Many consumers have accepted the new world challenges of keeping resources from being wasted and want to “go green” and are looking for opportunities to do so. Based on this consumer behavior and demand changes, many companies have instituted plans to develop sustainability practices within their business models. In fact, some consumers are willing to pay a premium to contribute to environmental sustainability efforts if paying a little more will help curb global warming and protect the environment. However, strategy creation and implementation are not always aligned together. Many of the companies that are offering eco-friendly options are falling short on delivering on them. Many other companies are just creating marketing materials and have no immediate desire to change anything within their organizations. Others, however, are suspected of committing a new type of fraud—“greenwashing.” This refers to companies that make unsubstantiated claims about how environmentally friendly their products or services really are. These latter kinds of companies are just preying on people’s goodwill. What is your understanding of the initiative? What companies have you seen that are doing this the right way, while the others are just creating a facade for this community action. Give examples to support your answer. How critical are these issues for strategic planning for companies and their corporate governance? What are the legal requirements, if any, to be called a sustainable company? Will the current health crisis derail this proposition to ‘go green’? What is the government currently doing to such laws? Is sustainibility expensive to implement in companies?
e Rules of Procedure for the CoP include the ability to vote through secret ballot. In order for this to be done, a country’s request must be seconded by at least ten other Parties. Secret ballots go against transparency, which is the main reason for Non-Governmental Organisations criticising them. Also, they enable countries to freely ignore the FLC, as they will not be questioned for their vote, which might be taken in aims of pursuing political interests. For this reason, certain Parties have suggested that the CoP Rules increase the number of votes needed to allow secret ballots. Nonetheless, the Rules themselves expressly admit that secret ballots should not be used on a regular basis, but rather when a Party feels like they cannot vote sincerely with the pressure of others. This is normally the case with under-developed countries, as they use the secrecy to protect themselves from the pressure of more developed countries, which is why in such cases their decision is promoted by ten other Parties. Secret voting enables smaller and less powerful countries to preserve their sovereignty. Lastly, secret ballots do not restrict those who wish to disclose their votes, which results in the accountability of developed countries from not being diluted. Although secret ballots should not be the main method of voting in CITES, its availability is supported through the protection that it provides intimidated Parties. c. Secretariat: The role of Secretariat is often criticised as being given too much unconstrained power. Firstly, this discretion is depicted by the Secretariat’s exclusive role in evaluating information received from individual states and choosing how to use it for recommendations to the CoP. However, these are merely suggestions and the CoP has the final power in making decisions, illustrating a restriction of the Secretariat’s power, as he is highly incentivised to produce convincing recommendations. The CoP is nonetheless limited, in the sense that they can only accept or reject the Secretariat’s recommendations. Conversely, the fact that the Secretariat’s work is closely related to the CoP, inevitably means that he is closely observed, and any unconvincing activity is discovered. Furthermore, the ability to create recommendations is wholly based on the provision of informat>GET ANSWER