Abstract
According to the United States’ Energy Information Administration (EIA), in 2010 the US government provided financial subsidies to energy producers—of all types of energy—worth approximately $37 billion.1 The majority of these subsidies were in the form of direct investment ($14 billion), tax benefits ($16 billion), and research & development incentives ($4 billion). About $15 billion was devoted to renewable energy incentives, up from $5 billion in 2007, mostly in wind and biofuels incentives as part of the 2009 federal stimulus programs. Another $16 billion was devoted to conservation and heating assistance for low-income consumers; $4 billion was devoted to fossil fuel sources, down from $6 billion in 2007. The EIA does not focus on the reasons for providing these subsidies, but we covered the general reason in the preceding chapter: to incentivize development of technology and production of energy that increases social welfare for the population of the United States. The $37 billion estimate does not capture some indirect subsidies that other industries also receive (such as depreciation benefits and domestic manufacturing tax deductions), so the total energy subsidy is likely higher than just $37 billion.
Business success, sustainability, and survival are all driven by economic factors. In a world with limited natural resources and increasing population and with evolving personal preferences and priorities, our ability to find novel approaches to utilizing these resources is paramount. Human, social, and environmental investments can be significant sources of competitive advantage. Understanding the economics behind those investments is essential for maximizing value.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
John Elkington, Cannibals with Forks: Triple Bottom Line for the 21st Century (Oxford: Capstone Publishing, 1999).
Abstracted from Mike Valente, “Business Sustainability Embeddedness as a Strategic Imperative: A Multilevel Process Framework,” Business & Society 54, no. 1 (January 2015): 126–142.
See, for example, Peter Drucker, People and Performance: The Best of Peter Drucker on Management (Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2007).
Ray Anderson, Confessions of a Radical Industrialist: Profits, People, Purpose—Doing Business by Respecting the Earth (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2009).
James Margolis, Hillary Anger Elfenbein, and James Walsh, “Do Well By Doing Good? Don’t Count on It,”, Harvard Business Review 86, no. 1 (January 2008): 1–19.
Alex Edmans, “Does the Stock Market Fully Value Intangibles? Employee Satisfaction and Equity Prices,” Journal of Financial Economics 101, no. 3 (September 2011): 621–640.
Brian Bolton, “Corporate Social Responsibility and Bank Performance,” unpublished manuscript, Portland State University, 2013.
Caroline Flammer, “Does Corporate Social Responsibility Lead to Superior Financial Performance? A Regression Discontinuity Approach,” unpublished manuscript, MIT, 2013.
Robert Eccles, Ioannis Ioannou, and George Serfeim, “The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Organizational Processes and Performance,” forthcoming in Management Science, 2014
Copyright information
© 2015 Brian Bolton
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bolton, B. (2015). The Economics of Sustainability. In: Sustainable Financial Investments. The Diversity, Leadership and Responsibility Series. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137411990_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137411990_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-57358-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-41199-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)