Skip to main content

Let's Go Environmentally-Friendly and Bring In the Long-Term Profits

Entrepreneur

Whether we want to admit it or not--environmentally-friendly businesses practices are a must. However, it can often be shot down or argued against by certain people. A miser would argue by saying that spending money on proper waste disposal is a waste of money. A spendthrift would want to rake in as much money as possible for extravagant spending. Both views are equally misguided when they ignore the need for eco-capitalism. I ended up remembering one of my undergraduate classes and MBA classes at the University of San Carlos-Main Campus. One of them talked about business ethics especially concerned with green business practices. Do we need money? Sure! However, money alone isn't the factor. Money, when used properly, is beneficial to society and the environment. Spending money on proper waste disposal will benefit society. However, wanting only money no matter what the cost will end up harming both society and the environment.

How would sustainable business practices actually be better for the money in the long run? 

A Cree Indian proverb once said the following wise words, "When the last tree is cut down, the last fish eaten and the last stream poisoned, you will realize that you cannot eat money." We need money to buy food but money can never become our food. The value of money is in it as a medium of exchange. Money is useful when there's clean water, clean air, clean food, and all the necessities. Money is printed on a mixture of cotton fiber and linen. In short, the value of money is how it impacts both society and the environment. If the sources of cotton and linen were cut down--there would be nothing to print money with. If all the trees were cut down then there would be no more materials to make paper to make accounting reports, no more lumber to sell, and demolishing a forest for an instant profit is stupid. Throwing away garbage into the bodies of water because you're too stingy to spend on proper waste disposal means getting rid of more sources of income. If all the fish were caught and all the streams were poisoned--there will be no more continuous source of money. Fish markets have to get a steady supply of fish. Streams of water provide water to drink. If all of those were gone then the money is of no value.

I guess this is something greedy people can never get because they only care about money. However, I'm "greedy" enough to consider why environmentally-friendly business practices are better for the money. You would want to think of the following principles for long-term money-making:

  1. Having a clean workplace definitely benefits everyone. I could think how a miser wants more money but may not be able to for refusing to clean the workplace. If your workplace is so infested with pests--it would be a bad environment for both customers and workers. Spending money to have a clean and presentable (though not necessarily glamorous) environment will attract more customers, therefore, encouraging more growth. 
  2. If you cut down only trees that are ready for cutting--you allow the younger trees to grow. Younger trees provide new batches of trees for future cutting. Tree planting activities don't only stop floods but also provide new batches of trees for future cutting. Continued tree planting keeps the cycle of trees going to provide raw materials and safeguards against flash floods. Money will be useless if flashfloods keep flooding the city because all the trees were cut down.
  3. Keeping the health of the bodies of water will provide the best quality for water and everything in it. I definitely would want to drink healthy water and eat non-contaminated fish. I want to have a continued supply of clean water and fresh fish. How can that happen if we keep on dumping waste and overfishing? There will be a lack of clean water and a lack of food as a result.
  4. Sustainable crop practices such as crop rotation keep the soil healthy. Do you know that the soil needs time to rest? You would want to keep the soil as healthy as possible. Healthier soil equals healthier crops. Healthier crops equal you can sell at a higher price because the cost of production isn't going to come cheap either. However, economies of scale may soon make these healthy crops better and be sold at a better price.  People would be willing to pay more for a healthy crop than to pay more for an unhealthy crop. There will be a healthy generation of workers that will perpetuate the cycle of making crops that are worth a higher price.

In the long run, environmentally-friendly businesses will have better yields for years to come

Sure, it's a burden to spend money on proper waste disposal or to clean up your office space. However, it's a necessary burden for long-term spending. It's like investing money in mutual funds, index funds, or the stock market. A certain amount of money is set aside for enjoyment to investment. Paying PHP 3,000.02 to AXA every month for my Chinese Tycoon Fund isn't necessarily pleasing in the short run. I could've spent that PHP 3,000.02 on splurging but I chose to spend it on a long-term investment. A stock market player may set aside some money to let it grow. Spending money on environmentally-friendly practices would mean having to spend away some extra money. However, it will be beneficial in the long run.

Greedy people want results, right? However, we really need to learn to wait for better results while doing our part. Stock markets don't immediately yield profits either even if you do it yourself. Expert stock market players will probably admit that they had to be very patient before even buying or selling any units of stocks. I have to wait until whatever investments I have will yield. The money market is full of waiting periods. The value of the investment can go down so it's best to hold it. Holding periods can be very necessary. Environmentally-friendly business practices will also force you to wait for results. It would even mean that you have to reduce your production (for now) but you'll end up increasing both quality and quantity in the long run. Sure, planting crops on crop rotation can get rid of bigger short-term yields. However, it may increase the number of short-term yields in the future. Healthier soil would mean more room for better crops in the long run. Both quality and quantity should go hand in hand--not just one over the other. 

The sustainability cycle would go this way--better environmental practices make better products. Better products mean more satisfied customers who will be willing to pay for better quality. It's like how someone is willing to dish out an extra few pesos for better quality. Would you want to drink cheap coffee where the water is verified unsafe? Would you want to drink expensive coffee which is made from rotten coffee beans and unsafe water? The environment also affects customer health. What good would it be to make a million pesos today only to lose it in lawsuits tomorrow due to customer health?It would mean that the money can't be enjoyed for too long since it was the fruit of dirty labor. However, money made with clean hands is best enjoyed in the long run. The best environmental practices will give money its highest value eventually. After all, who would want to part with money over something that's just of bad value, right?

References

"CROP ROTATIONS" 

"Responsible Forestry"

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Venezuela as a Cautionary Tale on #SahodItaasPresyoIbaba, Nationalistic Pride, Welfare State Economics

The Sunday Guardian Years ago, I wrote about Venezuela's pride and protectionism , under a more "formal" style of writing compared to my latest posts. I decided to use an even "less formal" and "less academic" tone since I'm not writing a term paper. Instead, it's like how a professor and a student discuss the thesis using first person over third person, using contractions, etc., while the thesis doesn't use such tones. Back on track, I thought about the arrest of Venezuelan President Maduro can spark debate. Was it a violation of sovereignty? I'm no expert on international law. However, Venezuelans can be seen celebrating Maduro's arrest. Right now, I'm using Gemini AI and Google search to help me find some sources for this blog. It's because I don't want my blog to become another gossip central, but a place to discuss facts with my own personal opinions (making sure they don't  derail the facts).  I used Venezuela ...
Read more

Venezuela's Pride and Protectionism

The Telegraph Venezuela is an oil-rich country yet it's a very poor country. Somebody could go ahead and give every unthinkable reason such as "foreign investments caused it" (a blatant lie) and "It's because America had economic sanctions in Venezuela". Yet, the answer can be found in several causes such as corruption. Yet, China and Vietnam, which can be seen to still have a good amount of corruption, are far more successful. The answer also lies in one policy--economic protectionism . The very idea that a country that first world countries used "protectionism" to succeed is a lie as proven by Venezuela's ongoing crisis. A common-sense examination of one root cause of Venezuela's continuing crisis Forbes magazine mentions this in "What Do Investors Need To Understand About Venezuela's Economic Crisis?" by Nathaniel Parish Flannery on December 21, 2016: Venezuela is far and away the worst-managed economy in the Americas . Ad...
Read more

Davide vs. Mahathir: Which Lolo Should Filipinos Take Economic Advice From?

The real issue isn't that something is old or new. Instead, if something old or new still works, or doesn't work! Many modern laws are built on some ancient principles, while adjusting to the current times!  The Constitution of Japan is actually older than the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. However, it's more effective for the reasons that (1) their constitution is silent when it comes to regulating economic activities (ex., protectionist measures), and (2) it's a parliamentary system. Honestly, it's a pretty straightforward constitution compared to ours! As Mahatir Mohamad turned 100 today, I would like to raise up Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. once again. The problem isn't Davide's age but his unwillingness to embrace change when needed (read here ). This time, it's time to bring up a contrast between wise old people and unwise old people. A young person can be right where the old person is wrong. A young person can be wiser because he or she lea...
Read more

Filipino Manufacturing's Golden Age ENDED Because of the Filipino First Policy

Here's a picture from the Dose of Disbelief Page on Facebook. Here's something that it wrote: Filipinos once trusted locally made products more than imports. Before World War II, the label "Made in the Philippines" carried prestige, not stigma, reflecting a strong sense of national confidence in domestic production. Local products such as shoes, cigars, textiles, furniture, and food were often preferred over imports. This preference was rooted in the belief that local goods were better adapted to local conditions, tastes, and were often of comparable, if not superior, quality. This period showcases a strong historical era of consumer nationalism and thriving local industries. We need to look into the context of Filipino history  If we look at the Philippine history timeline , we must account for 1935-1940, during which the Philippines was under the Commonwealth government. Independence was declared from Spain on June 12, 1898. However, there was a transition period w...
Read more

Confusing Foreign Direct Investment for Foreign Imperialism for the Bajillionth Time

I guess those fools of the Philippine Anti-Fascist League (and many of its deluded supporters) either refuse to get it or are blatantly lying. Almost every rally held by what many believe are CPP-NPA legal fronts also confuses foreign investors for foreign invasion or even foreign imperialism . Once again, do I need to say that 100% FDI ownership is all about the shares and not land ownership ? What makes it even more hypocritical is that they are actually recording these things on imported media . They're sharing their anti-FDI rants using imported devices, imported platforms, and imported social media (read here ). When I do ask them on Facebook, they say how can they take them seriously and that they're "simply forced to participate in capitalism". Did anybody (especially those they call "evil capitalists") force them to buy the expensive Apple equipment when they could've settled for Xiaomi or Huawei?  A simple research on the dictionary will tell us...
Read more