Monsanto Case Study

1028 Words5 Pages
In 2005, Monsanto was charged and found guilty of bribing an Indonesian government official. According to the Department of Justice, Monsanto authorized an Indonesian consulting firm to pay an environmental official $50,000 in an attempt to make him overlook the requirement for conducting an environmental impact study before getting approval to grow genetically modified crops. Monsanto was found guilty by the Department of Justice and agreed to pay a $1 million penalty (USSEC - Third Worldnetwork, 2005). Monsanto also has a history of lobbying, spending millions of dollars on federal lobbying. All with the intention to gain political influence and connections allowing them to run their business however they want without having to worry about the government intervening with them. The social and environmental interests are not adequately accounted for. By putting patents on their seeds, farmers are forced to buy new seeds each year. In India most farmers have to take out loans to be able to afford seeds and they are not protected by government subsidies. The weather has a huge influence on their income and unpredictable weather can wipe out their entire crop, whereas in the past these farmers would save their seeds as an insurance policy against the weather but now Monsanto does not allow them to do this. The Indian government directly links the introduction of Monsanto’s GM seeds as the root cause behind the sharp increase in farmer suicides. The Indian farmers are figuring out that the biotechnology revolution has a huge effect on their crop lands and personal debt levels. This all started in 1998 when the World Bank underwent structural adjustments and changed some of their policies which forced India to open up its seed sector to global corporations like Monsanto, Cargill and Syngenta (, 2016). These global corporations changed India’s agricultural economy because Monsanto’s seeds require Monsanto fertilizers and pesticides which adds costs on top of being unable to save seeds. Monsanto does not meet the characteristics of this paradigm with the lack of social and environmental responsibility due to the corporations’ business structure and board intentions. Radical Paradigm
Get Access