Disclaimer: the opinions and viewpoints expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or viewpoints of the management or editors of ethisphere.

Like many CEOs, I am skeptical of government action. It’s often uninformed, expensive, and even pernicious. I think, therefore, that we business leaders have a special obligation to help cure society’s ills. 

Some CEOs shirk that obligation. In my experience, their defense is that they do not want to be associated with controversy. The problem is, many social ills are a source of profit to some group, and naturally, that group resists change to the status quo. Therefore, all positive social action is going to be controver-sial to someone. Instead, in trying to cause offense to no one, CEOs spend their influence on less important causes. Donating shareholders’ money to a local symphony-that’s not my idea of ethical action. How much better to give away one’s own wealth to bring attention to a social problem-even if it is a controversial one? 

Twenty years ago, I was a student of development economics and spent a fair bit of time in developing countries. I gradually came to the realization that development theory was overly complex, and that development really came down to two issues: a good system of education and a properly functioning capital market operating under the rule of law. A good educational system builds human skills, which, when combined with capital, naturally brings about development. //Read more