HOSP230 Final: Chapter 1 & 2 WTW - Part 1

For questions 1, 2, 3, and 6 you are welcome to use Wikipedia. However, you should cite at least two other sources in each question. Your sources should be identified at the end of each answer. As you can see by now many of the assignments are very important to our understanding of the topics, but they have not been integrated as well into the course as I would like. This assignment is very different. Much of the discussion here is to better understand Latin America, a region of the world that we will need to skip because of time constraints. Some of you will be writing a country report about one that uses ISI. Some of this information may be useful to include in your report. Other sources you could consult are in the reference section of the library or you can ask a librarian for help. 1. What is Import Substitution Industrialization? (between 200-400 words) 2. Raul Prebisch was one of the prominent proponents of ISI, write a short biography of him (between 200-400 words) 3. Explain why Prebisch and others proposed ISI (up to 250 words). 4. Visit the site EconoMonitor and once there search for the article On Populism in Argentina (and other Latin American Countries) by Nicholas Magud published June 25th, 2008. Summarize it. 5. Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Mexico, and Bolivia among many countries followed both ISI and Economic populism. Visit the IMF site at www.imf.org and click on Data and Statistics, then click on World Economic Outlook Databases, select the October 2014 database,and select By Countries, next Latin America and the Caribbean. Find inflation in percent change for Argentina, since 1980 to date and graph the data in several sub-periods so it can show the different inflation rates better. In a couple paragraphs describe what you see. 6. Brazil, Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Argentina, and India followed ISI and different levels of Economic Populism, choose one of these five countries and explain when your selected country followed ISI and when it stopped following ISI? Why did your country stop using ISI? What were the consequences of ISI and Economic Populism in your country? (no less than 250 words and up to 700 words)

Assignment Scenario:

As a new marketing associate with Barclays Bank, you are tasked with writing a critical essay summarizing what transpired during the investigation conducted by the United States Department of Justice into the abuse of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) interest rate regulated by the British Banker’s Administration. This essay, if chosen by your new employer, will be the report presented to the Board of Directors.

Write a 2–3 page, (not including a title and references page), double spaced, critical essay responding to the checklist items. For assistance with your Assignment, please use your textbook and library research resources. The instructions for you to execute this task are as follows:

Directions for completing this Assignment:

1. Read the “Barclays Bank: Banking on Ethics” case study: case study is below..

2. Learn how to write a critical essay: I will make the changes if need be..

3. Use APA format and citation style, provide a title page and references, and do not forget to use in text citations with their accompanying references so as to avoid plagiarism.

4. In your critical essay that includes your thesis, arguments, support, and conclusion, respond to the following:

Checklist:

● Describe the level of ethical development the executives at Barclays demonstrated

when manipulating the LIBOR interest rates.

● Did Barclays Bank neglect social responsibility? What could they have done to be more socially responsible?

● What actions regarding Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) could Barclays have engaged in after the scandal broke to set things right and ensure that such an event would not happen again?

● Describe what level of morality would have been demonstrated if executives at Barclays asked themselves, “Even though manipulating the LIBOR will increase company profits, is it the right thing to do in the long run?”

● Explain the importance of ethics and social responsibility in marketing as a result of your case study analysis.

Case study

Chapter 3

On February 28, 2012, the United States Department of Justice announced a criminal investigation into abuse of the LIBOR, an important interest rate regulated by the British Bankers’ Administration. Four months later, London-based Barclays Bank was fined more than $440 million by United States and English financial regulatory agencies for knowingly manipulating the LIBOR to its own advantage. The political and economic uproar that followed the exposure of Barclays’ actions led to several resignations (including that of Barclays’ CEO Bob Diamond) and further criminal investigations. Former governor of New York Eliot Spitzer called the incident “the mega-scandal of mega-scandals,” while journalist Robert Scheer christened it “the crime of the century.” The LIBOR, short for “London Interbank Offered Rate,” is the interest rate banks pay when they borrow money from each other. To calculate this rate, up to 20 influential British banks report their own proposed bank-to-bank lending rates. The highest and lowest rates are trimmed off, and the remaining rates are averaged, creating the LIBOR. A low LIBOR often points to financial stability, while a high LIBOR indicates that banks lack confidence in each other’s economic health. What Barclays was fined for was proposing artificially low bank-to-bank rates to make itself appear more stable than it actually was. However, further investigations indicated that Barclays colluded with other banks—and perhaps even the British government—to impact the LIBOR itself. An unnaturally low LIBOR would suggest greater economic stability than actually existed, misleading investors and loan-seekers in a potentially volatile market, and thus creating profit for the banks involved in the collusion. The rate manipulation carried out by Barclays affects not only London banks and business executives, but also small businesses and individuals—perhaps even you yourself. Because it has historically been considered trustworthy and economically accurate, the LIBOR is used all around the world as an interest rate and financial instrument benchmark. Everything from currency values (including the United States dollar) to multimillion-dollar corporate debts to home mortgages to individual student loans depend on the LIBOR. While it may not seem like it, each of these is a product that is marketed and sold. As loans and exchanges of varying types are banks’ primary sources of profit, banks compete to exchange these products within a market. At the consumer level, consider how many car and credit card commercials you have seen advertising a low interest rate. Hundreds of trillions of dollars’ worth of these financial products have been sold based on the LIBOR—a rate that may not in fact accurately reflect the world’s shaky economic standing. Journalists and economic analysts have been quick to reject the ethicality of Barclays’ actions. As information about the LIBOR scandal broke, TIME contributor Christopher Matthews wrote, “[Barclays’ alleged collusion] speaks to the moral compass, or total lack thereof, of the world’s financial professionals...the public and the government no longer trust the industry to set its own standards for acceptable behavior.” In a piece for

The Nation, Robert Scheer said, “The modern-day robber barons pillage with a destructive abandon totally unfettered by law or conscience and on a scale that is almost impossible to comprehend.” Dennis Kelleher, president of nonprofit financial watchdog organization Better Markets, Inc. was perhaps most condemnatory of all: “What we probably need is to wipe out this entire generation of so-called banking leaders who apparently have no ethics or integrity.” While the total sum of the LIBOR scandal’s consequences are yet to be seen, Barclays’ actions may go down in history as a monumental failure in business ethics and corporate social responsibility.

Check the Course Announcements at the beginning of the week following the deadline for Part 1 to discover exactly what happened to the deer population on the Kaibab plateau. This information is essential for completion of Part 2.

The second part of your project is to take what you've learned about the Kaibab forest ecosystem and write an accurate description of the boom and bust of this deer population, using correct ecological language. Consider as many of the aspects of these events as you can. Be sure to consider the effects on the other species in the ecosystem as well.

Refer to your on-line materials and the appropriate sections of your textbook. Your discussion should include (but not be confined to) consideration of all of the following concepts: carrying capacity, predator/prey relationships, population cycling, resource partitioning, competitive exclusion, fundamental and realized niches, food chains, food webs and trophic pyramids.

Note that the purpose of this exercise is for you to demonstrate to me that you understand these important concepts of ecology by utilizing them accurately and appropriately in the description of the disaster in the Kaibab forest. Your essay must include both clear indications that you understand the meanings of these principles and clear indication that you understand how these principles can be used to describe what happened to the ecosystem on the Kaibab plateau.

information given of part one: On the north rim of the Grand Canyon, an area called the Kaibab plateau, there is a conifer forest called the Kaibab forest. The forest's trees include pine, fir and spruce. Shrubbery includes a variety of willows, raspberries, etc. A hundred years ago, this forest was a stable ecosystem, housing, among other species, a population of about four thousand mule deer.

These deer were hunted by local Native Americans, who used them for food and other materials. They were also hunted by predators like pumas, wolves and coyotes.

In 1906, the US made this region into a National Game Preserve. With the intent of protecting the deer, hunting was forbidden. Bounties were paid for killing the pumas, wolves and other large animals that preyed on the deer. By 1925, more than 6000 predators had been killed, virtually wiping out the ecosystem's large predators.

*Read the instructions* for Part 2, then consider this additional information about the Kaibab forest.
There are some hints in here to suggest the *minimum* range of the subjects you need to discuss to explain this; You will need to read the chapters and the course materials to understand the meanings of these concepts, and to be able to use them to explain the Kaibab disaster. There are other important concepts as well--so keep your eyes open as you read. It wouldn't hurt to go back and read the original description in Part 1, either. And you may find it necessary to do some quick browsing in areas of your book not directly related to ecology. (For instance, you might just want to do some looking into the nature and importance of the bark and twig ends on a tree.) Do not neglect the on-line essays which are provided for you in this Unit. What you should *not* do is Google the Kaibab, or look it up on a source like Wikipedia. This is not about what you can *discover* about the Kaibab forest.
Your grade will depend upon how completely you convince me you understand the concepts involved in this description. This is your test on ecology--your goal is to convince me that you understand the concepts and terminology of the subject, and can apply them to a real life situation.
Before we go on to the new information, there are a few things that came up as I was grading the Part 1 submissions which I think I should mention, just to keep you from straying in some incorrect directions.
First, remember that your concern is the fate of the Kaibab forest in the *immediate* sense--over tens of years, not thousands. There are no evolutionary issues here, at least in the short term (and that's your concern right now). So we won't be talking about adaptive radiation.
Also, keep your focus on the *Kaibab forest*, not on other ecosystems. Oh, and remember that the Kaibab is pretty isolated--emigration really isn't a reasonable alternative for the species living in this forest.
And finally, until we get to Part 3, the only human interaction we are considering is the initial decision to put bounties on those large predators, which led to their near-extinction in the area. You will be thinking a bit about human hunters trying to control the deer population toward the end, but the rest of the time you're just concerned with the natural processes going on in the ecosystem.
Okay, now on to the actual description of what happened in the Kaibab Forest as a result of killing almost all of the large predators. Remember, your task in Part 2 is going to be to describe and explain all of this using the concepts of ecology which you are learning in Unit 2 of the course.
*****
The primary, most immediate outcome of the removal of the predators from the ecosystem was that the deer population exploded, because the loss of the normal predator populations removed a primary source of population control. And the expanding deer population ate a *lot.* [Hint: explaining this requires discussion of population cycling, predator prey relationships and carrying capacities.]
As the deer population got larger and larger, their impact upon their favored food plants became extreme. They ate a much larger percentage of each year's plant populations, and they ate a larger portion of each individual plant. They also began to eat more from the plants which they didn't like so well--plants normally consumed by other herbivores in the ecosystem. In the winter, the starving deer ate about anything remotely resembling food, including twigs and bark from trees. As a result of the destruction of many of the twig ends of the trees, the spring tree growth was inhibited (why?). The stripping of the bark caused the death of some of the trees (why?). The extreme browsing on the herbaceous plants caused shifts in the plant population diversity, as the deer drove many of their favored plants into extinction within the ecosystem. [Hint: Explanation here will need to include discussion of resource partitioning, competitive exclusion, and realized vs. fundamental niches.]
All of this also impacted upon the rest of the animals in the ecosystem, since many of them depended upon the same kinds of food the deer ate, or depended upon the foods that the deer were eating because they could no longer get the food they favored. Then of course, the smaller predatory species (like foxes and owls) depended upon the health of those populations of small herbivores (like rabbits and mice). [Hint: sounds like food chains, food webs and trophic pyramids come into this part.]
After a couple of decades, the ecosystem was quite altered. The plant community was very different from what it had been before, and the deer herd, though not extinct, was composed of significantly smaller and weaker deer than the herd from the 1890s. (This was partially due to their straightened circumstances re. food, but also partially due to the absence of predators. Why would the removal of the natural predators cause this change in the general vigor of the deer in the herd (and why would the substitution of *human* hunting not exert the same positive influence)?)
Okay, the next phase of your assignment is to describe all the things going on in this ecosystem using the proper terminology that you should be learning from studying this unit of the course. Note that your use of terms like, for instance, "resource partitioning" needs to show that you understand not just what the concept means, but how it is reflected in this specific ecological disaster. Feel free to discuss this as much as you want to on your Discussion Board. Don't ignore the little questions tucked into the above description, and pay attention to those hints. Your response must demonstrate proper understanding of these concepts and how they are demonstrated by the disaster in the Kaibab forest.
This is the largest part of your exam project; your response should reflect the fact that this is a 50 point "essay" question. You are given a lot of organizational clues and hints about what issues you need to include in the information above. Make use of those things.