Why to Implement or Not to Implement ISO 26000 (Social Responsibility)

[harry]

I have got some more information on how to assess ISO26000: Unlike other ISO standards, companies cannot acquire certification in ISO26000 to prove that they have observed its strictures. One way forward, however, is for a company to acquire an independent third party assessment of its practices in order to evaluate its performance with regard to its social responsibilities. (source: SGS/ Corporate responsibility)

Welcome to the Cove.

You quoted SGS in three out of your four posts. Are you in any way connected to them? Sorry to ask but our terms if service require those with vested interest to declare so.

 

[ElisaRossi]

I'm sorry if it looked like I was connected to SGS. I just made some good experiences with them and I am interested in their field of work. But I will try to find some other sources for future topics

 

[harry]

I'm sorry if it looked like I was connected to SGS. I just made some good experiences with them and I am interested in their field of work. But I will try to find some other sources for future topics

Thanks for the reply. No problem if you are not affiliated to them in anyway - in the interest of our users, we have to watch out for posts with conflict of interest and that's why we sometimes asked for clarification.

 

[Marc]

Green politics - Wikipedia is gaining strength: and Green New Deal - Wikipedia

 

[John Broomfield]

Better to have widespread conformity to ISO 26000 among all organizations than to wait for the costly Green New Deal as currently proposed. Organizations may then become more sustainable while saving enough money to help fund the USA's GND.

It seems that our huge bail out of the banks over ten years ago has given some politicians the courage to propose more QE but Green QE this time shake the magic money tree some more.

I cannot yet find a cost:benefit analysis for the USA's GND but here are some of the costs:

• The proposed expansion of renewables to provide 100% of the nation’s power needs would, according to respected physicist Christopher Clark, cost about $2.0 trillion or approximately $200 billion a year for ten years.
• The Deal’s desire to build a “smart power grid” for the entire country, would, according to the Electric Power Institute, cost some $400 billion or $40 billion a year for ten years.
• According to several sources, AOC’s aspiration to “draw down greenhouse gases” would cost upwards of $11 trillion or about $110 billion a year for ten years.
• The Deal’s goal to upgrade every home and industrial building in the country to state-of-the-art safety and energy efficiency would run some $2.5 trillion over ten years or about $250 billion a year. This figure may well understate. Consider that there are 136 million dwellings in the United States. An upgrade of each would conservatively cost $10,000 a unit on average or near $1.4 trillion, and this does not even include the industrial and commercial structures. Nor does it include upkeep.
• The Green New Deal also aspires to provide jobs guarantees at a “living wage.” A government assessment of a similar proposal by Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) puts the cost of such a program at $543 billion in its first year. Though the costs thereafter would fall, the cumulative expense over ten years would come to some $2.5 trillion.
• The goal of developing a universal, single payer health-care system would, according to an MIT-Amherst study of a similar plan put forward by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), come to about $1.4 trillion a year.

According to Milton Ezrati of Forbes