This reversal is completely contradictory to the University’s purported goals. Justifying this as a way to earn research funding for climate change and environmental science research is such a flimsy and insulting argument — these companies are not incentivized to actually provide the sustained infusion of resources that if successful would be misaligned with their aims. Moreover, companies that once had “corporate responsibility” portfolios no longer find these in vogue, and have cut these under current political pressures. These too are dwindling avenues.
I’m disappointed and also frustrated by the fact that so much effort has been spent to ensure that Princeton could be an example of this movement toward aligning its principles with its portfolio. Now it’s an example of buckling when it actually might mean something to be a leader of change.
This reversal is completely contradictory to the University’s purported goals. Justifying this as a way to earn research funding for climate change and environmental science research is such a flimsy and insulting argument — these companies are not incentivized to actually provide the sustained infusion of resources that if successful would be misaligned with their aims. Moreover, companies that once had “corporate responsibility” portfolios no longer find these in vogue, and have cut these under current political pressures. These too are dwindling avenues.
I’m disappointed and also frustrated by the fact that so much effort has been spent to ensure that Princeton could be an example of this movement toward aligning its principles with its portfolio. Now it’s an example of buckling when it actually might mean something to be a leader of change.