Ethics and Decision Making in Green Product Design:
Business, Science, and Policy Perspectives
ESPM 290 and MBA 296.1A (CCN 30165)
When: Wed. 2-4 pm during first seven weeks of the Spring 2012 semester
Where: Cheit 250
Instructors: Christine Rosen (Haas), Alastair Iles (ESPM)
and Joseph Guth (Berkeley Center for Green Chemistry)
SYLLABUS I.
Introduction and Learning Objectives
This 1 credit seminar will explore some of the personal, business, legal and
political conflicts that complicate society’s efforts to transition to a green
chemistry economy, as seen through an ethics lens. Our focus is on the different
approaches to resolving ethical issues raised by the social objective of
minimizing harm to human health and natural ecosystems through green product
design.
Some of the ethical conflicts we will examine are personal in nature. As the
green chemistry economy emerges, scientists, engineers, business leaders and
others involved in the development, design, testing, and marketing of new
products must make decisions in the context of evolving social norms and
competing organizational objectives. This can raise for individuals a variety of
dilemmas, and can challenge them to develop a personal ethical viewpoint. We
will explore whether individuals have an obligation to adopt new social norms
even if they are not required to do so by law or are not supported by their
organizations, and what the bases for those obligations might be. We will also
explore the challenging ethical issues underlying whether organizations
(including firms) have any obligation to green their products over and above that
required by law.
Ethical values also form a critical element of how the United States makes legal
and public policy decisions that promote or constrain the development,
production, and marketing of green products. While these decisions usually
purport to rely on technical issues of science and economics, they, too, are in
fact often grounded in ethical postures toward economic growth, future
generations, other species, and distributive justice within and between societies
worldwide. We will examine the role that the debate over different ethical
approaches and viewpoints plays in the development of laws that could promote
innovation in the area of environmental sustainability, green chemistry and green
product design.
1
II.
Intended Audience
Graduate students in a variety of Departments at U.C. Berkeley, including the
College of Chemistry, Haas School of Business, College of Natural Resources,
School of Public Health, School of Law, Goldman School of Public Policy,
Molecular Toxicology, Education, Engineering and others.
III.
Prerequisites
Graduate standing, or undergraduates with instructor approval.
IV.
Course Textbook
Required: Course Reader at Copy Central on Bancroft.
V.
Lead Instructors
Prof. Alastair Iles, Environmental Science, Policy & Management
(iles@berkeley.edu)
Prof. Christine Rosen, Haas School of Business (crosen@berkeley.edu)
Dr. Joseph Guth, Research Scientist, School of Public Health
(jguth@berkeley.edu)
VI.
Office Hours
TBA
VII.
Student Assignments
(1) Class Participation: Students will be expected to attend class and participate
in class discussion. Course readings are an essential part of this course and will
be integral for the successful completion of your term paper. All students will
need to have name plates that display their names in large, very visible capital
letters.
(2) Class Assignment: There is a very short research assignment for class no.
5. There may be other short assignments as well.
(3) Term paper: 5-10 page paper. The instructors of the three three green
2
design mini courses sponsored by the Berkeley Center for Green Chemistry are
considering holding a joint session at the end of the semester. If we do this, you
will have the opportunity to meet with students from all three courses and share
your paper and your thoughts about the issues covered in this course with them and to learn about what they have been working on. The goal will be to generate
a more holistic perspective on the challenges and opportunities of green
product design.
VIII.
Course Expectations
Respect: Our goal is to create an interdisciplinary class where ideas can be
freely exchanged. This will only be possible in an atmosphere of respect where
everyone is free to express ideas and ask questions. With so many different
disciplines represented, your instructors will strive to avoid discipline specific
jargon, and will gladly explain unfamiliar terms and concepts. We expect students
to show the same respect for and interest in all the the many disciplinary and
ethical viewpoints we and your fellow students bring to bear in our discussions .
Plagiarism: Official university policy states that “students who submit plagiarized
work will be subject to consequences ranging from a grade of F on the
assignment to suspension from the university.” The Campus Office of Student
Judicial Affairs has produced a guide to academic honesty:
http://uga.berkeley.edu/sas/rtf/guide_student.rtf
IX. Course Calendar
Clas
Date
Subject
s
1
January 18 Introduction to the Course: Green Product
Design and Ethics
2
January 25
Ethics and Decision Making at the
Organizational Level
Ethics and Decision Making at the Personal
Level
3
February 1
4
5
6
February 8
February 15
February 22
Ethics and Morality in the Legal System
Ethics in Institutional Governance
The Public Ethics of Greening Chemistry
7
February 29
Participatory Ethics
8
April 30
Possible Student Presentations (to be
decided)
3
Instructors
Prof. Iles
Prof. Rosen
Dr. Guth
Prof. Rosen
Prof. Rosen
Prof. Iles
Prof. Bergman (guest)
Dr. Mulvihill (guest)
Prof. Cranor (guest)
Dr. Guth
Dr. Guth
Prof. Iles
Prof. Rosen
Prof. Iles
Dr. Guth
Students!
X.
Detailed Course Outline And Reading Assignments
Week 1 (January 18)
Introduction to the Course: Green Product Design and Ethics
Professor Christine Rosen, Professor Alastair Iles, Dr. Joseph Guth
This session introduces students to the entire course. We will discuss the
two main theories of normative ethics, utilitarian (consequentialist) and
deontological (non consequentialist) theories in order to give students a
conceptual framework for thinking about why ethical issues that
complicate the project of making products safer and more environmentally
benign is so contested. We will provide a classroom exercise to help
students understand the distinctions between and the implications of the
different models of ethics. We will also ask students to share why they are
taking the course and what kinds of ethical questions they believe that
they may face later in their careers, and how they are personally inclined
to decide what to do about the ethical issues that arise in their own
lives.
Readings:
1. Thomas Donaldson and Patricia H. Werhane, “Introduction to Ethical
Reasoning,” in Thomas Donaldson and Al Gini, Case Studies in
Business Ethics, 3rd Edition (1993), pp. 1-13 (see Course Reader).
2. Andrew Martin, “Chemical Suspected in Cancer Is in Baby Products,”
New York Times, May 17, 2011, available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/18/business/18chemical.html?_r=1
3. (As background for this and subsequent classes) Douglas A.
Kysar, Regulating from Nowhere: Environmental Law and the Search
for Objectivity, Yale University Press (2010), pp. 25-45 (see Course
Reader).
Week 2 (January 25)
Ethics and Decision Making at the Organizational Level
Professor Christine Rosen
In this session we will focus on ethical responsibilities of firms to ensure
that the products they manufacture and /or sell are safe and
environmentally benign. What ethical values should guide business
decision making in the area of green business design? How far do a
firm’s responsibilities to its customers and the public go? Do corporations
have responsibilities to green their products beyond the requirements
4
imposed by law? What can/should individual employees do to promote
ethical analysis and behavior in their firm’s organizational practices and
business strategies? In addition to the case discussion, which focuses on
a ethical failure in corporate decision making, Helen Holder, HP's
Corporate Material Selection Manager, Global Engineering Services, will
share her personal insights into the conditions that enable and support
corporate managers who are interested in leading sustainability initiatives
in their firms and industries.
Readings:
1. “The Ford Pinto Case,” in William H. Shaw and Vincent Barry, Moral
Issues in Business, 11th Edition (2010), pp. 88-91 (see Course Reader).
2. Joseph W. Weiss, “Ford’s Pinto Fires: The Retrospective View of
Ford’s Field Coordinator,” in Business Ethics: A Stakeholder & Issues
Management Approach (2009), pp. 146-150 (see Course Reader).
3. W. Michael Hoffman, “Business and Environmental Ethics,” Business
Ethics Quarterly, vol. 1, No. 3 (Apr. 1991), pp. 169-184, available at:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3857261?seq=1
4. (Optional) Milton Friedman, “A Friedman Doctrine: The Social
Responsibility of Business is to Increase Profits,” New York Times
Magazine, (Sept. 13, 1970) (see Course Reader).
Week 3 (February 1)
Ethics and Decision Making at the Personal Level
Professor Christine Rosen, Professor Alastair Iles, Professor Robert Bergman,
Dr. Martin Mulvihill
In this session we will discuss and debate the personal ethical implications
of sustainability for individuals employed in university labs and
corporations. We will focus on the challenges of doing the “right” thing in
situations where this defies the status quo and/or what one’s supervisors
think is appropriate. In adition to discussing the case, which focuses on
ethical failings, regrets, and non-regrets of individuals, two leaders of the
green chemistry movement here at UC Berkeley will speak . Marty
Mulvihill, a recent UCB Chemistry Ph.D and Executive Director of the
Berkeley Center for Green Chemistry, and Bob Bergman, Gerald E.K.
Branch Distinguished Professor of Chemistry, will provide their personal
perspectives on the challenges they faced pushing the College of
5
Chemistry to go green, reduce hazards in labs, introduce green chemistry
to curriculum, and join the BCGC.
Readings:
1. “The A7D Affair,” in William H. Shaw and Vincent Barry, Moral Issues
in Business, 11th Edition (2010), pp. 33-36 (see Course Reader).
2. Terry Collins, “Essays on Science and Society: Toward Sustainable
Chemistry,“ Science, vol. 291 no. 550 (January 2001), pp. 48-49,
available at: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/291/5501/48.full
3. Robert Jackall, “The Main Chance,” excerpt of Chapter 3, Moral Mazes:
The World of Corporate Managers (Twentieth Anniversary Edition),
Oxford University Press (2010), pp. 44-68 (see Course Reader). Week 4 (February 8)
Ethics and Morality in the Legal System
Professor Carl Cranor, U.C. Riverside
Guest lecturer Professor Cranor will give a lecture based on his recent book that
will be followed by discussion based on questions resulting from the lecture and
his book.
In this session we will explore ethics and morality in a legal system that allows us
to be poisoned. What normative prescriptions have become embodied in our
legal system, and what considerations underlie them? What is the importance or
value of law that is based on precedents and legal theories that don’t necessarily
reflect contemporary ethical positions?
The class may also involve development of a scenario where students are judges
in a case involving the sale of toxic chemical products.
Readings:
1. Carl Cranor, Legally Poisoned: How the Law Puts Us at
Risk from Toxicants, Harvard University Press (2011), pp. 1-15,
208-48 (see Course Reader).
2. Norman Daniels, “Health-Care Needs and Distributive
Justice,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 10, no. 3 (1981),
pp. 146-148, 154-179, available at:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/2264976
6
Week 5 (February 15)
Ethics in Institutional Governance
Dr. Joseph Guth
In this session we will introduce introduce the idea that our environmental
laws are all ultimately grounded in ethical theories and positions. We will
examine the ethical structure underlying the predominant approach to
environmental law and policy in the United States: the use of cost-benefit
analysis (CBA). We will examine how CBA is grounded in utilitarianism
and welfare economics as a tool for promoting net social welfare. Is CBA
neutral or does it favor certain kinds of outcomes? Why are utilitarian
values so important in our regulatory culture?
We will focus on the Toxic Substances Control Act as a specific example
of a law grounded in CBA, and on an example regulatory use of CBA. We
will also debate whether CBA is theoretically workable, and if so, whether
it accounts for our ethical obligations to future generations, to nature and
other species, and to other polities outside the US. Is this structure
desirable? Can it be changed? Should it?
We will examine other options
suggested by recent developments in EU chemicals laws.
Assignment:
Quick Internet Search: Who is Cass Sunstein and why is he currently
important?
Readings:
1. Douglas A. Kysar, “Prescription and Precaution,” Chapter 2 in
Regulating from Nowhere: Environmental Law and the Search for
Objectivity, Yale University Press (2010), pp. 46-67 (see Reader).
2. Cass R. Sunstein, “Throwing precaution to the wind -- Why the 'Safe'
Choice Can Be Dangerous,” Boston Globe (July 13, 2008), available at:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/07/13/throwing_pr
ecaution_to_the_wind/
3. T. O. McGarity, S. Shapiro, D. Bollier, “Introduction,” Sophisticated
Sabotage: The Intellectual Games used to Subvert Responsible
Regulation, Environmental Law Institute (2005), pp. 1-16 (see Reader).
4. Presidential Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review”
(58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993): Read §§ 1(a) and (b), particularly
§1(b)(6) (federal agencies must justify rules using CBA), available at:
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/.
5. One page of U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act: Read 15 U.S.C. §
7
2605(a) “Scope of Regulation” (especially the first paragraph), available
at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgibin/usc.cgi?ACTION=BROWSE&TITLE=15USCC53.
Week 6 (February 22)
The Public Ethics of Greening Chemistry
Professor Alastair Iles, Dr. Joseph Guth
This class will build on the previous week’s material by switching focus to
the tensions that pervade more environmentally protective forms of
democratic decision-making. We will examine the deontological ethical
underpinnings of approaching sustainability issues through policies
founded on the precautionary principle, environmental justice and
ecological economics as the normative bases for public action. Can or
should government adopt an ethical position other than aggregating
utilitarian welfare maximization? How do democracies decide on the
ethical issues underlying chemicals policy and environmental policy
generally? Should technical experts be making the choices? Or should
citizens in a democracy be able to make decisions that experts applying
cost-benefit analysis find unreasonable?
We will also examine how the central legal provisions of proposals to
reform the Toxic Substances Control Act reflect the ethical underpinnings
and normative judgments of the precautionary principle, ecological
economics and environmental justice. Perhaps the most important of
these are the recent EU chemicals laws, particularly REACH.
Readings:
1. Douglas A. Kysar, “Ecological Rationality,” Chapter 8 in Regulating
from Nowhere: Environmental Law and the Search for Objectivity,
Yale University Press (2010), pp. 203-228 (see Course Reader).
2. One page of S.847, Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 (U.S. Senate
Legislation introduced by Senator Lautenberg), read the “Safety Standard”
for chemicals in the proposed law, from p. 65, line 7 through p. 66, line 15,
available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s847is/pdf/BILLS112s847is.pdf.
3. One page of Assembly Bill No. 1879 (Feuer 2008) (One of two Green
Chemistry Initiative laws signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2008).
Read Section 25253(a)(1) on page 4 of AB 1879, available at:
8
http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/PollutionPrevention/GreenChemistryInitiative/uploa
d/ab_1879_GCI.pdf .
Week 7 (February 29)
Participatory Ethics
Professor Christine Rosen, Professor Alastair Iles, Dr. Joseph Guth
In this session we will pull the whole course together by analyzing of the
role and contribution of participatory processes to greening chemistry.
Does participation equate to ethics, or are there ethics in participation?
Can participatory processes help advance the cause of making products
safer and more environmentally benign. What is the role for “experts”?
We conclude with a discussion of the role of individuals in green chemistry
as scientists, employees, corporate managers, citizens, and consumers.
Can the multiple ethical views of different interests be reconciled? Should
individuals adhere to decisions made by participatory processes or act on
their own ethical principles?
Readings:
1. Alastair Iles, “Green chemistry: emerging epistemic political tensions in
California and the United States,” Public Understanding of Science
(2011), available at:
http://pus.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/06/28/0963662511404306.abs
tract
2. Edward Woodhouse and Steven Breyman, “Green Chemistry as Social
Movement?”, Science, Technology & Human Values, v. 30 (2005), pp.
199-222, available at:
http://sth.sagepub.com/content/30/2/199.full.pdf+html
3. Daniel Lee Kleineman, “Democratization of Science and Technology,”
in Daniel Lee Kleineman (ed.), Science, Technology & Environment
(2000), pp. 139-165. (see Course Reader).
4. (Optional) David Hess, “Technology- and Product-oriented
Movements," Chapter 5 in Alternative Pathways in Science and
Industry: Activism, Innovation, and the Environment in an Era of
Globalization, MIT Press (2005), pp. 123-169 (see Course Reader).
9