Europa 2020

U vrijeme kada recesija pogađa svaku zemlju Europske Unije, svjedoci smo smanjenja stope zaposlenosti.  Međutim, jedan od glavnih ciljeva EU, odnosno Europa 2020 strategije je održavati tu stopu na 75%. U 2010, stopa je bila na 68%. Danas se broji 23 milijuna nezaposlenih ljudi diljem 27 zemalja članica EU.

Postoji nekoliko transformacija koje EU planira pojačati u narednih nekoliko godina. Nastoje se osigurati pravi ljude s pravim obrazovanjem i pravim vještine za buduće tržište rada, ali također poboljšati uvjeti za rad ljudi diljem zemalja EU. Nadalje, nastoji se olakšati razvoj za poduzetnike koji bi rezultirao u sposobnost stvaranja novih radnih mjesta za više ljudi u budućnosti.

Drugi važan dio Europa 2020 strategije je smanjiti siromaštvo. Zadatak je smanjiti stopu siromaštva za najmanje 25%, no ovo se prikazuje kao jedan od najtežih zadataka ove strategije. Također se spominje i korištenje različitih indikatora od strane političara u definiranju broja ljudi koji zaista žive u siromaštvu, što Europi dodatno otežava ostvarivanje cilja.

Jedna od strategija će također pomoći redistribuciju bogatstva i resursa na području EU, što posljedično treba smanjiti nejednakost i reformirati neke od zemalja Istočne Europe, u čijim kućanstvima je nerijetko samo jedna zaposlena osoba. Nije dokazano da ova strategija zapravo i djeluje, vjerojatno zbog izbjegavanja negativnih konotacija za političare i nadolazećih izbora u Europskom parlamentu u 2014.

EU također u obzir uzima važnost tehnološke ovisnosti i kreira politiku kojom potiče istraživanja i razvoj, te inovacije kako bi stvorila svijest o obnovljivim izvorima energije i, najvažnije, stvorila klimu za promjene.

Prema EuroStat-u (2011), proizvodnja primarne energije u EU u 2009. godini iznosila je 818 Mtoe, što je 48% njene potrebe za energijom. Danska je jedina zemlja u EU koja proizvodi više nego dovoljno energije za svoje potrebe. Ona je jedini neto izvoznik energije u EU. U suprotnosti je Malta koja je u potpunosti ovisna o uvozu.

Rusija je najveći opskrbljivač Europske unije energijom. EU je kreirala Ugovor o energetskoj povelji, s glavnim ciljem kooperacije između energetski  bogate Azije i siromašne Europe, u kojoj obje strane imaju interes. Ruska ekonomska snaga ovisi o izvozu plina i nafte po višim cijenama. Najveći kupac i najveće tržište za Rusiju jest EU. Unatoč tome, Rusija i dalje nastoji povećati svoj udio u opskrbljivanju EU energijom, dok EU ne želi ovisiti o Rusiji niti joj dopustiti monopol na tržištu.

1994. je Rusiija odbila postići dogovor u saboru i time prislila EU na razmišljanje o njenoj budućoj energetskoj politici. Dodatno, ljudi su postali svjesniji važnosti održivog razvoja i sačuvanja prirode, što je bio dodatan razlog za novu Energy 2020: competitive, sustainable and secure energy politiku. Ta je politika fokusirana na interno energetsko tržište s kvalitetnim uslugama po niskoj cijeni, te na poticanje razvoja obnovljivih izvora energije.

Jedan od načina za postizanje tih ciljeva jest osnivanje Europskog tehnološkog institute u 2008. Nadalje, putek KIC-innoenergy, EU potiče inovacije u sedam različitih područja kao što su tehnologijama čistog ugljena, energetski učinkovitih zgrada i gradova te obnovljivim izvorima energije.

Europa 2020 strategija ima specifične planove za zemlje i Uniju, kojima se nastoji osigurati postizanje strateških ciljeva. Iako je EU jedna od najvećih i najuspiješnijih  trgovinska organizacija modernog vremena, veliki izazovi recesije i zaštite blagostanja njenih građana stoje pred njom.

Europe 2020

In a time where the recession is hitting every land in the EU, we have seen employment rates decrease. However, one of EU’s main goals of the Europe 2020 strategy is to maintain at 75%. In 2010, the rate was at 68%. Today, there are 23 million unemployed people throughout the 27 EU countries.

There are a number of transformations the EU is planning to step up within the next few years. They want to provide the right people with the right education, holding the right skills for future labour, and also improve the working conditions for people throughout EU countries. Another transformation the EU plans to put forward is to make it easier for entrepreneurs to develop to result in the ability to create more jobs for more people in the future.

Another main part of the agenda for the Europe 2020 is to lower poverty. The task is to reduce poverty by at least 25%, but this has proven to be one of the hardest tasks of the strategy. It has also been mentioned that some politicians have used different indicators to define the number of people actually living in poverty and this makes it harder for Europe to work towards the goal.

One of the strategies will help to redistribute the wealth and means in the EU area and therefore reduce inequality and reform some of the Eastern European countries, as many households there have only one person working. There is not yet proof that these strategies work, possibly due to the election of the European Parliament coming up in 2014 and politicians may not want to make unpopular announcements.

The EU also takes on board the importance of technological dependency and creates policies to underpin research and development and innovations, to create awareness of renewable energy and most importantly to create climate for changes.

According to EuroStat (2011), the EU’s production of primary energy in 2009 was 818 Mtoe which was 48% of its energy needs. Denmark is the only country in the EU that produces considerably more than enough energy than they need. It is the only net energy exporter in the EU. In the opposite direction is Malta who has total dependency on imports.

Russia is the EU’s biggest energy supplier. The EU created the Energy Charter Treaty with the main aim to arrange cooperation between energy rich Asia and poor Europe, in which both sides have interest. Russia’s economic strength depends on the export of gas and oil for higher prices. Russia’s largest market and biggest buyer of energy is the EU. Therefore, Russia aims to increase their share in supplying energy in Europe. However, the EU does not want to depend on Russia or let Russia monopolise the market.

In 1994, Russia refused to approve an agreement in the parliament and pushed the EU to think about their future energy policy. In addition, people became more aware about the importance of sustainable development and nature conservation, another reason for the new energy policy, also known as “Energy 2020: competitive, sustainable and secure energy”. This policy focused on an internal energy market with quality service at low prices and on supporting development of renewable energy.

One of the ways to reach these goals was by establishing European Institute of Technology (EIT) in 2008. Through KIC-innoenergy it supports innovation project in seven different areas such as Clean coal technologies, Intelligent energy-efficient buildings and cities and Renewable energy.

The Europe 2020 strategy has specific plans for countries and the union as a whole, to make sure they reach their strategic goals. Even the EU is one of the largest and most successful trade organisations in the modern time, great challenges stand before this union to beat the recession and to yet again work their way to protect the well-being of the European Union citizens. 

GREEN IS "IN"

This season green is in! The trend of corporate social responsibility, which have been growing more and more, is certainly green business which strives to have a positive impact on the environment and community. Doing business that way demonstrates commitment to a healthy and sustainable future, and it adopts principles, policies and practices that improve the quality of life for its customers and employees.

As this aspect of corporate social responsibility is recently becoming more valuable, it is not surprising that green is becoming more popular word in a dictionary of all the companies that are trying to be different. Saving energy and respecting the environmental impact in doing business may not yet be at the top of priority list of Croatian companies, but with time, this shift is moving in a positive direction. The reason is probably growingly accepted perception that  green is not just saving environment, but money too, and the more obvious potential benefits are, the greater emphasis companies put on sustainability. In addition, it is known that resources are becoming scarce and costly, so customers, employees and investors are becoming increasingly environmentally-conscious.

Although the main reason for green business should probably be the preservation of our planet, it is clear that in business world it is difficult for this to become the main motive. Therefore, it is important to make companies aware that there are many other reasons for green business, and why green business is good business.

Reduced Risk. Environmental degradation threatens the ecosystem that allows the economy to function and companies are beginning to take notice. PepsiCo, for example, is investing in sustainable solutions to water scarcity, while Siemens is investing in renewables that will prepare them for future. Also, the American retailer Target constructs halls and buildings in accordance with the american government's guidance on energy perservation,  U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, so saving literaly starts from the ground. In addition, they announced that they have reduced waste by as much as 70% with an extensive recycling program.

Green Product Demand. Demand for environmentally-friendly products and services continues to grow. According to a survey conducted by Cohn & Wolfe, a majority of consumers say that it is very or somewhat important that companies are environmentally-friendly and 35% are willing to spend more for green products. Per example Wal-Mart, in cooperation with suppliers, changed packaging of certain products. Optimization enabled them to transport as much as 42% more pieces in the truck and they saved 16.3 tons of plastic packaging, but also reduced consumption of diesel fuel by 158,000 gallons per year.

Consumer Engagement. Community involvement is an important cornerstone for many companies, and green practices can enhance public image and community relations. According to a report by D S Simon Productions, media initiatives with a corporate social responsibility focus generates 35-50% more positive media coverage on television, radio, web and social media than comparable programs without the CSR hook.

Attracting Talents. Environmentally-conscious business practices help attract and retain the best employees by increasing employee satisfaction and pride in the workplace. According to a MonsterTRAK poll on green employment, 92% of young professionals would be more inclined to work for an environmentally-friendly company.

Attracting Investors. Socially and environmentally responsible assets rose more than 324% from 1995 to 2007, indicating a growing interest in sustainability among investors. Investors are also shifting from a "do no harm" approach to a "do more good" approach that will certainly benefit companies committed to the health of the communities they operate in.

Saving Money. As already mentioned, green business is not saving the environment only, but money too. EPA also concluded that in 2006, only its ENERGY STAR program reduced greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the one that would be produced by 25 million cars, and that way American traders saved $ 14 billion on their utility bills. Besides that, there are many other examples of how companies saved money with green business: Coca-Cola's efforts to cut down on packaging saved it $100 million; after Marks & Spencer adopted environmental and ethical business guidelines, the company earned an extra £50 million in revenue; and small business owner in the UK introduced more energy efficient lighting throughout his shop, saving him £2,282 in annual energy costs.

These examples certainly show multiple benefits, but the real question is how to actually include green in a business process?

“There’s this theory that you have to pick one: economics or environmental performance. That’s nonsense. Innovation is the way you can have both. Companies that don’t get this, really risk becoming irrelevant to the marketplace.” - Mark Vachon, vice president of GE’s ecomagination

Many will say that the key to success is research and development, which are critical for innovation and thereby gaining competitive advantage over other companies. One of the competitive advantages is certainly sustainability, whereby the ecology can be incorporated into the manufacturing process and so, at certain stages, minimize negative impacts on the environment. This is of course only one possibility. What are your advices for companies that want to do green business? What are your thoughts on green business? Can it really be beneficial for the company? Do you appreciate such companies more?

GREEN IS "IN"

Ove sezone nosi se zeleno! Trend društveno odgovornog poslovanja koji sve više uzima maha svakako je tzv. zeleno poslovanje, koje nastoji imati pozitivan utjecaj na okoliš i zajednicu. Ovakvo poslovanje pokazuje predanost zdravoj i održivoj budućnosti te usvaja načela politike i prakse koje poboljšavaju kvalitetu života svojih potrošača i zaposlenika.

Kako upravo ovaj aspekt društvene odgovornosti poduzeća u današnje vrijeme postaje sve cjenjeniji, ne čudi da i zeleno postaje sve popularnija riječ u riječniku svih kompanija koje nastoje biti drugačije. Štednja energije i uvažavanje utjecaja na okoliš u poslovanju možda josš uvijek nije na vrhu ljestvice prioriteta hrvatskih kompanija, no s vremenom ovaj pomak ide u pozitivnom smjeru. Razlog tome vjerojatno je i činjenica da je sve više prihvaćeno shvaćanje da zeleno ne štedi samo okoliš, već i novac i što više moguće koristi postaju očite, to veći naglasak poduzeća stavljaju na održivost. Osim toga, poznato je da resursi postaju sve oskudniji i skuplji pa tako i potrošači, zaposlenici i investitori postaju ekološki osvješteniji.

Iako bi glavni razlog za zeleno poslovanje vjerojatno trebalo biti očuvanje našeg planeta, jasno je kako će u poslovnom svijetu to teško postati osnovni motiv. Stoga je bitno poduzeća osvijestiti da je mnogo drugih razloga zašto poslovati zeleno, odnosno zašto je zeleno psolovanje dobro poslovanje.

Smanjen rizik. Ekološka degradacija prijeti ekosustavu koji omogućava funkcioniranje gospodarstva i kompanije danas toga postaju svijesne. Tako primjerice PepsiCo ulaže u pronalaženje rješenja za nestašicu vode, a Simens pak ulaže u obnovljive izvore energije kako bi bili spremni za budućnost. Također, američki retailer Target gradi hale i zgrade u skladu s napucima američke vlade o štednji energije U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, pa štednja počinje doslovno od temelja. Osim toga, objavili su da su smanjili otpad za čak 70% opsežnim programom recikliranja.

Potražnja za zelenim proizvodima. Potražnja za ekološki prihvatljivim proizvodima i uslugama i dalje rasate. Istraživanje koje je proveo Cohn&Wolfe pokazalo je da većina potrošača istiće kako im jue vrlo ili donekle bitno da su tvrtke ekološki osvještene, a 35% njih spremno je i više platiti takve proizvode. Tako je primjerice Wal-Mart, u suradnji s dobavljačima, promijenio pakiranje određenih proizvoda. Optimizacija im je omogućila prijevoz čak 42% više komada u kamionu, a uštedili su i 16,3 tona plastičnog pakiranja te smanjili potrošnju dizel goriva za 158.000 litara na godinu.

Angažman potrošača. Uključivanje potrošača temelj je za mnoga poduzeća, a upravo zelena politika može poboljšati sliku poduzeća u javnosti te odnose sa zajednicom. Prema izvješću D S Simon Productions, medijske inicijative s fokusom na društvenu odgovornost poduzeća generira 35-50% pozitivniju medijsku pokrivenost na televiziji, radiu, Internetu te društvenim mrežama, u usporedbi s programima bez DOP-a.

Privlačenje talenata. Ekološki osvješteno poslovanje pomaže u privlačenju i zadržavanju najboljih zaposlenika povećanjem njihovog zadovoljstva i osjećajem ponosa na radnom mjestu. To je potvrdilo i MonsterTRAK istraživanje čiji rezultati govore da će čak 92% mladih stručnajka biti sklonije raditi za ekološki osvještena poduzeća.

Privlačenje investitora. Društveno i ekološki odgovorna imovina porasla je više od 324% u periodu od 1995. do 2007. godine, što ukazuje na porast zanimanja za održivošću među investitorima. Osim toga, sve više njih se pomiće od pristupa „ne činiti štetu“ na pristup „učiniti više dobra“, što će svakako koristiti poduzećima koja vode računa o zdravlju zajednice u kojoj posluju.

Ušteda financijskih sredstava. Kao što je već spomenuto, zeleno poslovanje ne štedi samo okoliš, već i novac. EPA je tako ocijenila da je tijekom 2006. samo njen program ENERGY STAR smanjio emisiju stakleničkih plinova u količini ekvivalentnoj onoj koju bi proizvelo 25 milijuna automobila, a američki su trgovci tako uštedjeli 14 milijardi dolara na komunalnim računima. Osim tog, još je niz primjera poduzeća koji su zelenim poslovanjem uštedjeli novac: Coca-Cola je u nastojanju da reducira pakiranje, uštedjela 100 milijuna dolara; Marks & Spencer je nakon uvođenja ekoloških i etičkih smjernica u poslovanje, zaradio dodatnih 50 milijuna funti prihoda, a vlasnik male tvrtke u Velikoj Britaniji uveo je energetski učinkovitiju rasvjetu te tako smanjio godišnje troškove energije za 2.282 funte.

Ovi primjeri pokazuju mnogostruke koristi, no pravo je pitanje kako zapravo zeleno uklopiti u poslovne procese?

“There’s this theory that you have to pick one: economics or environmental performance. That’s nonsense. Innovation is the way you can have both. Companies that don’t get this, really risk becoming irrelevant to the marketplace.” - Mark Vachon, vice president of GE’s ecomagination

Mnogi će reći kako je ključ uspjeha upravo istraživanje i razvoj, koji su ključni za inovacije, a time i stjecanje konkurentske prednosti nad drugim poduzećima. Jedno od konkurentskih prednosti svakako je i održivost, pri čemu se ekologija može uključiti u proizvodni proces i tako u određenim fazama smanjiti negativne utjecaje na okoliš. To je naravno samo jedan o utjecaja. Koji su vaši savjeti za kompanije koje žele poslovati zeleno? Što općenito mislite o zelenom poslovanju? Može li ono doista biti korisno za poduzeće? Cijenite li vi više takva poduzeća?

If not us, who? If not now, when?

Protection of the environment and nature is a topic that should be discussed today more than ever because environmental protection and economic development are key problems of today's world. This is the reason we decided to dedicate this week's post to environmental protection and the fight against global warming.

Most of us often think that the topic of global warming is overused and that there is nothing new to learn about it. However, it's hard to ignore and not talk about climate changes because in the past few years they were pretty strong. Our goal is to make you think about how does the fight against global warming and especially implementation of Kyoto protocol influence companies around the world.

In the beginning, just a few words about the Kyoto protocol. According to the Protocol, industrial nations and developing countries commited to reduce emission of harmful gases by 5,2% in the period from 2008 to 2012. The Protocol couldn't be applied before the ratification of industrial countries responsible for 55% of GHG emission; that condition was fulfilled on 18th of November 2004 by joining of the Russian Federation, the country responsible for 17% of greenhouse gases. 34 of 141 nations that ratified the Kyoto protocol are industrial countries, but the most interesting fact is that USA rejected to sign it in 2001.

This immediately opens the biggest question – is the whole project in jeopardy and does it have any sense if US as world's biggest polluter doesn't join?

Experts have different opinions. Everyone agrees that the success would be greater if US participated, but is this reason enough to ignore the progress that is achieved in other countries?

Some of the many questions are: How does the implementation of this protocol influence companies and their management? How do they deal with the costs? Are there any advantages in comparison with companies from countries that didn't sign the Protocol?

Nations that have ratified the Kyoto protocol brought different regulations to reduce gas emission. But the biggest weight falls on companies, especcialy those that work in industries which are responsible for biggest pollutions. Every country can choose some industries or companies that will be spared in some way. This could mean that they aren't obligated to change their manufacturing process in a way that reduces pollution or governments can cover some part of those necessary costs. Why would any government decide to do this? The answer is very simple, every country has specific industries which are critical for its development and competitiveness in global market, so it's in their interest to protect those industries.

Competitiveness – Following the new regulations companies have to invest some funds in technologies that reduce environmental pollution. This increases total cost of the production and affects the price of their products. All of that makes them lose the battle in price competitiveness. But, you can look at this situation from a different angle. Conscious consumers could prefer products made by companies who are helping to preserve the enviromenment and that could increase their competitiveness.

Multinational companies – Let's think about the influence of Kyoto protocol on multinational companies. In various countries, where they have their subsidiaries, are possible differences in protocol implementation because every country has its own prescribed qouta. American companies have a special situation. In most of their subsidiaries they have to follow the Protocol but in their homeland they are not obligated to do so. It's very interesting that Kyoto protocol doesn't count the part of gas reduction that they accomplish on US teritory.

In the end, we would like you to think about following questions: How much attention do you give to global warming? Are you sceptical about this theory and believe it is all just a big hoax? Do you appreciate companies which use clean technologies or is that information completely irrelevant to you?

And remember, environmental protection isn't just a job for companies and governments, but for every conscious person who cares about our planet. So, think about it and ask yourself, could the simple act of throwing a paper in the garbage can be one small step for a man but a giant leap for the mankind.

Ako ne mi, tko? Ako ne sad, kad?

O zaštiti prirode i okoliša danas bi trebalo razmišljati više nego ikad jer su zaštita okoliša i gospodarski razvitak ključni problemi današnjice. Iz tog razloga smo i mi odlučili posvetiti naš ovotjedni post zaštiti okoliša i borbi protiv globalnog zatopljenja.

Svima nam se ponekad čini da je globalno zatopljenje tema koja je već toliko potrošena i o kojoj ne možemo više ništa novo saznati. No, klimatske promjene posljednjih godina su toliko osjetne da ih je teško ignorirati i ne razgovarati o njima. Mi bismo vas htjeli navesti da razmislite kako borba protiv globalnog zatopljenja, a posebice Kyoto protokol utječu na poslovanje poduzeća diljem svijeta.

Za početak da kažemo nešto o Kyoto protokolu. Njime su se industrijski razvijene zemlje kao i one u tranziciji obvezale da će u periodu između 2008. i 2012. godine smanjiti ispuštanje GH plinova za 5,2 % od razine zabilježene bazne 1990. godine. Protokol se mogao početi primjenjivati tek kad su ga ratificirale industrijske zemlje odgovorne za 55 posto emisije štetnih plinova, a taj je uvjet ispunjen 18. studenog 2004. pristupanjem Rusije, zemlje koja je odgovorna za 17 posto štetnih plinova.  Protokol je ratificirala 141 zemlja, od čega su 34 industrijske, a najzanimljivije je da ga je SAD odbacio 2001. godine.

Tu se odmah otvara ono najveće pitanje  - je li cijeli projekt ugrožen i ima li on uopće smisla ako se SAD kao najveći svjetski onečišćivač ne uključi?

Stručnjaci su podijeljenih mišljenja, naravno svi se slažu da bi uspjeh bio puno veći da i SAD sudjeluje, ali zar možemo zbog toga zanemariti napredak koji ostvaruju ostale zemlje?

Neka od mnogobrojnih pitanja koja se postavljaju su: Kako provođenje ovog protokola utječe na poslovanje poduzeća? Kako se nose s troškovima? Postoje li prednosti u odnosu na poduzeća iz zemalja koje nisu potpisale Kyoto protokol?

U zemljama koje su potpisale Kyoto sporazum doneseni su određeni propisi kako bi se smanjilo ispuštanje plinova, ali najveći teret pada na poduzeća, posebno ona koja se bave industrijom jer su zaslužna za najveća ispuštanja GHG plinova u atmosferu. Svaka država može odrediti industrije ili poduzeća koja su na neki način pošteđena, bilo da ne moraju provesti promjene u svojim proizvodnim procesima da bi se smanjilo zagađenje ili pak da su im troškovi tih promjena u nekom dijelu pokriveni. Zašto bi se neka država odlučila na takav potez? Odgovor je jednostavan, svaka zemlja ima određene industrije koje su kritične za njen razvoj i konkurentnost na svjetskom tržištu pa im je u interesu da ih zaštite.

Konkurentnost- Provođenjem propisa poduzeća moraju izdvojiti određena sredstva za tehnologije koje smanjuju onečišćenje okoliša, što povećava njihove ukupne troškove i utječe na cijenu po kojoj oni prodaju svoje proizvode te samim time gube bitku u cjenovnoj konkurentnosti. No, na ovu situaciju se može gledati i iz drugog kuta. Osviješteni potrošači bi mogli preferirati proizvode kompanija koje pridonose zaštiti okoliša i tako se povećava njihova konkurentnost.

Multinacionalne kompanije- Razmislimo sada o utjecaju Kyoto protokola na multinacionalne kompanije. U različitim zemljama u kojima imaju svoje podružnice moguće su razlike u primjeni protokola jer svaka zemlja ima posebno propisane kvote što dovodi do različitih troškova. U posebnoj situaciji su američke kompanije koje se moraju u većini svojih podružnica pridržavati protokola dok na domaćem tlu nemaju tu obvezu. Zanimljivo je da se takvim kompanijama za ostvarenje norme ne računa onaj dio smanjenja emisije štetnih plinova koje ostvaruju na području SAD-a.

Voljeli bi da za kraj razmislite o sljedećim pitanjima: Koliko pažnje vi pridajete globalnom zatopljenju? Spadate li možda u onu skupinu skeptika koja smatra da je ta teorija velika prevara? Cijenite li poduzeća koja koriste čiste tehnologije ili vam je taj podatak pri kupnji potpuno nebitan?

I zapamtite, zaštita okoliša nije samo briga poduzeća i državnih vlasti već i svakog osviještenog pojedinca koji cijeni i voli okolinu u kojoj živi. Stoga razmislite o samima sebi i zapitajte se može li banalno bacanje papirića u smeće koje je mali korak za čovjeka postati veliki korak za čovječanstvo.

To be or not to be - to whistle or not to whistle?

In recent years, Democracy in Croatia has become significant in uncovering many scandals and illegal operations of some state owned companies. Or has it? Where are the people today who "whistled"? Is it better to expose these scandals or to ignore unethical business operations and "mind your own business"?

What is a whistleblower and how is it defined? The whistleblower (from English to blow the whistle) is a person who publicly warns others of illegal activities (such as corruption, misconduct, violation of law or abuse of authority) of guilty individuals. Generally, a whistleblower is a brave individual who, for moral reasons despite the risk to his own career, decide to speak publicly about illegal or unethical behavior superiors.

In Croatia, we have had several examples of public whistleblowers who, at the end of "whistling," are not regarded with respect as a result of their actions.

Perhaps the best known whistleblower in Croatia is Vesna Balenović who, ten years ago, revealed corruption in INA. As a result of her exposure, she was fired and never returned to her job. To this day, she is still struggling with the event, which, according to many, is now part of the distant past. In fact, most people have even forgotten who she is – is she that too gaudy makeup blonde?

Damir Mihanović, one of the key witnesses of the case Fimi-Media, has suffered a similar fate following a public statement about corruption in Croatia Insurance Company. Because of his "whistleblowing," he lost his position as a board member of the company.

Additionally, Robert Mihanović still leads quixotic battles with the institutions of the state. He argues that for the past ten years, the Attorney General has warned of corruption in customs administration events. Now he argues that, in this respect, no one has done anything.

After a brief overview of how whistleblowers ended up in Croatia we ask ourselves: to whistle or not to whistle? What will be my fate if I discover some kind of corruption? Is it better not to expose what's going on and live a peaceful life?

Last week at our lecture, Mr. Mihanović sent a message asking us to think twice when we hear of corruption; it will be hard to compete with an unethical business.

How can we solve unethical business, corruption, and organized crime if we all keep quiet and close our eyes to what is going on? How will we ever prosper and thrive? How do we make a difference in society? Often we like to think of what Gandhi said: "Be the change you wish to see in the world." Is it just a saying that we repeat, share on social media, write in the signature of our mail, or put it on the slides of our presentation? Are we meant to speak these words to others but ignore them in practice?

Some other countries have been able to solve this whistle-blowing problem, and their democracy is flourishing. Many of these countries are those we are often compared to; in Croatia, however, only 5% of people actually expose corruption. Is this a testament, as some argue, to how far we are from democracy ourselves?

So let's go a little to the West - what does the U.S. SEC do in cases like this? How can you protect your whistleblowers? In America, the whistleblower is not only protected from losing his or her job, but they are also given the opportunity for promotion within the same company which they've whistled. Additionally, they earn 10% to 30% of the amount of the damage they have discovered. Sounds encouraging for all of you who witness unethical behaviors, but is money is the only motive for whistling? Or are ethical reasons also considered?

Students – in what kind of company do you want to work? If you were to choose between a company that operates ethically, but does not achieve high profits thereby lowering your salary, and a company that is not operating ethically, but your salary is secured and very high - what would you choose? Likely, most of you would say always an ethical company, but would you think twice?

Employees - what would you do if you were to uncover corruption in your own company? Do you wonder if your salary, that is regular and fairly high, is earned ethically and because your company is successful or could something else be behind it? Or someone else?

Employers – do you conduct your business ethically? If you do not do business ethically (are you reporting on the minimum wage, the cost justification of private business purposes, anything else ...), would you mind if your employees acted unethically towards you by not working as efficiently as they could?

To be or not to be? To whistle or not to whistle?

Think twice.