Environmental Management and Corporate

Social Responsibility Project

Topic 1- Climate Change, Social Issues
Environmental Management and Ethics,
Nudge Theory

By Admin Group 11:

Varun Mujumdar (C051)
Keertiman Garodia (C052)
Mahima Dangeti (C053)
Eklavya Rai (C054)
Taha Zafar (C055)
Introduction
In this project, we are going to look at climate change, business sustainability,
environmental management, ethics and nudge theory. We are also going to
look at how these topics are viewed by the society, and what their views on
these topics are. However, before we do that, let us see exactly what these
terms are.

Climate Change
Essentially, climate change is the change of weather patterns observed over a
long period of time. It indicates, among other things, change in surface
temperatures, rise of sea levels, cloud cover and precipitation.
Factors that shape climate are known as climate forcings. They can be internal
(caused by the climate system itself) or external (caused by humans). 97% of
scientists, however, have agreed that climate change has mainly been caused
by humans. External causes could include volcanic eruptions and meteor
strikes. Thankfully, these events are few and far between. A recent study found
that almost two-thirds of the impacts of climate change are due to
anthropogenic forcing (human caused drivers). These include emissions from
power plants and cars, as well as greenhouse gases.
The impacts of climate change include rising temperatures and sea levels,
shrinking glaciers, changes in precipitation patterns and other potentially
dangerous effects.
The Kyoto Protocol was adopted and in effect from 2008 to 2012. It set targets
for 37 countries to reduce GHG emissions, thereby contributing to control of
global warming. Although the numbers were reduced, it was of the opinion
that the Kyoto Protocol had limited success. Its successor, the Paris Agreement
(starting in 2020), aims at further reducing the levels of GHGs.

Business Sustainability
Business sustainability refers to managing the triple bottom line, or how
companies manage their financial, social and environmental risks, obligations
and opportunities. The three impacts are also known as profits, planet and
people.
Sustainable business are those businesses who learn from their customers and
employees, embed environmental efficiency into their culture, and analyse the
environmental and social impact of the products they produce.
Examples of sustainable businesses:
 Tech/financial firms with a paperless office environment
 A bank committing carbon free operations
The three most sustainable companies (as of 2017) are:
1. Siemens AG, Germany
2. Storebrand ASA, Norway
3. Cisco Systems Inc., USA

Environmental Management
Environmental management refers to an attempt to guide a process or activity
towards seeking new perspectives with respect to the environment and
society. It offers research and opinions on use of natural resources and
protection of habitats.
Environmental management involves many stakeholders, as all human
activities have an environmental impact. However, their extent of importance
varies.
It is mainly concerned with description and monitoring of environmental
changes, and at the same time attempting to maximise human benefits and
minimise environmental degradation.

Ethics
The terms ethics, morals and values are often used synonymously. Knowing
the difference between right and wrong is moral. Using morals to do the right
thing is ethics. And values are the qualities worth having, especially those
obtained from ethics.
Business ethics relate to the daily activities of businesses, and whether or not
they are doing the right thing. Business ethicality is considered an obligation,
but is not followed by all businesses. Many global brands do not hold ethics in
high regard. For them, profit is the deciding factor. Many of them take
decisions based on how much profit is earned, rather than how ethical it is.

Nudge Theory
Nudging is a behavioural theory predicated on the idea that instead of making
a bold move or implementing a huge change to get people to act differently,
you should make small, economically neutral changes instead. It was most
famously used by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein.
It also talks about how if people were given a choice, along with some positive
information about the consequences, they would choose the correct option.
Often, nudges are so subtle that people do not even realise that it is
influencing their decision making capability.

Social Issues
A social issue is a problem that influences or affects a number of individuals in
society. It is generally a cause of inequality between various types of people,
which leads to many other effects.
Thomas Paine addresses individual's duty to "allow the same rights to others
as we allow ourselves". The failure to do so caused the birth of a social issue.
There are many social issues prominent in India. We shall try to determine
which is the most important one, whether they are all linked, and if we can
stop their impact.
Objective of Report
The objective of this project is to understand the mentality of individuals as
well as businesses when it comes to major issues. We are trying to gauge the
behaviour of individuals and firms in general, and apply that to specific
contexts.
We need to understand the idea of climate change, and do what we can to
reduce its impact. Businesses must have a similar mind set towards this
problem. This is also linked to sustainability. A business which adopts practices
that help counter climate change are sustainable in nature.
We have to analyse the other topics as well. Ethics is an important one. We are
trying to understand how the minds of people work. What action do humans
take in a certain situation, and what action businesses take in a certain
situation must be analysed. We can also estimate the priority levels of various
factors, and which factor is of utmost importance while taking a decision.
We shall also look at the Nudge Theory, and how people give out subtle hints
in case they want something done. What can also be looked at is the
effectiveness of nudging compared to outright demands.

Relevance of Questions
Questions 1-6 talk about climate change, what views are regarding climate
change, and what can be done about it.
Questions 7-12 talk about social issues, and seeks to find which one is most
predominant in India.
Questions 13-23 explain various concepts of behavioural ethics. We shall look
at each concept in detail in the analysis.
Questions 24-27 are about the Nudge Theory, and try to discover various ways
in which businesses use it, and whether the customers are oblivious towards it
or not.
Objective of Questions
The questions were specifically designed to try to understand the attitude of
humans towards problems in our society. They included open ended questions
which obtained their views about climate change and social issues, and also
hypothetical situations to gauge their reaction to certain situations.
There were also some questions which had one word answers, but each of
those questions was specifically framed such that even a one-word reply would
give us some insight as to how an individual would act in certain situations, as
well as their general mind-set regarding ethics.
Most of the questions were far from straightforward, and respondents had to
think hard before answering. They also had to make some tough choices when
answering certain questions.
Data Presentation
I have asked these questions to friends, family, society members, and other
people. The results are as follows.
90% of the respondents said that climate change was a worrying matter,
because it has ill effects like health issues, rising temperatures, melting
glaciers, rising sea levels and unpredictable precipitation patterns. However,
10% of the respondents said there was no need to worry about climate
change.
Why are people not paying enough attention to the problem? It’s probably
because of their own selfish interests. They are short sighted, and do not look
at the whole picture. As it will probably have an impact in the future, and will
hence not affect them personally, humans are more disorganised and pass the
responsibility to other people.
The long term impact could include temperature issues, a reduction in
agricultural productivity, shortage of food and water, extinction of species,
floods and droughts.
The respondents feel that the government should introduce measures like
pollution taxes and fuel norms, encourage the use of solar panels and electric
cars, make PUCs mandatory. They should also stimulate responses from
individuals by offering incentives. At the same time, individuals should
cooperate with the government and follow their laws. They should also
encourage businesses which are eco-friendly. Lastly, businesses should find
efficient ways of production, and make use of environmentally friendly raw
materials.
As for the question as to who should bear the costs of climate change, the gist
is that we should all come together to help fight climate change. However,
some respondents felt that large businesses and developed nations should
have to bear the brunt of it, as they are the ones who are mostly responsible.
Hypothetical #1
In response to Hypothetical #1, 70% of the responses opposed the factory,
whereas just the 30% favoured it.
The respondents all have a different opinion on which is the most prominent
social issue in India. Some of them include overpopulation, casteism, poverty,
illiteracy, the education system, female foeticide and dowry.
When asked if ultrasound machines should be banned, 90% of the respondents
disagreed. However, while saying it shouldn’t be banned, they also said that its
use should be more controlled.
The root cause of social issues among the youth include social inequalities,
poverty, lack of housing, economic discrepancies, unemployment, and lack of
proper education, among others. This leads to high tensions causing juvenile
delinquency and unrest.
When asked what measures should be taken to reduce the adverse impact of
these social issues, they said that the government is currently too slow to
respond, and they have to be more prompt in addressing these social issues.
They can be eradicated at the core by creation of employment and proper
education to all. One respondent also said that the government should
mandate companies to allocate funds to NGOs or charities, as this would be
more effective than they themselves doing CSR.
When asked if there was a connection between growth of MNCs and rise of
social problems, most of the respondents were unable to give a satisfactory
reply.
Hypothetical #2
When asked if they would opt for having 5 kids or choose the path of family
planning, I received a landslide vote. Each and every respondent said they
would never even think of having 5 kids, and would definitely choose the route
of family planning, even if it meant having to work hard until an old age.
Hypothetical #3
When I asked the respondents what they would do if they saw a colleague
breaking office rules, 70% of them said that they would confront him and tell
him to stop doing it. If he didn’t listen, they would report him to the boss. The
other 30% said that even though what he was doing was wrong, they would
turn a blind eye.
On posing the question regarding the importance of ethicality vs profitability,
80% of the respondents said that ethics was more important to the company in
the long run, whereas profit should not be the sole aim of any organisation.
The respondents had mixed feelings about bullying two people in the office,
even if it meant that the other employees would increase their productivity.
40% said it was a sound strategy and that they would employ it, whereas the
others said it was not fair to those particular individuals.
60% of the respondents vehemently disagrees with the fact that humans
should continue clearing forests for their own consumption, whereas 30% said
that it should be done at a controlled rate, and only as and when needed. 10%,
however, said that we must clear forests, as we need the land.
One of the hardest questions was whether it was justified to sack 10,000
people in order to keep 10,001 people employed. 70% of the respondents said
it was not justified, as this was unfair to the people sacked. The remaining 30%
said it was acceptable, as the number of people benefiting was greater.
60% of the respondents said they would be more likely to lie in order to keep a
job. 40% said they would be more likely to lie in order to get a job.
When asked if companies copy the actions of others, the respondents stated
that they observed this quite often, as most companies are copycats. Many car
companies and phone companies copy various features of their counterparts,
and other companies also copy business models and marketing strategies.
Some companies also take part in increased CSR just because their competitors
are also doing it.
Hypothetical #4
At being asked this question, most of the respondents said that their decision
would depend upon the severity of the defect in the product. If it was a severe
problem likely to harm the consumers, they would make the necessary
changes before launching it. But if the defect was purely aesthetic, they would
launch it rather than facing their investors’ wrath.
Personal conflict of interests of the respondents include:
 Dividing responsibility and credit in a group project, as everyone wants
credit without having to do too much work
 Taking a decision to break a traffic signal when late to work
 Choosing a friend or family member when hiring, over more deserving
candidates.
 Choosing to go to one friend’s house over the other’s on New Year’s Eve.
  Deciding whether to go for a movie or a play, rather than adhering to a
prior commitment.

Another landslide vote was observed when asked what you would do if you
saw someone drop money on the road. The answer of every respondent was
identical: They said they would run after the person and try to give it back, but
if that wasn’t possible, they would donate it to charity (Not a single person said
they would keep the money for themselves).
When asked if they felt it was justified if, after purchasing eco-friendly raw
materials, it was acceptable to use potentially harmful machinery, 70% said it
wasn’t justified. But there were 30% who said it was justified.
80% of the respondents said they wouldn’t mind paying 10% more for an
environmentally friendly product; some even said they would pay up to 40%
more.
30% of the respondents said that at times, they wanted to cancel certain
subscriptions, but gave up on the process because it was too lengthy. They
gave examples of electricity providers, telephone networks and magazine
subscriptions. However, they also mentioned that if the subscription was very
expensive, they would make the effort to cancel it.
When asked if they would choose the 4-day delivery option over the 2-day
option, as the former is eco-friendlier, most of the consumers agreed, but on
the condition that the requirement of the product was not urgent.
The various ways in which the respondents influence others to do a certain job
without directly asking them include:
 Listing out the benefits
 Guilt them into doing it
 Not demanding, being respectful; saying “Please”
 First doing something for them, which then entitled them to ask for a
favour
 Giving subtle hints
 Try to make the other person think of the situation from their point of
view
Data Analysis
From the data received, I have made the necessary analysis and have come to
the following conclusions.

Climate Change
I have observed that a majority of the people think climate change is a serious
problem, and that it has many adverse impacts which could affect us.
However, people ignore it as of now because it is likely to affect future
generations, not them. Hence they are not bothered about the problem;
furthermore, they are exploiting the planet’s resources for their own selfish
interests. However, some people believe that the Earth can withstand a lot
more population than it currently has. Also, as the fertility rates are falling, and
therefore climate change is not a problem.

From this, I have observed the concept of Tangible versus Abstract. Tangible
versus Abstract says that humans are more worried about factors that affect
them in the present, rather than distant or hypothetical factors. People are
more concerned about their current wellbeing, and are not as concerned
about the next generations, as it is not only in the future, but also a
hypothetical scenario which could possibly correct itself without any human
intervention.
I have also observed the concept of Self-Serving Bias. According to this
concept, humans tend to always act in a way that is in their own self-interest,
even if they are not aware of it. People are exploiting natural resources for
their personal gain, without worrying about what impacts it could have on
other people.
The impact of climate change could be devastating. So the government has to
work together with companies and individuals to help counter it. How the
costs should be borne is a tricky question. Currently, the largest emitter of CO2
is China, so maybe China should bear the greatest burden. However, China has
4 times the population of the United States, so the ecological footprint of an
average Chinese citizen is much lower than that of an average American. So
maybe the burden should be borne on a per capita basis.
Measures taken by global organisations could bring carbon trading into the
picture here. Essentially, the idea is that countries are given an allowance to
emit a certain amount of gas. If it goes beyond that, it must buy the right to
emit from other countries, thereby cutting their emissions. This concept limits
the total emissions. However, it was a major loophole used by some countries
in the Kyoto Protocol.

When asked if they would favour a factory which pollutes, but also eradicates
unemployment, 70% of the respondents opposed it.
Factory in the city

Favour it Oppose it
The logic was that there were other ways to reduce unemployment without
polluting the city. They also said that if a factory was to be developed, it
shouldn’t be near their residential areas. This displays the NIMBY concept (Not
In My Back Yard). Some people were fine that the factory was being
developed, as long as it was not located near them.
The respondents who favoured the factory said that it was needed because
right now, unemployment is a bigger problem than pollution. This again
showcases Tangible versus Abstract. These respondents felt that
unemployment should be dealt with because it is more pressing, more
immediate, whereas climate change is in the future.

From the vast array of responses received about the most prominent social
issue in India, I have deduced that there are many social issues which are all
quite serious. However, they all seem to be linked to each other, and they all
seem to stem from a common root – overpopulation. Overpopulation leads to
lack of employment, which causes poverty. It also causes lack of resources and
lack of housing, which leads to urbanisation and exploitation of resources.
This brings me to the Hypothetical #2, family planning: yes, or no. Each and
every respondent said they would follow family planning. Hopefully, this is a
good sign for the future generations. If each and every citizen of India can
know the benefits of family planning, it could lead to declining birth rates and
reduction of population explosion. Conformity bias could be key here.
Conformity bias is the tendency of individuals to conform to the actions of
those around them. If people see other members of society limiting
themselves to two kids, they too may follow the same. However, the flipside is
also true. If people see other members of society opting for 5 kids, they may go
down that route too. However, based on the results of my questionnaire, I am
optimistic that this will not be the case from here on.

Family Planning: Yes or No?

Family Planning Five kids

90% of the respondents said ultrasound machines should not be banned, but
their use should be controlled. This is logically sound, as every instrument can
be used to do harm if it’s in the wrong hands. A knife can be used by a chef to
cook food, or can be used by a killer to harm someone. The same logic can be
applied to ultrasound machines. It is used for diagnosis, treatment, and gives
guidance during procedures. It has had a significant impact on reducing the
number of casualties during labour.

However, it is being used for sex determination too. This in itself is not a
problem, but when combined with Indian mentality, could be a disaster. Indian
parents want a male child, and on learning that the unborn foetus is female,
sometimes opt for abortion. Having a daughter is often viewed as incurring a
lifetime of debt for parents because of the dowry payment at marriage. This is
where the use of ultrasound machines should be restricted. The government
should prohibit doctors from using ultrasound machines for sex determination,
as this is a cause of the falling sex ratio.
Poverty is one of the main reasons of social problems amongst the youth.
Children feel burdened by their parents’ lack of money, which may cause them
high tension. It may even lead to them attempting to help their parents
financially (although a nice thought, they often do it illegally).
Another cause of juvenile crime is the psychological effect caused as a result of
dysfunctional families. Self-centred parents end up building pressure on
children, which causes them to act out. Child Rights Trust Director Nagasimha
G Rao has said that must dedicate at least two hours a day to interact with
their children and learn more about them.
A third source of juvenile crime is a lack of education. Research has shown that
despite a majority of arrested juveniles being 16 or above, 45% of them have
only completed primary school, and 12.25% of them are illiterate.

Behavioural Ethics
On being asked Hypothetical #3, the respondents who said they would
confront their colleague are ethical warriors. They believe that the person who
is in the wrong should be corrected. A few people said they would tell the boss,
which shows that they are ethical. The know what is right and wrong, and try
to do the right thing. And one person said they would turn a blind eye, which
means that he is simply moral. He knows what is being done is wrong, but will
not bother to correct it.
However, this is purely theoretical. In reality, it is highly possible that the
number of ethical warriors are quite low. Most people know it’s wrong, but will
not bother doing anything (moral). And a few people will put these moral
values in action and display ethical behaviour.
The economy and ethics go hand in hand. A company cannot earn profits if it is
not ethical. Hence, as observed in the interviews, ethicality is more important
than profitability.

Ethicality vs Profitability

Being ethical Earning profits

If a business is unethical, it may earn more profit in the short run, but will
ultimately pay the price over a longer time period. It will also wreak havoc on
the various stakeholders. Being ethical will guarantee customer loyalty, staff
loyalty, long term profits and a good public image. All these things will
automatically translate into profit for the firm.

If you agree to bullying two people in your office so that the others all perform
better, you are following the principle of consequentialism.
According to consequentialism, your actions are right or wrong depending on
its consequences. It aims at getting the best possible outcome, irrespective of
the method used to achieve it. It follows the statement “The end justifies the
means.”
The 40% of respondents who said bullying two employees was justified follow
this theory. They aim at attaining maximum productivity from their employees,
and if bullying two people is what motivates the others, then so be it.

There was also a general opinion that humans should stop clearing forests for
our own consumption, as this could lead to climate change which will have an
adverse impact on everyone. Here, I observed the concept of Altruism, which
means acting in the self-interest of others. Empathy towards the future
generations is construed as altruism.
However, the 10% of the respondents who said we should continue clearing of
forests displayed the concept of Tangible versus Abstract. They said that right
now, the demand for land is high, and hence we should clear forests so that we
obtain more land, regardless of the future consequences.

The question “Is it justified to sack 10,000 people in order to employ 10,001
people” was a real head scratcher. It also clearly shows the concept of
Deontology and Utilitarianism.
Deontology says that we should do the right thing, regardless of what the
consequences are. It follows the statement “The ends do not justify the
means.”
Utilitarianism is the opposite of deontology. It says that we should carry out
our action such that it has the best possible outcome for the largest number of
people. “The ends do justify the means.”

Deontology vs Utilitarianism

Deontologists Utilitarianists

The respondents who said it was not justified to sack 10,000 people in order to
employ 10,001 follow the concept of deontology: follow the rules at all costs.
But the respondents who said it was justified follow the concept of
utilitarianism: greatest good for the greatest number.

Loss aversion is a theory which states that people hate losses more than they
enjoy gains. People are more likely to lie and cheat in order to keep something
they already have, rather than lie to acquire it in the first place.
 Lie in order to:

Get a job Keep a job

60% of the respondents follow this notion, as they said they are more likely to
lie in order to keep a job, rather than lie in order to get a job. A few also said
that they wouldn’t lie in either situation, which shows their ethical values.

I have also obtained information about companies and individuals copying the
actions of others, and have come to the conclusion that it is a recurring
phenomenon. Companies copy each other for their own benefit. For example,
Xiaomi copies Apple when designing its own phones, or when Google Home
copied Amazon Echo as a personal home assistant. Individuals also mirror each
other’s actions. Herd mentality is common in social as well as societal spheres.

Another case is that of Pepsi and Coca Cola. Pepsi committed to cut water
usage by 20% and fuel usage and electricity levels by 25% from 2006 to 2015.
Coke then came out with a plan (Commitment 2020 plan) to reduce carbon
footprint by 15%, minimise water usage and increase recycling.
The example of Pepsi and Coca Cola is conformity bias. Conformity bias is the
tendency of people to copy the actions of others rather than using their own
judgement. In the above case, it is visible that Coke only announced its plan to
be greener because its greatest competitor was doing it. This is where
conformity bias can help the environment. One company doing something
positive will lead to its rivals emulating them. But unfortunately, the flip side is
also true.

When asked if they would launch a faulty product, most said they would do it,
as long as the defects were not dangerous. This highlights the concept of
Tangible versus Abstract. People are more worried about today’s problems,
and do not hold high regard for any distant problems.
A conflict of interest is something quite commonly observed. It arises when
doing something is personally beneficial for the individual, but may be harmful
to the interest of someone close to him. It could also be caused when a person
owes loyalty to multiple parties, but serving one is not in the nest interest of
the other.
When faced with a conflict of interest, individuals generally choose one of the
options, possibly the one which has the best possible outcome, or the one
which has the least ill-effects. But either way, he feels guilty or may regret his
choice, as he is unable to keep both parties satisfied. Hence, we must all try to
avoid ending up in situations which could create a conflict of interest.

The fact that each and every respondent said that if they saw someone drop
money on the road, they would return it shows that they are all ethical. They
will not do the wrong thing, even when faced with an ethical dilemma.
However, if the respondents had said that they would give it to charity, it
would have shown the concept of utilitarianism. Giving the money to charity
would mean that a large number of needy people would benefit from it,
leading to maximum benefit for the maximum number of people.

The concept of using eco-friendly raw materials, and then using machines
harmful to the environment, is the concept of moral equilibrium. Moral
equilibrium plays on the mentality of humans to allow themselves to do a
negative thing after doing one positive thing. It also says that we feel obligated
to do something positive after doing a negative thing. It is the idea that we
keep a running scorecard, and always try to keep it balanced.
The 30% of the people who said yes follow the concept of moral equilibrium.
At least some efforts are being taken to be environmentally friendly, and no
individual can be perfect. Hence they felt it was justified. In their opinion, since
they had taken some efforts to acquire eco-friendly raw materials, they should
be rewarded by being allowed to use harmful machinery.
Although theoretically, 70% said it wasn’t justified, in a practical situation, it is
quite possible that these people would change their beliefs.
 Is it justified to use eco-friendly raw materials
and harmful machines?

Yes No

80% of the respondents were willing to pay a higher price for an

environmentally friendly product. This brings into play the ethicality versus
profitability issue. If companies are ethical and considerate towards the
environment, consumers will remain loyal, and would even be ready to pay a
higher price. Ethicality, therefore, has a direct link to profitability.

Nudging
30% of the respondents have observed situations where they gave up on
cancellation of a contract because the process was too tedious. This is a
perfect example of nudging. The customer is given a choice to opt out, which
makes him feel like he is in control. But if he chooses to opt out, the many
terms and conditions make him give up, and he tries to justify the subscription
(compensation effect).

Is nudging successful?

Yes No
This is commonly seen in telephone companies, electricity providers and
magazine subscriptions. Though the rate of success is not too high, it is quite
effective, as the company holds on to customers it would have lost otherwise.
It is less effective when the product or service is high in cost, as the user would
then take the effort to cancel it, rather than pay exorbitant amounts for
something he does not need.
Nudging can also be applied to influence consumer behaviour. When ordering
products online, the 4-day delivery is eco-friendlier than the 2-day delivery. By
choosing 2-day delivery, companies have a smaller time frame to ship your
product. Sometimes, they have to send out trucks half-full (or half-empty, if
you’re a pessimist). This leads to a larger number of trucks on the road, which
leads to increase in emissions. If they were given a larger time frame, the
companies could fill the trucks completely before dispatch.
Most people are unaware of this, and hence choose 2-day delivery (It’s free,
why not?). Companies should make people aware of this by putting a sign
saying “Eco-friendly” next to the 4-day delivery. 70% of the respondents have
said that they would choose this option, as long as their need was not urgent.
This concept of nudging is known as nudging by sharing of information.
Companies should nudge their customers towards eco-friendly and sustainable
practices by following such strategies.
Nudging is also a part of an individual’s daily activities, whether or not they
realise it. The respondents stated various ways in which they would try to
influence others to do a certain task. This in itself is nudging. The other person
is given an option to not comply, but at times they may feel obligated to do it,
they may be guilted into doing it, or they may want to do it themselves after
hearing more about it.
Comparative Analysis
As a group, we have asked the questions to about 50 people. We shall now
present the comparative analysis.
Almost all the respondents (over 90%) were all united in their belief about the
severity of climate change, and how it will affect us if no measures are taken.
The people who were based in Mumbai have seen drastic change over a period
of the past decade.
They also believe that there are various measures that can be taken by the
government. However, implementation of these laws can be improved.
Companies can also take various measures to help counter climate change.
With respect to Hypothetical #1, the group got around 50% favouring the
factory, compared to 30% in my individual interviews.
The general view is that individuals or companies cannot solve climate change
on their own. Only the government can make a difference. However, common
belief is that the government will not actually implement a decision in favour
of the environment as doing so could cause a loss in votes. Since the
government of India is democratic in nature, it is highly unlikely a party would
take that risk.
However, it is possible that due to the progress in the technological sector,
there may be more start-ups targeting prevention of climate change. The
change is already taking place with the introduction of green TVs, ACs, electric
cars, etc.

When we asked about social issues, the group got a variety of responses
ranging from overpopulation, poverty, child abuse and rape. In 2016, 106
women got raped every day in India, and 40% of the victims were minors.
Shockingly, 94.6% of the perpetrators were none other than the victim’s
relatives, friends or acquaintances.
Compared to the 90% not wanting ultrasound machines to be banned, the rest
of the group got mixed responses. This was mostly because the respondents
did not believe that ultrasound machines are the cause of the declining sex
ratio. They blame that on Indian mentality. However, at the same time, there is
progress in our thinking, as each and every respondent we interviewed said
they were planning to follow the route of family planning.

When asked questions about ethics, people are very sceptical about revealing
their answer. They have a strong feeling of being judged based on their
answer. We obtained answers for each of the questions related to ethics, but
the results may or may not be completely accurate. Some people may have
given false answers in order to seem ethical.
Contrary to the 70% I obtained, around 75% of the total respondents said they
would not mind if a colleague used the company’s services for his own benefit,
as long as it was not harming the company. The ones who said the manager
should not bully the employees said that it would lead to demotivation and a
higher rate of employee turnover.
Contrary to my data, about 80% of the respondents said that they would
rather lie to get a job. This is because even if they would lie to get their job,
they would still do their best at that job if they got it. On the contrary, if they
lied about their performance, they would eventually be caught which would
lead to consequences.
Humans should not deforest at the rate which they are doing currently, instead
they should plant trees which they had cut down earlier and should find better
sustainable ways to cultivate the forest. However, if they must, they should
make sure they are planting more than they cut down.
Of all the respondents our group interviewed, almost all the people said they
would return the money. There were a few who followed the principle of
“Finders, Keepers”, but those are just the exceptions. The others believe that
everyone has the right to spend their hard earned money wherever they see
fit.

Most people do not know what nudging is, even though they may practice it
regularly. Most people do prefer to pay 10% more to achieve a certain product
whose production has not harmed the environment. If the good is organic,
people have a feeling that the good is benefiting their family. People seem to
have a feel good factor when it comes to using organic products. This is due to
the fact that organic products help the environment as well as the human
body.
80% of respondents were unaware of how the 4-day delivery option is eco-
friendlier than the 2-day option, and hence would choose the 2-day option as it
is faster. A majority also said that their time was valuable, and it was
preferable to pay a small fee rather than wasting long hours trying to cancel
the subscription.
Executive Summary
All said and done, people feel climate change is a worrying matter, and could
have a massive impact on the planet. There are many measures that can be
taken at various levels to counter climate change, and these measures should
be put into practice as soon as possible. However, we are doing too little too
slow. Whatever has to be done needs to be done immediately, before the
impact is irreversible.
Social issues are vast in number, and many exist in India. They affect people of
all ages, genders, religions, etc. But this is exactly the problem - we classify
ourselves on the basis of certain characteristics. We are all members of the
same country, and we should all act like Indians. It doesn’t matter where we
come from, what our religion is, what our gender is. As portrayed in the movie
“Chak De India”, we are all Indians, and should all stand together and fight
social problems which differentiate us.
When we look at businesses, we see that they perform a number of activities
according to certain principles or beliefs. Some of these are good (altruism,
moral compensation, conformity bias with respect to CSR). However, there are
also a few of these business activities which are unethical. They should look at
these activities and correct them, for their own well-being. Businesses which
perform ethical activities tend to be more successful in the long run.
Nudging is something which is performed by everybody, but whether or not it
is intentional may vary from person to person. Businesses do it, individuals do
it, everyone does it. But the impact it has on different people varies. It may not
have a 100% success rate, but it could be quite beneficial even at a low success
rate.
In summary, after covering all these topics, I have understood a lot more about
the status of our planet, and the status of our country socially. I have also
understood the reason behind companies doing certain things, which may
seem pointless.
Conclusion
From the above analysis, we have learnt that a majority of the people are
worried about the planet. However, even though they all have an opinion on
what should be done, they themselves are not doing too much. The time for
passing the blame has come and gone. We must now all collectively work
towards fighting climate change. The same goes for social issues in India. We
must not discriminate between our fellow citizens on the basis of caste,
religion, gender, etc. We are all together, and must display unity and solidarity.
Each of us should help the government in any way possible to help rid the
country of social evils.
We have also learnt how individuals and companies act when in a certain
situation. We have learnt the importance of ethics, and how it often stands in
the way of success. But if one follows ethics will never be far from success. In
fact, if one follows ethics, success follows him.
Lastly, we have learnt about nudging. At times, we are not even aware of it. It
can be used for good or bad, hence we have to be alert. We must realise when
we are nudging others, when others are nudging us, and make sure that the
nudge is in a positive direction.
Annexure
Questionnaire
1. In your opinion, is climate change a worrying matter for us right now?
Why?
2. Why are people not paying enough attention to the problem of climate
change?
3. If the situation is not rectified, what do you think could be the impact?
4. What proactive measures can be taken at an organisational level, at an
individual level, and by the government?
5. It is believed that the costs of countering climate change immediately
will be lower than the costs of keeping it unchecked. However, if it were
to be done, who should bear these costs?
6. Hypothetical: If there was a factory to be set up in the heart of your city
which would add to the pollution levels, but at the same time
completely eradicate unemployment in your city, would you favour it or
oppose it?
7. Which social issue is currently the most prominent in India?
8. Research has showed that the ultrasound machines are responsible for
the falling sex ratio in India. Do you think that ultrasound machines
should be prohibited?
9. What do you think is the cause for social issues affecting the youth such
as juvenile delinquency, youth tensions and student unrest?
10. What steps can be taken by the government to help reduce the adverse
impact of any of these social issues?
11. Is there a connection between growth of MNCs and rise of social
problems? (such as labour problems, industrialisation, etc.)
12. Hypothetical: Would you choose to have five kids if it was guaranteed
that they would start earning at a young age, meaning that you would be
able to retire sooner than expected? Or would follow the route of family
planning, even if it meant working hard and providing a source of
income to your family until the late stages of your life?
13.You see one of your colleagues using the company’s services for his
personal work, which is against company policy. What would you do?
14. What do you think is more important: being ethical or earning profits?
15. Agree or Disagree: If bullying two people in your office leads to the
others all performing better (out of fear), would you carry out this
tactic?
16. Should humans continue to clear forests for human consumption?
17. Is it justified to sack 10,000 people in order to keep 10,001 people
employed?
18. Would you be more likely to lie in order to get a job, or more likely to lie
in order to keep a job?
19. Have you observed any individuals or companies copy the actions of
others?
20. You have designed a new product. There are still some minor defects,
but your investors are threatening to stop supporting you if you don’t
launch the product immediately. What would you do?
21. Could you give an example about a personal conflict of interest?
22. If you see someone drop a Rs.2000 note on the road, would you run
after them and give it back, or take the money and donate it to charity?
23.If you are a manager, and you take a decision to purchase eco-friendly
raw materials, do you then feel it is okay if use machines which are
harming the environment?
24.Would you be willing to pay 10% more for a product which is
environmentally friendly?
25.Have you ever tried to cancel a subscription, but then gave up on it
because the process was too lengthy?
26.When ordering products online, would you select the 2-day delivery
rather than the 4-day delivery, as this is the eco-friendly option?
27.How would you try to influence friends and family to do a specific job
without directly asking them?
Respondents
Interviews conducted by Varun (C051)
Sr No Name Contact Number Email ID
1 Aryan Shah 7666891003 aryanshah527@gmail.com
2 Vikas Mujumdar 9820044097 vmujumdar@gmail.com
3 Kshitij Dodani 9619259049 kshitijdodani@gmail.com
4 Nitesh Kamath 8850356691 kamathnitesh25@gmail.com
5 Bhavya Kamdar 8369581181 bhavya_kamdar@rediffmail.com
6 Bharati Mujumdar 9892012484 bharati.mujumdar@gmail.com
7 Aryan Hosangady 8452013646 aryanhosangady1@gmail.com
8 Neela Mujumdar 9833029174 neelamujumdar@gmail.com
9 Rashmi Gaitonde 9970163735 gaitonderashmi@gmail.com
10 Raghav Shah 9167079279 raghavshah0410@gmail.com
11 Nikita Mujumdar +447826434579 nikita.mujumdar@gmail.com
12 Dhruv Oza 9167524765 dhruvoza007@gmail.com

Interviews conducted by Keertiman (C052)

Sr No Name Contact Number Email ID
1 Utsav Sharma 7002556723
2 Janvi Jain 8486344435
3 Diviyaj Mittal 9706016339
4 Yashokrita Jain 9365783838
5 Dhruv Sikaria 9854990119
6 Pranika Agarwal 9401474001
7 Samarth Kanoi 7002878144
8 Raghav Agarwal 9674430210
9 Siddhart Garodia 9435109167
10 Ankit Chaudhary 9401745000

Interviews conducted by Mahima (C053)

Sr No Name Contact Number Email ID
1 Prasanthi Dangeti 7045582266
2 Hephzibah Smith 8790501312
3 Karuna Jaggi 9321529365
4 Ram Mohan Rao 9833819409
5 Rajesh Dangeti 9920367585 dangetirajesh@gmail.com
6 Boledu Dilip 9920450902
7 A.Ramana Rao 9010833144
8 K. Umakanth 9490607678
9 Dr. Bhanu Prakash 9129056172
10 Dipali Salunkhe 9967535904
Interviews conducted by Eklavya (C054)
Sr No Name Contact Number Email ID
1 Brinda Rai 9350802907 Brindarai@yahoo.in
2 Saraansh Pran 9643218801 saraanshpran1999@gmail.com
3 Prirhvi Chatrath 9953532721 Ppcchatrath@gmail.com
4 Sarthak Saini 9650394482 Sarthak6j@gmail.com
5 Deep Aggarwal 9810012214 deepaggar15@gmail.com
6 Siddhant Jain 9999027120 Jsidrock@gmail.com
7 Tarun Mishra 9521801085 Tarunmishra2602@gmail.com

Interviews conducted by Taha (C055)

Sr No Name Contact Number Email ID
1 Manisha Gera manishagera13@gmail.com
2 Shiba Kamal shibak07@gmail.com
3 Syed Zafar Islam
4 Poonam Kanwal punamakanwal@gmail.com
5 Riddhi Kanwal riddhikanwal@gmail.com
6 Megha Gera meghagera13@gmail.com
7 Jenil Bhansali
8 Anisha Kale 9987501450
9 Chris Mathew 9820076063
Contribution Sheet
Varun Mujumdar, C051
 12 interviews
 Framing of questionnaire
 Introduction
 Objectives
 Data Presentation
 Data Analysis
 Comparative Analysis (together)
 Executive Summary
 Conclusion

Keertiman Garodia, C052

 10 interviews
 Comparative Analysis (together)
Mahima Dangeti, C053
 10 interviews
 Comparative Analysis (together)
Eklavya Rai, C054
 7 interviews
 Comparative Analysis (together)
Taha Zafar, C055
 9 interviews
 Comparative Analysis (together)