This blog has expressed a greater affinity with "best" business practices than might be expected by many of a site dedicated to as progressive of a cause as the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. A growing belief that governments, at all levels, are not able to innovate quickly and deeply enough has also led to a greater affinity with libertarian concepts, at least on a tactical level. The main mission remains, regardless of frustrations with old ways to dealing with the world's problems, progressive. Progressive though is a loaded word and there will be a large contingency that will take issue with my claiming that label if for no other reason than I claim that a site that supports free enterprise can be progressive.
This blog has posted on the position that big business should and can make ethical investments. Trouble is that we still worry, and arguably need to, when they do.
An earlier post on the Girl Effect revealed an intense discussion between -Erin Erlenborn of ONE, two commenters who expressed concern over the involvement of Nike, and a Nike representative.
On another blog, I argued for taking lessons from some of the management practices of the DuPont Company. The post also reveals again my bias towards MIT as a change-agent organization. But the PERI - Political Economy Research Institute lists DuPont on its Toxic 100 Table, raising the question whether DuPont is making a valid effort in walking the walk and not just talking.
Id21 takes a balanced view on ensuring big business social responsibility.
So it seems that both the carrot and the stick are needed in working to get businesses to support the Millennium Development Goals.
diigo tags: peri, politics, economics, research, sustainability