Corporate Governance and Social Responsibility Land Owners

Question: Describe about the Corporate Governance and Social Responsibility for Land Owners. Answer: It is not ethical to acquire the land of others without taking prior consent from the land owners. The Aborigines are an integral part of the Australian culture (Montagu 2013). The original inhabitants of the country are usually considered as the most deprived section. There are instances when their land property is acquired illegally by the companies for their own benefit. Rio Tinto acquired the Aboriginal land without taking permission from them. It also performed activities that degraded the natural environment. The activities of the company impacted the environment in a serious manner which caused negative impact on the environment. Rio Tinto spilled radioactive substances outside the aboriginal land which was a matter of concern for the land owners. It failed to admire the civil liberties (Principle 6) of the land owners. The company did not solve the issue of the land owners in protecting the natural environment. Rio Tinto endangered animals as well as plants while undertaking expansion plans at Warkworth mine. The organization did not engage in responsible managerial activity (Principle 3) while trying to undertake the expansion plans. It is not ethical to perform non responsible activities while aiming for profit generation through the expansion plans (Grant 2016). The company did not engage in adequate compensation for the land owners (Principle 8). The company also faced infringement issues in the Mackay flooding at Heidi. Rio Tinto faced serious charges as they did not take consent from the land owners. The company itself admitted that they did not have proper policies for environment management which fur ther escalated the issue. The company failed to distinguish the possible dangers (Principle 7) that could arise due to illegal land acquisitions. It was unable to comprehend the implications on the environment that could pose potential dangers for the human beings as well as the animals. The company did not have a monitoring framework for controlling the flood scenario. The company was imposed a fine for the lack of environment regulation. Rio Tinto not only engaged in degrading the natural environment, but it also did not pay royalties to the elderly Aboriginal population. The company did not provide adequate employment opportunities for the indigenous population. This made the Aboriginal population dissatisfied. The company did not engage in honesty when dealing with financial matters (Principle 4) with the aboriginal community. The company did not make appropriate revelation to the original land owners (Principle 5). References Grant, R. M. (2016).Contemporary strategy analysis: Text and cases edition. John Wiley Sons. Montagu, A. (2013).Coming into being among the Australian Aborigines: The procreative beliefs of the Australian Aborigines. Routledge.