Introduction
Ethical behavior is rightfully regarded as the building block of a productive and well functioning society. For this reason, ethical conducts are emphasized on in personal as well as public life. Businesses are encouraged to act ethically and when they fail to do this, criticism and even public uproar may follow. In most cases, ethical conduct also includes showing some measure of social responsibility which implies engaging in actions that are beneficial to the entire community. In many cases, ethical issues are not clearly cut out, and one needs to review a case critically so as to make a decision that can be considered ethical.
A significant ethical case that has arisen in Australia is with regard to Barangaroo South Development. This multi-billion project has faced allegations of unethical practice which has led to the project being stalled. A particularly contentious issue in the Barangaroo development is the approval of a new hotel building which is to be built on a pier jutting into the harbor The project’s developer, Lend Lease, affirms its commitment to ethical conduct by stating that “Lend Lease is committed to maintaining high ethical standards, excellence, integrity and respect in all of our business relationships” (Lend Lease 2011, p. 19). Despite this assertion by the developers, a lot of skepticism has been expressed concerning the ethical standing and social responsibility of the Barangaroo project. This paper will set out to access the ethical standing of the Barangaroo South Development Project. An analysis of whether the project is socially responsible will also be made.
Initial Perspective
The Barangaroo South Development Project is a $6 billion contract for the commercial development of Barangaroo given to Lend Lease in February 2010. The contract was formally signed by Premier Kristina Keneally demonstrating the importance of the project for New South Wales. The contract guarantees the delivery of commercial as well as public benefits since Barangaroo will be a mix of commercial development, residential areas and parkland. The project is expected to create more than 3000 jobs in the construction industry during its 10 year implementation phase (NSW Government 2010).
When the project is completed, 20,000 workers are expected to live in Barangaroo which will have been elevated to the level of “financial hub”. The Barangaroo South Development project has therefore been given significant attention by many members of the society. This is because the project is the first of its kind in Australia and promises to bring about huge benefits to the country including increased employment opportunities and transforming Sydney into a global financial hub (Asia Pulse 2010b). The project will also be a model that, if it is successful, will be followed by other cities throughout the world.
A number of key ethical and social responsibility issues have come up. The first key issue that has arisen is the awarding of the development contract to a single developer. Clark (2010) suggests that it was hugely irresponsible for the government to hand over the development of such an enormous parcel of land to a single developer no matter the particular developer’s proficiency. Clark (2011) suggests that this action was not fair since it afforded Lend Lease too much power and control over a lucrative deal. However, the awarding of this contract was done in a transparent manner and companies that were interested in the project gave their bids for consideration. Lend Lease’s bid was deemed as the best and for this reason, the government of New South Wales awarded the Barangaroo project to this company.
Environmental concerns have also been raised by various groups. To begin with, Barangaroo South lies on a geographical area that was in the past home to a number of industries that left behind below-ground contamination. This means that Barangaroo has some contaminated areas, and there is fear that contaminants will be released into the environment during the development phase of the project. These fears are not unfounded since the former Millers Point Gasworks left behind underground structures including tanks following its demolition in the early 1920s (Barangaroo Remediation Fact Sheet 2011). Another environmental issue is the proposed 5star hotel which is proposed to be built on a pier jutting into the harbor. This location will result in irreparable damages to the marine life as well as contamination during the land reclamation process.
Conflicts of interest have also arisen, especially with regard to criticism of the project. Members of the governing party have a political motivation to ensure that the project proceeds unabated. Asia Pulse (2010a) reports that the issue of the five-star hotel, which is styled to become Sydney’s new landmark building, had escalated to the point when NSW Premier Kristina Keneally had to step personally in and deal with the issue.
Premier Keneally took control of Barangaroo’s development saying that the project was too important to be derailed by council members. On the other hand, professionals in the building industry are wary of criticizing the project since it may negatively affect them in future. Clark (2010) points out that abuse has been meted out to architects who have given criticism to the project leading to great silence by architects over the issue. The managers in the Barangaroo project are therefore accused of intimidating architects who are critical of the project. The architects have to tow the line or risk a losing a chance of future work with the project.
The issues that touch Barangaroo Development are ethically complex because they affect various stakeholders in differing ways. Land Lease also sees the construction of a 6 star landmark hotel as being critical to the success of the project, and the director of Sydney Business Chamber, Patricia Forsythe asserts that “there is no doubt as well that to put Barangaroo on the map, it needs to have iconic development” (AAP 2011b). The public, on the other hand, sees the hotel as an unnecessary cause of the destruction of the harbor.
Uncertainties and Ambiguities
A key aspect with ethical issues is that there is no standardized approach to dealing with them since these issues hail from a unique set of legal, political and social backgrounds (Johnston 2009). There is therefore no “universal” way of resolving ethical problems, and each case has to be dealt with on its own merits. This is the case with the Barangaroo issue where there exist a number of uncertainties as well as ambiguous issues. To begin with, the environmental impact of constructing the new hotel in the harbor is not fully known. Opponents of the hotel construction state that the sand extraction and construction work which will be necessary for land reclamation will cause disturbance that will frighten away marine life. The OSPAR Commission (2008) reveals that while it is true that disturbance may frighten off shy species from the area in the immediate vicinity of the disturbance, the effect is temporary and it can be expected that recovery will occur in two to four years.
The proposed hotel is to be built on reclaimed land in the Sydney harbor. Land reclamation is defined as “the gain of land from the sea or coastal wetlands for agricultural purposes, industrial use and harbor expansions” (OSPAR Commission 2008, p.8). The process of reclaiming land in the ocean has a number of significant negative effects on the environment. Due to pressure concerning the development of the hotel, a critical review of the project was commissioned and a draft of recommendations made on the issue. One of the recommendations made was that Land Lease moved the hotel from the harbor onto land so as to protect the marine environment (AAP 2011a).
This decision was backed by the OSPAR Commission (2008, p. 1) which declared that land reclamation activities that took place along the coast resulted in the permanent loss of marine habitats where land was reclaimed from the sea. Land reclamation also has an effect on local ground water system since the water tables rise following reclamation. Even so, OSPAR Commission (2008) reported that land reclamation had the unintended advantage of increasing the fresh water resources since the reclaimed land acted as an additional aquifer.
There is also ambiguity regarding Lend Lease’s alleged dedication to environmental conservation. A key component of Barangaroo project is sustainability, and the project boasts of setting world standards in climate conservation. The land reclaiming efforts will require the use of heavy equipment. The fuel consumption by these machines will affect air quality by increasing the concentrations of Nitrous Oxide and Sulphur Oxide (OSPAR Commission 2008). As such, the construction of the hotel will result adversely and affect the climate.
Following the successful acquisition of the Barangaroo project by Lend Lease, the developers were required to make significant changes so as to satisfy key public aspects of the plan. In response to this, key changes were made by Lend Lease so as to comply with the public comment. These changes included reducing the size of the pier from the originally proposed 150 meters to 90 meters and also reducing the height of the hotel from 213m to 170m. In line with its agreement with the NSW government, Lend Lease submitted its planning applications to the BDA and made amends to satisfy the Development Authority (Chong 2010).
These key changes were welcomed by the government which approved the new concept plan. The processes that were used to approve the hotel over the harbor were consistent with the laws of New South Wales government and Lend Lease therefore acted in a legitimate manner. However, Potocan and Mulej (2007) warn that just because an action is legal does not mean it is ethical or even socially responsible.
There is a doubt that the public is looking forward to enjoying the various benefits that will result from the Barangaroo project. However, these benefits appear to be intricately tied to the construction of the controversial hotel. According to the business community, the hotel must be developed in order for the society to achieve maximum gains from the project (AAP 2011b).
The Options
There are a number of significant stakeholders in Barangaroo South Development Project whose interests must be looked into. These stakeholders will be affected by the decision arrived at concerning the 5 Star hotel. Some of these stakeholders have differing perspectives on the situation and their desirable outcomes differ. These stakeholders are as follows:
The New South Wales Government
Arguably, the greatest stakeholder is the NSW Government which issued the contract for the project to Lend Lease. For the NSW Government, getting the Barangaroo project up and running are both a matter of commercial interest as well as national prestige (NSW Government 2010).
There is therefore a great desire by the government to see the Barangaroo project implemented, and this has resulted in a conflict of interest since the government has demonstrated its willingness to put up with unethical conduct due to its vested interest in the project. Key political figures such as Lord Rogers have expressed their frustration over delays in the implementing of the project since it is a grand investment for Sydney and the potential returns are enormous. This pressure for progress may result in ethical conduct and social responsibility being sidelined. While the government has been involved in most of the key developments of the project, it was not consulted on the issue of the hotel. Wilkinson (2011) stated that the government was not consulted on the location of the hotel in the harbor.
Investors
The Barangaroo project has attracted a wide variety of investors who are all happy to be involved in this exciting opportunity. It is universally recognized that the aim of all the business ventures is to make profits, so it is reasonably assumed that the profits are within limits of the investments made (Jenster & Hussey 2001). Many investors have made substantial investments in the Barangaroo project and their ability to reap benefits hinges on the success of the project. From the onset, the company received significant interest from investors who wished to be a part of the project.
These investors were attracted by the opportunities that the Barangaroo project presented for the city. The investors cannot be accused of greed which is defined by Weitzner and Darroch (2009, p.9) as “occurring in situations where an individual seeks an economic return of greater value than what her input should reasonably earn and in so doing imposes costs upon others”. This is because the investors in Barangaroo do not seek to make unreasonable profits from the venture and the hotel is simply seen as an entity that will increase the probability of success of the project.
The NSW Business Community
The business community in Sydney is another major stakeholder to the project. This group is bound to benefit significantly from the Barangaroo redevelopment plans which will rejuvenate the western shoreline of Sydney into a global financial hub (Asia Pulse 2010c). AAP (2011a) reported that business groups had expressed enthusiasm at the approval of the Barangaroo project by the government, but continued to assert that the luxury hotel on Sydney Harbor was necessary. The Director of Sydney Business Chamber declared that Barangaroo needed an iconic development if it was going to establish itself as a global hub (AAP 2011b).
The tourism industry is a major business branch that will be a key beneficiary of the Barangaroo project. This sector will benefit since the project will transform Sydney into a financial hub and international meetings and conferences will be held in the redeveloped area. The luxury hotel will provide the necessary accommodation for the high profile business people and guests who will come to Barangaroo. While opponents of the hotel state that it is superfluous, the business community declares that Sydney is almost full in terms of hotel occupancy and therefore in need of additional luxury hotels (AAP 2011a). This assertion is backed up by the fact that there has not been Five Star hotel constructed in Sydney over the last decade.
The Public
The inhabitants of Sydney are also major stakeholders in the Barangaroo development project. The project will result in the creation of more employment opportunities which will benefit the people as well as residential areas. The project will also include amenities such as a public park and a cultural center. As it is, the public feels that its interests have been given little consideration (Fishkin & Laslett 2003). Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore resigned from the Barangaroo Delivery Authority in 2010 in protest of what he deemed as “railroading” of public interests on the project (Asia Pulse 2010b).
AAP (2011a) reports that the community is angry over the development of Barangaroo for reasons including the skyscrapers which would block out too much sunlight for more modest building and the proposed hotel whose construction would lead to a destruction of marine life. There is also concern by the public that the Barangaroo project has had so many drastic changes since the initial concept plan was approved and as it currently stands, the project is invalid. For example, the contentious hotel was not present in the concept plan approved by the government.
However, the public was not entirely left out of the project since from the very onset; the public was involved in the development plans of Barangaroo South. BDA (2010) states that the developers of the project, Land Lease, revised their plans and incorporated key elements as a result of feedback that was obtained from the public.
The Choices
There is agreement among the various stakeholders that the Barangaroo project is of huge significance to the city and its success should therefore be assured. Considering this huge significance of the project for Sydney, the ethical soundness and social responsibility of the development is desirable. The development of the first commercial buildings was expected to commence early last year. This did not take place due to the many controversies that surround the project. As such, the public and investors alike are still a long way from enjoying the vast benefits that the project promises to bring to Sydney.
Ethical theories which are the criteria used to make judgment as to the fairness or unfairness of actions can be used to access the Barangaroo issue illustrated herein (Chryssides & Kaler 1993). The Social Contract theory is one of the theories which can be applied on this situation. According to this theory, the actions carried out by a party are morally permissible if they increase the benefits of both individual as well as the society at large (Frederick 2002). The ideas behind the construction of the iconic luxury hotel in Barangaroo are beneficial to most of the stakeholders. The hotel will result in a boost in the tourism industry in Sydney. It will also increase the likelihood of Barangaroo being the preferred venue for high profile international meetings.
The stakeholder theory which states that managers should make decisions which take into account interests of all the stakeholders in the firm can also be applied to this issue. According to this theory, the financial investors are not the only legitimate claimholders and as such, the needs of other entities such as the community should be taken into consideration (Solo 2000). By applying this theory, it can be seen that the ethical action would be for Lend lease to
Deontological ethics place emphasis on the assumed duty. This implies that duty is the basis of all moral actions regardless of the consequences. By applying this theory, it can be seen that the developers do not have to relocate the hotel. This is because Lend Lease Company has fulfilled its duties to the Government which is the primary contractors. The contract entered into between the government and the developer gave the developer the rights to “build commercial, residential, retail, hotel floor space and public domain within the southern part of the precinct” (NSW Government 2010). Legally, the developer reserves the right to dictate the location of the hotel without necessarily involving the government. Lend Lease cannot be forced to relocate the hotel and Smith (2011) reports that the government can only hope to urge that the developers move the hotel as a sign of goodwill.
A major concern by the public is the issue of contamination since some parts of Barangaroo contain hazardous material. While it is true that Barangaroo lies on a contaminated site, past projects have been successfully completed on contaminated sites. The Barangaroo Remediation Fact Sheet (2011) reports that the Sydney Olympic Park lies on what was once an uncontrolled land fill which for many years caused wide-spread contamination. However, as a result of massive remediation processes, the site was rehabilitated and is now a world-renowned parkland. The Barangaroo Delivery Authority assures the public that the remediation process will not cost the taxpayer any money. Instead, the developer of Barangaroo South will cover the expenses for these tasks. This actions demonstrate that the Barangaroo project is both environmental conscious and unwilling to impose any unnecessary additional responsibility to the public.
Community groups are calling for a complete overhaul of the project and a new development application. This is a drastic call considering the amount of time and financial resources that have already gone into the Barangaroo project. As of March this year, the Barangaroo process has been in motion for 6 years (ABC News 2011a). Planning Minister, Brad Hazzard, declared that Barangaroo was a once-in-a-generation project and the government would therefore not welcome any major delays to its implementation (The Environmental Guys 2011). This view by the government is valid since if the government were to call for new development applications, it would incur significant financial loses as well as loss faith with developers in the future. Wilkinson (2011) reported that there were already demands by Lend Lease for compensation due to the delays that had been experienced this far.
The government is charged with creating an environment that forces business entities to act ethically and care about their responsibility to the society. In the Barangaroo case, government involvement may not be enough to force the developer to act in an ethical and socially responsible manner. Crane and Matten (2007) go on to assert that government involvement is not effect since the effectiveness of business ethics depends on the willingness and morality of the business people.
As it currently stands, Lend Lease is prepared to negotiate a new location of the 5 star hotel with the government. This is an act of good faith by the developers since they are legally entitled to place the hotel at any location that they want within the development area (Kahane 2010). The move by Lend Lease to negotiate on an alternative site for the hotel was a demonstration of goodwill which will contribute to the mending of relations between the developers and the community.
The developers also have an extensive plan to deal with waste in Barangaroo. The problem of waste has become significant in recent decades due to the industrial growth of many nations as well as the rise in living standards which has led to more waste being produced. Improper waste management negatively impacts on the quality of life of people. Dealing effectively with waste on the other hand benefits people as well as the environment.
In line with its social responsibility, the project also aims to make use of renewable sources of energy. According to the Barangaroo Delivery Authority (2010), Barangaroo will be carbon neutral which means that it will be generating more renewable energy than it uses. As it is, Barangaroo is a signatory to the “Climate Clinton Initiative’s Climate Positive Development Program”. BDA (2010, p.25) goes on to articulate that Barangaroo is a member of the UN Global Compact which is “the largest corporate social responsibility network globally”.
The Impact and Potential Support
Various stakeholders involved in the Barangaroo project have differing interests and some of these interests are at loggerheads. The hotel which is at the center of the controversy is by the business community as critical to the rejuvenation efforts of the Barangaroo project. On the other hand, the public is concerned that this hotel will compromise marine life. At the beginning, Lend Lease was firm about its decision to have the hotel in the Harbor area. An independent review on the planning process undertaken by Lend Lease found that there were no breaches of contract by the company. Even so, there was little transparency in the handling of the issue.
Transparency is a necessary component for business conducts to be deemed as ethical. The developer Lend Lease failed to exhibit this virtue when they came up with the location for the hotel. Butson (2011) goes on to declare that the proposed luxury hotel amounted to an “ambush” to the government by the developers. This is because the proposed hotel which has resulted in so much controversy was not part of the original plans that Lend Lease forwarded when bidding for the project. This hotel was included in the August 2010 amendments of the plan that Lend Lease made.
The integrity of the government has been questioned following the Barangaroo issue. The government has particularly being accused of focusing on the immediate interests (such as the commercial gains and revenue from Lend Lease) at the expense of future impacts of the project to Sydney. Following the criticism over the location of the luxury hotel, the government did not take a firm stance against the project developer. Instead, the government went so far as to defend Lend Lease’s move to locate the hotel at the harbor by saying that the move was “consistent with good commercial practice and probity guidelines” (Smith 2011). There is considerable pressure for the project to be pushed through since it is seen as a major opportunity for the city. Even so, these pressures should not result to ethical standards by the developers being lowered or social responsibility neglected.
While all projects are subject to state environmental planning laws, the Barangaroo development had been exempted from this by the Labor planning minister. This issue raised public uproar against the government which was seen to be complacent as far as the project was concerned. As a result of the negative reaction, the government has reaffirmed that Lend Lease will be obligated to comply with environmental planning laws and in particular with regard to the remediation action plan (The Environmental Guys 2011). The government has also taken action following community anger and a critical review of the hotel project was made. Following this review, recommendations that the hotel be located to another site have been made.
Lend Lease as a company is able to acquire huge deals due to its reputation as an effective developer. For the sake of future projects, it is important for Lend Lease to present itself as an organization that is socially responsible and lets ethical values dictate its decision making (Ledingham & Bruning 2000). In the Barangaroo Project, Lend Lease has managed to conduct itself in a responsible and fair manner in line with the company’s policy that “We will conduct ourselves honestly, responsibly and fairly at all times and in full compliance with the law” (Lend Lease 2011, p. 19).
It is theorized by Potocan and Mulej (2007, p.134) that ethical conduct and social responsibility result in businesses co-existing with each other and with the society in an environment of trust. This interdependence ensures future economic prosperity as well as sustainability which are desirable for the society. Lend Lease appears to be ready to work together with the relevant stakeholders so as to foster an environment of trust and goodwill.
Implications and Lessons Learnt
Unethical conduct or even perceived unethical conducts result in loses for all stakeholders involved in a project. The controversies surrounding the hotel have led to a delay in the commencement of construction work which was supposed to begin in mid 2010. These delays are unacceptable considering the huge investments made by various stockholders into Barangaroo.
The government should not place too much focus on the commercial aspects of a project and overlook all other considerations such as environmental impact. The collective welfare of the society should be the major determinant of the decision made by an organization. The government concedes that while Barangaroo is an important project for the future of NSW, the integrity of the process must be unquestionable (Johns 1996). With these undertones, the government has set out to ensure transparency in the implementation of the project. Lend Lease responded appropriately in this case by agreeing to enter into dialogue with various parties so as to reach a compromise on the location of the hotel.
One reason for the ethical and social responsibility issues in Barangaroo was the lack of cooperation between the various stakeholders involved in the project. Due to this, mistrust developed among the parties and accusations followed. All these could have been avoided if the relevant stakeholders had worked together from the beginning (Coelho, McClure & Spry 2003). Wilkinson (2011) suggested that a consultative and collaborative approach in the project was the only way through which great outcomes could be achieved. The public perception towards a company is pivotal to the growth and development of the company. The agreement by Lend Lease to enter into negotiations with the government over the hotel issue even when it did not have to is therefore a prudent action by the company.
Another lesson that can be learnt from the Barangaroo Project is that the government should let the legal process run its cause and avoid derailing the process. The move by Tony Kelly to exempt Barangaroo from planning laws on contamination even as the matter was still in court was viewed by the public as an abuse of the court process (ABC News 2011b). If the government hopes to be seen as fair, it should allow fair assessment and let the court processes run.
ABC News (2011a) documents that the reason why the community concern over the Barangaroo project was high is because of the constant changing of ground rules by the developers. These changes brought about mistrust since the changes were done without consulting the public or even bothering to explain them. Future projects should therefore endeavor to stick to their original plans and in cases where changes are made, all the relevant stakeholders should be notified and involved as much as possible. The decision by Lend Lease to negotiate a new location for the hotel has appeased the community who consider this a major victory. The government, on the other hand, has been able to demonstrate that it has the public interests at heart and is willing to ensure that the future of NSW is preserved.
Professionals have an obligation to look at the public good even when it is in conflict with their own professional self-interest (Miner 2007). In the Barangaroo case, architectures have given their own self-interest priority and failed to criticize Lend Lease even when the actions of the company have deviated from good practice. Clark (2011) states that the architects should endeavor to act in a morally right manner and consider the interest of the community at all times.
Summary
This paper set out to analyze the ethicalness and social responsibility of Lend Lease in the Barangaroo project. In particular, the issue concerning the building of a 5star hotel in the Sydney harbor area has been analyzed. This paper has shown that the proposal for Barangaroo was subject to the public and formal planning process and that the developers made some key changes to the initial plan so as to address key public concerns. Without a doubt, the commercial and political imperatives of the project are being given more consideration than public concerns. Even so, most of the commercial interests have been seen to take into account key public concerns such as sustainability, climate control, and increased employment.
Applying a number of ethical theories such as utilitarianism, social contract and stakeholder theory has demonstrated that the Barangaroo project is being guided by ethical and socially responsible ideals. From these theories, it has been seen that it is legally justifiable for Lend Lease to proceed with the luxury hotel plans. Majority of the stakeholders (the government, business community and investors) would benefit from this action. Even so, this proposed building of a luxury hotel into the water front is socially irresponsible since it would lead to a destruction of marine life. The action would also foster mistrust and alienate the developers from the public. For this reason, Lend Lease is willing to negotiate and change the location so as to suit the interest of other stakeholders.
For all the accusations leveled against Barangaroo South Development, the project has exhibited remarkable ethical conduct and social responsibility. From the discussions presented in this paper, it has been demonstrated that to a large extent, the Barangaroo project is being handled in an ethical manner and the social responsibility of the development is unquestionable.
Unethical conduct results in loss and damage for people who are involved in the issue. From the case discussed herein, it is evident that the future welfare of the society suffers if ethical and socially responsible conduct is ignored. As such a number of lessons that can be learnt from the Barangaroo project have been highlighted. In future, the company should ensure that it involves all the relevant stakeholders when coming up with monumental decisions that will affect them.
References
AAP 2011a, Government steps in on Barangaroo remediation, The Sydney Morning Herald. Web.
AAP 2011b, Barangaroo harbour hotel critical for Sydney: Businesses, The Sydney Morning Herald. Web.
ABC News , 2011a, NSW Parliament closure ‘allows Barangaroo law change‘. Web.
ABC News, 2011b, Barangaroo law change ‘morally corrupt’. Web.
Asia Pulse 2010a, Opposition to Sydney’s Barangaroo Project Mounts, Asia Pulse Pty Ltd. Web.
Asia Pulse 2010b, Briefing – Asia real estate, Asia Pulse Pty Ltd, Rhodes. Web.
Asia Pulse 2010c, Business groups pledge support for Sydney’s Barangaroo development, Asia Pulse Pty Ltd, Rhodes. Web.
Barangaroo Delivery Authority (BDA) 2010, Annual Report, NSW Government, Sydney. Web.
Barangaroo Remediation Fact Sheet 2011, Remediation of Barangaroo – the facts. Web.
Chong, F 2010, Lend Lease signs Barangaroo contract: Sydney’s harbour foreshore, The Australian. Web.
Chryssides, DG & Kaler, HJ 1993, An Introduction to Business Ethics, Cengage Learning EMEA, Michigan. Web.
Clark, J 2010, Architecture, ethics and the city, Architecture Australia. Web.
Coelho, RP, McClure, EJ & Spry, AJ 2003, The Social Responsibility of Corporate Management: A Classical Critique, American Journal of Business, Vol.18. No. 1. Web.
Crane, A & Matten, D 2007, Business ethics: managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization, Oxford University Press., Oxford. Web.
Fishkin, JS & Laslett, P 2003, Debating Deliberative Democracy Philosophy, Politics and Society, Wiley-Blackwell, NY. Web.
Frederick, RA 2002, Companion to Business Ethics, Wiley-Blackwell, Boston. Web.
Jenster, P & Hussey, D 2001, Company Analysis: Determining Strategic Capability, Wiley, New Jersey. Web.
Johns, G 1996, Organizational Behavior: Understanding and Managing Life at Work, Harper Collins, NY. Web.
Johnston, G 2009, An Introduction to Ethics, for Training Colleges, BiblioBazaar, NY. Web.
Kahane, JD 2010, Deliberative Democracy in Practice, UBC Press, Canberra. Web.
Ledingham, JA & Bruning, DS 2000, Public relations as relationship management: a relational approach to the study and practice of public relations, Taylor & Francis, NY. Web.
Miner, JB 2007, Organizational Behavior, M.E. Sharpe, Texas. Web.
NSW Government 2010, Green Light for $6 Billion Barangaroo Contract. Web.
OSPAR Commission 2008, Assessment of the environmental impact of land reclamation. Web.
Potocan, V & Mulej, M 2007, Ethics of a Sustained Enterprise and the Need for it, Springer Science, NY. Web.
Smith, A 2011, No room for hotel over the harbour in Barangaroo recommendations.Web.
Solo, A 2000, Economic Organizations and Social System, University of Michigan Press, Michigan. Web.
The Environmental Guys 2011, New South Wales, Australia: Govt steps in on Barangaroo remediation. Web.
Weitzner, D & Darroch, J 2009, Why Moral Failures Precede Financial Crises, Critical Perspectives, International Business, 5 (2), 6-13. Web.
Wilkinson, J 2011, Luxury hotel in limbo as Barangaroo gets green light. Web.