![]()
Basel, Switzerland, 12-14 October 2005 |
GOOD GOVERNANCE AND
COMPETITIVENESS
Arthur Lyon DAHL
International Environment Forum and European
Bahá'í Business Forum

Enlightened
business leaders recognize that strict environmental regulations
effectively enforced can increase their competitive edge. A globalizing
economy requires more effective governance structures at the
international level to make corporate social and environmental
responsibility competitive.
Business and environment
The first encounters between business and environmental interests in
the 1960s and 1970s were negative. Industrial pollution had caused
great damage, and the costs of pollution control and clean-up were
considerable. Governments instituted increasing levels of environmental
regulation in the public interest against the strong opposition of the
business community. This resulted in the general assumption that
environmental regulations reduce profits and damage competitiveness.
Today that assumption persists, particularly in government. Many
governments continue to believe that, to stimulate the economy and
create wealth, government regulation and interference with business
should be minimized or eliminated.
But the reality is different. One of the surprising results of the 2004
Executive Opinion Survey of the World Economic Forum, representing the
considered opinions of 8,729 business leaders in 104 countries (Blanke
and Loades, 2004), was the demonstration that business leaders
considered good governance, as expressed in strict environmental
regulation fairly enforced, actually increased their competitiveness
(Dahl, 2004). The countries where business thinking on environmental
and social responsibility is most advanced are also those with some of
the most advanced and competitive industrial economies. Having strong
regulations allows companies to compete in meeting their regulatory
obligations, giving a competitive advantage to companies that innovate
and increase their efficiency in environmental performance, as well as
opening up new market niches for environmental services.
Importance of good governance
Having good laws and regulations is not enough. Countries where the
laws are inefficiently or irregularly enforced and businesses can
escape from their responsibilities put companies that want to advance
in this area at a competitive disadvantage, and this rebounds in the
longer term on their international competitiveness as well. Good
governance is essential.
The quality of governance, the trust and collaborative spirit
established between business and government, and the confidence in
business that their taxes will be spent effectively in their common
interest, are critically important features of the countries that are
most competitive at the international level.
Table 1 (from Dahl, 2004) ranks country performance in environmental
and social responsibility as judged by business leaders. This is not a
ranking of environmental quality, but of the efforts of both business
and government to address and resolve their environmental problems in
the context of sustainable development.
The strong correlation between economic and environmental performance
shows both that increasing wealth helps to fund environmental measures,
but also that high environmental performance and economic
competitiveness go together rather than conflicting. Countries that
have been politically averse to environmental controls in order to
favour the business sector are relatively less competitive than those
that give environmental protection and sustainable development a high
priority. The poor performers in Europe like Greece and Italy rank far
below many developing countries
|
HIGH COUNTRY PERFORMANCE |
POSITIVE WITH SOME WEAK AREAS |
PROGRESS BUT MAJOR WEAKNESSES |
| 1. Sweden | 10. Taiwan | 23. South Africa |
| 2. Japan | 11. Austria | 24. Brazil |
| 3. Denmark | 12. Canada | 25. Hong Kong |
| 4. Finland | 13. United Kingdom | 26. Slovenia |
| 5. Netherlands | 14. Belgium | 27. Estonia |
| 6. Switzerland | 15. Australia | 28. Indonesia |
| 7. Singapore | 16. New Zealand | 29. Costa Rica |
| 8. Norway | 17. Luxembourg | 30. Slovak Republic |
| 9. Germany | 18. Iceland | 31. Tunisia |
| 19. France | 32. Korea | |
| 20. Ireland | 33. Gambia | |
| 21. United States | 34. Chile | |
| 22. Malaysia | 35. China | |
| 36. United Arab Emirates | ||
| 37. Lithuania | ||
| 38. Thailand | ||
| 39. Spain | ||
| 40. Israel | ||
| 41. Uganda | ||
| 42. Czech Republic | ||
| SOME PROGRESS BUT BALANCE NEGATIVE |
MOSTLY NEGATIVE | NEGATIVE - HAVE NOT YET STARTED |
| 43. Bahrain | 67. Turkey | 94. Ethiopia |
| 44. India | 68. Sri Lanka | 95. Nicaragua |
| 45. Kenya | 69. Mali | 96. Bolivia |
| 46. Mauritius | 70. Romania | 97. Serbia & Montenegro |
| 47. Ghana | 71. Jamaica | 98. Georgia |
| 48. Hungary | 72. Malta | 99. Honduras |
| 49. Morocco | 73. Philippines | 100. Venezuela |
| 50. Portugal | 74. El Salvador | 101. Ecuador |
| 51. Nigeria | 75. Uruguay | 102. Paraguay |
| 52. Greece | 76. Ukraine | 103. Bosnia and Hercegovina |
| 53. Jordan | 77. Zimbabwe | 104. Angola |
| 54. Egypt | 78. Panama | |
| 55. Zambia | 79. Poland | |
| 56. Italy | 80. Trinidad & Tobago | |
| 57. Botswana | 81. Croatia | |
| 58. Cyprus | 82. Mozambique | |
| 59. Colombia | 83. Russian Federation | |
| 60. Namibia | 84. Algeria | |
| 61. Madagascar | 85. Macedonia | |
| 62. Tanzania | 86. Pakistan | |
| 63. Latvia | 87. Argentina | |
| 64. Mexico | 88. Bangladesh | |
| 65. Vietnam | 89. Bulgaria | |
| 66. Malawi | 90. Dominican Republic | |
| 91. Guatemala | ||
| 92. Peru | ||
| 93. Chad |
The challenge from globalization
While the link of environmental responsibility and competitiveness is
clear at the national level, it is more complex from the global
perspective of sustainable planetary development. In a rapidly
globalizing world economy, global competitiveness is rapidly becoming
more important than national competitiveness, and in the present
unregulated global system, there are strong pressures to lower
environmental and social standards. Global sustainability requires good
governance at the international level as well to achieve the same
effect as effective regulation at the national level.
Global environmental problems like climate change, stratospheric ozone
depletion, biodiversity loss, natural resource depletion and management
of toxic chemicals and wastes, require global environmental regulations
to establish a level playing field for global competition (Dahl, 2002).
Harmonization of social regulations would also reduce the pressures for
delocalizations with their associated social and economic costs. Yet
the mechanisms of governance created for at least some of these
problems are cumbersome, voluntary and under-resourced.
Another challenge to global sustainability is the international
distribution of wealth. No society can continue for long with
increasing disparities between the richest and the poorest; this is
socially and morally unsustainable. Without mechanisms of global
governance to address this problem, the symptoms of social stress such
as failed governments, illegal immigration and terrorism will increase.
Yet with globalization, multinational corporations and private fortunes
can more easily escape from national taxation, which is the major
existing mechanism for wealth redistribution (Dahl, 1996).
Poverty reduction is high on the international agenda, with targets
such as the Millennium Development Goals, but the efforts to go beyond
words to actions is falling far short of the needs. There is increasing
recognition that some international mechanisms for taxation will be
necessary to pay for the costs of global services and governance
mechanisms and to moderate the extremes between nations that are
destabilizing the world social, economic and environmental systems. The
private sector should support efforts to strengthen international
mechanisms that will improve their ability to compete fairly in global
markets.
Only more effective global governance will make corporate social and
environmental responsibility competitive at the international level,
and thus create a virtuous circle of development towards sustainability.
References:
Blanke, Jennifer, and Emma Loades (2004). "Capturing the state of
country competitiveness with the Executive Opinion Survey", p. 199-208.
In Michael E. Porter, Klaus Schwab, Xavier Sala-i-Martin and Augusto
Lopez-Claros, The Global Competitiveness Report 2004-2005. World
Economic Forum. Houndsmill, UK and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dahl, Arthur Lyon (1996). The ECO Principle: Ecology and Economics in
Symbiosis. London: Zed Books Ltd, and Oxford: George Ronald.
Dahl, Arthur Lyon (2002). The challenge of sustainable development and
prosperity. Paris, European Baha'i Business Forum.
Dahl, Arthur Lyon (2004). "The competitive edge in environmental
responsibility", p. 103-110. In Michael E. Porter, Klaus Schwab, Xavier
Sala-i-Martin and Augusto Lopez-Claros, The Global Competitiveness
Report 2004-2005. World Economic Forum. Houndsmill, UK and New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.

Return
to IEF
Home Page .
.
Return to Papers List
Last updated 4 July 2006