Rewriting the bases of capitalism: Reflexive modernity and ecological sustainability as the foundations of a new normative framework
Journal of Business Ethics 47 (4):299 - 314 (2003)
|Abstract||The debate on sustainable globalized development rests on two clearly stated economic assumptions: that "development" proceeds, solely and inevitably, through industrialization and the proliferation of capital intensive high-technology, towards the creation of service sector economies; and that globalization, based on a neoliberal, capitalist, free market ideology, provides the only vehicle for such development. Sustainability, according to the proponents of globalized development, is merely a function of market forces, which will generate the solutions for all problems including the environmental dilemmas that loom over the globe today. The social focus of globalized development is clearly the "individual" and the much-touted goal of development in the context of these debates, is the emancipation of the individual from want. This glorification of the individual, so characteristic of the Enlightenment, has defined all aspects of modernity, leading to approaches that are self-focused and that give little thought to the needs of society or even the social context. The increasing impoverishment of human life and the growing environmental degradation, however, provide a poignant counterpoint to this onrush of capital interests, demanding a reassessment of sustainability separate from the logic of industrialization and globalized development. This paper examines the unfolding of the logic of capitalism, which underlies the structure of the Rostowian model of development and the problems in the assumptions underlying today''s globalized development process. The evident impossibility of sustainability in the current growth-based market system leads to the examination of alternatives including a reflexive understanding of the choices and the inclusion of opportunity costs, related to the social, environmental and economic aspects of decision making. The integration of all factors of production into the logic of development provides a sustainable alternative to the current system|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kathia Laszlo, Alexander Laszlo, Carlos Romero & Marcia Campos (2003). Evolving Development: An Evolutionary Perspective on Development for an Interconnected World. World Futures 59 (2):105 – 119.
Julie L. Davidson (2000). Sustainable Development: Business as Usual or a New Way of Living? Environmental Ethics 22 (1):25-42.
Ivan Marquez (2005). Development, Ethics, and the Ethics of Development. World Futures 61 (4):307 – 316.
Rudi M. Verburg & Vincent Wiegel (1997). On the Compatibility of Sustainability and Economic Growth. Environmental Ethics 19 (3):247-265.
Vincent Wiegel (1997). On the Compatibility of Sustainability and Economic Growth. Environmental Ethics 19 (3):247-265.
Tobias Hahn & Frank Figge (2011). Beyond the Bounded Instrumentality in Current Corporate Sustainability Research: Toward an Inclusive Notion of Profitability. Journal of Business Ethics 104 (3):325-345.
W. Mckinney (2000). Of Sustainability and Precaution The Logical, Epistemological, and Moral Problems of the Precautionary Principle and Their Implications for Sustainable Development. Ethics and the Environment 5 (1):77-87.
Petter Naess (2011). Unsustainable Growth, Unsustainable Capitalism. Journal of Critical Realism 5 (2):197-227.
Jacob Park (2007). China's Rapid Industrialization and its Sustainability Discontents. International Corporate Responsibility Series 3:365-375.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #201,730 of 548,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?