Green logistics: key elements for a well-functioning sustainable logistics system

A growing awareness of the modern society about the direct relationship between a growing global community with increasing total industrial activities on one hand and various environmental problems and a natural limitation of natural resources on the other hand set the base for sustainable or “green” approaches within the supply chain. This paper therefore will look at the issue of “Green Logistics” which seeks to reduce the environmental impact of logistics activities by taking into account functions such as recycling, waste and carbon emission reduction and the use of alternative sources of energy. In order to analyze how these approaches and ideas are being perceived by the system as a whole two models from the area of prospective and scenario planning are being used and described to identify the main drivers and tendencies within the system in order to create feasible hypothesis. Using the URCA/CHIVAS model allows us to identify the driver variables out of a high number of variables that best describe the system “Green Logistics”. Followed by the analysis of the actor’s strategies in the system with the Mactor model it is possible to reduce the complexity of a completely holistic system to a few key drivers that can be analyzed further on. Here the implications of URCA/CHIVAS and Mactor are being used to formulate hypotheses about the perception of Green Logistics and its successful implementation among logistics decision makers by an online survey. This research seeks to demonstrate the usefulness of scenario planning to a highly complex system observing it from all angles and extracting information about the relevant factors of it. The results of this demonstration indicate that there are drivers much beyond the factory walls that need to be considered when implementing successfully a system such as Green Logistics.

Comparison and analysis of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports of the top five companies ranked on the 2013 CSR RepTrak

In the 1970s, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) was discussed by Nobel laureate Milton Friedman in his article “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits.” (Friedman, 1970). His view on CSR was contemptuous as he referred to it as “hypocritical window-dressing” a reflection of the view of Corporate America on CSR back then. For a long time short-term maximization of shareholder value was the only maxim for top management across industries and companies. Over the last decade, CSR has become a more important and relevant factor of a company’s reputation, shifting the discussion from whether CSR is necessary to how best CSR commitments should be done (Smith, 2003). Inevitably, companies do have an environmental, social and economic impact, thereby imposing social costs on current and future generations. In 2013, 50 of the world biggest companies have been responsible for 73 percent of the total carbon dioxide (CO2) emission (Global 500 Climate Change Report 2013). Post et al. (2002) refer to these social costs as a company’s need to retain its “license to operate”. In the late 1990s, CSR reporting was nearly unknown, which drastically changed during the last decade. Allen White, co-founder of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), said that CSR reporting”… has evolved from the extraordinary to the exceptional to the expected” (Confino, 2013). In confirmation of this, virtually all of the world’s largest 250 companies report on CSR (93%) and reporting by now appears to be business standard (KPMG, 2013). CSR reports are a medium for transparency which may lead to an improved company reputation (Noked, 2013; Thorne et al, 2008; Wilburn and Wilburn, 2013). In addition, it may be used as part of an ongoing shareholder relations campaign, which may prevent shareholders from submitting Environmental and Social (E&S)1 proposals (Noked, 2013), based on an Ernst & Young report 1 The top five E&S proposal topic areas in 2013 were: 1. Political spending/ lobbying; 2. Environmental sustainability; 3. Corporate diversity/ EEO; 4.Labor/ human rights and 5. Animal testing/ animal welfare. Three groups of environmental sustainability proposal topics of sub-category number two (environmental sustainability) 6 2013, representing the largest category of shareholder proposals submitted. PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) even goes as far as to claim that CSR reports are “…becoming critical to a company’s credibility, transparency and endurance.” (PwC, 2013).