June 1992. 12. Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (Basel, 1989). 28 I.L.M. 657 (1989). Entered into force 5 May 1992. India signed, 5 March 1990; ratified 24 June 1992. 13. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Rio de Janeiro, 1992). 31 I.L.M. 849 (1992). Entered into force 21 March 1994. India signed, 10 June 1992; ratified 1 November 1993. 14. Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio de Janeiro, 1992). 31 I.L.M. 818 (1992). Entered into force 29 December 1993. India signed, 5 June 1992; ratified 18 February 1994. 15. Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa (Paris, 1994). 33

I.L.M 1332 (1994). Entered into force, 26 December 1995; India signed, 14 October 1994; ratified 17 December 1996. 16. International Tropical Timber Agreement (Geneva, 1994). 33 I.L.M. 1016 (1994). Entered into force 1 January 1997. India signed, 17 September 1996. India ratified 17 October 1996. 17. Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctica Treaty (Madrid, 1991). Entered into force 15 January 1998.

Business Ethics Introduction Business ethics is a form of applied ethics that examines ethical principles and moral or ethical problems that arise in a business environment. It applies to all aspects of business conduct and is relevant to the conduct of individuals and business organizations as a whole. Applied ethics is a field of ethics that deals with ethical questions in many fields such as medical, technical, legal and business ethics. WHAT IS APPLIED ETHICS.......? Applied ethics is, in the words of Brenda Almond, co-founder of the Society for Applied Philosophy, "the philosophical examination, from a moral standpoint, of particular issues in private and public life that are matters of moral judgment". It is thus a term used to describe attempts to use philosophical methods to identify the morally correct course of action in various fields of human life. Bioethics, for example, is concerned with identifying the correct approach to matters such as euthanasia, or the allocation of scarce health resources, or the use of human embryos in research. Business ethics can be both a normative and a descriptive discipline. As a corporate practice and a career specialization, the field is primarily normative. In academia descriptive approaches are also taken. The range and quantity of business ethical issues reflects the degree to which business is perceived to be at odds with non-economic social values. Historically, interest in business ethics accelerated dramatically during the 1980s and 1990s, both within major corporations and within academia. For example, today most major corporate websites lay emphasis on commitment to promoting non-economic social values under a variety of headings (e.g. ethics codes, social responsibility charters). In some cases, corporations have redefined their core values in the light of business ethical considerations (e.g. BP's "beyond petroleum" environmental tilt).

Business Culture Of India The business culture of India is a reflection of the various norms and standards followed by its people. Indians have various cultural yardsticks, which extend to their business culture too. Thus, it is important that a person visiting the country has an idea of the business culture of India. Thus, it is important that a person visiting the country has some basic idea regarding the business ethics and customs followed here. Having a good grasp on Indian business culture will ensure that you succeed in maintaining a well-earned affinity with your business counterparts. If you are unsure of how to deal with an Indian when it comes to business, we are here to simplify the task. Read on to know about the things that are to be strictly adhered to, while forming any kind of business associations with Indians.

Why Study Ethics?

Even granting that business ethics is important, many seem to believe that there is no point in studying the subject. Ethics is something you feel, not something you think. Finance,

marketing, operations, and even business law lend themselves to intellectual treatment, but ethics does not. The idea that ethics has no intellectual content is odd indeed, considering that some of the most famous intellectuals in world history have given it a central place in their thought (Confucius, Plato, Aristotle, Maimonides, Thomas Aquinas, etc.). Ethics is in fact a highly developed field that demands close reasoning. The Western tradition in particular has given rise to sophisticated deontological, teleological and consequentialist theories of right and wrong. No one theory explains everything satisfactorily, but the same is true, after all, in the natural sciences. Even when they grant that ethics has intellectual content, people often say that studying the field will not change behavior. Character is formed in early childhood, not during a professor’s lecture. If the suggestion here is that college-level study does not change behavior, we should shut down the entire business school, not only the ethics course. Presumably the claim, then, is that studying finance and marketing can influence one’s conduct, but studying ethics cannot. This is again a curious view, since ethics is the one field that deals explicitly with conduct. Where is the evidence for this view? The early origins of character do not prevent finance and marketing courses from influencing behavior. Why cannot ethics courses also have an effect?

Why Should One Be Ethical?

There is already something odd about this question. It is like asking, “Why are bachelors unmarried?” They are unmarried by definition. If they were married, they would not be bachelors. It is the same with ethics. To say that one should do something is another way of saying it is ethical. If it is not ethical, then one should not do it. Perhaps when business people ask why they should be ethical, they have a different question in mind: what is the motivation for being good? Is their something in it for them? It is perfectly all right to ask if there is a reward for being good, but this has nothing to do with whether one should be good. It makes no sense to try convince people that they should be good by pointing to the rewards that may follow. One should be good because “good” is, by definition, that which one should be. As for motivation, good behavior often brings a reward, but not every time. Think about it. If it were always in one’s interest to be good, there would be no need for ethics. We could simply act selfishly and forget about obligation. People invented ethics precisely because it does not always coincide with self interest.

What Business Ethics Covers Doing Well by Doing Good Although ethics is not the same as self interest, business executives often want to be assured that it is the same. They want to make certain that “one can do well by doing good,” meaning that one can succeed in business by being ethical. There is no denying that one can often do well by doing good. An ethical company is more likely to build a good reputation, which is more likely to bring financial rewards over the long term. But good behavior cannot be grounded in tangible reward alone. People who are interested only in reward will behave ethically when it suits their purpose, but they will go astray whenever the incentives change. There is a deeper confusion here, too. To look to ethics for motivation is to misunderstand what ethics is all about. It is like studying finance to find a reason to make money. Finance does not teach one to want to be rich. It teaches one how to be rich, assuming one wants to be rich. So it is with ethics. Ethics teaches one how to be good, assuming one wants to be good.

It is important to know that one can normally do well by doing good. Otherwise ethical people could go into business only with a high risk of failure. Business ethics, however, addresses the opposite question: how can one do good by doing well? It begins with the premise that managers want to do something good with their lives and investigates how to accomplish this through business. In other words, it treats profit and business success as means to a greater end: making the world a little better. The Duty to Make Money Granting that a business person’s ultimate objective is to make the world better, how is this best achieved? A common view is that it is achieved by making as much money as possible. The best thing business people can do for society is to be good business people, which is to say, to maximize the company’s profit. They should therefore stick to finance, marketing and operations management rather than waste time with ethics. Economist Milton Friedman articulates this view in an essay that is quite popular with business students, “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase its Profits.”1 According to Friedman, corporate officers have no obligation to support such social causes as hiring the hard-core unemployed to reduce poverty, or reducing pollution beyond that mandated by law. Their sole task is to maximize profit for the company, subject to the limits of law and “rules of the game” that ensure “open and free competition without deception or fraud.” Friedman advances two main arguments for this position. First, corporate executives and directors are not qualified to do anything other than maximize profit. Business people are expert at making money, not at making social policy. They lack the perspective and training to address complex social problems, which should be left to governments and social service agencies. Second, and more fundamentally, corporate officers have no right to do anything other than maximize profit. If they invest company funds to train the chronically unemployed or reduce emissions below legal limits, they in effect levy a “tax” on the company’s owners, employees and customers in order to accomplish a social purpose. But they have no right to spend other people’s money on social welfare projects. At best, only elected representatives of the people have such authority. Sole proprietors can spend the company’s money any way they want, since it is their money, but fiduciaries and hired managers have no such privilege. If they

contribute corporate money to arts or community development, it must be with an eye to increasing profit, perhaps by attracting better employees or improving the company’s image. If they want to contribute to other social causes, they are free to join civic organizations and donate as much of their own money as they please. It would be nice if the world were so simple. What happens, for example, when laws permit anti-social behavior? Should businesses not restrain themselves voluntarily, even if it imposes a cost on company stakeholders? Friedman’s reply is that they must not, again on the libertarian principles just described. But suppose a hurricane hits a town and cuts off routes to the outside world. There is a desperate need for portable electric generators, and the only local seller takes the opportunity to charge an exorbitant price. (Something like this happened when Hurricane Andrew hit southern Florida.) Since this sort of price gouging is legal, the store manager has no right, on Friedman’s view, to “tax” the owners by charging less than the market will bear. He does, however, have a right to ask the buyer to pay more, since the purchase decision is voluntary in a free market. The Rules of the Game The task of business ethics, then, is to identify the duties that business people have as business people. What are these duties? One can begin with the most basic ones mentioned by Friedman: the duty to obey the law and the “rules of the game,” which provide for “open and free competition without deception or fraud.” Yet even these basic obligations are disputed. Albert Carr’s very popular essay, “Is Business Bluffing Ethical?” argues that deception, for example, is a legitimate part of business.2 Business, he says, is like a poker game. There are rules, but within the rules it is permissible to bluff in order to mislead others. In fact one must do so or lose the game. The ethical rules of everyday life therefore do not apply to business. Using examples from the 1960s era in which he wrote the paper, Carr defends: • “food processors” that use “deceptive packaging of numerous products”; • “automobile companies” that “for years have neglected the safety of carowning families,” as described in Ralph Nader’s famous book Unsafe at Any Speed; • “utility companies” that “elude regulating government bodies to extract unduly large payments from users of electricity.”

“As long as they comply with the letter of the law,” he says, “they are within their rights to operate their businesses as they see fit.”

CODE OF ETHICS It is believed that the best way of promoting high standards of business practices is through self-regulation. Business should be conducted in a manner that it earns the goodwill of all concerned through quality, efficiency, transparency and good values. This Code has been designed as a voluntary guideline to achieve these objectives. 1. Be truthful and realistic in stating claims. 2. Be responsive to customer needs and concerns. 3. Treat all stakeholders fairly and with respect.

4. Protect and promote the environment, conserve water and power and community interests.

5. Be law abiding and do not suppress the truth howsoever unpleasant it may be in the short run. SEVEN STEPS FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CODE ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢

Integration and Endorsement Distribution Breaches Affirmation Contracts Training Nurture

Business Ethics Leadership Alliance The goals of the Business Ethics Leadership Alliance (BELA) are: (1) to publicly affirm commitment to certain ethical principles and compliance practices; (2) to provide public resources for BELA members to uphold their commitment and other companies to follow our lead. Leadership in business must set the standard and “walk the talk” when it comes time to ethical behavior. There can be no compromise of ethics. There can be no “waiver of ethics.” A leader must constantly keep his or her actions above reproach. If leaders are committed to that high standard, there will be no more Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, and Adelphia ethical meltdowns. Knowing what is right is very important to personal and business ethics. Doing what is right is absolutely critical to personal and business ethics. A strong unwavering commitment to your core values and guiding principles of your business or organization will lead to the right ethical decisions and actions. In the absence of these actions, all one has is good intentions and that simply is not enough for effective leadership.

Reference www.google.co.in www.buisness-ethics.org www.wisegeek.com