Week 3: Sustainability and Innovation

This week’s topics were Technology and Industrial Development: Moving Towards Sustainable Development and Technology and Innovation Management. In the first half we discussed how there is a need for “cyclical models of production” based on sustainability and the policies in place attempting to shift society towards sustainability. The second half saw us talking mostly about how products are made: from the conception of an idea to placing it on the store shelves.

Interesting Observations:

In the first half, prof showed us a video called the Story of Stuff. It’s a video that takes an in-depth look into our linear system of production. Why linear? Because linear means that it only goes in one direction; from extracting the earth’s resources to dumping the used stuff into landfills never to be seen again.

When I got back, I took a look at the whole video and these are things I gathered from it is that the whole process is engineered.

The idea behind this grand scheme of perceived and planned obsolescence turns all the hardworking citizens into consumers. There is a vicious cycle here as consumers are tricked into believing whatever they currently have is inadequate and buy more stuff just for the media and society to shame them into buying more of the latest products. Planned obsolescence is done in such a way that people are forced to buy newer models even if their current model is still in perfect working condition. For instance in technology, most of the new upgrades come out so fast, the moment one decides to buy a new computer, a new model is released. It’s an insane cycle that turns the average person’s life into an endless trip between the workplace and the shopping centre.

Have we all been victims of a clever scheme to enrich others at the expense of others? That much seems clear. Thankfully there are at least some companies that show some signs of going in the right direction.

Prashant presented to us H&M’s measures to become more sustainable. Among them were efforts to decrease water consumption when making clothes and being more transparent when it comes to workers in the production lines. However, we need to bear in mind that H&M is a fast-fashion business model clothes company. While it is good that they are taking steps to conserve natural resources, would they be able to reflect the price of all these changes in their price tags? These measures internalize a lot of costs and consumers might have to pay more. Would their customers be able to make the shift in their spending habits? All of us have to change if the world is at stake.

Responses to Presentation Discussion Questions:

•        Should Consumers demand for or should the Government regulate the level of transparency disclosed by Businesses?

In my opinion, both have an equal part to play when it comes to business transparency. Consumers are the people who fund the businesses by purchasing their goods. The Government is the body that should have the people’s interests at heart and Business transparency should be something the people should know.

The people have to be aware of every step of the development process as to be able to make an informed decision on the qualities of a product. If businesses sneak harmful toxins into the product, would they let us know? No! If their business practices are unethical would they let us know? No! The people have to take charge of the things that we buy as at the end of the day it’s our money we’re paying them. We are not going to fork over our cash to unethical people masquerading around as if they have our interests at heart are we?

The government collects taxes from firms. Why does the government collect taxes? Because the government is (supposed) to use the money to benefit the citizens of its country. The government has the power through legislation to impose regulations on companies to make them more transparent. The people’s protests (or threats to move to another company) will not work for all companies. The government must step in for the interests of everyone involved.

Rating for class:

The class went smoother than previous rounds (even though the prof was late) as we’re all getting more into the swing of things. It’s good that the prof reminded us to take the discussions to Facebook. We’re seeing a lot more action there now. I’ll give this class an 8 out of 10.