Search results

This case considers the attitudes of stakeholders in a risk management challenge of a major foreign bank operating in an emerging market country in the Mediterranean region. The case provides insights into the task facing an international organisation trying to operate in a sociallyresponsible way in a developing economy, where operating conditions are quite different from the head office environment.

The case is designed for MBA and MSc students studying corporate social responsibility (CSR), international business, emerging markets, country risk (and related subjects).

The case discusses the implications of the actions of a negligent/possibly dishonest lawyer in undermining an international bank's risk management systems. The lawyer did not register the sale of a house, causing it to be repossessed by the bank, thinking that the property still belonged to the vendor, who had allowed a large overdraft to accumulate. By chance, the repossession of the house and subsequent forced judicial sale was averted, but to ensure undisputed ownership the real owner of the house was left with heavy legal bills. There were several players possibly at fault here: the lawyer; the bank; the vendor; the local courts; and the real estate agents (who recommended the dishonest lawyer to the purchaser in the first place).

These include a clearer understanding of the different stakeholder perspectives, and a greater appreciation of the challenges of doing business for aWestern multinational company now operating in emerging markets worldwide.

The concept of CSR in emerging markets is very different from the way CSR is viewed in more developed ones – posing several challenges for international companies (especially banks) in the way they operate. Making assumptions of ethical ways of doing business can cause great problems, as discussed in this case – especially in the way that different stakeholders are impacted.

Teaching notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

The years 2011, 2012, and 2013 witnessed both significant developments and setbacks in global polio eradication efforts. On the positive side, January 13, 2012, marked a full year since India had detected a case of wild poliovirus. On the negative side, polio continued to be endemic in three countries-Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Nigeria-and in those countries the goal of eliminating polio seemed more challenging than ever. Between December 2012 and January 2013, sixteen polio workers were killed in Pakistan, and in February 2013, nine women vaccinating children against polio in Kano, Nigeria, were shot dead by gunmen suspected of belonging to a radical Islamist sect. In addition, after a 95 percent decline in polio cases in 2010, the number of cases in Nigeria rebounded in 2011. Recognizing that polio was unlikely to be eliminated in these countries in the near term, the Global Polio Eradication Initiative moved its target date for eradication from 2013 to 2018.

These setbacks sparked a debate about the appropriate strategy for global eradication of polio. Indeed, some experts believed that recent setbacks were not caused by poor management but were instead the result of epidemiological characteristics and preconditions that might render polio eradication unachievable. These experts argued that global health efforts should focus on the control or elimination of polio rather than on the eradication of the disease.

This case presents an overview of polio and the Global Polio Eradication Initiative and recounts the successful effort to eradicate smallpox. The case enables a rich discussion of the current global strategy to eradicate polio, as well as the issue of whether eradication is the appropriate global public health objective. More generally, the case provides a concrete example of a particular type of global public good, namely infectious disease eradication.

After analyzing and discussing the case, students will be able to:

• Understand the nature of a global public good

• Perform a back-of-the-envelope benefit-cost analysis of polio eradication

• Discuss the appropriate strategy for eradicating an infectious disease

• Apply game theory to analyzing which countries would be likely to contribute funds toward global polio eradication

• Discuss the role of private organizations in the provision of global public goods

Understand the nature of a global public good

Perform a back-of-the-envelope benefit-cost analysis of polio eradication

Discuss the appropriate strategy for eradicating an infectious disease

Apply game theory to analyzing which countries would be likely to contribute funds toward global polio eradication

Discuss the role of private organizations in the provision of global public goods