Operation Management

Assignment

17 February 2011

Submitted to: Prof. Imran Gahfoor

Submitted by: Saad Saeed Qureshi (SP10-MBA-113)

2
Background

The aim of is paper to describe the input of natural resources and ecosystems to
economic development still remains under-estimated by market evaluation and
productivity analysis. The aims of the paper is to discuss the neoclassical growth
theories, the productivity concept practiced a gradual transformation from its
previous understanding based on natural resources and other environmental
factors to its modern narrow concept. This paper argues that the course of the
classical debate has shaped the scope of main up to date analysis. Except for
some very recent findings, multifactor productivity focuses on a two-factor model.
Material Flow Analysis (MFA) gives a useful step for extending the measurement
and notion of productivity.

Methodology
Material Flow Analysis (MFA) is the most competent. It designs at developing a
main indicator for environmental pressure, overcoming individual society
considerations and integrated life cycle aspects of resource use. MFA follows the
physical flow of consumption, recycling and final disposal. It links to the usage of
resources to nature’s capacity to provide materials and to absorb wastes.
Methodology, MFA adds up the weight of resources used plus the mass moved
during exploitation processes and deliberate landscape and alternations

Proposed solution
An analysis of value of earth’s ecosystems still important to examine the value of
the concept of objectives, research should take together these results. It is also
important to redefine the theoretical frame work of productivity. In addition to
above recall the history of productivity concept and it would be help to
understand statistical data, the measurement concepts, and others econometric
models. Econometric models should not be biased towards labour and should
not ignore services from the natural environment.

3
Findings
Findings of the papers are that, traditional thinker failed to come up with a clear
definition, idea and an administrable measurement concept. In this paper,
findings like “dusty museum piece” or the “possibly most maligned concept in the
history of economic analysis” are justified. Apart from this recalling some classis
insights would certainly become deeper the work a day dialogue of economist. It
was not the reason on this paper to investigate suitable measurement concepts
or political explanation.

Conclusion
In wrapping up, we can declare that a review of the classical debate give us more
awareness of our intellectual heritage and direct new light on these continuing
question, this paper will have fully served its principle, and scope.