Continuing the discussion of Enbridge Pipeline, a question comes to me – to what extend, geographically, does the concept of shared value apply?

Shared value is defined as policies that enhance the competitiveness of the company while advancing the economical and social conditions in the community in which it operates. In the case of Enbridge Pipeline, it has stated that this project will create direct construction employment of up to 1500 jobs and that Alberta will get substantial revenue. However, economics also suggested that the Enbridge Pipeline would result in an inflationary price of oil, thereby posing serious threats to Canada’s economic wellbeing as a whole. So the question is, how do we define a community in which the Enbridge project operates? If we think of community just as Alberta, implementing Enbridge Pipeline project is viable because of the boost in the local economy from the direct construction employment of 1500 jobs. However, in a much broader sense, Canada’s economic wellbeing is put into threats if provinces act solely on their own initiatives. So the central conflict lies at the different perspectives we choose to look at issues and a mutual agreement is not guaranteed even when people are trying to reach the same value principle.

Reference:

http://www.northerngateway.ca/assets/pdf/Project%20Brochure/ENB_NGP_BrochureOct26.pdf