Analysis pf Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES)

Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES), a non-profit organization was founded in 1989. Its objectives include encouraging ethical and sustainable business practices and promoting investment policies which are environmentally, socially and financially sound. It has created a group of world’s largest companies and investors who are responsible to take care of the environmental issues. 100-plus companies and many Fortune 500 businesses like- General Motors, Polaroid, Body Shop International, Bank of America, are engaged with Ceres for supporting clean energy policies and maintaining a strong climate. Financial organizations and Environmental groups like Sierra Club are members with Ceres (Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES), 2016). 
Ceres aims at making companies understand the concerns of the planet’s future. Meeting the sustainable challenges of the 21st century is important along with running business. Ceres works on making the environment more sustainable and therefore it follows all the laws that comes under the Environmental Laws and Regulations of the U.S. government.
Ceres’ rights:
On the account of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill that happened in the Gulf of Alaska in March 1989, Ceres came up with its core Ten Principles. These principles aim to protect the earth, its energy and resources wisely; reduce waste and doing business in fair manner. The principles and its aspects are as follows:
(The Ceres Principles , n.d.)
Laws supported by Ceres-
There are several issues addressed by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA). Some of them include- limitation on air pollutants, enforcement of clean water and laws on safe drinking. EPA works for implementation of these federal laws so that the environment does not get affected by business practices. Ceres works along with EPA in implementation of the laws.
The INCR Policy Working Group – an initiative by Ceres focuses on five different areas of policy engagement:

Its members collaborate with other investor groups, including the European IIGCC, the Australian/New Zealand IGCC, the Asian AIGCC, UN PRI and UNEP-FI, to support the Strong Climate and Clean Energy Policy among the investors worldwide.
Its members also support the policies which promote clean and low carbon fuel sources, improving Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions which happen by transportation activities. INCR members also support research reports which show the investment case for such policies.
Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA has proposed an arrangement of noteworthy controls that will lessen air emissions, help the economy and make occupations. Financial specialists have signed letters and met with Congressional staff to guarantee implementation of the Utility Mercury and Air Toxics Standard, the Cross State Air Pollution Rule and the Carbon Pollution Standard for Future Power Plants.
The Ceres Roadmap to Sustainability, organizations are relied upon to adjust publicly disclosed arrangement positions on atmosphere and energy issues with the approaches they advocate through their lobbying and political expenditures.
Its members bolster a scope of approaches at the state and government level, for example, the Production Tax Credit for renewable vitality, the California AB32 climate and Clean Energy Program and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

Ceres makes sure companies and investors follow the strong climate and Clean energy policies in the US and abroad.
One of the CEOs of Ceres- Mindy S. Lubber joined U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1995. She joined it as a senior policy advisor and has achieved recognition as a ‘regional administration’ under President Bill Clinton in 2000. She has also been a president at former National Environmental Law Center. Her efforts include-

Organizing waste removal at hazardous waste sites
Redevelopment, new jobs and urban revitalization
Protection of drinking water supplies (2016 William K. Reilly Award Winners Announced, n.d.).

Ceres along with WWF assembled a group of 100 large companies which supported the Paris Climate Agreement. It also supports the Clean Power Plant which was an initiative by Obama administration. Ceres strongly supports Clean Air Act(Business Is Taking Action on LGBT Rights. Will Climate Change Be Next?, n.d.).
In the ‘Six Proactive steps’ that Ceres has made for insurance companies, for addressing the climate change, it mentions about the ‘Greenhouse gas emission’, in favor of Federal and International Policies which limit its emissions. It addresses the threat of change in the climate because of carbon pollution (Insurance, n.d.).
Laws opposed by Ceres-
Ceres mostly works for sustaining the environment and limiting business practices for better future. It supports laws that relate to maintaining environment standards. Therefore, there aren’t many laws that are being opposed by Ceres. Rather there are a couple of them which are addressed as below.
It opposed the President’s and Congressional Leader’s abandoning of Methane rule and the Clean Power Plant. Ceres believes that these laws were made to support the environment. There are many companies that has made an agreement in support of the law. And so, Ceres does not want such laws to get abandoned.
It also shows its disagreement with the President’s ‘two-for-one’ executive order which requires deletion of two federal regulations against any one issued.
Ceres’ impact on business-
Ceres’ major goal lies in influencing business and its practices which affect environment. It has made many huge contributions which has helped business to follow the standards and become effective in their practices. The contributions by Ceres which impacted companies include-

Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), 2003- works on leadership and accomplishments on climate and sustainability of financial firms.
Launched the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) for corporate reporting on environment, social and economic performances
Launched the Climate Declaration
Launched Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP)

Ceres made an evaluation of its member companies and found that most of them have adopted policies based on International norms and fewer companies have adopted sector-specific policies. In the evaluation, most frequent instituted policies include those related to bribery and corruption and elimination of discrimination along with overall sustainability of environment. Companies which adopted the international standards like International Labor Organization(ILO) and United Nations’ Global Compact (UNGC), show understanding of sustainability issues and are committed in implementing changes in their business (Corporate Policies and Management Systems, n.d.).
Ceres influence on legislative process-
Ceres resolved an issue on United Parcel Service (UPS)’s Lobbying Disclosure. It laid down points which the BOD of UPS requires to disclose in their report. “Indirect lobbying” and “Grassroots lobbying communication” are the points covered under the solution. These points include efforts at the local, state and federal levels.
Along with this, we already saw that Ceres has laid down its core 10 principles which are in favor of environmental protection. Business and stakeholders adhere to these aspects and make sure that they are abiding by the rules related to these policies. It tracks shareholder’s resolutions and considers the following issues:

Climate change
Carbon asset risk
Greenhouse gas emission
Water pollution and scarcity
Public policy
Air pollution – methane emission
Proxy voting policies
Human rights

The shareholders make such resolutions. This ensures that they make proper implementation of the laws. On studying the resolutions, the legislatures can make laws that depend upon the environmental standards.
Ceres’ 3-year plan-
Ceres has presented a Road map on Sustainability which covers – Governance for sustainability, Stakeholder Engagement, Disclosure, Performance: Operation, Supply Chain, Transportation and Logistics, Product and Services, Employees.

The Roadmap expectation on corporate policies and management systems measures the extent to which companies embed sustainability into decision-making.
Encourage organizations to receive a more expansive way to deal with recognizing and speaking with stakeholders, including engagement on a more extensive topic.
The disclosure segment layout the attributes of a way to deal with revelation that meets the new and rising difficulties on corporate sustainability.
The operation segment enhances sustainability across their operations, including building and facilities management, water management, the elimination of waste and respect for human rights.
Sustainable supply chain performance expects establishing supplier policies and endorsing industry codes or practices containing explicit references to social and environmental standards.
Transportation and logistics include reducing transportation impacts which are focused on the architecture of the transportation network, including distances traveled; and specific transportation modes, including the sustainability credentials of the energy sources used. This section also looks at business travel and commuting practices and the role that companies can take in shaping employee behavior.
Sustainable solutions for products and services should be that they are marketed and delivered in a sustainable way. Proper communication of the usage and consumption pattern.
Improved recruitment and retention rates, employee morale and productivity, and lower healthcare costs should be crucial for company’s employees in order for sustainable performance (The Ceres Roadmap for Sustainability – Ceres, n.d.).

Ceres aims at transferring the way corporations integrate environmental and social risks into their decision-making. By 2020 Ceres wants major companies which re its members to attain these standards. The areas in which more companies should come forward include – Product and Services and Supply Chain. Ceres looks forward in making greater attempts at helping companies in achieving the goals of sustainable environmental business practices.
Mind-Map:

Ceres an organization works majorly in line with the International Laws on Environmental protection. It supports U.S. laws as well about certain policies. Ceres helps implementation of the following laws of Unites States Federal Environmental Statutes-

Clean air act
Clean water act
Emergency planning and community right to know act
Energy policy act
National environmental policy act
Resources conservation and recovery act

References
(n.d.). Retrieved from 2016 William K. Reilly Award Winners Announced: http://www.american.edu/spa/cep/news/2016_Reilly_Award_Winners.cfm
Business Is Taking Action on LGBT Rights. Will Climate Change Be Next? (n.d.). Retrieved from Business Is Taking Action on LGBT Rights. Will Climate Change Be Next? – Ceres: https://www.ceres.org/press/press-clips/business-is-taking-action-on-lgbt-rights.-will-climate-change-be-next
Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES). (2016, november 24). Retrieved from Encyclopædia Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Coalition-for-Environmentally-Responsible-Economies
Corporate Policies and Management Systems. (n.d.). Retrieved from Corporate Policies and Management Systems – Ceres: https://www.ceres.org/roadmap-assessment/about/roadmap-expectations/governance-for-sustainability/policies-and-management-systems
Insurance. (n.d.). Retrieved from Insurance-Ceres: https://www.ceres.org/industry-initiatives/insurance
The Ceres Principles . (n.d.). Retrieved from The Ceres Principles- Ceres: https://www.ceres.org/about-us/our-history/ceres-principles
The Ceres Roadmap for Sustainability – Ceres. (n.d.). Retrieved from The Ceres Roadmap for Sustainability – Ceres: https://www.ceres.org/roadmap-assessment

Advocacy Coalition Framework for Analysing UK Immigration

The Advocacy Coalition Framework (Sabatier, 1993) is a tool that is used in policymaking and is particularly helpful in dealing with intense public policy systems. It facilitates the understanding of the policies and priorities that are involved in dispute management that arises from the interaction of different levels of Government and multiple actors while implementing the public policies formulated. To analyse the Immigration in the UK to the movement towards the UK Border Control, the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) can be applied.
The UK Border Agency is the merging of the Border and Immigration Agency, UK visas and the port functionalities as managed by the HM revenue and Customs. Thus, the policies that are under study in this assignment are those that surround the integration of the various functions into one body (Sabatier, 1993.)
Sabatier states that the various defining terms in the ACF include policy subsystems that involve the group of actors that interact with an element of constancy in a functional policy domain, which in this case is the immigration system transferring into the UK Border Control. Thus, all the players and positions in the whole transitional issue make up a policy subsystem (Sabatier, 1993.) There are two types of subsystems; the first being the Nascent subsystem that is in the process of forming such as the one in discussion (Sabatier 1993.) The other type is the mature subsystem that has existed for a period of ten years or more. Policy subsystems arise from the fact that there are new issues emerging or the conceptualisations of new issues and this is the case with the need for a more effective Border Control authority or immigration system in the UK. The other term is advocacy coalition that is basically a group of people sharing the same belief system. The goal of these advocacy coalitions is usually to change the actions of the government and redirect them to accomplish certain policy reforms (Sabatier 1993.)

Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Essay Writing Service

One of the reasons why the Advocacy Coalition Framework is preferred in this context is the ability to deal with the changing elite and public opinion regarding the priorities that arise in Border Control. Before the issue is addressed, it is important that the basic premises that constitute the ACF be mentioned. First, there is need for the issue of technical information to be addressed in addition to understanding that the issues that concern policy change need time. The policy subsystem is used in the analysis of the policy change that will require at least a decade to monitor. Sabatier (1993) states that the public policies can be conceptualised as belief systems. Advocacy conditions are usually associated with the players of the system being combined into a number of groups, or advocacy coalitions, which have the same normative and causal beliefs. The advocacy groups also have the ability to engage in a substantial coordinated activity over a long period. The beliefs systems that are shared by the advocacy coalitions are grouped into a hierarchy depending on the degree of resistance to change. There are those that are deep core and others are policy core beliefs. Due to the existence of the belief systems, various strategies are used to push for their beliefs. For example, there is the changing of the statutes and manipulation of the budget.
Sabatier states that there are exogenous variables that are considered in the framework. There are the stable variables that will not change despite that coalition changes this in the current case will include the basic constitutional structures that are to be followed. On the other hand, there is the issue of dynamic exogenous variables that are likely to change over time. In this case, the governing coalitions that result from the merger are going to change. The impact that the other subsystems have on the new system will be included here (Sabatier 1993.)
In the context of the UK immigration system being turned into the UK Border Controls there are the issues that are monitored constantly. For example, there is the advocacy coalition that constitutes the employees who will object to the policies that are meant to lay them off or reduce their benefits as well as the effectiveness that comes from the integration of various departments. Thus, there is going to be the issue of policy learning that can be described as members of various coalitions seeking to know more regarding the system so that they can be able to further their agenda.
In terms of the deep core convictions that can be obtained from this case study, there is the belief system that is held by the citizens. The deep core belief is that there needs to be free movement in and out the UK and especially around Europe. The citizens want it to be standard whereas the policies that are implemented by the Border Control want the age to be higher. However, under the belief system this falls within the category of the secondary beliefs that is shared by that advocacy group. Thus, there is a resistance to the new policies resulting from the merge of the various immigration bodies into one (Mcdonald, 2009.) Another advocacy coalition that is involved is the funding from the Government that requires the reduction in budget resulting from the different bodies coming to form one administrative head. Thus in the end there are various actors that are involved in the policy implementation.
The major controversies that arise in this context are concerned with the policy subsystem, when the policy core beliefs of different advocacy groups are in dispute. Consequently, each advocacy group is very unlikely to change when it comes to policy belief change. For example, the suggestion that the travellers will be checked against a watch list and in case of any inconsistencies separated for questioning, is bound to raise the issue who will make it to the watch list and its compilation given that there are regular complaints that the foreign offices are understaffed. In the case of such a dispute, there are the secondary aspects that the advocacy group will give up so that they can proceed to change the deep core belief.
Despite the disputes there are various points that the actors show consensus for example, all the actors agree on secure borders and accountability in the immigration that the country’s Government allows. It is important to note that the policy that is core in the subsystem cannot change significantly unless there is a change in the Government in power for example from Labour to Conservatives and vice versa. Hence, the idea to transform the immigration system into the UK Border Control cannot change much unless the Government changes (Fischer, Miller & Sidney 2007).
There is learning that is occurring across the advocacy coalitions that exist. On the dispute level it is easier for the policy-oriented learning to occur in across belief systems when the subject of contention is quantifiable, than when it is qualitative in nature (Sabatier, 1993.) For example, there was a concern that was raised by the legislative function concerning the staffing and adherence of Britain manages foreign UK Border Control offices. In response, the Director of the UK Border Control was able to provide statistics regarding the employees but on the issue of regulation adherence, the dispute still holds. There is difficulty that is associated with the clarification of subjective issues that are under contention.
Consistent with this is the fact that natural systems are more conductive to policy-oriented learning than subsystems that are social or political. However, in this case there are both dimensions involved in that the boundaries are natural but the control that is enforced at this point is more of a political nature (Fischer et al, 2007.) Due to this integration of the political and the natural dimensions there are aspects that can be quantified and other are purely subjective. This can be represented by the demographics that are instituted in determination of the age for foreign marriage partners to curb immigration and the various checks that are required to acquire full citizen identification.
An issue worth mentioning in ACF is there is a wide spectrum from which the advocacy coalitions can arise. The advocacy coalitions can include journalists, researchers and agency officials and other non-government organisations (NGOs) if there is the interaction occurring as they all pursue their common objectives. In every policy subsystem, there are usually more advocacy groups than are depicted. For example, there is the union of British shoppers that is opinionated in regards to the policies that are arising from the integration of the immigration system into the UK Border Control (Sabatier, 2007.) That is the reason for the importance of an all round consideration in analysing the policy subsystem to include information from professionals such as the actors, for the emergence of all the relevant advocacy groups. The advantage that stems from this is the ability to obtain all the accurate picture of the composition and stability (Sabatier, 1993.)
There are other aspects of the ACF that can be used to analyse the immigration overhaul in the United Kingdom. First, in examining the individual belief system and structure there is the assumption that the actors make judgments and analyse the information that is contained in the policies in respect to time and computational constraints. An example that can be given was issue of incorrect numbers that were provided by the UK Border Control regarding the number of refusal cases that were brought forward for reconsideration. Only the independent monitors who were in a position to review the statistics from the previous year were able to realise that the numbers were from a previous year (Mcdonald, 2009.) Thus, the belief structure that emerges after analysis is dependent on the ability to understand and the time that was available to learn.