The Corporate and Individual Social Responsibility (C&ISR) – a Part of the Sustainable Future of Humankind

Keywords: Corporate and Individual Social Responsibility (C&ISR), climate change system impact, energy, drinking water, food, credit and social crisis, humankind's sustainable future, contemporary humankind civilization, system thinking, requisite holism, social technologies as a tool for improvement of global humankind society, nature of the Earth, globalization, leadership.

Introduction

The ending of the year 2008 opened new horizons for heavy crisis situations of the contemporary human civilization. Because of the United States' poor leadership in 2000–2008 not only the USA but also the whole global community faces a serious social crisis.[1] In 2009, the resource and social crises combined with the starting age of the climate change and its crucial impact and, thus, added to the complex situation.

The scenario of the USA and global community entering the globalization age or the energy, drinking water, food, credit and social crises has been excellently elaborated and presented in the Global Future Analysis 2008 by Planck Foundation[2] and the Global Resources Analysis draft version 2008 by Induscorp.nl.[3] Both analyses were carried out by excellent research teams. The brilliant social scientists were to deal with humankind and its humankind-centric thinking. The teams' complex system thinking and their co-operation with natural scientists enabled a more complex but also a more truthful analysis.

Actually, what is missing here, is the system impact on climate change on the changes in the biosphere, which is going to have a broad impact on the present living conditions for all creatures living on the Earth.

The Issue of the Sustainable Future of Humankind

The question which we are putting forward is the humankind's sustainable future.[4] To analyze it, one needs an integrated and complex system thinking. The globalization age has its complex issues as they are, regardless whether humankind detects them or not. Thus, quite complex problems of 2008/2009 should be considered within the living space/environment of the humans – the biosphere – taking together with the problems evolving within the biosphere itself and their synergies.

In the present article we give a broader analysis of more complicated/complex Nature of the planet Earth and of global humankind society situation in 2009. As system thinkers we analyze different in their origins statuses of humankind – both as a system/entity of its own and as a part of the Planet Earth system – the biosphere.

During the unfolding of the Globalization Age in the biosphere, which provides a living space for global human civilization, there evolved a situation of the climate change system impact.

The climate change system[5] provides, makes, holds and guards living conditions in the biosphere of the Earth; it has a more important role than people used to think. In order to survive all living creatures must adjust to these environment conditions. The extinction of some species, smaller and larger alike, is the result of the changed environmental qualities, caused by changes in the climate system.

Systemic thinking better than single specialists' efforts enables us to see that the Earth's biosphere is organized as a synergy resulting from interdependences, interactions and co-operation of matter, energy, and information within the time frame and it has three dimensions/environments – Water, Land and Air. To be ready for changes and mitigate the climate change impacts, all of us – every individual representative of the human race – must learn more about general characteristics of the biosphere.

System Theory – A Tool for Humans to Understand the Climate Change

System theory, thinking, synthesis and analysis as research tools allow scientists to go beyond the classical scientific approaches. Thinking process could help create a comprehensive description of the system of climate change.

The term ‘system’ has many meanings. But here we will interpret it neither a mental picture of the event or process to deal with, nor a usual method of work, nor a socio-economic or other order, nor a network/complex of plants, stones, or humans, somehow fitting together. Within the article we use the term ‘system’ to denote rather a feature/event/process that is so complex in its components, relations and influences between them and their consequences that it is difficult to comprehend and even more difficult to control.

That is why we call the climate change a ‘system’. Comprehending and/or controlling it separate parts is not very reasonable, because a system as a whole has attributes that essentially differ from those of its constituents. Let us offer some clear examples: edible salt is a synergy/system of two poisons; water is a synergy/system of two gases; an organization is a synergy/system of many (different from each other, but unavoidably complementary) professionals; a house is a synergy/system of bricks/concrete/ wood, doors, windows, electric, water and other works, etc.

Synergies emerging from their attributes provide a new entity/system with new attributes.

Therefore, it will be easier to discover the truth and control difficulties and events, if a feature/event/process is considered as holistically as possible, rather than in parts. This is called a systemic or system thinking.

A total holism of human behaviour, that is monitoring, perception, thinking, emotional and spiritual life, decision making and action, and a total wholeness of insights and outcomes, is usually impossible to attain, but a single specialization – a single viewpoint of profession – limits humans to fictitious holism providing for fictitious wholeness. This fact makes us apply Mulej/Kajzer law of requisite holism as a suitable one.[6]

In the case of the climate change system this means awareness of the need for synergy of physics, chemistry, biology, history, technology, economy and some other disciplines and practices. One would choose essential and interdependent approaches and viewpoints to complement each other's advantages.

Following the ancient Greek philosophy one would consolidate them on the basis of their interdependence (or, in the Greek wording, dialectics), and thus create a dialectic system.[7] This system is not meant to be a complex feature, but a mental picture about it, which we introduce in order to attain the required holism of human behaviour and desirable wholeness of its outcomes.

A Dialectical Systemic Approach to the Climate Change

A dialectical systemic approach to the climate change must investigate the age of globalization, the present state of our civilization, unnatural life of humans in poly/mega and similar urban centres, management of technologies without sustainability, lack of individual and corporate social responsibility,[8] uncontrollable human-population explosion, short-, often medium- and even long-term (‘side’-)effects of the following aspects: synthetic chemicals; modern technologies; weapons; combustion engines; transport systems; nuclear technologies; industrial and agricultural production; pollution of the energy production system; national and international political distribution of power and administration, and their influence on the global, national and local scientific communities. All these cause the gap between the needs and the results of the Homo-sapiens-civilization cohabitating with the nature on the Earth. This gap threatens the civilization with disappearance.

The gap results in the climate change and impacts global human community: strong winds, large droughts and floods, tsunamis, earthquakes, large air pollutions by industrial, city life's, and transport system's (including the Internet!) emissions, changes in local climatic patterns, global warming, depletion of the ozone layer, pollution of all three basic parts of the biosphere: soil, seas/oceans and air. They are caused by huge misunderstanding of the climate change by pepole in local communities around the Globe. Unfortunately, the economic theory declared all three to be free commodities, thus causing their neglect in economic practice. This mistake, though not exclusively, leads essentially to the current climate change problems.

Simple language for simple people and clear explanations are needed for sustainable future of humankind. Whether we shall understand the climate change system or not is of crucial importance for the local/global community life. Its realization gives humankind slim chances of long-term survival which requires sustainable future. Sustainability of local communities leads to the sustainable future of the global human civilization.[9]

We think that the above discussion has paved the way for discussion on humankind's sustainable future.

The Sustainable Future and Harmony of the Global Society

The sustainable future and harmony of the global society and its coexistence with other living creatures and the Earth's biosphere is the best solution we know, which should be adopted as a condition of its survival. We need a society-wide global approach instead of the dilution of scarce financial means, for it is impossible to buy the humankind's survival for all the money of the world.

In the 1960s, the awareness of a certain state of environment needed as a basis for life of humankind and all creatures on the Earth also triggered elaboration of sustainable development concept/strategy/vision or social technique.

First compliments are reserved for pioneers and among them the Club of Rome[10] with its first report and publication ‘The Limits to Growth’. Then other reports followed and the awakening of global society commenced.

Stockholm-72, the UN Conference on the Environment in Stockholm/Sweden, 1972, achieved the establishment of UNEP – United Nations Environmental Program in Nairobi (Kenya). More research and reports followed and it took humanity two decades to prepare the global conference on sustainable development – Rio 1992.

In 1987 the term ‘sustainable development’ was introduced in the report ‘Our Common Future’ or ‘G. H. Bruntland Report’ presented by the World Commission on Environment and Development to the General Assembly of the United Nations. This report had a strong impact on the global society.

At time of awakening it was excellent, but did not change in line with challenges of the present and past short-term and narrow values of humans preferring profit to long-term survival, in line with the so-called neo-liberal economics reigning over the world from the Chicago school of economics by Milton Friedman et al.; they even won several Nobel prizes for what is now found mostly a source of danger for humankind. In the 20^th century, one came to realize a much more complex character of sustainability problems as well as the failure to consider social responsibility in the way Adam Smith used to claim. The neo-liberal economics is a very dangerous deviation from Smith's liberal economics allowing no big companies, no share-holding or limited liability companies.[11]

The first part of the wording ‘sustainable development’ – sustainability – is much more important and has a crucial value for the future of humankind. Its second part ‘development’ is a misused term from industrial revolution and economics, and has nothing to do with nature of the Earth. Development could tackle product, construction, man-made systems, repairs, machines, armaments, etc., and it is a part of human society of post-industrial era. The nature has no what-so-ever development, but evolution; and the nature system works basing on contents and interdependences, interactions and co-operation relations.[12]

What is needed is a New Approach[13] as an introduction of global society system relations, values, ethics, contents and mechanisms, which should assist the transition to sustainable future of Earth as a global society.

What we find necessary for survival of humankind is to introduce sustainable future of humankind as a harmony of local and global human society with the other constituents of nature on the Earth that is yet not fully known to us, humans.

It would be easy to write many pages on sustainable development concept, but the purpose of this article is to indicate the possibility for transition from sustainable development to sustainable future as social technique needed for human survival.

The transition from sustainable development to sustainable future should be devised with all possible co-operation of humankind, and with mitigations of the climate change impact on the Earth biosphere.[14] The sustainable future is the most complex issue, which could be undertaken with consent of all humankind and dedication to fulfillment of its content. Let us study the contents of the sustainable future concept.

An indicative description is possible only by a short definition: humankind's sustainable future is a harmony of the human system/civilization with the system of nature/biosphere of the Earth.

It is a short description of a very complicated and complex content of the present global human society and its basis – the biosphere of the Earth.

We think until now many humans'efforts towards sustainable development should be transcended toward a more complex sustainable future concept.

The sustainable future concept includes:

– Redirection of scientific work to the study of the Earth nature, Solar System, Milky Way, stars and galaxies of the Cosmos/Universe and/or the basic environment Cosmos/Universe as stated after introduction of the Information Theory of Nature.[15]

– Redirection of the climate change research towards the study of the climate system as a part of the Earth biosphere, and interdependences, interactions and co-operations within this system itself and other systems of the nature on the Earth.

– Transition of the contemporary education system towards education for understanding and use of human abilities, creative and other thinking processes as major tools for better work. Ethics, human values, tolerance, past and present achievements, knowing the humankind's heritage, and many more impacts should become a part of education system. One could add life-long education, long-distance learning and new methods of knowledge transfer allowed by new communication means. Public media matter too.

– Transition from Homo urbanus to ‘Homo of sustainable future’ with new approach to life based on the long-term values and requiring holistic behavior by means of systemic thinking for the necessary wholeness of outcomes of the human activities from the daily work to leisure aimed at sustainable health.

– Establishment of the global human society with direct democracy, World parliament, Constitution of the Federation of the Earth, and World government disabling any abuse and misuse of power-holders' impact over humans and their natural preconditions of sustainable life.

– Transformation of the United Nations in terms of their integration with global society's needs for solving the problem in co-operation with global governing institutions.

– Decommission of biased and one-sided national governments and bureaucracies towards meeting needs of new global human system/civilization/society for all nations/humans to survive and lived well.

– Rethinking of military and security needs and establishment of responsible attitude of humans within the global human society.

– Rethinking of present living style practice, techniques, and technologies in use towards sustainable ones. Wars, transport, use of nuclear power and technologies, construction, land use, water use, air use, communications, energy, conservation practices, long term impacts of present over future possibilities, and many more should be examined and the proposed solution should be reviewed.

– Rethinking of the contemporary research[16] and industrial production practices of producing without knowing the long-term impacts on the Earth biosphere.

– Mitigation of the climate change impact and its consequences in the biosphere and prevention of damages caused by current practices of human everyday life, and present short- and long-term living practice changes.

– Creation of a new Homo sapiens for the third millennium within education and knowledge system needed for common performances under challenges of the present and possible future evolvements.

– Stopping wars and riots, stopping practices, which harm human society and its chances for survival; establishing tolerance and peace philosophy; transformation of the present financial and monetary system, which have become our civilization Monster, to introduce a new more equitable and motivating socio-economic system based on creativity, social responsibility, ethics of interdependence and cooperation rather than the current abuse of power causing terrorism; transcending the present media and free time practices and their influences on the global human society; and study of their long-term impact on humans.

– And many more changes, which should be worked out in co-operation of humans with abilities for it.

Of course, this is an optimistic scenario, which we support and initiate its enhancement and long-term realization.

A Possible Path to Sustainable Future

The path is to work with local communities and with sustainable future of local communities to enhance global society sustainable future or harmony with nature. The basis from ‘Our Common Future’ ‘Agenda for Change’ and ‘Agenda 21 Processes’ (Rio Summit), ‘New Approach’, ‘Our Common Enemy – The Climate Change System Threat’ and many other achievements of present and past humans should anchor the new approach for the global sustainable human society to be created or evolve. A major goal is education for the new profile of humankind's individuals, knowledgeable and thinking persons devoted to necessary holism and wholeness. Humankind needs such a transition from present to future in order to survive. Hopefully, the contemporary generation does not hate its own children and grandchildren as much as to prevent rather than elaborate and support this concept.

Many excellent achievements from the past and present make humanity’s heritage that should be rethought and put into a new frame of requirements of the 3^rd millennium and present challenges coming from the differences between the global human society and nature:

– The humankind's construction practice is not meant for the present disastrous conditions.

– Wind could reach a speed of 500 kilometers and more. The power of wind could increase much more, with lifting soil particles due to our practice in agriculture etc.

– Floods and droughts will reduce food production possibilities; new techniques should be invented for covering the demands for food and other fundamental needs.

– Earthquakes, volcano eruptions, tsunamis and larger floods will increase damages over human achievements.

– The oceans/seas level could rise 75 meters (James Hanson, Dec. 2008) by the 3100s; this impact to the present living space of mankind could significantly harm global civilization.

– People may learn from other planets in our Solar system on environment or living conditions needed for life of human and other living creature’s societies. Learning from research of the nature could be short cut to new solutions for sustainable future of humankind.

Let us now connect the time of the 2009 global human community situation with the climate change system, sustainable future of humankind and corporate and individual social responsibility.

Some Challenges of the Current Age Requiring Social Responsibility and Cooperation for Sustainable Future of Humankind

Whileentering ‘Globalisation Age’ the challenges for humanity are more complex and possibilities for survival of our civilisation are on the edge of ability and responsibility of humankind. Let us enumerate some of challenges we are facing today: the climate change impact, very dangerous activities of warring nation-states, use of nuclear technologies, use of large number of synthetic chemical products and contemporary technologies from nuclear, particles acceleration, nano, digital, GMO, GMP, communications, transport to armaments, without knowing their medium- and long-term effect within the biosphere of the Earth, producing enormous quantities of all sorts of waste, Money Monster leadership, losing working efficiency of a very large share of human population due to urbanization and activities of nation-states, of international, and global administrations and services which are hardly able to feed the global human population, losing ability to ensure safe water for humans, losing possibility to have enough space for living including the ocean/sea level rise impact, and losing possibility to ensure qualitative air for breathing. These are some of challenges we are facing today and will probably face them and unknown, may be more severe, ones in future. The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) was invented to support work with new challenges faced by corporations and their effect on the human society, which failed to support possibility for its own survival, and opened a large gate for the Money Monster leadership which does not recognize the individual, social and global human society's needs of now and in the possible sustainable future. Authors consider the CSR and individual social responsibility top to be the forgotten values of the humanity neglected by the Money Master that needs the money reproduction and is managed by humans without human/e qualities/ethics.

The genesis and evolvement of the corporate social responsibility – CSR,[17] could be presented from ancient history to modern times as the American case study: ‘Even if the notion of Corporate Social Responsibility is quite recent, the concern regarding the consequences of economic activities – that lies behind these words – has existed since a long time in human history’.

The formulation of ‘CSR’ is expressed as a fruit of religion and ethics in the United States. From 1916 on the American economist John Maurice Clark stated what could be one of the earliest sign of CSR: ‘If men are responsible for the known results of their actions, business responsibilities must include the known results of business dealings, whether these have been recognized by law or not’.

In early 1930s, Professor Theodore Kreps used the term ‘Social Audit’ while introducing the subject of Business and Social Welfare to his Stanford students, developing a concept of companies declaring their SR.

But it was 1953 when a protestant pastor Howard Bowen was the first to introduce and define the term ‘CSR’ as: ‘The obligations of businessmen to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society’.

Corporate social responsibility has many more definitions but foundations are in social responsibility.

Let us emphasize it again: Social responsibility is an attribute of humans and their organizations. It prevents or diminishes, at least, the danger of humans' abuse of their influence leading to damage caused by their co-workers, other business or personal partners, broader society or nature on which the human existence or, at least, quality of life depend. This is a short summary of definitions in international official documents. Other references see in social responsibility an upgrading of the innovation effort/support called improvement or total quality management or business excellence. Further references see it closely linked with systemic behaviour; yet further ones link it with efforts aimed at peace in the world.[18] The current dangerous state of climate change system to a considerable degree results from a lack of responsible behaviour of humans over centuries of industrialization until today.

Abuse of Money – A Threat to Social Responsibility and Sustainable Future

Corporate, individual and social responsibility is very much connected with monetary system, an invention of humans from ancient time, and its abuse.

Money as a Homo sapiens' invention/innovation evolved in ancient history.[19] People needed money to pay for goods and services, and to substitute the barter exchange. In this respect the eastern cultures were more advanced than the western ones. The Chinese invented coins and coins-like money in the 2^nd millennium BC, then India followed. The first paper money was invented in China in the AD 1^st millennium. Marco Polo reported about the use of paper money after visiting China. The first coins known in the Western world appeared in Lydia, a kingdom in the western Turkey; thus its king guaranteed the uniform value. Paper money was invented in the Western world much later; we know today, it was developed in the 19^th century. In the early 20^th century, the monetary system was a nice and very helpful assistant of civilisation.

It took the monetary system only half a century to transform from a nice assistant into a master. By the end of the Second World War in 1945 and within the following five years, due to the US administration assistance, the implementation of Marshal Plan and development of society, the money evolved from servant/assistant to the master of our civilisation.

From the master to the monster – at the beginning of the third millennium our civilization adopted a secondary role in society after the money master, which transformed from the master into the monster. Today it is the Money Monster that decides on right or wrong, dependence or independence, war or peace, values of services and commodities, people, nature, environment, and, sadly, even the scientific achievements. In the last hundred years an intensive knowledge acquisition by our civilization was driven by the development of better and more effective weapons for destruction/killing/protection of Homo sapiens – from whom? The contemporary wars always result in financial gain of the nation that wins the war.

At the beginning of the 3^rd millennium our civilisation is declining; some nations such as G7 countries look like success stories (in short-term criteria), but the majority is stranded: 85 % of people live on less than six US dollars a day.

The recent impact of the climate change clarifies the role of C&ISR and long-term values. The whole value of the Money Monster system is insufficient to protect or mitigate the impact of the climate change, and humans have to find ways for better life or sustainable future, but of course not under the Money Monster leadership, but in sustainability and harmony with the Earth biosphere.

The C&ISR should be re-checked from a new angle making the monetary system a tool again and its impact on the biosphere (such as production of synthetic chemical products; nuclear technologies; GMO, GMP, human organs sale; production of waste; etc.) less destructive. It would contribute to the eco-remediation of forest, river basins, coastal waters, deserts, large town areas, transport communications, and polluted land/water/air.

Some Cultural Aspects of the Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Future

And now let us explore the case study of cultural aspects of the corporate social responsibility I quote Sir Prof. Dr. Roger How:

We have the scientific knowledge to solve our major world challenges. We have the technological know-how to solve our problems. We have biological, psychological, and sociological knowledge to educate and transform human beings. We have organizational knowledge to design institutions that could support the transformation towards a sustainable world. But what we need is to have new hearts and a new vision as well as cultivating Social Responsibility practices both at local and international levels. Who says that one person or an organisation can't have an effect in this world? We all have an effect, and if your effect is an inspired one, then it will inspire countless others around the world.

This is what I have advised the United Nations through the Academic Council on the United Nations System. It gives a new direction and perspective for the entire United Nations NGOs systems to practice and seriously look into social responsibility wide perspectives for the benefit of world citizen in this new millennium.

The CSR and individual SR should be a part of new ethics. As Ecimovic stated in talks with students at Mangalore State University, India, 2007: ‘The CSR should not be responsibility of corporations, but individual SR of each and every citizen of the World; and when individual SR will be a part of all of us, we shall have CSR as result of new ethics, new approach or knowledge of each and every citizen of the World.’

Social responsibility has been a part of ancient people during and before the Stone Age. It is a part of heritage from the Nature to humans as social creatures, which was most essential for survival. In those ancient times humans would have no chance to survive without social responsibility integrated in their ethics and behaviour. Unfortunately, the present Homo urbanus has developed egocentric behaviour and ethics with no connections to his ancient heritage and life out in the country. By 2030 we may expect up to 80 % of global human community to live in urban environments; this is why we have to develop learning methods and education, which will integrate system thinking, social responsibility, and many more topics and attributes needed for transition to sustainable future.

Individual social responsibility should be a part of each and every representative of human global community and integrated into the human ethics of the 21^st century and on. The global human community with integrated individual social responsibility would not need separate corporate social responsibility, which will – due to acting of people for the benefit of all including the biosphere – become a tool of humans' individual social responsibility.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Our intention was to present the situation, reasons and solutions but not all of them, because it is the task for the team of many more researchers than we are. We hope that our task of putting together a clear picture of the present situation in the global human society and the Earth biosphere was reasonable. And if it will lead to a better research in future we shall have the great pleasure to be a part of the commencement.

Our recommendations are:

1. Revival of individual social responsibility for each and every individual of the global human community.

2. Distribution of the knowledge needed for survival of ‘Homo of sustainable future’ of the 21^st century, namely: system theory, thinking, synthesis and analysis, the Nature and the climate change system.

3. Rethinking of the role of the Money Monster/Master system within humankind.

4. Rethinking of the present governing national and international systems.

5. Rethinking of the present urban life stile of humans, constructions, consumption, pollutions and attitudes towards basic values of both humankind and the Nature.