Politics Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In Is the United Nations Useless? Politics Share Hyunbin Jo 2023/02/05 Works Cited > News 8 02/05/2023 On the 24th of October, 1945, in San Francisco, California, a new international organization was formed to replace the incompetent and weak League of Nations that had formed 25 years prior. This organization would be known as the United Nations, and it primarily became the responsible and competent international organization the world needed after two world wars. Or so it seems. Though the UN is indeed more competent than its predecessor, there are still questions left unanswered:ill it be the just arbitrator of the world, or be nothing more than a weak bystander, just like what its predecessor was reduced to? The birth of the United Nations has dramatically changed international politics and diplomacy. For one, regardless of the wealth, size, or how populated a country is, all member states of the organization get an equal vote and get represented equally in the General Assembly. Which changes, at least nominally, the situation when world powers dominated international politics according to their wishes. Furthermore, some of the resolutions it passes are now legally binding, and enforceable to all its member states, which is a massive progress from the weak days of the League of Nations. However, if we uncover the grim truth, it does not look too ideal. Although it states that all member states have an equal say on all matters, in reality, it is the few wealthy and powerful member states that dominate the General Assembly. With their wealth and power, world powers like America, China, and Russia influence, sway, and lobby other member-states for support. Support that they are able to get almost all the time. Which brings a lot of questions to its supposed “equality”. Secondly, although the UN looks better than the League of Nations in that it can legally bind some of its resolutions, again, the truth is grim. Of all the resolutions, the resolutions from one certain branch, the UN Security Council, is legally binding. Thus, out of the six main organs, and many other sub-branches of the UN, only a resolution from only one of them will be guaranteed full implementation from (most of) the international community. What's worse is how the Security Council is organized. The UN Security Council is organized into five permanent member states; America, China, The Russian Federation, The United Kingdom, and France. These five permanent member states, along with the ten non-permanent ten member states that serve for two year terms make up the security council. It is also worth noting that these five permanent member states also have the right to veto any action proposed to the council. These five countries, all very wealthy and influential both inside and outside the UN, get to practically “rule over” the UN's most powerful branch, while simultaneously also influencing many of the General Assembly as well. Which turns the UN to a mere stage, where these five countries, and other powerful countries compete one another for the complete dominance of this “Oligarchy” from the others. While the ideals of the UN lie forgotten for political conflicts and squabbles. For all its ideals and visions, the UN is practically an oligarchy for the dominant powers of the world. The UN is the most well-known international organization around the world, and from 1945, it has indeed done many things that did benefit the international community. From its humanitarian health efforts from the WHO, to the humanitarian work done by UNICEF, and several of its peacebuilding efforts that have actually succeeded, the UN isn't “completely useless”, like some of its extreme critics say about it. However, the UN`s dependency on world powers, and the control these powers have over the said organization may bring it to its downfall to incompetency. As the world powers again begin to take sides, and slowly ready themselves for another potential conflict like the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War, the UN must tread carefully, otherwise, their future does not look too bright. Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Politics Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” Robinson About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Weekdays, Month Day, Year 00 °c Log In Monthly Edition Should You Boycott Starbucks? A Look into the BDS Movement Monthly Edition 3/03/2024 Share Dowoon(Bill) Lee, Jiwoo(Jade) Kim, Kiki Adams In October of 2023, the war between Palestine and Israel rose again. This time, Israel officially started the war by fighting back Hamas's attack. Both sides allege that the war criminal is the opposing side. Israel argues that Hamas, the terrorist group located in Gaza, Palestine, had already committed hundreds of crimes against women and children. Thousands of palestine citizens, on the other side, allege that Israel inflicts similar harm due to the ongoing war. To support their own rights, people started to actively join the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. Its aim is to end international support for Israel's oppression of Palestinians and pressure Israel to comply with international law. In order to achieve their goal, they picked boycott as one of the methods. If a company has supported Israel either directly or indirectly, it became the target of the BDS movement regardless of how global the firms were. For instance, according to an Oct. 22 X post, McDonald’s Israel has given 100,000 free meals to security and rescue forces worth 5 million shekels ($1.3 million). As a result, it became the target of the BDS movement. Similarly, Startbucks is going through a similar economic impact due to BDS movement’s accusations. At this point, the question arises: What has been the economical impact of such boycotting, and is this justified? The answer to this question is that might be yes, might be no. In the short term, such companies are suffering economic impact. Some have even terminated a contract. Yet, economists suggest that the impacts of such boycotting often last too short against very economically resilient firms. So far, BDS movements have set high expectations on people who advocate Palestine by actually decreasing the net profit. As starbuck is a world-wide company that almost everyone knows, some actually started to believe that the movement is effective. According to Anson Freick, the co-founder of Strive Asset Management, this can be true for the first two or three months. Yet, what he had realized is that those movements and impacts usually don’t last longer than that. If the movement can’t last for longer than three months, large companies, which are very resilient to such economical damage, would easily recover. Therefore, while boycotting companies’ products might be good to show to society what the BDS movement is, it would be hard to show a great decrease in the selling trend of the global iconic company for long term. On the other hand, there are companies that made different choices compared with Starbucks. One of the exemplar brands is Ben & Jerry’s which is the ice cream maker. This January, this brand called a “permanent and immediate ceasefire” in Gaza. What they have claimed was that this is not related to the Gaza war. However the society is being skeptical about their speaking of the Gaza war and their Ceasefire. Puma also made a different choice. Puma was the supporting brand of the Israel Football Association. Last December, however, they announced that they would not be renewing the sponsorship of Israel Football Association. This would be reasonable to see that this has high relation with the BDS movement and the brand. While many boycotting movements are short-lived, it is still plausible that BDS lasts longer, resulting in more and various economical impacts. In a situation where global franchise firms are exiled from the country due to a boycott, the banishment would do more goods for the local economy than it harms the firm. In the perspective of an international firm, they would still be able to gain profit and rehabilitate through investments in other countries. In the perspective of citizens who now don't have large franchises in the region, banishment would mean new chances for local business expansion. Currently, the large firms like Starbucks and Mcdonalds are almost dominating the nation’s food market. Even though the local restaurants and cafes were protected by law, the expansion that they could reach was very limited. Therefore, absence of monopoly-like firms can result in various positive economical impacts. The increased and flourishing local firms can increase competition, create jobs, diversify the economy, and retain the profit. Also these impacts are viewed positively by most of the economists. As a result, the BDS movement can have unintended impact of reviving the local markets. Observing the consequences of the BDS movement, their decision on boycotting seems reasonable and justifiable. Their methods to cause short term impacts, which is not likely to last long, was very effective at spreading their word around the world. Targeting the global countries eventually became a method to minimize the economical harms caused by the movement. In addition, even if the BDS movement lasted long, the researchers have proven that the companies’ resilience and local companies’ expansion seems to have much more benefits and disadvantages. Works Cited Astha Rajvanshi, and Yasmeen Serhan. “What to Know about the Global Boycott Movement against Israel.” TIME, Time, 14 Feb. 2024, time.com/6694986/israel-palestine-bds-boycotts-starbucks-mcdonalds/. Accessed 3 Mar. 2024. “BDS Movement.” BDS Movement, 2024, bdsmovement.net/. Accessed 3 Mar. 2024. > News Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Opinion Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In Interview Series: Interview With SELFidence Opinion “Wonderful!” is the word Hninn, the 12th-grade Co-Director of Research of SELFidence used to describe the organization in one word. Every wonder has its beginnings. Hninn first stumbled across SELFidence on Instagram. She experienced great mental enrichment from the Instagram posts and gathered a greater understanding of self-confidence and mental health. That is why she thought SELFidence would be “a warm, supportive community” to be a part of. Before joining SELFidence, Hninn originally expected SELFidence to be a fun extracurricular and a chance to try out a leadership role. She confidently stated that the expectations were met over the past two years she has been with them. Moreover, she said it was a delightful experience being able to learn more about mental health from her peers. Every experience has its golden moments. They may be the climax of big events that were organized or even the smallest incident that happened in the process. While looking back at the memories, Hninn’s favorite moment with SELFidence has been the simple calls she used to have with the members. Due to time constraints, she, unfortunately, wasn’t able to take part in multiple events such as fundraising webinars. However, the calls with the members helped her catch up with the rest of the team and get involved with the activities that were going on. Hninn expressed how wonderful it was to envision ways to aid the youth grow more self-confident in small, but practical steps. And this is what she considers being most proud of as a member of SELFidence. She is determined that in the rest of the year 2023, she will contribute to further growing the SELFidence community and gain a more comprehensive global reach by leading the creation of well-articulated and knowledgeable posts. 2023/06/17 Share Jeongyun Lim Works Cited > News Opinion Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Magazine Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In A Prequel to the 2020 Election: Joe Biden and Donald J. Trump Magazine Share Yechan Kim 2023/04/26 Works Cited > News 0 4/23/2023 Joe Biden has announced his candidacy for the 2024 presidential election. Despite doubts and skepticism towards his age and ability to lead the country, he claims that America should elect to “finish the job” they have started. While some expected Joe Biden to hand over the torch to a new candidate in the Democratic Party to due to his age, president Biden decided to run again, possibly his arch-enemy Donald J. Trump. Former president Trump announced his candidacy last November after the results of the Midterm elections were announced. After the former president faced major losses in the election with the loss of Republican candidates he endorsed including Mehmet Oz of Pennsylvania and Herschel Walker of Georgia, Ron Desantis faced a historical victory in the state of Florida to make Florida a red state. However, the two rivals have faced different fates recently with Trump’s indictment of sexual abuse charges. Experts have expected this to “benefit” Trump considering his political personality, with Trump attracting a great number of populist bases who are enthusiastic of the former president’s erratic actions in his campaign trails. Before the announcement of Joe Biden’s candidacy, the Democratic Party’s nomination was in uncertainty with the lack of leadership compared to the Republican Party. Potential candidates including incumbent Vice President Kamala Harris, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, and Secretary of Department of Transportation Pete Buttigieg were expected to run, as they were seen in the past running for the office. Most famously, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders made the run against former New York Senator, First Lady, and the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016 only to fall short and concede a few weeks before the last few primary elections. Compared to these lack of capable political candidates, the Republican party had been expected to have a strong competition other than Donald J. Trump who was expected to clinch the nomination without problem. Candidates included former Vice President Mike Pence, Texas Senator Ted Cruz, South Carolina Senator Nikki Haley, and most importantly Florida governor Ron Desantis who trailed Trump closely. This made experts and the Democratic Party’s base advocate for the return of many former superstars such as former Senator Hillary Clinton, former First Lady Michelle Obama, and former Vice President Al Gore who has been advocating for environmental issues after his concession to George W. Bush in the 2000 election that caused controversy with the case of Bush v. Florida. Despite such apprehension and calls for a return of a superstar, they have shown their support to the incumbent president, especially Michelle Obama who showed great hesitancy to run for the position, claiming that “it was not an option” she considered. With such a controversy and chaotic period before the presidential election, the 2024 presidential election is expected to be amidst a great change in American democracy. Hoping for the preservation of America’s democracy and the management of both domestic and foreign conflicts, the American public will determine the outcome of the transitory election in next year’s November. Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Magazine Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” Robinson About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Opinion Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In Works Cited > News Share Seoa Park 2023/03/11 0 Luxury brands are increasingly searching for the world of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) to enhance their marketing and engage with customers in more innovative ways. NFTs are digital assets that use blockchain technology to verify ownership and authenticity, making them a natural fit for the luxury industry, where exclusivity and authenticity are highly valued. Luxury brands are exploring the use of NFTs to create limited edition virtual products, such as digital fashion items or artwork, that can only be owned by a select few. This creates a sense of exclusivity and scarcity that resonates with luxury consumers. As metaverse and NFT (Non-Fungible Token) emerged as hot keywords throughout the industry last year, news of luxury brands entering the virtual world is reported almost once a week this year. Amid their attempts to see who carries out the most original project, the German luxury brand "Philip Plain" recently bought a huge virtual real estate worth 1.2 million euros (about 1.62 billion won) on the "Decentraland" metaverse. Gucci, the brand that has been leading the virtual project, also bought the digital space of Hong Kong's video game platform "The Sandbox" under the plan to provide an "immersive experience." These are both metaverse gaming platforms, leading virtual real estate trading platforms that gained huge popularity over the past year by expanding their reach to their own token economy activities. Until now, Louis Vuitton, Balenciaga, and Gucci have continued to invest in the virtual world by planting virtual stores, public relations centers, and digital characters through various video games and platforms. Major luxury Maison is following them and interest in the virtual world is increasing. In February, Prada sportswear line "Linea Rosa" launched a series of Virtual Outfits and Equipments (such as snowmobiles, pet bikes, skiwear) in the extreme video game "Riders Republic," and simultaneously held a "Prada Beyond the Line" multiplayer event. Opinion Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice. Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Opinion Seoa Park Luxury Brands and NFT

Politics Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In Politics ESG, unfavorable concept in corporate and investing world Politics 12/14/2023 Share Jeonghyeon Park (Kevin) Businesses and investors seeking to have a positive impact on the world are finding that environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors are becoming more and more crucial. However, opinions on the usefulness and efficacy of ESG vary, particularly in the political area. From a political standpoint, corporate and investment circles are abandoning ESG. ESG is politically dying, in part because some governments and regulators strongly oppose it, believing that economic growth should take precedence over social and environmental concerns. For instance, the US government has been rolling back numerous environmental regulations that impacted investors and businesses and withdrew from the Paris Agreement, a global agreement to combat climate change, in 2020. (BBC,2020) This action was interpreted as a betrayal of the ESG principles and a warning to other nations that they, too, could choose to forgo their obligations to cut greenhouse gas emissions and safeguard the environment. (CNBC, 2023) Many companies and investors implementing ESG practices had to deal with uncertainty and pressure to adjust to the new political landscape that the U.S. has created. The absence of precise, standardized metrics and standards that can be used in a variety of industries and geographical areas is the second reason that ESG is politically dying. The term "ESG" is broad and ambiguous, and different stakeholders will interpret it differently. Moreover, there is no agreed-upon definition or methodology for evaluating and disclosing ESG performance. This leads to misunderstandings and discrepancies among companies and investors who wish to adopt ESG practices and among lawmakers and regulators who wish to keep an eye on and enforce them. Furthermore, it can be challenging to compare and validate some ESG metrics and indicators because they are qualitative and subjective. (The Economist, 2023) ESG loses credibility and significance as a political tool in the absence of consistent and trustworthy data. The fact that ESG is frequently viewed as a cost or a trade-off rather than an opportunity or a benefit is a third reason why it is politically dying. Rather than being a source of value creation and competitive advantage, ESG is seen by many investors and businesses as an additional burden that limits their operations and profitability. In a similar vein, rather than seeing ESG as a means of improving their standing and influence internationally, many politicians and policymakers see it as a threat to their national interests and sovereignty. (Financial Times, 2023) As a result, when faced with ESG initiatives and policies that demand a change in the status quo or call for compromises or sacrifices, they frequently oppose or subvert them. In conclusion, political opposition, a lack of standardization, and perceptions as a trade-off are why ESG is dying in the corporate and investment worlds. As a means of addressing the environmental, social, and governance issues that the world is currently facing, these factors call into question the legitimacy and efficacy of ESG. Increased cooperation and coordination between various actors and stakeholders, as well as increased innovation and awareness-raising regarding the advantages and prospects of ESG, are necessary to resurrect ESG politically. (McKinsey & Company, 2023) Works Cited > News Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Monthly Edition: November Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In Monthly Edition: November It’s time to throw the ESG name into the wastebasket Monthly Edition: November 12/13/2023 Share Seoeun Park “It’s time to throw the ESG name into the wastebasket,” says Rothschild, the founder of the Council for Inclusive Capitalism. Many say environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing is dead in the corporate and investing world. The term ESG was first introduced in 2015, in an article entitled “Who Cares Wins”. As its title states, it stated that investing should be based on determining the corporate “who cares” the ethical responsibilities, encouraging them to act more responsibly. For example, investors could consider an environmental criteria, such as how the corporation is addressing climate change. It was around 2018 when ESG reached its golden age. It decorated the front pages of world’s leading financial papers, with thousands of professionals entitling themselves as “ESG Analyst”, over 80% of the world’s largest corporations incorporated the standards, and even a UN secretary general personally met and encouraged the CEOs of world’s leading financial institutions to implement the investing strategy. However, what was the problem with ESG that it has declined into its ultimate death? The answer lies in the word especially coined to condemn ESG: greenwashing. Greenwashing is a portmanteau of the words green and whitewash, suggesting that the corporates are attempting to conceal and deceive investors and customers to look eco ethically (green), exonerating themselves from the ecological responsibilities and frame themselves as innocent (white). “Investment companies, especially mutual funds and ETFs, are increasingly using terms such as ‘ESG’ and ‘sustainable’ in their fund names to attract hundreds of millions of dollars from investors even when there has been little or no change in the fund’s investment holdings — a practice known as ‘greenwashing’”, remarked Stephen Hall, the legal director of a non profit financial organization, Better Markets, that pursues public interest in economic markets. To let it straight, take Starbucks, probably the world’s largest global coffeehouse corporation as an example. Starbucks in recent years have imposed numerous environmental policies as a part of ESG, such as giving reward points and discounts if the customer brings a tumbler, have eliminated the use of plastic straws and replaced them entirely with paper ones, and so on. However, customers have detected the absurdity of Starbucks’ “eco” policies, as they are not that effective on protecting the environment; for example, the paper straws are not recyclable but have to be incinerated. Hence, Starbucks received bitter criticisms and backlashes, that their ESG policies are not to “save the environment” but to deceive the customers to frame themselves as an “ecologically-responsible” corporate, inducing them to consume the misleading “eco-friendly” products. The world is now awoken from the deceptions of ESG. As Rothschild once again highlighted, “this acronym, ESG, should go away”. Works Cited > News Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Business Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In Business The Green Revolution: How did Original Clothing Changed to Sustainable Clothing Business 01/21/2024 Share Dongha Kim We are currently experiencing the ‘Green Revolution,’ a term used to describe the rapid development of ? where the transformation of clothing can be seen. The increasing prefernce for sustainable clothing has now the clothing industry. Original clothing refers explicitly to clothes that are made with traditional methods of production. Of course, these original clothing industries would have been impacted by this time. And many people will wonder what the process will be like for the original clothes. A long process is required until a single piece of clothing is manufactured and delivered to shopping malls. single clothes to be made. Even though we wear clothes daily, there are dark sides to the clothing industry that we do not know about Such unveiled problems in theclothing industry are related to unsustainable and unethical practices. Further, this issue may lead to global issues in the mass production of clothes, which doubles the problem in the current clothing industry. The process of mass production of clothes in a short period of time often happens with the use of child exploitation and child labor, which comes from cheap labor costs in countries with fast fashion industries, such as Bangladesh, Vietnam, and China (Kanbi). Ethical problems in relation to human rights issues are also present when producing clothes. The process of manufacturing has caused environmental problems, such as global warming and pollution ("fashion industry"). Clothes production has been causing pollution, which includes air, water, land, marine pollution, and more. These pollutants are likely to be caused by the process of making clothes, which emits greenhouse gasses, produces wastewater, and pollutes oceans from microfibers that are washed during the production of clothes. With ongoing problems in the clothing industry that have been harming the environment, people now tend to buy clothes that are sustainable. Clothing industries can produce environmentally friendly clothes by reusing materials and using a method that could reduce carbon emissions from other toxic gasses. One of the most common and well-known methods of sustainable clothing production is reusing materials. Many fashion brands tried to approach sustainable practices by using organic materials for clothing or recycling materials such as plastics, fibers, and textiles with fewer chemicals ("Organic, Recycled"). Furthermore, as water pollution occurs from massive water waste, some clothing brands reuse the wastewater, consequently reducing the water waste produced afterward (5 Sustainable). On the other hand, there have been findings related to sustainable clothing made using scientific technology, such as producing textiles from organisms' proteins. Discosoma coral, for example, is a naturally produced textile by extracting the protein from the bacteria that contains the copied DNA of the coral (How Coral [HH:MM:SS]). Consequently, with the production of sustainable clothing, there have been positive impacts on the environment: lessening water waste, reducing carbon emissions, and more ("7 Benefits"). As sustainable clothing production considers using eco-friendly materials, this will increase the quality while reducing the quantity of clothes being produced. Sustainable clothing will also save money in the long run, as most of the materials are recycled and still durable when recycled. We could often find cases of brands producing sustainable clothes. Patagonia, for instance, uses recycled materials for most of its products. On top of that, in 1973, Patagonia decided to repair their customers' clothes for free, which was definitely effective for the environment ("Patagonia's Journey"). As sustainable clothing production considers using eco-friendly materials, this will increase the quality while reducing the quantity of clothes being produced. Sustainable clothing will also save money in the long run, as most of the materials are recycled and still durable when recycled. While there are many advantages to sustainable clothing, there are still some limitations. Although the sustainable clothing and fashion industry tends to consider the environment, awareness of sustainability is lacking, which means that there are not enough brands or fashion industries to promote or influence others to participate in sustainable practices (Schulz). Therefore, adopting sustainable clothing in a market can be difficult if not enough people support it. Moreover, since sustainable clothing is more ethical, this will require more money in the production process. This is because it would avoid child exploitation and use cheap labor, in which the number of productions can be limited in terms of mass production in the short term and the profit that follows. Still, the ethical and sustainable practice of sustainable clothing is making an impact on society. In conclusion, there should be time taken to spread these practices so that sustainable fashion industries or brands can settle in the market and enlarge the scale. Works Cited > News News Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Economics Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In Economics The Death and Future of Ethical Business: ESG Economics 12/15/2023 Share Chaeeun Lee (Jessica) Environmental, Social, and corporate Governance (ESG) is a concept that has undergone a massive surge of interest in the corporate world for the last couple of years. ESG composes the 3 main pillars of corporate sustainability, that evaluate firms' business practices based on an ethical perspective. The ESG report is used in an attempt to restrain corporate corruption ranging from pollution, human right violations, and an overall dismissal in ethics. The report is also utilized as a tool for firms, as a favorable report score increases attraction from investors, customers, and employees with their high ground in social responsibility and performance. (Mathis) However, this sustainability framework was recently criticized for their critical shortcomings. ESG characteristically combines 3 separate factors of environment, society, and governance into one singular scoremark. Due to the nature of these vastly different sectors, measuring these include "different methodologies, metrics, weightings and subjective judgment in ESG ratings (Laidlaw) This leads to widely different scores for the same firm, and even different interpretations. For instance, the data may be assessing a company's exposure to water shortages, while another a company-specific one such as which directors generate more expertise. (Laidlaw) Thus, some ratings are more effective on gauging financial risks and company performance than others, contributing to the unreliability of ratings. The strong favorability towards an ESG approach compels firms to prioritize this mode, yet this may not be sustainable for companies long term. Some scholars argue that ESG investment has a negative impact on profitability or firm value. This is reasonably predicted as investing in this business model causes reallocation of funds to other stakeholders from shareholders, ultimately leading to a negative impact on firm financial performance. (Aydogumus) The final factor is scrutiny of ESG reports over the manipulation from firms. As the ESG reports have gained tractions over the years, more and more firms are prone to forging documents or adjusting the presentations to improve their perceptions by buyers.Many organizations exploit the system to engage in "greenwashing", where one appears to be environmentally friendly to align their view with environmentally conscious customers. (Smith) This manipulation has significantly altered the dynamics of ESG based investments, inducing the reported numbers as less reliable. The death of ESG may seem devastating for the future of ethical business practices. However, just because an ineffective measure has failed to be implemented on a global scale, doesn't signify its end. Approaches to conscious capitalism, and separating the E, S, and G to report separately and achieve a regulated healthy market should be anticipated. Works Cited > News Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Science Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Science 5 ‘Ooho’ is an edible water bottle that is made with waterproof seaweed film. The Skipping Rock Lab first developed this product and created the original, however, now Notpla (which stands for Not-Plastic) a sustainable packaging company produces the Ooho 'bottle'. The Skipping Rock Lab aims to reduce plastic packaging waste, which inspired Ooho. Ooho is unlike other water bottles since it is edible, not made of plastic, small enough to put into the mouth at once, and has a gelatin-like texture, which can be swallowed easily. With these special characteristics, the aim of this product is to reduce environmental issues caused by non-reusable packaging waste. As Ooho is a biodegradable, sustainable product, it reduces plastic packaging wastes, having a multitude of positive impacts on the environment. Microplastics are harmful toxins to both humans and animals and are often ingested through the use of plastic water bottles. This not only happens directly but also when plastics are broken down in the ocean. Marine life eats these, and then we in turn eat the marine life in a cycle of ingesting microplastics, which has a detrimental effect on our health in the long run. By switching to an Ooho water bottle, we can avoid this issue and decrease the harmful effects on the environment, and our health. Ooho also provides real-life benefits with its small size and lightweight, making it more convenient to carry around than a conventional water bottle. In fact, in the 2019 London Marathon, Ooho water bottles were used by the athletes to reduce the number of plastic bottles thrown away, showing that Ooho is quick, light, and convenient. This product makes it easy for athletes to quench their thirst quickly by putting the whole ‘bottle’ of Ooho into their mouth. The plastic waste created at athletic events is a prime example of how Ooho can reduce the waste created by the use of traditional plastic water bottles. The small size and biodegradable nature of the Ooho material make it useful for other purposes. Besides water, it has the ability to carry other liquids in a small capsule form. We can see this material used in washing detergent pods, and by making this simple change from traditional washing detergent bottles, plastic use is decreased. Ooho might also be used to hold small quantities of milk for daily drinks like tea and coffee -- these drinks are regularly drunk by the public and therefore this would save non-biodegradable plastic from being used. Bottleless water is also a strong alternative to the use of plastic water bottles. However, it may not be practical in our everyday use. Since Ooho is not solid, there is a possibility of bursting, such as if you were to throw it in a bag on the go. The Ooho ‘bottle’ is made from seaweed causing a slimy texture, and this niche product may not appeal to all customers. Also, with its small size, it can only contain a limited amount of water, versus water bottles which usually contain 500 ml to 1 liter. In conclusion, Ooho achieves its main goal of reducing plastic waste by being a biodegradable alternative. Although Ooho may not replace all water bottles, its use in replacing other plastics such as detergent and single-serving milk, is effective in reducing waste. The small changes can add up to reducing plastic waste to help the environment and fight climate change. Ooho inspires others to make small changes for the planet in their everyday lives. These changes will continue to have a positive impact on the environment. 2023/04/23 Share Dongha Kim Works Cited > News Science Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Weekdays, Month Day, Year 00 °c Log In Economics Impact on the Korean Economy with the Growth of Other Countries’ Semiconductor Economics 3/03/2024 Share Jiwoo(Jade) Kim Korea is well known for creating one of the most high-quality semiconductors in the world. This can be shown by the fact that the semiconductor export has a high increase compared to each year, and especially for this year, it has been about a 66% increase. However, Korea is not the only country that seeks for the beneficiary with the semiconductors. Then, how would the increase in other countries’ semiconductor markets affect Korea’s economy? Currently, there are four major countries in the global semiconductor market which are Taiwan, China, the United States of America, and Japan, excluding Korea. Especially the global semiconductor industry is colliding around two types of gigantic paradigm shifts; the AI revolution and supply chain restructure due to the US’ sanctions on the Chinese semiconductor market. The United States is blocking the production of Chinese Semiconductor exports to the country so that they can keep in check the growth of Chinese economic benefits using the diverse trade using their high production rate compared with other countries, based on their amount of plants. From this situation, the Korean market can expect the reverse gain between the two country’s market competition. However, it is expected that the Taiwan semiconductor makes it hard for Korea to maintain its export value. First of all, Taiwan has the highest-ranked semiconductor production all around the world. Producing over 60% of the semiconductors, Taiwan is highly supporting the dominant brand TSMC(Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation). The real problem is that Japan is cooperating with TSMC, creating the factory in their land. This will have a high effect on Korean economics if Korea cannot survive this global competition. Since IT including the semiconductor market has about a 50% portion of the Korean industry and economy, the decrease in the export rate of semiconductors will highly affect the Korean economy not for 50% but more than that. What Korea will have to do to stop this situation will a creation of big change. The Korean market for semiconductors has been steady with reasonable maintenance. However, this was when Taiwan was the only competitor that Korea should have thought of. Nowadays the global semiconductor market has increased by 573.44 Billion USD in 2022, thus showing the expectation of 12.2% growth throughout the world. Korea will have to seek for new spots that they can mainly improve or differ from other nations and stabilize their own primacy. Works Cited Khadija Shafaat Khan. “Semiconductor Market Share by Country: Top 5.” Insider Monkey, Insider Monkey, 27 Dec. 2023, www.insidermonkey.com/blog/semiconductor-market-share-by-country-top-5-1243198/5/. Accessed 3 Mar. 2024. “Semiconductor Market Size & Share | Industry Growth [2029].” Fortunebusinessinsights.com, 2022, www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/semiconductor-market-102365. Accessed 3 Mar. 2024. > News Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” General About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.

Economics Tuesday, December 23, 2025 00 °c Log In Boosting Pay, Boosting Prosperity: Benefits of Minimum Wage Economics Share Jihan Kim 2023/03/11 Works Cited > News 0 03/11/2023 With the Covid-19 pandemic handicapping people in their homes, many workers suddenly found themselves out of work, and thousands of businesses fell apart. As a consequence, an outcry from workers put pressure on many governments to increase minimum wages, reigniting debates on its impacts between economists and politicians. While many economists agree that low pay is bad for workers, others believe that increasing the wage would bring about worse effects on low-skilled workers due to a fall in the employment rate. This argument is, of course, supported by conventional economic theory: If the cost of labor increases, production would become less profitable, and hence, businesses would lay off workers. To make matters worse, firms would lay off low-skilled workers out of all employees due to their lack of productivity. As a result, those whom the minimum wage was intended to help lose out of the game. However, reality is far more complex than what textbooks state. In reality, firms are not able to determine or quantify the productivity of each and every employee, nor can they make every possible comparison between them. This asymmetric information puts firms in less advantageous positions: they could potentially pay more wage to workers who are actually worth less. From the perspective of firms, overpaying workers signals a loss of profit, and so most firms pay workers less than their marginal revenue product. This, in other words, is a monopoly of firms where a firm acts as the only “buyer” of the employees of the firm and hence utilizes its power to negotiate the price of the employee (wage) as low as possible. Minimum wage, in this framework, attempts to reduce the power of firms in strong negotiation positions. In fact, research conducted by David Card and Alan Krueger has proven that it successfully reduced the power of firms and, in fact, increased the employment rate. In 1992, New Jersey’s hourly wage was increased from $4.25 to $5.05, while Pennsylvania’s wage was kept at $4.25, and the two economists gathered information on employment of fast-food restaurants in these states before April and again several months later. The result turned out to be counterintuitive: the employment rate increased in New Jersey, whereas it fell in Pennsylvania. The result of David Card and Alan Krueger’s research seems absurd. Why would the employment rate increase when the labor cost increases? It turns out that minimum wage has acted as a correction of the market failure by monopsony: the wage that was capped artificially below the market equilibrium was raised by the minimum wage policy back to its equilibrium where buyers and sellers can exchange freely. People are more allured to enter the market. Minimum wage is essential to market failure in the labor market. It artificially raises the wage that was once artificially kept low by the monopsony of employers. If the suitable minimum wage is applied, it would encourage more people to enter the markets. Yet, debates are still ongoing about what is a suitable minimum wage. Would raising the minimum wage to $12 per hour be suitable? Or would $15 per hour be suitable? This varies by the country’s circumstances and assessments of other potential benefits or harms of the minimum wage. Robinson Review Favorites A Review of Alternative Bottleless Water Ooho Dongha Kim Three Reasons Why the U.S. Shot Down the Chinese Spy Balloon Seunghyeon Lee How Truly Significant Is the Collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank on the U.S. Economy? Songi Chai, Yubin Cho, Seohyun Jang.. Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights As the Birth Rate Issue Emerges in China, CNN’s Recent Report May Shine Light on a New Vision of Politics Seoun Kim The New Fossil Fuel: Lithium Yubin Cho Yubin Cho Economics Trending on Robinson Review As Economic Growth Slows, Retail Sales in March Decreases Joe Biden's Signing of the Respect for Marriage Act Becomes A Turning Point in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Right Vaseline on Your Face? Four Tips That Others Don’t Know The Controversy Behind Netflix “Dahmer–Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” Robinson About Us Staff Events My account Popular sections Politics Economics Science Arts Other sections Opinion Magazine Games Contact Us Contact Us Social media Advertise With Us COOKIE PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE Markets data delayed by at least 15 minutes. © Robinson Review 2023. R and ‘Robinson Review’ are trademarks of Robinson Review. Robinson Review and its journalism are subject to a self-regulation regime under the Robinson Editorial Code of Practice.