AUTOLATINA:

AUTOLATINA: An International Partnership that ended up in a Divorce: Ford – Volkswagen Joint Venture in Brazil Autolatina, a joint venture of Ford and Volkswagen (VW), was created in 1987 in Brazil. The partners created the new company in order to serve the highly protected car markets of Brazil and Argentina from within. In addition, their goal was to create a giant theoretically invincible in the Latin American market. The partners’ strategy was to share the risk of operating in a volatile market and support a wide model range. Soon after the fusion, Autolatina market share reached 60% in the Brazilian market and 30% in Argentina. Of German origin, Volkswagen was originally founded in 1937, with the goal of offering the “popular cars” that anyone could afford. This was best reflected by the Volkswagen Beetle which, at one time, was the world’s best selling car. Early on, the Beetle became a mascot of Brazil’s economic miracle, accounting for nearly half of Brazilian car sales. Volkswagen launched VW Gol in 1980 please substitute the VW Beetle. It was assembled at Volkswagen do Brazil, which employed more than 45,000 people and was the largest industrial corporation in Latin America. VW Gol has been the best-selling car or in Brazil since VW Beetle. Ford was the first automotive company to assemble in Brazil, and prior to 1939, it dominated passenger car sales. In the 1950s, Ford resisted Brazilian government plans to establish complete automotive operations, including assembly and full manufacturing. Reluctant to share the same vision with the Brazilian government, Ford allowed Volkswagen to capture the Brazilian market. Ford reentered the market in the 1970s and became the second largest automobile producer after VW. Brazil’s car industry, coddled by years of high tariff barriers and other forms of protectionism, has been scrambling to modernize. For decades, imported cars were banned or made prohibitively expensive and foreign parts were not allowed to be fitted to locally made cars. A symbol of the “Brazilian miracle” of the 1970s, the auto industry became emblematic of Latin America’s “lost decade” of the 1980s. A ban on imports meant that the auto industry did not keep up with technological innovations, and consumers had no choice but to accept the manufacturers’ complacency. Brazil was, at the time, a new potential market for U.S. subcompacts. Autolatina: A Perfect Marriage Ford and VW’s strategy to combine operations reflected the partners’ will to overcome obstacles in the Brazilian market. By the 1980s, Ford and Volkswagen had a total of 15 vehicle, engine, and parts plants in Brazil and Argentina, employing 75,000 people. Their combined annual production capacity was 900,000 cars and trucks, distributed through 1,500 dealerships. Their automotive and credit operations reported sales totaling US$ 4 billion. In a market protected from external competition, Autolatina became highly successful. It offered inexpensive models, including the Escort XR3, Sierra, VW’s Gol, Beetle, and aging midsized Ford Falcons. Autolatina spent $35 million refitting a plant to build Beetles. The growth in this market segment relied exclusively on tax incentives from the Brazilian government. The products were adapted for a smaller engine. The goal was to manufacture car models at lowest possible cost. Plant operations were organized by size of vehicles. Ford had been relying on VW to build small cars while Ford was supplying the larger Escort and a line of pickup trucks. The two partners even produced shared products. For instance, Volkswagen was producing Ford Versailles (derived from VW Santana), and for those producing VW Logus (derived from Ford Escort). Marketing and sales staff were unified. Specialists and consultants were hired to accommodate the two different company cultures. Production of Autolatina cars rose substantially over time. In 1994, it seemed both companies had succeeded in identifying the key factors contributing to Autolatina’s success: inexpensive, non-competing models, a growing Brazilian market, and sharing of manufacturing and profits. Autolatina enabled both companies to serve an important country from within, and reduced operational costs for both partners. Developments: New Competition and the Emergence of MERCOSUR During the 1990s, conditions shifted in Brazil, and Autolatina was caught unprepared by renewed economic growth. In addition to the popular car policy, Brazil reduced tariffs on car imports. Over the course of five years, import tariffs fell from 85 percent to as low as 20 percent. In 1991, MERCOSUR (Mercado Comun del Sur, or free trade area of the Southern Cone) went into effect. The creation of the MERCOSUR free-trade area boosted Brazil’s exports to Argentina. Originally a free trade agreement between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, MERCOSUR was extended in 1996 to include Chile and, in 1997, Bolivia. With 150 million of MERCOSUR’s 200 million inhabitants, Brazil was ready to become the region’s car-making center. The formation of MERCOSUR, falling tariffs, and the Autolatina’s success, provoked rivals into action. GM and Fiat moved into Argentina and Brazil in a big way, and began producing cars to compete with Autolatina. Brazil became the world’s tenth-largest producer of automobiles. Economic conditions vary widely among the MERCOSUR member states. Despite these asymmetries, the members agreed to strive for economic stability through political, fiscal and monetary policies, a wider opening of the economy to global competition, and modernization of the economies through deregulation and privatization. The implementation of economic reforms (that stabilized and liberalized the Brazilian and Argentinean economies) and specific governmental policies, such as commercial agreements, were the political and economic bases for a new structure in the supply chain of the automobile sector. These measures contributed to new environmental factors such as the increase in domestic demand and the industrial modernization of both countries. The new scenario in MERCOSUR favored the activities of automotive assemblers in the region. Business executives in the MERCOSUR countries had to adapt distribution channels, consider a broader market, learn about new consumers and take into account the complementarities of their MERCOSUR partners. The reduction of tariffs among the member countries opened new opportunities for multinationals. MERCOSUR allowed Argentina to increase its exports, and Brazil to engage in international trade at an accelerated rate. The emergence of MERCOSUR led to a substantial increase in foreign investment in Brazil from major multinational car makers. Major new players in the Brazilian market includes GM, Fiat, Renault, Mercedes Benz and Toyota, all with their own manufacturing plants. In addition, other major players began direct investment in Brazil and Argentina, or announced that they would locate in these countries: Asia Motors Inc., Audi AG, Honda Motor Co., Hyundai, Toyota and Mercedes-Benz. Meanwhile, the products of Autolatina, built for a protected market, fell out of step. Brazilian consumers began to show a preference for lower-cost small cars, and pricing competition intensified as a result of the abundance of competing small cars. Both GM and Fiat launched popular cars for less than $7,000 (Corsa and Uno). The table below presents the variety of offerings by four leading companies. Although Autolatina had succeeded in reviving the VW Beetle, customers deserted “the bug” in droves for lower-priced competing brands. With increased competition, customer’s choices were expanded beyond low cost, increasing the pressure on manufacturers to improve quality and offerings. Company Market Segment Products Volkswagen Small Mid-sized Large Beetle, Gol Logus, Pointer, Voyage Santana Ford Mid-sized Large Escort, Verona Versailles General Motors Small Mid-sized Large Corsa Kadett, Monza, Vectra Omega Fiat Small Large Uno Tempra Conflicts between the Partners In addition to dynamic changes in the market, conflicts arose in the strategies of Ford and VW. Ford dealers in Brazil had been begging for smaller cars that are better suited to Latin American consumers. But Ford avoided the erosion of Autolatina’s profits by competing with VW’s Gol (from which it was receiving half the profits). Volkswagen management, on the other hand, was reluctant to share its subcompact design with Ford so that Ford could use it in other markets. Mutual Willingness to share technological knowledge and other key competences with each other declined over time. Differences in the organizational cultures of the two partners also contributed to deteriorating relationships between Ford and Volkswagen. The German and the U.S. organizations had different histories and origins, as well as different management styles. Within the boundaries of the Autolatina, VW and Ford were reasonably well integrated operationally, even exchanging model fabrication. However, external to the relationship, suppliers continued to serve the two companies independently, as well as the dealerships. Autolatina was not fully integrated with suppliers or the dealers, leading to inefficiencies in the supply chain. For example, the dealerships were not consolidated, a potential for reducing administrative costs. Furthermore, the partners could have consolidated their supply base, gaining scale economies. The suppliers continued to serve Autolatina independently of the two partner companies. In addition, VW and Ford continued to compete with each other in the worldwide market, making it really difficult to share any technical knowledge, jeopardizing internal collaboration. Outside of the Autolatina collaboration, the partners were even competing against each other by launching new cars in the same category. The End of Autolatina In 1995, Ford and VW decided to end their alliance. The parting was so amicable that the employees were allowed to choose the company they wanted to continue to work for. Because the sale of subcompact vehicles, known as “popular cars” in South America, took off rapidly, Volkswagen’s smaller cars benefited from the demise of the joint venture. VW held a third of the regional market and on a $ 2.5 billion investment plan, expanding capacity by a third (up to 2,500 vehicles a day), and launching a line of new engines and a new truck plant. Ford specialized in midsized cars and was unable to respond to the regional demand for small cars. Eventually Ford’s image was damaged, and it was seen as the company producing cars that few wanted to buy. Ford began a $1.1 billion investment on its own to produce Fiestas in Brazil and Escorts in Argentina. Ford then controlled 11 percent of auto sales in Brazil, while VW, Fiat, and GM held market shares of 35.6 percent, 27 percent, and 23.2 percent, respectively. After the break-up of Autolatina, Ford launched a series of new models in Latin America to rebuild its image. The Fiesta has, despite its rocky start, bolstered Ford’s position. Ford also launched the late version of the Escort in Argentina, and Ford had big hopes for the Ranger pickup and for the Ka. Future The removal of trade barriers within the MERCOSUR contributed to intensified competition in Latin America. However, much uncertainty remained as to how government policies would evolve over time regarding regional free trade blocs. After decades of high inflation and ineffective government, Brazilian businesses are becoming more entrepreneurial, and the labor force is more productive. Managers at Brazilian firms have become more sophisticated, putting more emphasis on long-term profits and strategic planning. Competition has increased substantially. In the new competitive environment triggered by MERCOSUR, managers increasingly understand that improving goods, service quality, and lowering prices are the best ways to maintain long-term domestic competitiveness. But both Brazil and Argentina continue to experience periods of instability. QUESTIONS (1) What strengths did Ford and VW bring to the Autolatina venture? Did these firms have any weaknesses? Please elaborate. (2) Did Ford commit any blunders in its Latin American operations? Please specify. What can be learned from Ford’s experience in Latin America? What should Ford do now? (3) What types of opportunities does a trade bloc present to the firms that do business within it? What opportunities and threats should management at Ford and VW anticipate within the evolving MERCOSUR trade bloc? (4) What strategies can you recommend for Ford and VW to follow in order to maximize their prospects for success in the MERCOSUR bloc? (5) Using GlobalEDGE ™ (globaledge.msu.edu) and other online portals, please research the current status of MERCOSUR? In light of your findings, what should foreign automakers do if they want to participate and succeed in the evolving trade bloc? This case was prepared by doctoral candidate Alexandre M. Rodrigues and MBA student Elvin Zung under the direction of Professor S. Tamer Cavusgil. SOURCES: Economist (1993), “The Bugs from Brazil”, Aug 21; Economist (1994), “Brazil’s Car Industry: Party Time”, Sep 17; Berry, B.H. (1987), “Volkswagen Steps up Imports from Latin America”, Iron Age, pp. 230-249; Blumenstein, Rebecca (1997), “Head of Ford Unit In Brazil Expects A Narrower Loss”, Wall Street Journal, May 14; Bradsher, K. (1997), “Messy Latin Divorce Splits Ford and VW” International Herald Tribune. May 18; Cavusgil, S. T. (1998), “International Partnering: a Systematic Framework for Collaborating with Foreign Business Partners”, Journal of International Marketing, 6 (1); Corcoran, E. (1987) “Special Report- The global automobile: Cooperating to Compete”, IEEE Spectrum, 24 (53); Guiles, Melinda G. and Roger Cohen (1986), “Ford, Volkswagen Plan Joint Venture To Oversee Units in Argentina, Brazil”, Wall Street Journal, Nov 25; Kamm, Thomas (1993), “ Beetles Could Give Power to the People Of Brazil Once Again – President Wants Autolatina To Revive the VW Bug, But Price Won’t Be Retro”, Wall Street Journal, Feb 1; Kamm, Thomas (1994), “Pedal to the Metal: Brazil Swiftly Becomes Major Auto Producer As Trade Policy Shifts — VW, Ford, GM Are Building New Low-Priced Models For an Eager Populace – How Hyperinflation Helps”, Wall Street Journal, Apr 20; Katz I., Smith G., and Mandel-Campbell A., “Brazil’s Neighbors are Very Nervous” Business Week: 138, November 17; Kotabe, M. “Mercosur and Beyond” Center for International Business Education and Research, University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX; Moffett M. (1996) “Bruised in Brazil: Ford Slips as Market Blooms”. Wall Street Journal. December 13; Shapiro, H. (1991), “Determinants of Firm Entry into the Brazilian Automobile Manufacturing Industry”, Business History Review. 65, p. 876

 
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

FINA 6750 Urgent

Black-Scholes-Merton & Binomial

Inputs: Black-Scholes-Merton Model Binomial Model
Asset price (S0) 699.49 European European Steps: 100
Exercise price (X) 695 Call Put European European
Time to expiration (T) 0.1288 Price 18.8015 9.9471 Call Put
Standard deviation (s) 14.00% Delta (D) 0.6098 -0.3902 Price 13.5523 12.0788
Risk-free rate (r or rc) 4.89% Gamma (G) 0.0109 0.0109 Delta (D) 0.5700 -0.4300
Dividends: 0.00% Theta (Q) -72.3091 -38.5218 Gamma (G) 0.0121 0.0121
continuous yield (dc) or discrete dividends below: Vega 96.3225 96.3225 Theta (Q) -68.9155 -63.3643
Rho 52.5009 -36.4301 American Call American
Call Put
d1 0.2787 Price 13.5523 12.1121
d2 0.2285 Delta (D) 0.5700 -0.4316
N(d1) 0.6098 Gamma (G) 0.0121 0.0121
N(d2) 0.5904 Theta (Q) -68.9155 -63.7694
PV of divs 0.0000
PV of strike 690.6356
Dividend # Dividend Time to ex date Present Value S – PV divs 699.4900
1 0.0000
2 0.0000
3 0.0000
4 0.0000
5 0.0000
6 0.0000
7 0.0000
8 0.0000
9 0.0000
10 0.0000
11 0.0000
12 0.0000
13 0.0000
14 0.0000
15 0.0000
16 0.0000
17 0.0000
18 0.0000
19 0.0000
20 0.0000
21 0.0000
22 0.0000
23 0.0000
24 0.0000
25 0.0000
26 0.0000
27 0.0000
28 0.0000
29 0.0000
30 0.0000
31 0.0000
32 0.0000
33 0.0000
34 0.0000
35 0.0000
36 0.0000
37 0.0000
38 0.0000
39 0.0000
40 0.0000
41 0.0000
42 0.0000
43 0.0000
44 0.0000
45 0.0000
46 0.0000
47 0.0000
48 0.0000
49 0.0000
50 0.0000
51 0.0000
52 0.0000
53 0.0000
54 0.0000
55 0.0000
56 0.0000
57 0.0000
58 0.0000
59 0.0000
60 0.0000
61 0.0000
62 0.0000
63 0.0000
64 0.0000
65 0.0000
66 0.0000
67 0.0000
68 0.0000
69 0.0000
70 0.0000
71 0.0000
72 0.0000
73 0.0000
74 0.0000
75 0.0000
76 0.0000
77 0.0000
78 0.0000
79 0.0000
80 0.0000
81 0.0000
82 0.0000
83 0.0000
84 0.0000
85 0.0000
86 0.0000
87 0.0000
88 0.0000
89 0.0000
90 0.0000
91 0.0000
92 0.0000
93 0.0000
94 0.0000
95 0.0000
96 0.0000
97 0.0000
98 0.0000
99 0.0000
100 0.0000
= = = =
Sum 0.0000
Do not change the items below******************************
discrete 2 continuous risk-free rate
continuous

BLACK-SCHOLES & BINOMIAL OPTION PRICING MODELS bsbin3.xls

In lieu of a continuously compounded yield, place below up to one hundred discrete dividends and the time in years to each ex-dividend date. Leave all unused cells blank. Set the yield above to zero. If yield is not set to zero, all discrete dividends are disregarded.

Black-Scholes-Merton and Binomial Option Pricing 10e

Run Binomial Model

Instructions

Instructions: Insert values in highlighted cells. Risk-free rate, standard deviation and yield can be entered as decimal or percentage (e.g., .052 or 5.2 for 5.2 %). Select form (discrete or continuous) for risk-free rate. Black-Scholes values automatically recalculate. Click on “Run Binomial Option Pricing Model” button to recalculate binomial values. Input cells have double borders. Output cells have single borders. Up to 5,000 time steps can be used in the binomial model. Input a continuous dividend yield or up to 0 discrete dividends. Do not enter both or the discrete dividends will be ignored. This spreadsheet can be used to calculate options on forwards or futures using the Black variation of the Black-Scholes model. Input the forward or futures price instead of the asset price and input the risk-free rate as both the risk-free rate and the dividend yield. Do not enter discrete dividends. To price foreign currency options, input the spot rate as the asset price, the domestic interest rate as the risk-free rate and the foreign interest rate as the dividend yield. Do not enter discrete dividends.

About

Written by Don M. Chance and Robert Brooks For use with An Introduction to Derivatives and Risk Management, 10th ed. (Mason, Ohio: Cengage, 2015) Date: 7/09 Last updated: 3/18/14 © 2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

s

s

s

=

=

++

=

=

012

201

‘2

0

1

21

()-()

(1-())-(1-())

ln(/)(/2)

c

c

rT

rT

c

BlackScholesMerton

cSNdXeNd

pXeNdSNd

where

SXrT

d

T

ddT

ïłïłïłï€œï€œï€«ï€«ï€œï€œ-‘012-‘201’20121–()-()(1-())-(1-())ln(/)(/2)-ccrTrTcBlackScholesMertoncSNdXeNdpXeNdSNdwhereSXrTdTddT

+-

=

+

+-

=

(1)

1

1

ud

Binomial

pcpc

c

r

rd

p

ud

 
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Case Study 1.1 Transworld Minerals- International Business

Please read Case Study 1.1 Transworld Minerals on pages 28-30 of the ebook.  This case discusses the expansion into Salaysia of Transworld Minerals Inc. Please consider the different ways to internationalize in this case while “keeping the peace” with the domestic Salaysian Coal Mining Company. 

 Please provide well- written and well-reasoned 2 – 5 page paper addressing and focusing on the two questions below.

 

Question 1:

GRADING RUBRIC for REFLECTION PAPER

Page 1 of 4

 

CRITERIA FAILS TO MEET EXPECTATIONS

0

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

5

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

8

EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS

10

YOUR SCORE

ORGANIZATION

Clearly organized

introduction, body,

conclusion

Fails to meet this criteria by obvious

disregard for the

expectations stated in

the criteria;

Disorganized and the

reader can not follow

the paper at any

length

Disorganized, leaves reader wondering

what is being said;

abrupt ending

Paper has intro, body, and conclusion

but may take a re-

reading to understand

Easy to read, topic introduced, organization

clearly evident with

proper introduction,

body, conclusion

 

Does this paper address the prompt

or the topic?

The topic of the paper is not addressed at all;

Fails to stick to the

topic therefore fails to

meet the criteria

Student does not clearly identify his/her

reflections about the

topic; may veer from

topic

The entire paper’s content relates to the

prompt or topic; the

student explains his/her

reflections about the

topic but may take a re-

reading to

understand

The student’s reflection about the topic is

explained in clear

language; immediately

interesting and supported

with detail

 

Paragraph Organization and

Writing Style: Ideas

are clearly

connected and

make sense

Fails to meet this criteria by obvious

disregard for the

expectations stated in

the criteria

Paragraphs are disorganized; ideas are

included which do not

relate to the main idea;

ideas are not connected

and have little or no

supporting details; one

sentence paragraphs

Each paragraph has a central idea that is

supported with details;

ideas are connected and

important points make

sense

Each paragraph has a central idea; ideas are

connected and

paragraphs are

developed with details;

paper is easy to read and

“flows” naturally in an

organized pattern

 

 

 

GRADING RUBRIC for REFLECTION PAPER

Page 2 of 4

CRITERIA FAILS TO MEET EXPECTATIONS

0

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

5

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

8

EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS

10

YOUR SCORE

ORGANIZATION

Fails to meet this criteria by obvious

disregard for the

expectations stated in

the criteria

Paper is shallow and does not present

detailed evaluation of

reflection about the

topic; little use of

business literature to

support thought

The paper shows that the student has

thought about the topic

although the written

presentation may

appear weak or lack

clarity; use of business

literature to support

thought

Paper provides evidence (through the use of

description, details, and

use of business

literature) that the

student has examined

his/her own belief

systems and related this

to their current views

about the topic; use of

business literature to

support thought

 

 

 

GRADING RUBRIC for REFLECTION PAPER

Page 3 of 4

 

CRITERIA

FAILS TO MEET EXPECTATIONS

0

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

5

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

8

EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS

10

YOUR SCORE

GRAMMAR

Basic writing expectations:

mechanics,

spelling,

grammar, or

punctuation

errors

More than 8 grammatical ,

punctuation, or BWE

errors

4-7 grammatical, punctuation , or

BWE errors

Between 1-4 grammatical,

punctuation, or

BWE errors, but

they are minor and

do not detract from

the paper

No errors whatsoever!

Use of transitions to connect

sentences and

ideas

Fails to meet this criteria by obvious

disregard for the

expectations stated in

the criteria

Choppy; sentences do not connect or

transition well; ideas

do not connect

Paper expresses the ideas of the author;

sentences relate to

one another; may

take a re-reading to

understand

Paper is easy to read and makes sense the first

time it is read. It is

interesting and well

written; sentences

connect and flow.

 

Correct choice of verb tenses, words, Avoidance of wordy phrases, correct use of pronouns

Fails to meet this criteria by obvious

disregard for the

expectations stated in

the criteria

Improper use of language or slang;

wrong word choice;

appears “padded”

Occasional wrong word choice;

somewhat wordy

but not enough to

detract from the

summary; May

occasionally use the

wrong tense.

 

 

No wrong word choice or slang; uses correct

verb tense and pronouns.

Well written and use of

words convey meaning

 

 

 

 

 

 

GRADING RUBRIC for REFLECTION PAPER

Page 4 of 4

 

CRITERIA

FAILS TO MEET EXPECTATIONS

0

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

5

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

8

EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS

10

YOUR SCORE

FORMATTING

Follows APA professional

writing style of

using 12 point

Times New

Roman font,

1inch margins all

around, correct

APA headings

Fails to meet this criteria by obvious

disregard for the

expectations stated in

the criteria; 3 or more

errors

Meets the criteria with 2 errors

Meets the criteria with 1 error

Exceeds this by completely meeting all

of these requirements

with NO exception!

 

Correct format of title page

including

running head,

page numbers,

correct page

justification

Fails to meet this criteria by obvious

disregard for the

expectations stated in

the criteria; 3 or more

errors

Meets the criteria with 2 errors

Meets the criteria with 1 error

Perfect title page, running head, page

numbers, and page

justification!

 

Correct use of citations within

paper according

to APA; Correct

APA reference

page

Fails to meet this criteria by obvious

disregard for the

expectations stated in

the criteria; 3 or more

errors

Meets the criteria with 2 errors

Meets the criteria with 1 error

Perfect use of citations within paper per APA

format; Correct reference

pa

What additional incentives should Wright suggest to improve the attractiveness of Transworld’s proposal to the Industries Ministry.

Question 2:

What strategy should Transworld adopt to offset the political advantage enjoyed by the Salaysian Coal Mining Company?

 

All papers must be professional, well-reasoned, well-written, and free from profanity.  This paper assignment should reflect the fact that this is a written product for a graduate professional program.  All responses should be professional, and if you disagree with a point-of-view presented in the case, keep it professional.  Make any case solutions and suggestions constructive.  If ideas are not your own, please reference them with the appropriate internet link or written resource link.  Although I do not wish to restrict speech, I reserve the right to fail any student who engages in plagiarism and/or does not show proper respect for any international culture and ethnicity and/or is obscene and promotes discriminatory ideas.

Turn-it-in is enabled on all papers.

 
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Strayer BUS309 Quiz 6 (ALL CORRECT)

Question

Question 1

One truth about factory farms is

Answer

they rarely inflict any genuine suffering on animals.

most animals we eat are from them.

they are necessary to feed the world.

they are run by brutal people.

Question 2

“Pollution permits” are an example of which of the following methods of achieving our environmental goals?

Answer

pricing mechanisms

government subsidies

a laissez-faire approach

regulations

Question 3

The “tragedy of the commons” is

Answer

the lack of a commons—a common place where people can come together.

the failure to appreciate what we have in common with other species.

that cost-benefit analysis involves value judgments that we do not share in common.

that individual pursuit of self-interest can sometimes make everyone worse off.

Question 4

The philosopher Tom Regan

Answer

claims that no impartial morally sensitive person could approve of the treatment of animals in factory farms if he or she knew what was going on.

argues against the use of governmental regulations to control the actions of businesses.

 

believes that the FTC should be abolished.

denies that non-human animals have any moral rights.

Question 5

Which of the following is a drawback to the regulatory approach?

Answer

regulation can take away an industry’s incentive to do more than the minimum

regulation is an incentive to an industry to do more than the minimum

regulation does not apply to all equally

does not require polluters to use the strongest most feasible means of pollution control.

Question 6

The moral theorist William T. Blackstone claims that the right to a livable environment

Answer

would solve the problem of how to conserve resources.

prevents the use of government regulation to control the actions of business.

is a fundamental human right.

implies that non-human animals have no genuine moral rights.

Question 7

Concerning future generations,

Answer

all philosophers today reject the idea that future people have rights

utilitarianism dictates a radical reduction in population growth

future people have a right to be born

the social and environmental policies we adopt can affect who is born in the future

Question 8

According to the philosopher Joel Feinberg,

Answer

future generations of people have a right to be born.

future generations have no moral rights.

we have no duties to future generations.

the rights of future generations are contingent upon those people coming into existence.

Question 9

According to Shaw and Barry, utilitarians

Answer

focus on human well-being and ignore animal welfare.

oppose animal experimentation in principle.

should include nonhuman animal pleasures and pains in the overall utilitarian calculus.

are likely to favor factory farming.

Question 10

William F. Baxter addresses environmental ethics by noting

Answer

the best ethical position to adopt on environmental issues is a naturalistic position.

non-human animals have intrinsic value.

judgments about environmental problems ought to be people-oriented.

damage to geological “marvels” is inherently wrong and should be prevented.

Question 11

Animal manure

Answer

is not available in sufficient quantities to replenish agricultural land.

is a large source of pollution.

helps counteract the “greenhouse effect”.

is potentially more dangerous than nuclear power.

Question 12

According to Holmes Rolston III,

Answer

naturalistic ethics ought to be abandoned

some natural objects are morally considerable in their own right, apart from human interests

all moral rights are derived from the interests of human beings

nature has no value apart from human beings.

Question 13

A moral vegetarian

Answer

rejects eating meat based on moral grounds

only eats animal that were raised humanely

does not believe animals suffer

the pleasure we get from eating a hamburger justifies the price the animals pay.

Question 14

Business has considered the environment to be

Answer

a scarce commodity.

free and nearly limitless.

a limited supply.

costly

Question 15

An ecosystem

Answer

should never be tampered with.

can survive any human intervention.

can be upset by human behavior.

is independent of all other ecosystems.

 

 

 

 
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"