Critically evaluate statements (a) and (b): - Essay Example

The same applies to natural resources that may be required by an organization. In the case of natural resources, ownership rights dictate the person or organization to which the property belongs to. This limits the way in which resources are managed in terms of exploitation and accessing rights (Greenhalgh & Rogers, 2010). If an organization fails to create property rights, the natural resources aligned to the organization can be confiscated by the government. This may happen in case of misunderstanding on the ownership of the natural resources.

In an argument by Greenhalgh & Rogers (2010) government intervention may negatively affect the exploitation of natural resources. The author further points out that the government may use paradigm that may align on a particular side rather that create equal ownership rights (Peter, 2007). For this reason, the effectiveness of property rights cannot be undermined in an organization. In the case of two companies sharing the same natural resources, it is advisable for the organization to come up with rights that would clearly define the ownership rights and percentage.

This would reduce the probability at which the government may be forced to intervene on the issue. Generally, clearly defined property rights are mandatory requirements in an organization in order to assure quality control of both the external and internal environments. Clearly defined property rights minimize the indulgence of external forces. External force entrance in an organization may distort the market significance on an organization. This may lead to failure of the organization. Hahn (2005) points out that the relationship between property rights and the existence of an organization is directly proportional to the appropriateness at which the rights were created.

Additionally, this ensures privatization of rights regardless of the person or organization that may own the property. Greenhalgh& Rogers (2010) point out that keeping the government out reach of the company property is the best strategy that an organization may implement. Desired pollution level The issue on pollution has been sensitive over the years with organization ignoring their social responsibility of ensuring a healthy environment. In an argument by Roman (2010) pollution by organization is an unethical practice that organizations should implement strategies to reduce the issue.

Over the years, NGOs and activist groups have come up with policies and recommendations that were aimed at limiting the rate at which organizations pollute the environment. The campaign has existed for many years bearing less significant results are organization have always generated enough comeback strategies. Additionally, the inclusion of legal laws has been also less significant in minimizing the rate at which organizations pollute the environment. Devra (2002) points out that external efforts by neutral and government bodies have done a lot more to minimize corporate pollution but the recorded results is not satisfactory.

From this analysis, one may point out that the only possible way of stopping corporate pollution is by making organizations join this fight. Additionally, corporates should be appointed to with the responsibility of generating pollution controlling decisions and regulations. This is attributed to the fact that polluters may in the best position to realize possible and comfortable way of minimizing and controlling pollution (Roman, 2010). The generated