Fiji Water and the Chocolate Slaves Essay Example

(Svensson & Wood, 2004).

When linking issues to Applied Ethics two requirements must be satisfied the issue must be controversial and moral. Applied Ethics can be broken down into ten normative principles. The first two principles, personal benefit and social benefit, are consequentialist since they appeal to the consequences of an action as it affects the individual or society; the remaining principles are duty-based; he principles of benevolence, paternalism, harm, honesty, and lawfulness are based on duties we have towards others; lastly the principles of autonomy, justice and the various rights are based on moral rights (Ethics, n. d. ). Applied Ethics standards may or may not overlap in fundamental ideas to address certain ethical dilemmas, the contrast in the cases of Fiji Water Company, LLC tapping a rare water resource and chocolate manufacturers purchasing cocoa beans harvested by slave labor from trafficked children will be discussed.

In the early 1990s, the Fijian government and aid organizations were performing a study as part of a plan to find water for local people which led to the discovery of an enormous aquifer; David Gilmour (heard of the study and became founder of Fiji Water Company, LLC) obtained a 99 year lease on land atop the aquifer which led to his launch of Fiji Water five years later (Lenzer, 2009). Fiji Water is now America’s leading imported water; it has spent millions pushing not only the seemingly life-changing properties of the product itself, but also the company’s green cred and its charity work (Lenzer, 2009).

Fiji Water as an American owned company, pumps freshwater from the small island nation of Fiji, and later imports

it into the United States and the United Kingdom, as a high ranked bottled water (Waterway, 2008). As much as 1/3 of the Fijian population lack access to safe clean drinking water therefore, many cases of typhoid outbreaks as well as parasitic infections have gone on record due to the poor quality of their water supply. Fiji Water has the duty to act non-negligently when extracting this resource without harming the people, the land, or the environment.

Tom Heap’s (2008) article Bottled Water: Who Needs It? argued that bottled water is “morally unacceptable” – the discomforting fact while having perfectly good tap water, the UK spends almost $2 billion pounds on bottled water, “its treated as a luxury bauble while others die from its absence”. The Fiji Water Company, LLC provides some water to surrounding villages after cyclones and flash flooding, it also provides some funding towards clean water projects across the islands, but the company is not responsible for the islander’s water supply (Heap, 2008). Fiji Water’s good works are more hope than reality.

Two years after a riot at the water plant, the Vatukaloko Trust Fund was created, a charity targeting several villages surrounding the plant, agreed to donate . 15 percent of its Fijian operation’s revenues, a company official testified that the total was about $100,000 in 2007 (for perspective, the trade journal Brandweek put Fiji Water’s marketing budget at $10 million in 2008) (Lenzer, 2009). The aforementioned presents an ethical issue with Fiji Water profiting from freshwater pumped from the aquifer, then exported and marketed as a luxury product, meanwhile the people of Fiji are getting sicker in certain

cases dying from the lack of it.

This can be viewed as controversial and moral contextual issue; under Applied Ethics the normative principles that can be argued are Social Benefit, Principle of Benevolence, and the Principle of Paternalism. Next, an additional concern arises, the environmental and ecological impact the extraction, transportation and packaging of the Fiji Water has created. Pumping freshwater from any volcanic island, such as Fiji, the removal of a vital life-giving force from that region of the global ocean occurs; freshwater is the most precious liquid on Earth, about one-hundredth of one-percent, is readily available for human use (Waterway, 2008).

Questionable production, packaging, and transportation practices raise an ethical issue when addressing the company’s sustainability. The company’s claims of ‘sustainable practices’ are questionable due to their production, packaging, and transportation practices of raw materials, work in process packaging, and finished goods which are the source of carbon emissions and oil spillages with an ecological impact (Buckless et al. 2010). The evolutionary issue of sustainability has become more and more controversial and moral in the past decade; under Applied Ethics the normative principles that can be argued are Social Benefit, and the Principle of Harm. Fiji Water planned to begin conservation and energy projects in 2008 to offset their carbon emissions by 120% (Buckless et al. , 2010).

The company only calculates 2% increase in fuel usage by shipping vessels, as a large corporation they probably do effect the shipments more, their website is not clear in stating how much carbon emissions the Chinese plant produces when making neither the plastic nor the transportation of raw materials to the Chinese

plant (Buckless et al. , 2010). In brief, it’s foreseeable that Fiji Water Company is the proximate cause of harm due to monopolizing the extraction of water on the island as well as their production, packaging, and transportation practices.

Following the summary of ethical issues driven by child slave labor and chocolate, stakeholders on both cases with be identified along with the development of ethically responsible alternative(s) for both commodities will follow. A close association between child slave labor and chocolate in the Coast of West Africa can be observed, thousands of young boys under the age of 16 are sold into slave labor and forced to live under inhumane conditions, extreme abuse, and obligated to work in cocoa plantations in order to harvest the beans without paid wages.

In the late 1970’s cocoa supplanted coffee as the major commodity causing a cocoa boom due to the government’s encouragement to cultivate by offering various price incentives; this emphasis on cocoa production has been entrenched in the economy to the extent that many cocoa farmers are dependent on cocoa for their livelihood (Chanthavong, 2002). West African countries are responsible for 60% of exports in cocoa beans to world markets (Children in cocoa production, n. d. ).

Cocoa is considered an unstable commodity due to its fluctuating market prices, making their profitability dependable on world prices which farmers’ lack control over and also the natural conditions that affect cocoa yields, such as droughts (Chanthavong, 2002). Chocolate manufactures have the duty to act non-negligently when purchasing the cocoa beans from farmers at reasonable prices since they create this large market and the labor needed to

produce such a commodity is equally as large.

Profit losses negatively impact the cocoa bean farmers, which in return seek alternative ways to cut costs, such as cheap labor or ultimately resorting to using slave labor (Chanthavong, 2002). Culturally, children of Ivorian or Ghanan farmers also help cultivate cocoa beans, which make it harder for them to see any wrongdoing in using labor from other children; in fact 40-50% of children 5 to 14 years old are in the work force (Chanthavong, 2002).

Trafficked children come from Mali and Burkina Faso, which are among the poorest countries in the world. Children who are subjected to slave labor are irrevocably changed; psychologist say that “being a slave often a process of systematic destruction of a person’s mind, body, and spirit” (Chanthavong, 2002). The abovementioned presents an ethical issue by chocolate manufacturers profiting from this commodity while children are trafficked into slave labor to harvest the cocoa beans needed to produce it.

Child slave labor for profit is a controversial and moral evolutionary issue; under Applied Ethics the normative principles that can be argued are Personal Benefit, Principle of Paternalism, Principle of Harm, Principle of Lawfulness, Principle of Justice, and Rights. The cocoa industry was accused of profiting from child slavery and trafficking.

US senators attempted to add an amendment to the 2001 Agricultural Appropriations bill that would require chocolate products to carry a label confirming that slaves were not used in cocoa production, the chocolate industry protested that the action would cause consumers to boycott the chocolate products, saying that the cocoa producers would be hurt even more, therefore causing them to

continue using slaves (Chanthavong, 2002).

The European Cocoa Association dismissed these accusations as "false and excessive" and the industry said the reports were not representative of all areas; later it was acknowledged the working conditions for children were unsatisfactory and children's rights were sometimes violated and admitted the claims could not be ignored (Business Ethics, n. d. ). To preclude further official government action the chocolate industry decided to take action by joining other organizations to establish mechanisms to end the worst forms of child labor (Chanthavong, 2002).

Numerous discussions have arisen in response to the issue of child slave labor relating to the economic system; debates as to the appropriate response from the chocolate industry, government officials, and consumers concerning whether there should be boycott, government legislation or some type of international cooperation needed to ensure improved working conditions have transpired. In short, chocolate manufacturers are the proximate cause of harm since they provide the commodity, get enriched with profits from it, and exhibited little regard with details of the labor required to produce it.

The Stakeholders Theory normative approach (identification of moral or philosophical guidelines linked to the activities or the management of corporations) primary objective is to answer the following questions, “what are the responsibilities of the company in respect of stakeholders? ” and “why companies should take care of other’s interests other than stakeholders’ interests? ” (Fontaine, Haarman & Schmid, 2006). In essence, the ultimate goal of Fiji Water Company, LLC and chocolate manufacturers is to make the highest profit possible for their stakeholders.

If a company's purpose is to maximize shareholder returns, then sacrificing profits to

other concerns is a violation of its fiduciary responsibility; corporate entities are legally considered as persons in USA and in most nations, as 'corporate persons' are legally entitled to the rights and liabilities due to citizens as persons (Business Ethics, n. d. ). For instance, having the right to own property, sue or be sued, etc. … can be interpreted to imply that they have independent ethical responsibilities.

In the contrary, economist Milton Friedman stated, "the only entities who can have responsibilities are individuals ... A business cannot have responsibilities. So the question is, do corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, have responsibilities in their business activities other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible? And my answer to that is, no, they do not. ”—A multi-country 2011 survey found support for this view among the "informed public" ranging from 30-80% (Business Ethics, n. . ).

In response to the second question, it would be in the best interest of both companies to take other group’s interest into account since they are vital to the survival and success of both commodities. One view of business is that it must exhibit corporate social responsibility (CSR): an umbrella term indicating that an ethical business must act as a responsible citizen of the communities in which it operates even at the cost of profits or other goals (Business Ethics, n. . ). Kilcullen and Kooistra’s study indicates that it appears to be a change occurring in corporations which makes them move from unacceptable conduct to acceptable ethical business activities and management principles; some corporations that continue to behave unacceptably fail

to see signs of what is really happening in the general society/marketplace (Svensson & Wood, 2004).

Comparably, the origin of the questionable practices differ, for instance the root of Fiji Water’s ethical issues are the company’s stakeholders disregard for the immediate need of potable water for the Fijian population; chocolate and child slave labor roots from the little to no oversight from chocolate manufacturers as stakeholders in regards to labor and the regulation required for the production of that commodity.

Many stakeholders are inevitably implicated in both issues, from the country governments, the cocoa bean farmers, Fiji Water Company, LLC, the European and/or American chocolate manufacturers, the trafficked children, aid organizations, relatives of trafficked children, and the consumers who unknowingly purchase the final product(s).

Since the stakeholders in each case have been clearly delineated, ethical responsibilities explored, an ethically strategic alternative(s) can be developed. Questionable practices have been linked to ethical standards, proximate cause of harm identified, stakeholders defined, ethical responsibilities discussed, the development of socially responsible strategic alternative(s) for both commodities, in order to identify possible impact(s) to stakeholders in now achievable.

Reasons for malpractice in the corporate world are centered upon the self-indulgent, introspective and myopic perspective of companies that are not to transform their thoughts to consider all possible perceptions and ramifications of their actions, which are hypnotized with corporate and/or personal self-interest to the exclusion of other possible options (Svensson & Wood, 2004).

Fiji Water by not acting dutiful when extracting the resource due to questionable practices damages to the Fijian people’s health, and the negative environmental and ecological impact occurred. An ethically responsible alternative for

Fiji Water would be to improve access to potable water for the majority of the Fijian population, funded in part by profits made from sales. Building a water infrastructure system will significantly reduce the Fijian health concerns as well as the need to access potable water.

A sustainable ethical alternative for the negative environmental and ecological impact would be to insource the production of plastic instead of outsourcing it to China, this in turn would bring jobs to the local communities and reduce the carbon emissions connected. Chocolate manufactures did not act dutiful when purchasing the cocoa beans from farmers at reasonable prices (since they are the conductors of the large market), which in turn causes farmers to cut costs by having children trafficked for slave labor to produce this commodity.

An ethically responsible alternatives for chocolate manufacturers would be to be duty-bound in providing the labor for the commodity and/or hold/share the responsibility to provide proper conditions for laborers with the plantation owners, and to obey international labor treaties/laws as well as paying the cocoa farmers a fair price for their product. Labor theories of value are unorthodox economic theories of value, which argue that the value of a commodity is related to the labor needed to produce or obtain that commodity (Labor theory of value, n. d. ).

Peter Drucker observed that the ultimate responsibility of company directors is not to harm—primum non nocere (Business Ethics, n. d. ). Slavery is no longer acceptable by society and is considered harmful to the victims, therefore the chocolate manufactures need to do everything in their authority to minimize association with child trafficking

for slave labor. Cocoa farmers are due ‘just’ payment from chocolate manufacturers for the commodity they provide; in turn they would have a better opportunity at an honest life without resorting to slavery to make ends meet.

Another effective way to combat child labor would be for the governments in West Africa to invest some of the revenue it gets from high taxes on cocoa exporters in education and social services to help poor farmers (Parenti, 2008). Similarities overlap in ethical standards such as the Principle of Paternalism, and the Principle of Harm, which makes both cases equally as important regardless of the nature of their causation requiring remedies to damages, therefore reacting ethically responsible is vital for the ultimate success of both commodities.

Finally, economist Milton Friedman writes that corporate executives' "responsibility... generally will be to make as much money as possible while conforming to their basic rules of the society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom" (Business Ethics, n. d. ). To conclude, troublesome ethical dilemmas occur for corporations when they are a step behind current values, norms, and beliefs, which in turn can make a situation, have a severe impact on the corporation’s business activities (Svensson & Wood, 2004).

Fiji Water where health concerns caused by the lack of water and the permanent damage caused by poor sustainability to the vital life-giving force from that region of the global ocean needed immediate attention and remedy. For Fiji Water Company, LLC the aquifer is a finite resource, it will eventually run out. Rectifying the situation or giving compensation to the Fijian people would be in

their best interest, they could lose access to the resource and total profit loss would occur.

Chocolate manufacturers immediate attention to damages done to children who were trafficked into slave labor to harvest cocoa beans to produce the ommodity they profit from is required. For the children who are victims is a matter of ‘life’, it is in the best interest of the chocolate manufactures to provide proper conditions for laborers were safety from harm, just wages is the norm. Adam Smith depicted the good life in terms of material goods and intellectual and moral excellences of character; in The Wealth of Nations commented, "All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind"(Business Ethics, n. d. ).