Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
of impatience than does a social discount rate
because individuals tend to be more myopic
than societies when dealing with consumption—
individuals place more value on immediate con-
sumption than on future consumption. Private
interest rates are generally higher than social
interest rates and can be as high as 10 percent.
We have deliberately set the interest rate at such
a high percentage to reflect a high degree of
impatience, in order to entice firms to quickly
Sustainability: Business's New
Environmental Obligation
INTRODUCTION
Does business have any special obligations to
protect the environment? In an essay that has
b e c o m e a classic within the business ethics lit-
erature, N o r m a n Bowie concludes that busi-
ness does n o t have any special environmental
obligations, at least n o t in the n o r m a l u n d e r -
s t a n d i n g of this p h r a s e . In Bowie's words:
"Business does n o t have an obligation to pro-
tect the e n v i r o n m e n t over and above what is
required by law."
Bowie's conclusion is typical of mainstream
theories of corporate environmental respon-
sibility. These views hold that business is free
to pursue profit as long as it complies with the
law a n d causes n o avoidable h a r m to others.
From the classical model of corporate social re-
sponsibility associated with Milton Friedman to
the m o r e r e c e n t stakeholder theory, environ-
mental concerns function as side constraints
upon business's pursuit of profit. Business may
have some negative duties regarding the en-
v i r o n m e n t , duties n o t to pollute a n d n o t to
cause o t h e r avoidable h a r m , b u t business has
© 2007 Joseph R. Desjardins. R e p r i n t e d by permission of t h e author. Portions of this essay have b e e n previously published
in Business, Ethics, and the Environment: Imagining a Sustainable Future ( U p p e r Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2007).
533
come into compliance. Ahmed M. Hussen,
Principles ofEnvironmental Economics: Economics,
Ecology and Public Policy (New York, NY: Rout-
ledge, 2000), 324.
Editors' note: Seventy-six notes were deleted from
this essay because of space constraints. Readers in-
terested in detailed citations should consult the
original article.
Joseph Desjardins
n o positive duty to c o n d u c t itself in ways that
contribute to long-term ecological a n d envi-
r o n m e n t a l well-being.
Under this standard model of corporate en-
vironmental responsibility, society gets two op-
p o r t u n i t i e s to s h a p e business's activities in
respect to the environment. We can press for
e n v i r o n m e n t a l responsibility t h r o u g h t h e
products we d e m a n d as consumers, or we can
pass legislation requiring business to act in en-
vironmentally responsible ways. Absent con-
s u m e r d e m a n d a n d legal mandates, business
itself has n o ethical responsibility to consider
the e n v i r o n m e n t a n d is free to pursue profits
even if this might otherwise be j u d g e d envi-
ronmentally harmful.
Given his philosophical a n d environmen-
tal starting points, Bowie's a r g u m e n t is well
reasoned a n d persuasive. However, I believe
that the entire framework in which his position
is developed is misguided. Simply put, this is
the w r o n g way to think a b o u t business, the
e n v i r o n m e n t , a n d ethical responsibility. A
range of economic, environmental, a n d ethi-
cal realities at the start of t h e twenty-first
534 Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
century require that we reconceptualize busi-
ness's environmental obligations and redesign
business institutions to meet standards of sus-
tainability. Before explaining this claim, let us
review the state of the world at the beginning
of the twenty-first century.
THE NEED FOR A NEW PARADIGM
Why the need to reconceptualize and redesign
business? Several undeniable facts about the
world in which we live make this case. First, a
large percentage of the world's population,
mostly children and the overwhelming ma-
jority of them morally innocent in every way,
lack the basic requirements of a decent
human life. Lack of clean drinking water, nu-
tritious food, health care, education, work,
shelter, clothing, and hope is a daily reality
for billions of people. Population growth, even
at the most conservative rates, will significantly
exacerbate these problems in the near future.
Because population growth is highest in those
areas in which people are already most at risk
due to the effects of poverty and oppression,
these ethical challenges will only worsen in
the future.
To meet these fundamental human needs
on such a grand scale, the world's economy
must produce substantial amounts of food,
clothing, shelter, health care, andjobs and dis-
tribute these goods and services to those in
need. Clearly, then, significant worldwide eco-
nomic activity must occur if these harms are to
be addressed at all.
Furthermore, these challenges will impact
the nature and practice of virtually every busi-
ness. An increasingly integrated global econ-
omy means that fewer and fewer business
decisions anywhere can be made in isolation
of the social, political, environmental, and
economic events happening throughout the
rest of the world. Gone are the days when
business decisions in the United States or
Western Europe could be made in ignorance
and independence of financial markets in
China, labor markets in India, or resource
markets in the Middle East. Economic activ-
ity aimed at meeting the needs of the ex-
panding world's population has already
shifted the economic center of gravity away
from the United States and Western Europe
and towards Asia.
The extensive economic activity required
to address these goals must rely on the pro-
ductive capacity of the earth's biosphere. Two
facts about that biosphere are at the core of
my argument. First, the economy is but a sub-
system within earth's biosphere, and therefore
the biosphere establishes the biophysical pa-
rameters of economic growth. Second, that
very biosphere is already under stress due to
the level and type of activity that characterizes
the present world economy.
Given these realities, those of us living in
the consumerist economies of the developed
world are faced with three alternative con-
clusions. First, wc can have faith in the as-
sumption that the world's economy can
continue to grow indefinitely and that the
world's poor will be able to satisfy their basic
needs and even attain prosperous lives and a
higher standard of living. We can assume, in
other words, that there are no practical bio-
physical limits to economic growth and that
business as usual can be expanded globally
and into the long-term future without cata-
strophic environmental consequences. Sec-
ond, we can conclude that the world's poor
will not, cannot, or should not strive to satisfy
their basic needs or for prosperous lifestyles
and that they will or should remain poor.
Third, we can conclude that alternative eco-
nomic institutions must be created to meet
world demand without further destroying the
biosphere.
We have good reasons to doubt the legiti-
macy of the first option. Imagine the present
American and Western European paradigm of
 Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
economic growth a n d consumerism expand-
ing to the earth's entire population of slightly
m o r e than 6 billion people. Envision a world in
which the 1.3 billion people presendy living in
China used as many resources a n d created as
many wastes as the 300 million p e o p l e of the
United States. O n e estimate has it that if China
c o n s u m e d oil at the rate of the U n i t e d States,
it would consume 80 million barrels of oil each
day, which alone is m o r e than the world's total
p r o d u c t i o n of 74 million barrels a day. If the
Chinese e c o n o m y ever r e a c h e d the level of
C O s emissions as t h e p r e s e n t U.S. economy,
China alone would p r o d u c e double the pre-
sent worldwide C 0 2 pollution. 2 T h e earth's cli-
m a t e is already reacting to the p r e s e n t levels
of C 0 2 a n d o t h e r g r e e n h o u s e gas emissions
caused by m o d e r n industrial society. Imagine
that same world in which n o t only China, b u t
the 1 billion people of Indiaj o i n the economic
party at the same rates. Add to that a n o t h e r
billion p e o p l e living in Indonesia, Brazil, Rus-
sia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, a n d Nigeria.
The second option is not a real choice either.
Believing that the world's poor will not, cannot,
or s h o u l d n o t strive for m o r e p r o s p e r o u s
lifestyles is, at best, a policy of self-deception.
This leaves the third as the only realistic a n d
ethically satisfactory option. Unless a m o d e l of
business can be created that allows significant
economic activity without further depletion of
the biosphere's ability to support b o t h life a n d
the very economic activity on which it depends,
h u m a n s are facing a global ecological, eco-
nomic, political, a n d ethical tragedy.
A b a c k g r o u n d a s s u m p t i o n of most main-
stream theories of c o r p o r a t e e n v i r o n m e n t a l
responsibility is that profits a n d the environ-
m e n t r e p r e s e n t a zero-sum game. Resources
devoted to protecting the e n v i r o n m e n t come
at the expense of profitability, the pursuit of
profit excludes environmentally responsible
practices. But this assumption is unwarranted.
Consider how this assumption plays o u t in
Bowie's view. Business c a n n o t b e e x p e c t e d to
535
act in environmentally responsible ways un-
less c o n s u m e r s d e m a n d it or t h e law requires
it. Requiring business to d o otherwise violates
t h e " o u g h t implies can" m a x i m : ethics can-
n o t r e q u i r e us to act in ways t h a t we c a n n o t .
I n t h e business c o n t e x t in which Bowie ap-
plies this m a x i m , this m e a n s t h a t business
c a n n o t b e r e q u i r e d to act in ways that would
p u t itself o u t of b u s i n e s s by b e i n g unprof-
itable. If consumers d e m a n d environmentally
responsible p r o d u c t s , t h e n business can b e
b o t h environmentally responsible a n d prof-
itable. If t h e law r e q u i r e s it, t h e n e n v i r o n -
mentally responsible businesses are n o t at a
competitive disadvantage with less responsi-
ble businesses. Absent c o n s u m e r d e m a n d or
legal m a n d a t e s , business c a n n o t b e e x p e c t e d
to p u t itself at risk by pursuing environmental
goals.
But this b a c k g r o u n d assumption underesti-
mates the range of managerial discretion. In-
dependently of environmental issues, business
managers a n d executives enjoy a wide range
of decision-making discretion. There are count-
less ways to pursue a n d attain profitability even
within a single firm or industry. We s h o u l d
a b a n d o n the assumption that environmental
responsibilities are side constraints o n "the"
pursuit of profit, as if there is only o n e way to
pursue profits a n d ethical obligations are a bar-
rier to that. Rather, we should recognize that
some avenues to profitability are environmen-
tally risky, others environmentally p r u d e n t a n d
sensible. Sustainable societies g e n e r a t e b o t h
new responsibilities a n d new opportunities for
business in the twenty-first century.
This m o d e l is what I refer to as sustainable
business.
SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS
F o r s o m e observers, t h e s e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s
might suggest a "doom a n d gloom," pessimistic
outlook. While we should n o t underestimate
536 Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
the real and significant ecological dangers we
face, this is also the time to call forth human
creativity, imagination, and ingenuity. The call
for sustainability should also be understood
as a call for entrepreneurs to imagine the fu-
ture and help create the sustainable business
firm of the twenty-first century.
Business in the twenty-first century must be
practiced in a way that is economically vibrant shifts the goal of production from goods and
enough to address the real needs of billions of
people, yet ecologically informed so that the prisingly very few products: food, water, and
earth's capacity to support life is not diminished clean air are obvious examples, and so far at
by that activity and ethically sensitive enough
that fundamental human needs are met in the
process. Economics, ecology, and ethics form
the three pillars of a sustainable society.
Fortunately, some early versions of such a
model of business are beginning to appear.
What has been called, alternatively, "sustain-
able business," "the next industrial revolution,"
or "natural capitalism" provide models for
business which can, in the words of the U.N.
Commission on Sustainability, "meet the needs
of the present without jeopardizing the ability
of future generations to meet their own." It is
a new business model that emerges out of a
paradigm shift in economics, management,
and ethics. We must, to borrow the phrase of
economist Herman Daly, abandon the eco-
nomic model that takes unguided growth as
the economic goal and replace it with one that
targets economic development.4'
What is the model of business that emerges
from this new economics? First, we should rec-
ognize that there is not a single, unique way in
which a sustainable business should be orga-
nized. Several models have been described in
the literature, but we can abstract some com-
mon aspects of these various models. 5 The first
aspect is a significant increase in economic ef-
ficiency brought about by design changes in-
spired by biological processes. This alternative
business model should be based on a principle
of biomimicry in which wastes of the produc-
tion cycle are recycled back into a closed loop.
"Waste equals food," in the words of William
McDonough and Michael Braungart. Just as
the detritus of decomposed material is turned
back into fertile soil within biological systems,
sustainable business must be designed so that
its by-products are themselves the resources
for new productivity.
A second feature of sustainable business
products to services. Human beings need sur-
least, only the first two have become com-
modities. Human beings do need many services:
education, health care, shelter, security. As
consumers, we need very few of the products
purchased in the marketplace. What we actu-
ally want, although we often do not fully un-
derstand ourselves, are services. As the
popularity of auto leasing shows, consumers
want convenient personal transportation, not
necessarily ownership of an automobile. As
the information technology industry is show-
ing, consumers want easy access to software,
Internet, and e-mail, not ownership of a soon-
to-be-outdated piece of computer hardware
or software written on 3K-inch floppies. As In-
terface Corporation has shown, people want
floor-covering services, not carpet ownership.
This list goes on.
This focus on services rather than products
has important implications for both business
and consumers. By emphasizing services rather
than products, business has strong financial
incentives to create longer-lasting, more
durable products that are easily recycled back
into the product stream. Significant entre-
preneurial opportunities exist here for cre-
ative business leaders to seize this initiative in
creating a service economy. Significant eco-
nomic opportunity also exists as one-time-
product purchasers become long-term-service
lessees. Consumers benefit if they are helped
to escape what has been called a commodity
fetish.
 Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
A n o t h e r aspect of this alternative model re-
quires business to invest in natural capital. For
too long, business ( a n d growth-based eco-
nomics) has treated the productive capacity
of the earth's biosphere as an u n e n d i n g rev-
e n u e stream. Earth's productivity was some-
thing that could be spent without cost. Only in
the last few d e c a d e s have t h e t r u e costs of
spending down o u r natural capital b e e n un-
derstood. T h e better m e t a p h o r is to think of
t h e e a r t h ' s productivity as capital, as some-
t h i n g capable of g e n e r a t i n g r e v e n u e in the
form of interest but not something that should
be spent to the p o i n t where it is incapable of
c o n t i n u i n g to be a source of income. A pru-
d e n t financial strategy is to s p e n d interest b u t
n o t capital. T h e earth has d e m o n s t r a t e d a re-
markable ability to p r o d u c e life-sustaining ne-
cessities indefinitely, b u t only if we maintain
sufficient savings in reserve to generate these
necessities indefinitely.
O n e of the most interesting things a b o u t
this alternative m o d e l of sustainable business
is the h u g e p o t e n t i a l it h o l d s for e n t r e p r e -
neurial activity. Creative business leaders will
find vast opportunities for new business ven-
tures that transform business from the old in-
dustrial m o d e l to the new sustainable model.
Thus, Bowie's fear that doing good is too much
to ask of profit-seeking institutions is ill-
f o u n d e d . Sustainable business does n o t ask
mangers to forego profits (although it would
require that profits from ecologically destruc-
tive activities be a b a n d o n e d ) ; it only requires
t h a t profits be o b t a i n e d in ecologically sus-
tainable ways.
T h e ecological guidelines for this new ap-
p r o a c h to business are, in their most general
form, relatively straightforward. T h e entire
economic production process takes resources
from the biosphere;, turns them into products
a n d services, a n d g e n e r a t e s by-products (or
wastes) in the process. T h e ecological guide-
lines for sustainable business mirror the two
sides of this production cycle. Resources going
537
into the p r o d u c t i o n process should b e used
only at the rate at which they can be replen-
ished by t h e productive capacity of the bio-
sphere. By-products and wastes of this production
process s h o u l d be g e n e r a t e d n o faster t h a n
the earth's capacity to absorb t h e m .
More specifically, we can recognize that eco-
n o m i c resources c o m e in a variety of types.
Some are n o n r e n e w a b l e , either in principle
or in practice. O n c e a species becomes extinct,
h u m a n s will never again have the ability to use
it. O n c e oil or coal is b u r n e d , it is g o n e for-
ever, in any practical sense of the word. Thus,
use of n o n r e n e w a b l e resources ought, even-
tually, to b e e l i m i n a t e d b u t s h o u l d , in t h e
m e a n t i m e , be r e d u c e d to a m i n i m u m .
O t h e r resources are renewable, some only
within certain p a r a m e t e r s , others practically
without limit. Agriculture, fisheries, and forests
are renewable, but only if we use them at mod-
crate rates. Used wisely, the earth can p r o d u c e
biological resources at a sustainable rate in-
definitely. O t h e r resources—energy p r o d u c e d
by t h e sun, h y d r o g e n , wind, tides, a n d geo-
thermal sources—are for all practical purposes
infinite. An efficient, wise, a n d ethical sus-
tainable business will use these infinitely avail-
able resources first, m o d e r a t e its use of o t h e r
renewables, a n d wean itself from reliance o n
nonrenewables.
Similar guidelines can be developed on the
waste a n d by-product side of business. Waste is
a bad thing, b o t h economically a n d ecologi-
cally. Sustainable business must strive to elim-
inate all of the wastes created along each step
of the p r o d u c t i o n cycle. In general, all wastes
are sent back into the earth's biosphere and,
to b e sustainable, must n o t be p u t t h e r e be-
yond the capacity of the biosphere to absorb
them. For some by-products that will be easy.
Much agricultural waste, for example, can be
recycled b a c k i n t o the e a r t h as m u l c h . F o r
o t h e r by-products, the pollutants of m u c h of
the petrochemical or nuclear industry for ex-
ample, that will be impossible. Such wastes will
538 Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
need to be eliminated. But, to emphasize, busi-
ness wastes are n o t only an ecological h a r m ,
they are also an e c o n o m i c h a r m . As the word
itself suggests, wastes are unused resources a n d
any business that has a lot of waste is an inef-
ficient a n d poorly r u n business. G r e a t eco-
nomic opportunities exist for discovering ways
to transform this waste into useful resources.
THE BUSINESS CASE
FOR SUSTAINABILITY
As previously outlined, both history a n d ethics
can encourage us to think of sustainability a n d
business as a zero-sum game: environmentally
sustainable decision comes at a cost of prof-
itability; p u r s u i n g profits r e q u i r e s business
m a n a g e r s to forgo e n v i r o n m e n t a l responsi-
bility. But the possibility exists that what is right
in terms of sustainability, may also be right in
terms of business p e r f o r m a n c e . O n e of t h e
three pillars of sustainability, after all, is eco-
nomic sustainability. If we expect business to
address the significant global e c o n o m i c a n d
e n v i r o n m e n t a l challenges of the twenty-first
century, we n e e d vibrant a n d stable, i.e., prof-
itable, businesses. Simply p u t , a sustainable
business must b e a profitable business.
C o n c l u d i n g that business should n o t pro-
d u c e environmentally responsible goods a n d
services unless a n d until consumers d e m a n d
t h e m also misrepresents t h e dynamics of the
marketplace. Consumers cannot d e m a n d
what doesn't exist a n d what they d o n o t know
about. For example, Toyota did n o t wait until
consumers d e m a n d e d hybrid cars before they
began designing a n d manufacturing the Prius.
Toyota itself h e l p e d create t h e m a r k e t for hy-
b r i d cars. In contrast, by c o n c e n t r a t i n g o n
past d e m a n d patterns, A m e r i c a n a u t o m o b i l e
manufacturers were left b e h i n d in the hybrid
market.
Similarly, waiting for legal m a n d a t e s o u t
of a fear of b e i n g p l a c e d at a competitive
disadvantage has itself p r o v e n to be a com-
petitive disadvantage. Business at the cutting
edge of sustainable products a n d services will
enjoy the advantages that go along with b e i n g
the first to market. They are also likely to be
the o n e w h o h e l p establish future standards.
T h e sustainability paradigm starts with the
assumption that the time is approaching when
business institutions will either evolve into more
sustainable enterprises or will simply cease to
exist. T h e two forces of increasing social de-
m a n d for goods a n d services a n d the decreas-
ing ability of die biosphere to provide resources
to meet that d e m a n d are approaching a point
at which they will merge. T h a t assumption is
less a prediction of d o o m than it is an observa-
tion of present realities. But forward-looking,
creative, a n d e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l companies will
recognize this trend as offering tremendous op-
portunities rather than as creating barriers.
Barring a catastrophe, society will survive
a n d vibrant businesses must play a role in that
survival. All m o d e l s lor sustainable develop-
m e n t envision a central role for business in a
sustainable future. It will, after all, be the busi-
nesses of the n e x t industrial revolution that
m e e t the real needs of the billions of people
living in that sustainable future. T h e businesses
that survive in this sustainable world will b e
businesses t h a t a n t i c i p a t e this c h a n g e a n d
adapt to it o n their own terms.
So, can a "business case" be m a d e for the
move towards sustainability? In fact, some per-
suasive reasons can be offered to the business
community for why it should move in the di-
rection of sustainability. First, of course, is the
h u g e m a r k e t r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e billions of
h u m a n beings w h o face u n m e t n e e d s o n a
daily basis. All too often economists a n d busi-
ness m a n a g e r s c o n c e p t u a l i z e c o n s u m e r de-
m a n d in ways t h a t i g n o r e t h e n e e d s of t h e
billions of h u m a n beings who lack food, cloth-
ing, shelter, medical care, jobs. There are enor-
mous opportunities waiting for the businesses
who r e s p o n d to this market.
 Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
A convincing a n d detailed case for how this
m i g h t h a p p e n has b e e n m a d e by business
scholar C. K. Prahalad in his book The Fortune
at the, Bottom, of the Pyramid. Prahalad a n d oth-
ers have argued that e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l a n d cre-
ative businesses are finding ways to develop
markets a m o n g the world's p o o r e s t p e o p l e .
T h e 4 billion people comprising the base of
the pyramid (the phrase c h a n g e d by Stuart
H a r t to avoid t h e pejorative-sounding "bot-
t o m " ' ) provide a m a r k e t so large a n d diverse
that it can be addressed only in ways that are
environmentally sustainable. It will simply be
impossible to m e e t those needs with products
a n d services that are resource a n d energy in-
tensive, environmentally destructive, or socially
insensitive. Sustainable enterprises will find
h u g e markets at the base of the pyramid that
unsustainable business and industry will be un-
able to satisfy.
Beyond the unlimited opportunity for new
markets, there are many potential cost savings
available from the move towards sustainabil-
ity. Significant savings can follow from elimi-
nating wastes, reducitig o p e r a t i n g expenses,
a n d striving towards ecoefficiency. Waste is a
b a d thing, b o t h ecologically a n d financially. A
company that reduces and eliminates its wastes
will reduce its costs. A company that finds ways
to turn waste into a new resource will increase
its revenues from already existing assets.
Sustainability also creates opportunities to
decrease capital costs in building or remodel-
ing facilities. Buildings designed from the start
to be energy efficient, with bright, airy, a n d
well-ventilated space will decrease costs and im-
prove efficiencies over the long term. William
M c D o n o u g h a n d Michael B r a u n g a r t ' s work
with a new manufacturing plant for H e r m a n
Miller, a large office furniture maker, is a case
in point. H e r m a n Miller has a long tradition of
socially responsible practices a n d has worked
with M c D o n o u g h a n d B r a u n g a r t ' s c r a d l e -
to-cradle design protocol to develop truly sus-
tainable furniture products. But in the early
539
1990s, H e r m a n Miller also worked with Mc-
D o n o u g h to design a n d build their new man-
ufacturing plant in Michigan. T h e new design
has paid dividends in the form of lower en-
ergy costs a n d increased worker productivity.
H e r m a n Miller has also b e e n instrumental in
c r e a t i n g t h e U n i t e d States G r e e n Building
Council (USGBC) in 1993. T h e council de-
scribes itself as "the nation's foremost coali-
tion of l e a d e r s from across t h e b u i l d i n g
industry working to p r o m o t e buildings that
are environmentally responsible, profitable,
and healthy places to live a n d work." 8
Sustainable c o m p a n i e s can also a c q u i r e
competitive advantages. N o t only would in-
creased savings, r e v e n u e s , a n d efficiencies
place a c o m p a n y in a better position relative
to its competitors, b u t sustainable companies
are poised to take advantage of "green" a n d
sustainable m a r k e t s . Sustainable practices
should not be only a marketing tool, of course,
but one should not underestimate the growing
c o n s u m e r m a r k e t for sustainable a n d envi-
ronmentally beneficial products a n d services.
A n o t h e r aspect of the competitive advan-
tages of sustainability lies in the labor market.
H e r m a n Miller discovered t h a t t h e i r g r e e n
building became very popular with employees.
Improved morale, increased employee loyalty
a n d , simply, h e a l t h i e r a n d m o r e attractive
working conditions for employees were added
benefits of M c D o n o u g h ' s sustainable design
principles.
Business should also recogni/.e the real pos-
sibility of future g o v e r n m e n t regulation that
may well r e q u i r e steps towards sustainability.
T h e c o m p a n i e s already involved in sustain-
able practices are likely to play l e a d e r s h i p
roles in fashioning future standards. Again,
H e r m a n Miller provides an excellent exam-
ple. In 1993, H e r m a n Miller was a f o u n d i n g
sponsor of the U n i t e d States G r e e n Building
Council. T h e USGBC is a n o n p r o f i t organi-
zation of architects, construction companies,
engineering firms, a n d others in the building
540 Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
industry committed to promoting "environ-
mentally responsible, and healthy buildings
for business and homes." The USGBC devel-
oped the LEED rating system (Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design), a volun-
tary classification system of common standards
for creating and measuring sustainable build-
ings. The USGBC used Herman Miller's man-
ufacturing plant designed by Bill McDonough
as a model for the LEED certification and rat-
ing process. Today, there is a growing move-
ment, especially among state and local
governments, to require new construction to
conform to minimal LEED standards.
In the past, many companies waited until
environmental regulations coerced them into
action. At that point, many were overwhelmed
by the costs of cleanup and compensation.
Companies that wait will likely deal with sus-
tainability as a compliance issue take similar
risks. By taking the initiative in designing and
constructing a sustainable building, Herman
Miller helped create and set the standards that
less innovative companies will now be chal-
lenged to meet.
Finally, avoiding future legal liability pro-
vides another business reason for the move to-
wards sustainability. There is no better means
for managing both regulatory and legal risks
than by being proactive in taking steps to pre-
vent problems from occurring. The legal con-
cepts of negligence and forseeability are just
waiting to be exploited in holding business li-
able for the entire life cycle of its products. As
municipalities struggle to find ways to dispose
of solid wastes or clean up old polluted land-
fills, an obvious strategy will be to turn to the
businesses who designed, manufactured, and
sold those products and hold them account-
able to take back their products, or pay for
their proper disposal and cleanup.
Legal developments in Europe and else-
where already foreshadow this future. Be-
ginning in the early 1990s, several countries
have passed legislation mandating producer
responsibility for the wastes created by their
products. Variously referred to as "take-back"
laws or "extended producer responsibility,"
such laws require that business be responsible
financially, if not physically, for the eventual
disposal or recycling of products that they
place into the market.
Spurred on by the European Union's Waste
Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)
and Restriction of Hazardous Substances
(RoHS) directives, over 20 European countries
have already passed laws which encourage or
require manufacturers to take responsibility
for the eventual disposal of such products as
batteries, electronics, fluorescent lights, appli-
ances such as refrigerators and air condition-
ers, televisions, and automobiles. Japan, South
Korea, and Taiwan have similar legislation.
Business executives who do not anticipate
such developments on a wider scale by be-
ginning to redesign their products in ways
that make reuse and recycling easier and even
profitable are not acting as very prudent risk
managers.
FINAL REFLECTIONS
The concept of sustainability has grown out
of the recognition that economic development
on a global level cannot be separated from
questions of social justice and from ecological
stability. The new worldview emerging as an
alternative to the reigning paradigm of eco-
nomic growth and free markets holds that
long-term sustainability is the criterion of suc-
cessful economic and social development.
Sustainability involves three equally vital di-
mensions: economic, ecological, and ethical.
Business, within this conceptualization, is no
longer understood as having a primary eco-
nomic goal, with ethical and environmental
considerations functioning as side constraints.
Business has three equally compelling goals
that must be balanced over the long term.
 Ethical Issues Regarding the Natural Environment
Environmental responsibility functions less as
a side constraint on n o r m a l business activities
a n d m o r e as a central part of the very mission
of business in the twenty-first century.
NOTES
1. Norman Bowie, Morality, Money, and Motor Cars,
reprinted in this chapter.
2. These estimates are from Lester Brown, Eco-
Economy: Building an Economy for the Earth (New
York: W.W. Norton & Co., 200 J).
3. This definition of sustainability comes from
the United Nations World Commission on En-
vironment and Development (the "Bnmdtland
Commission"), which published its findings on
economic development and the environment
in Our Common Future (New York: Oxford Uni-
versity Press, 1987).
4. Herman Daly, Beyond Growth (Boston: Beacon
Press, 1996).'
5. My own thinking on this has been particularly
influenced by three approaches: Herman
Genetically Modified Organisms
and Business Duties
New technology is o n e of the principal areas
in which businesses struggle to find ethical so-
lutions to moral dilemmas. Genetically modi-
fied organisms (GMOs) are one case in point. 1
In general, a genetically modified organism re-
sults from splicing foreign genetic material—
a transgene—into a target organism's DNA to
create an organism exhibiting at least o n e new
genetic characteristic. T h e r e are already a vast
array of GMOs for medical a n d food purposes
in t h e m a r k e t p l a c e i n c l u d i n g goats t h a t
) Copyright 2007 by Dennis R. Cooley. Reprinted with permission.
541
Daly's writing on ecological economics and
especially in Beyond Growth; Amory Lovin,
Hunter Lovins, and Paul Hawken's Natural
Capitalism (Boston: Little, Brown, 1999); and
William McDonough and Michael Braungart's,
"The Next Industrial Revolution," Atlantic
Monthly (October 1998).
The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradi-
cating Poverty through Profits," by C. K. Prahalad
(Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Pub-
lishing, 2005). See also Prahalad and Stuart
Hart, "The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyra-
mid," Strategy and Business 26 (2002): 54-67;
and Prahalad and Allen Hammond, "Serve the
World's Poor, Profitably," Harvard Business Re-
vieiu (September, 2002).
7. Stuart Hart, Capitalism at the Crossroads (Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing,
2005), 108, footnote 4.
8. Information about Herman Miller's long tra-
dition of working towards sustainability can be
found on the company's Web site: http://www.
hermanmiller.com/. The United Stoles Green
Building Council also maintains a helpful Web
site, with links to local affiliates, at http^www.
usgbc.org/.
Dennis R. Cooky
p r o d u c e spider's silk in their milk, e n o r m o u s
cows that give gallons of milk, and pigs, mice,
and fish that glow in the dark. Plants have also
been modified. Monsanto's R o u n d u p Ready™
crops, for e x a m p l e , are insusceptible to the
company's R o u n d u p pesticide (glyphosate).
Most plants die when sprayed with glyphosate
b e c a u s e it blocks a key e n z y m e — E P S P syn-
thase—in an a m i n o acid pathway. R o u n d u p
Ready crops have a bacterium's DNA that is
unaffected by glyphosate t h e r e b y allowing