by Ken Cynar – Exec VP – G&A Institute

Since the nuclear accident at the Fukushima nuclear power facility in Japan two and a half years ago Accountability Central has been tracking carefully the response from the Japanese government and Tokyo Electric Power, the owner/operator of the site. Despite some very heroic efforts by individual company employees and local managers, the overall company and government response has been subpar and bordering on disastrous.

The greater concern appeared for months to be evading blame and official apologies than addressing solutions to the problem. The withholding of information from the public has at times been shocking. Caused by a huge earthquake off the coast of Japan, followed by a devastating tidal wave that destroyed coastal areas in and around the plant site, this event is being called the greatest peacetime nuclear disaster ever.

Every week there appear more and more stories about the depth and seriousness of the event and its increasing impact on the people and environment of Japan and the entire Pacific Rim and beyond. Just a few days ago it was announced that 300 tons of nuclear contaminated water used to cool the plant to avoid a complete meltdown has been escaping into the ocean …each day.!

A member of an independent committee reviewing the event recently stated that the group “…agreed on one thing: that the damage being caused by the crippled No. 1 nuclear plant is far worse than government officials cared to acknowledge. “It’s time we faced the danger,” said Takashi Hirose, a writer shocked by the under-reported radiation levels he found on recent trip into the evacuation zone. “So many terrible things are not being reported in the news.”

While the Japanese response to the Fukushima event might be rooted in cultural traditions, its impact on the nation and potentially the entire world warrants greater scrutiny.

Read last Thursday’s Time magazine story The News from Fukushima Just Gets Worse, and the Japanese Public Wants Answers . It is eye opening and a bit disturbing!

by Ken Cynar, Exec VP – G&A Institute

“The world is passing through troublous times. The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint. They talk as if they knew everything, and what passes for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for the girls, they are forward, immodest and unladylike in speech, behavior and dress.“ I once thought this was written 20 centuries ago by Plato quoting Socrates, but on researching it for this blog I found it more recently had gained recognition in a Forbes article or even in an Ann Landers column….its origin is murky.

But the point is that criticism of young people goes way back in time…way way back… with each generation critical of the younger for its such things as its attitude, dress and demeanor.

Last week an article appeared in Accounting Web outlining a study of Ethics among several generations conducted by the Ethics Resource Center. I found it of great interest.

The study contrasted the views of these groups on the matter of ethics. First they described them in these terms” The four generational groups examined in the survey are Traditionalists, Baby Boomers, Generation X workers (Gen Xers), and Millenials or Generation Y workers (Gen Yers). Traditionalists, born 1925–1945, are hardworking, respectful of authority, and value loyalty. Baby Boomers, born 1946–1964, are hardworking, idealistic, and committed to harmony. Gen Xers, born 1965–1980, are entrepreneurial, flexible and self-reliant, and comfortable with technology. Millennials, born 1981–2000, are tech-savvy, appreciative of diversity, and skilled in multitasking.”

They then contrasted the various generations’ views on ethics…not critical but just as pure observers. The prime difference was this: The study found that the youngest workers are significantly more likely than their older colleagues to feel pressure from others to break ethical rules because the pressure “eases as workers spend more time in the workforce and learn ways of coping with their work environment.”

Basically, peer pressure to break the rules is strongest in the younger workers.

The lessons of ethics appear not to be instilled prior to entering the workforce. Schools, colleges and the family unit do not seem to be teaching the importance of following rules and in being ethical. The influence of peers is stronger than that of society…rules are to be questioned and adherence is selective.

As a member of the Baby Boomer generation, that attitude does worry me, but it is the same mantra as “don’t trust anyone over thirty” or “question all authority.” (Remember those from the 1960s?) It gives food for thought and debateon what is being taught within the family unit and through the educational process by Baby Boomers and Gen Xers.

You can read more about the report “Ethical Behavior Differs Among Generations.” What generation do you belong to – and what are your thoughts on this?

Certainly the ultimate Sustainability is the extension of the life cycle — so we mere humans could live to 125 or 150 years of age, for example. But is this something we really want to do? A recent Pew Research Center Study explored peoples’ opinions on living longer and the results might surprise you. In the Washington Post article Americans sharply divided about dramatically extending human lifespan,  the poll finds there are interesting divides which raise all types of societal, ethical and religious issues.

“… fifty-six percent of Americans say they would personally not want treatments that would allow them to live dramatically longer lives…”

Some of the reasons given include, a drain on natural resources, negative impact on the economy, boredom and even “social, political, economic, environmental, moral and other questions, including on concepts of marriage, parenting and the gap between rich and poor…” (What might your reasons be if you agree with these views?)

One of the issues that seemed to escape the respondents is the state of one’s health during that extended life. If in the last 40 years of your life you would be physically and mentally in the shape of a current 90 year old, that prospect might not be very pleasant. Poor health in old age can be something that most people would not like to experience for an additional 25 to 50 years. But scientists quoted in the article indicate that health standards would be vastly improved and longer life would provide better health through the life-span.

Religious leaders also brought into the discussion with some musing that delaying the dying process takes away the opportunity to be with God.

My take is simple…I would like to live longer, as long as I was healthy and above all not bored. You would have to evolve a new value system, like writing a bucket list that would last 25-40 years…..and buying cars that would last 15-25 years (Detroit — are you listening?). And work at living a longer life with purpose and dignity. I love what I am doing right now – sharing news and commentary from around the world with our readers. And could continue doing it for another 25-30 years.

Read the article and the study. There are many other interesting results for the ultimate sustainability…a longer life.

The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) in collaboration with KPMG, UNEP, Centre for Corporate Governance in Africa and various stakeholders from each country studied recently released the third edition of the “Carrots & Sticks” publication.  This important publication analyzes the growing number of national and international reporting policies and guidance from around the world.

The first edition of Carrots and Sticks covered developments in 19 countries; the second, 32 countries: This third edition covers 45 countries and regions. In the seven years of the series, the amount of policy and regulation has markedly increased. This includes a notable increase in the number of mandatory reporting measures. In 2006, 58 percent of policies were mandatory; now, more than two thirds (72 percent) of the 180 policies in the 45 reviewed countries are mandatory

The Governance & Accountability Institute’s Hank Boerner (Chairman and CEO) and Louis Coppola (Executive Vice President) assisted GRI with developing the United States content section in the report.  A Fellow of the G&A Institute – Linda Lowson of CSR Insights – provided additional support and invaluable input into the US regulatory environment.

Among the current regulations and policies discussed by G&A in the US section are:

• Dodd-Frank Act, 2010
• Presidential Executive Order 13514
• Regulation S-K, 2010
• EEO-1 Survey
• Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 2002
• Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean Water Act (CWA)
• The Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
• California Transparency in Supply Chains Act, 2010
• USEPA Proposed Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule

In the future we are sure to see this trend of Sustainability reporting regulations and policies increasing.  As countries begin to develop their own policies around this important subject this research can be very useful in learning by example.

Based on the report the major developmental trends around the world were:

• Continued and growing interest in regulation, including corporate governance and disclosure requirements.
• An increase in the number of countries becoming involved in the sustainability reporting policy arena, including developing countries.
• An increasing number of policies inspired by or based on a ‘report or explain’ approach.
• Growing reference to existing sustainability and reporting frameworks, and the continuing emergence of new frameworks.
• A consistent focus on large and state-owned companies, yet voluntary reporting by SMEs is increasing.
• Sustainability reporting has become a listing requirement on several stock exchanges in non-OECD countries.
• The United Nations is now also asking governments to stimulate sustainability reporting by developing best practice and smart regulation.
• In their introduction of policies, regulation and guidelines, governments are striving to harmonize the use of multiple frameworks.

G&A Institute is proud to be a contributor to this important study – please download your full copy here.