Analyze

In Saxony-Anhalt, located in eastern Germany, the building and waste industry companies reap substantial profits thanks to the legislative and organizational framework governing the establishment and operation of waste disposal and recycling sites, such as landfills. To curtail state expenditures, German state agencies have reduced their staff with the expertise needed to evaluate proposed projects. Instead, they heavily rely on external evaluations conducted by experts closely connected to companies with a vested interest in securing ongoing contracts. While state agencies mandate oversight and safety measures, these responsibilities are delegated to the companies themselves. Only when concrete evidence, in the form of photos and videos, demonstrates that these companies are not fulfilling their obligations, do state agency employees step in to personally inspect the sites. Lastly, the approval of construction bids for waste disposal sites is typically granted unless there is substantial evidence of immediate harm to the environment or public health. In cases where the safety of the ground cannot be definitively ascertained, construction proceeds. Incomplete knowledge regarding geological factors or potential chemical reactions does not hold legal weight as an argument against waste disposal operations.

Baum, Philipp. 2023. "The Legal Framework of Constructing and Operating Waste Disposal Site in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany." In 4S Paraconference X EiJ: Building a Global Record, curated by Misria Shaik Ali, Kim Fortun, Phillip Baum and Prerna Srigyan. Annual Meeting of the Society of Social Studies of Science. Honolulu, Hawai'i, Nov 8-11.

This concluding quote really summarizes the position of this article: "No one expects or requires major companies to take extraordinary measures to help their many stakeholders, but the bold and creative steps they take today to deliver immediate assistance will define their legacy tomorrow."

The author is managing director of FSG, a global social-impact consulting firm. He is lauding how acts of un-mandated CSR like Johnson & Johnson's pulling Tylenol off shelves or his own company's sliding-scale pay-cuts instead of layoffs are still talked about and used as cases in business school. He is using the "business case for CSR" line of argument to encourage companies to take steps such as giving their employees loans at a lower or no-interest rate, or doing the equivalent of "buying gift cards" from small suppliers. These actions, which don't even require any loss from the corporation, are portrayed as providing a huge boon to the company's reputation and employee loyalty, and still being above and beyond what is expected or mandated of corporations. 

The author opens with stating that the government's stimulus package is too little too late, which unfortunately is true, and then saying that the only option is for corporations to voluntarily engage in these primarily loan-based forms of assistance. 

"If I`m driving and I don`t want this bottle in my car..throw it out the window.." (Wolfe line 30) - This shows how easy it is to litter and how there are many people who littler like this individual, disregarding the fact that they may be creating a bigger problem in the near future - lots and lots of trash.

"Residents need to do their part in the cleanup effort" ( Wolfe line 40). - This describes a possible solution the problem. If everyone resists littering and cleans up after themselves and do other things like recycle, the problem may persist but the amount of garbage may be less than the current amount.