Should trees have managerial standing? Toward stakeholder status for non-human nature

Most definitions of the concept of stakeholder include only human entities. This paper advances the argument that the non-human natural environment can be integrated into the stakeholder management concept. This argument includes the observations that the natural environment is finally becoming recognized as a vital component of the business environment, that the stakeholder concept is more than a human political/economic one, and that non-human nature currently is not adequately represented by other stakeholder groups. In addition, this paper asserts that any of several stakeholder management processes can readily include the natural environment as one or more stakeholders of organizations. Finally, the point is made that this integration would provide a more holistic, value-oriented, focused and strategic approach to stakeholder management, potentially benefitting both nature and organizations.Mark Starik is an Assistant Professor of Strategic Management and Public Policy at The George Washington University. His research and writing on environmental management topics include articles, chapters, and presentations on Global Strategic Environmental Management, Environmental Entrepreneurship, and Environmental Stakeholders of the U.S. Energy Sector. In addition, he is active in the advancement of environmental programs in both the Academy of Management and the George Washington University.     

The market for surrogate motherhood contracts

Surrogate motherhood is a controversial subject, and has not previously been formally modelled by economists. In this paper, a neoclassical model of the market for surrogate motherhood contracts is developed, based on the utility maximizing decisions of potential surrogate mothers and commissioning parties. The presence of both altruistic and self-interested behaviour generates unusual market outcomes.     

Determinants of internal and external R&D: Some Dutch evidence

Summary Innovating firms can choose to engage in either internal or external R&D, or in both. In the current study, we shall examine internal and external R&D separately to determine empirically the market structure characteristics explaining the external R&D share and the differences in market structure determinants between internal and external R&D. Our results indicate that a government policy that aims at stimulating technological progress by offering external research facilities is particularly interesting for smaller, capital-intensive firms operating in less concentrated markets.We would like to thank Alfred Kleinknecht for providing the R&D data and Kees Bakker and Yvonne Prince for providing the market structure data. We thank Alfred Kleinknecht, Bart Nooteboom and an anonymous referee for their comments and suggestions We acknowledge a research grant from the Stichting KMO Fonds.     

Fortress Bethesda

Critics within and outside the National Institutes of Health say that NIH's central administration is hostile and defensive and needs to be shaken up. They hope a new director will do just that.     

The economics of dying: A misapplication of tools

Conclusions Unlike McKenzie and Tullock, we do not know how personsshould treat their bodily organs or what is an ideal exit. That depends upon their utility goals, which are defined in output terms specific to the decision maker. We contend that the body is an input into the utility production process, and therefore, as with any input, it must be maintained and repaired at a level consistent with the output goals for maximization of utility. Thus, from this framework, it is quite consistent for a person to die with healthy organs without any thought of belief in reincarnation or the desire to bequeath one's bodily organs to others, or religious values. Self interest is all that must prevail.Also, the fact that there are interrelationships between the organs in the system, and at points these relationships take on fixed factor characteristics such that reduced levels of operation in one organ can create disorientation or coma or damage to other organs, means that the body cannot die as M-T suggest. Zero capacity for all organs at death is a technical impossibility as well as being inconsistent with the output goals of utility maximizers.