Google vs Government of China: A contention that undermines value ingrained sustainability approach

In our common biosphere, integration of values and institutions are essential to the future of human species. In fact, such assertion was central theme to Brundtland statement (WCED, 1987) that defines sustainability. However, often we find governments, policy makers and institutions (for that matter corporations) emphasizes physical aspect of sustainability than value ingrained Triple bottom-line (economic-social and environmental equity) approach of intergenerational equity. Little do we understand, without human values, progress cannot be sustained nor can we consume infinitely the resources of our common biosphere without consequences.

I thought being an enduring age-old culture and a world leader, China would be attentive to this; but I guess I am baffled; it’s policy is detrimental to it’s own progress and prone to socio-economic and environmental disaster. From trade to socio-economic policies, there is always a questionable Chinese performance that draws world’s attention. As a growing economic and military power with a sizable part of world’s population, a more responsible and sustainable China is a desire of the world.

For a sustainable world, we cannot expect less from a world leader and China should not be an exception. The survival of human species at stake here, and for China, these imperatives are to be considered for sustainable China than to the contrary.

Protectionism to this degree, without value ingrained approach, will only worsen respect of the world towards China.

Let us conceive, without value ingrained society, culture and institutions, we are doom to conflict and failure; I thought we have learned it by now.

But than, I cannot make presumption; I am sure Chinese government is aware of such imperatives and need for intergenerational equity towards economic, social and environmental equity. Nonetheless, when we hear about China’s questionable protectionism towards Google, one of world’s respectable and sustainable corporations; we wander, dishearten and dispute to this questioning China’s intention.

Is not such policy of protectionism detrimental to triple bottom-line of sustainability?

Is not such attributes of protectionism questions China’s ability to lead a more sustainable world?

Google has done nothing to be forced of being opt out of China; I expected and would have been very pleased, should China respected Google’s CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility). Standing up to China’s might, Google has again proved to the world, how values are important in doing business in today’s world. It is an exemplary work that I adore and imperative to our sustainable future.

After all, in our common biosphere, without value ingrained sustainability approach, we may create condition that may become threat to our own survival.

Reference

WCED, 1987. Our Common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.