• Recent Articles

  • Sodexo awarded for ethics as workers make minimum wage
  • Who owns your genes?
  • Apologies
  • The Robber Barons of Social Change
  • Good Intentions
  • Toyota’s Tylenol moment
  • “Walking away” not immoral, prof says
  • How Will the Citizens United Decision Affect Sustainable Business?
  • UK Business schools put ethics high on MBA agenda
  • Does Kraft’s Takeover Mean the End of Cadbury’s Fair Trade Policies?
  • U.S. Attorney: Johnson & Johnson Paid Millions In Kickbacks To Boost Sales Of Schizophrenia Drug In Nursing Homes
  • With Tylenol recall 2010, a corporate icon stumbles

• Archives

  Select Month May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 April 2008 January 2008 December 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 April 2007 February 2007 May 2006 January 2006 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005

Fred Pearce’s Greenwash – guardian.co.uk
Fred Pearce
Read the article here. H/t to Current.
Excerpt:

The agricultural giant Monsanto may well still be the world’s most hated company. The company that brought the world Agent Orange, the defoliant of choice in the Vietnam War, followed up a decade ago with a strident push to flood the world with genetically modified crops. It alienated millions – and even its friends and rivals among GM supporters blamed Monsanto’s belligerence for putting back the cause by many years. But I’m going to ignore GMs and talk about water. And belligerence.

In part, no doubt, to help salvage its GM-tarnished reputation, Monsanto now makes great play of its efforts to help engineer a second green revolution built around “sustainability”.

Sustainability is a much-abused term and it infiltrates almost every corner of the company’s website. But to be fair they do try and define what the word means for its business. The company promises that its “sustainable yield initiative” will “reduce by one-third per unit produced the aggregate amount of key resources such as land, water and energy, required to grow crops by 2030.”

Many analysts now see water, rather than land, as the key limitation on growing food to feed a future world population of nine billion in the coming decades. So a third more crop for the same amount of water is a valuable goal. The company trumpets especially its work to engineer more water-efficient maize.

Of course, despite the company’s public pledge to “share knowledge and technology” the company’s corporate aim is to make sure that farmers buy Monsanto-patented water-efficient seeds by the trillion.

But you would expect Monsanto to be especially sensitive about how it manages water in its own farming operations, and particularly to show concern for how neighbouring farmers are facing up to water shortages. Wouldn’t you?

Read more…

Comments

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Email Address(required)

Website

CAPTCHA Code

• Search for:

• Articles/Posts

  Articles
  Resources
  Academic Sites
  Audits/Reports
  Company Statements/Principles
  Organizations
  Other Business Ethics Sites
  SR Investments
  SR Job Resources
  Sustainability
  Tools

• Article Tag Cloud

  Mortgages Business Ethics Obstructionists Corporate Governance Censorship Transparency Pharmaceuticals Wall Street Reports Corporate Personhood Bioethics International Academia Sustainability Shame Scandals Corruption Fair Trade Sweatshops Economics Compensation Jeff Banks Legislation Essays/Papers/Presentations Pledges Investing SEC Greenwashing Regulation Philanthrocapitalism Company Audit Statements Litigation Stock Market

• Twitter Posts