Fiji Water and the Chocolate Slaves Essay

Water covers 71% of the earth. Water is needed for every person to survive. Yet water is bottled up and sold for profit. Some water bottling companies are making more profit than others, and not putting the profits back into the water source they use. The big company that comes to mind is Fiji Water. While Fiji Water is making millions selling water in the U.S. the island of Fiji is suffering. Fiji Water has the government in their pocket, and does nothing to help the island nation. Fiji Water can keep their profits high by masking their flaws and making the product look as appealing as possible on store shelves.

Introduction: Fiji Water developed a simple product that has come to be a symbol of high class and support for the environment. Bottled water is a luxury product which the Fiji company claims is made with “sustainable practices.” When one takes a closer look at the company and its product though, it is hard to come to the conclusion that they are indeed ahead of the curve on sustainability. Bottled water is surrounded by controversy, its sustainability firmly in question. Notably in 2008 Fiji Water was blasted by the public and their growing knowledge of the carbon impact that the production of bottled water was having on the environment. In countries like the United Stats, United Kingdom and other developing countries, Fiji Water was directly targeted for its “water insanity” due to the fact that the bottled water produced was shipped from South Pacific islands to its main markets thousands of miles away. Shortly thereafter, Fiji Water tried to right its wrongs by coming up with a environmental sounding tagline that was quickly deemed as greenwashing by environmental groups. Even the Fiji government was against the brand, seizing hundreds of containers of bottled water on grounds that the company was engaging in transfer price manipulation. After heavy taxes were imposed and layoffs ensued, Fiji Water intensified its PR activities and

Author Michael I. Niman is a professor of journalism at Buffalo State College. In his article “Bottled Insanity," Niman claims that the rage for imported bottled water is unnecessary. Niman argues that people in America are “mad” for Fiji Water because they are “being sold a fantasy. A moment in Fiji. A taste of Fiji”. The author describes how this craze for “designer water” is negatively effecting our environment. According to the Niman, to transport a bottle of water from Fiji to Western New York State requires packing the water into cardboard boxes made from rain forest trees, loading the bottles onto trucks that require gasoline that are driven to a cargo ships powered by fossil fuels, which are then shipped to The United States, and again loaded onto trains and trucks and transported all across the country, then from the warehouses the bottles are delivered everywhere you buy Fiji Water. The author supports his claim that this infatuation of “designer water” is “bottled insanity” by informing the reader that this process “threatens the very existence of the tropical paradise” because of how it is negatively effecting Fiji including the island’s “chronic water shortage”. In continuation, Niman brings up the fact that where he lives, in Western New York State he is fairly close to both the great lakes and Adirondack mountain aquifers. In addition, the author reveals that his region already has “some of the best water on the planet”. Overall, according to Niman the

Tom Standage’s essay “Bad to the Last Drop” first appeared in the New York Times on the first of August, 2005. And it appears on pages 662-664 in the textbook; Practical Argument, compiled by Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. In his essay, Standage argues that we, as a society, should do away with bottled water. He justifies his stance with several points including the shear monetary cost to the consumer, the lack of any nutritional benefit in bottled water, and even his results in a “water tasting”, a parody of a wine tasting which he partook in with the help of a few of his friends (Standage). By far, one of Tom’s strongest points, though, is the plight of impoverished nations around the world and their lack of clean water. One can almost feel his contempt for the seeming hypocrisy of first-world countries and their rejection of their perfectly adequate tap water, especially in the face of such global need. He demonizes the “illogical enthusiasm” with which wealthy nations turn up their noses at tap water (Standage). But in the midst of his tirade, he is certain to pardon developing countries, as bottled water is often times the cleanest water available to them. As his final point, Standage concludes that the most reasonable course of action is that the populace of developed nations, in light of the deficiency of water in other countries, ought to cease consumption of bottled water and send that money to water charities instead.

Recognizing personal strengths and weaknesses is part of the ongoing process of bettering ourselves. In the novel, Like Water for Chocolate by Laura Esquivel, she explains the strengths and weaknesses over the character named Tita De la Garza. Within the context, Laura Esquivel develops Tita’s emotions through feminity. Tita is the novel’s protagonist, struggles her needs for belonging and security. As well as her desires for adventure, sex, and liberation. In Like Water for Chocolate, it simply explains that there is no such thing as a good or bad woman. Every woman in different in their own unique way. Laura Esquivel explains that women are capable of a variety of complex and often contrary emotions and

These are the injustices that are happening all over the world and we need to prevent these companies from taking advantage of us and our water supplies just to fatten their pockets. We need to project our political voices and let these companies know that these behaviors will not be tolerated. Among the people who are raising their political voices against water ownership is Maude Barlow, senior advisor on water issues for the General Assembly of the UN, who argued that, " high water rates, cut-offs to the poor, reduced services, broken promises and pollution have been the legacy of

Tom Standage’s essay “Bad to the Last Drop first appeared in the New York Times” (pages 662-664) on the first of August, 2005. In his essay, Standage argues that we, as a society, should do away with bottled water. He justifies his stance with several points including the shear monetary cost to the consumer, the lack of any nutritional benefit in bottled water, and even his results in a “water tasting”, a parody of a wine tasting which he partook in with the help of a few of his friends. By far, one of Tom’s strongest points, though, is the plight of impoverished nations around the world and their lack of clean water. One can almost feel his contempt for the seeming hypocrisy of first-world countries and their rejection of their perfectly adequate tap water, especially in the face of such global need. He demonizes the “illogical enthusiasm” with which wealthy nations turn up their noses at tap water. But in the midst of his tirade, he makes sure to pardon developing countries as bottled water is often times the cleanest water available to them. As his final point, Standage concludes that the most reasonable thing for the populace of developed nations to do, in light of the deficiency of water in other countries, is to cease consumption of bottled water and send that money to water charities instead.

The majority of people in today’s global society have a false sense of security in believing that the effects of climate change will not take place until the very distant future, and are to dire to bear engaging. Environmental protection is currently one of the largest social issues facing different groups within society including; governments, special interest groups, everyday citizens and global organisations. The actions of organisations with regards to environmental sustainability are becoming a larger factor in business operations. Today’s more informed society expects businesses to perform out of the traditional economic measure of profit motive and adjust to society’s efforts to achieve modern sustainability goals. BHP Billiton (BHP) is the largest and leading global resources company, being the world’s largest producers of major commodities including; coal, copper, iron ore, nickel and uranium. BHP’s annual revenue for 2014 can be rounded off to $607,206million US Dollars and currently hires 128,800 employees and contractors over 141 locations. These figures not only represent how large BHP is, but they highlight the importance of BHP’s contribution to help achieve

The Popularity of Bottled Water: Annotated Bibliography Brei,Vinicius and Steffen Böhm. "Corporate Social Responsibility as Cultural Meaning Management: A Critique of the Marketing of 'Ethical' Bottled Water. " Business Ethics: A European Review, vol. 20, no. 3, July 2011, pp. 233-252. Academic Search Premier.

While corporations are driven by the vast engine of consumer satisfaction, many are also responsible for significant environmental destruction (VanDeVeer and Pierce 546). Since business always aim to increase revenue

The Triple bottom line, a principle largely advocated by Elkington, is considered by scholars as a fundamental if a corporation is to succeed in the ever changing business world. It is seen to be no longer acceptable to expect success within business by only focusing on the profitability of a company (the bottom line). However, it has been proven in several cases that a company’s reputation and profitability can be damaged in an instant by not taking into account the impact on sustainability a business decision has. For example the social issues Google and Facebook faced in the form of ‘Cyber-bullying’ and government censorship for data protection. (Savitz & Weber, 2013) This damage to a company’s reputation already goes some way to saying how important sustainability is to business. Today, brand image and

The economy today runs on an antiquated ritual of exploiting, plundering, devastation, and manipulation of land for material wealth, profiting the wealthy and condemning the poor. This mindset is no more sophisticated than feudalism, a system so bad it had to be outlawed along with witchcraft. The idea that exploitation of land is justified has brought plastics to the ocean and leveled rainforests. Large corporations have grown larger by manufacturing and production, depleting the planet’s resources in the process. Now, companies must make a combined effort to put the environment first, before profit. Because of their harmful practices, consumers have the right to know where products come from, how they’re made, and the impact on the environment. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the large corporations to change their harmful practices, to make strides towards ending climate change and use clean, sustainable methods.

The corporate greed of several large companies such as Monsanto DuPont, oil companies, fast-food chains, and chemical companies will not stop until every exploitable resource on our planet has been used up or sold to consumers. We can tell there is not a lot of hope that any meaningful change will come from any of these companies. “The corporate greed machine will continue rolling forward at continued growth, more consumption, and

In the article ‘Why making money is not enough’, Tata et al (2013) argue that maximizing the profit should not be the primary purpose of the businesses. Businesses need to understand sustainable development is more important and should be the primary driver. Authors highlight Tata Group as a good example as Tata primary purpose was to help people and not make money. Authors highlight what has changed in 20 years – after people realized fundamental changes will need to be made for a sustainable development. Today, some companies are investing into clean technology but we still haven’t done enough to reduce world population. Authors argue a critical need for economic, social and environmental issues to be considered with new business strategies and future technologies.

Cote d’Ivoire, a third of whose economy is based on cocoa exports, has long been a country reliant on exports of coffee, cocoa, and cotton. The same still holds true today; farmers are dependent on cocoa to support their lives, but there is one serious downside: cocoa is one of the most unstable crops, and because of its fluctuating price, farmers are constantly on the lookout for cheap labor, which leads them to enslave children (Chanthavong 4). The remote locations of the cocoa plantations contribute to the secretiveness of child slavery. The trading process leaves behind very little evidence, and the conditions of modern slaves are the exact same of that of their ancestors: “they aren’t paid, they are kept working by violence or the threat of it, and they are not free to leave” (Robbins). The cost to purchase a slave before the Civil War was $50,000 (in today’s dollars); whereas now, slaves are being sold as cheap as $50. The ownership of one human being by another is illegal in the world, but in Cote d’Ivoire, it is not called slaveowning but