Corporate Social Responsibility: A Real Options Approach to the Challenge of Financial Sustainability

BackgroundIn contemporary complex societies, social values like ethics, corporate social responsibility, and being respectful with the environment, among others, are becoming social requirements. Corporations are expected to fulfill them and, according to empirical evidence, an overwhelming majority aspires to good social valuation. At the same time, the maximization of market share value in the long run continues to be the central corporate goal. Making environmental and social expenses compatible with value creation is a central challenge for corporations since it implies the financial sustainability of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).

Methods and Results

The value creation capacity of CSR projects, mainly through innovation, is widely acknowledged in economic literature and corporate practice. This fact arouses the need of having a quantitative framework capable of summarizing the value creation capacity of the variables involved in CSR projects. With this aim we build up a sensitivity analysis of real option ratios that studies and quantifies the value creation capacity of CSR projects connected with innovation. Ratio analysis has the advantage of being scale independent. Hence, it furnishes a homogeneous framework to express the interaction of value creation variables and, thus, supports strategic thinking quantitatively. Often, CSR expenses can be regarded as preliminary projects that create the opportunity to undertake a full future project. For them, we obtain the minimum expectations scenario that makes financially sustainable a preliminary project that can be interpreted as a call option. We propose a classification of CSR projects from the decision analysis perspective following a two-fold approach: Their relationship with value creation and their links with existing corporate activities. This classification of CSR projects aims at contributing to choose the best capital budgeting method to study the financial sustainability of the project and identifying those CSR projects that fulfill the required features to be studied from the real options perspective.     

Lactate and the Lactate-to-Pyruvate Molar Ratio Cannot Be Used as Independent Biomarkers for Monitoring Brain Energetic Metabolism: A Microdialysis Study in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injuries

Background

For decades, lactate has been considered an excellent biomarker for oxygen limitation and therefore of organ ischemia. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the frequency of increased brain lactate levels and the LP ratio (LPR) in a cohort of patients with severe or moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI) subjected to brain microdialysis monitoring to analyze the agreement between these two biomarkers and to indicate brain energy metabolism dysfunction.

Methods

Forty-six patients with an admission Glasgow coma scale score of ≤13 after resuscitation admitted to a dedicated 10-bed Neurotraumatology Intensive Care Unit were included, and 5305 verified samples of good microdialysis data were analyzed.

Results

Lactate levels were above 2.5 mmol/L in 56.9% of the samples. The relationships between lactate and the LPR could not be adequately modeled by any linear or non-linear model. Neither Cohen’s kappa nor Gwet’s statistic showed an acceptable agreement between both biomarkers to classify the samples in regard to normal or abnormal metabolism. The dataset was divided into four patterns defined by the lactate concentrations and the LPR. A potential interpretation for these patterns is suggested and discussed. Pattern 4 (low pyruvate levels) was found in 10.7% of the samples and was characterized by a significantly low concentration of brain glucose compared with the other groups.

Conclusions

Our study shows that metabolic abnormalities are frequent in the macroscopically normal brain in patients with traumatic brain injuries and a very poor agreement between lactate and the LPR when classifying metabolism. The concentration of lactate in the dialysates must be interpreted while taking into consideration the LPR to distinguish between anaerobic metabolism and aerobic hyperglycolysis.