Dirty dairying
Discuss about the Legal Professional & Ethical Aspects Of Business & Management.
Fonterra cooperative group limited engages itself in dairy products. The cooperative company was started in 2001 after merging with kiwi cooperative diaries after the deregulation by the government. Fonterra is the largest company existing as a single organization in New Zealand. Fonterra accounts a quarter of the country’s exports making its performance in the economy of New Zealand very important. Globally, Fonterra is the leading company in supplying dairy products and account for about 21% of international exports in approximately 100 countries (Balaraman, 2017).
Dirty dairying can be referred to as the mutilation of the ecological health of the fresh waters and the surroundings of the New Zealand as a result of unscrupulous farming by the agriculturalists in the country. The dairy products post adverse effects on the environment in their daily activities.
Fonterra is one of the largest firms dealing in dairy products, unfortunately, has severally been mentioned to be involved in most of the dirty dairying in New Zealand. For example, the dumping of the waste products from the production into the fresh waters, therefore, causing adverse effects on the environment (Blackett, 2016).
Stakeholders are people affected by the policy of an organization both directly or indirectly. By the administration of the organization refers to the structures, goals, objectives as well as all the activities taking place in the company. Stakeholders can also include an individual or a group of persons who have interests in the company to achieve the set goals and objectives of the company. Stakeholders can be divided into two types;
Internal stakeholders are the individuals in the firm such as the interested investors, the managers, directors as well as the employees.
External stakeholders are those individuals outside the company and are not involved in the company’s activities, but they are affected indirectly by its performance. These stakeholders are the consumer of the products and the dealers of the dairy products in Fonterra.
Effects of dirty dairying issues on the company.
Dirty dairying is the critical challenge facing Fonterra as a dairy company. Fonterra is faced with the challenge of managing the excess nitrogen from the area of the animals and also the effective management of the water bodies. The problem emerges due to the large farms which consist of very many dairy animals whose waste products mostly the urea from the urine post an adverse effect on the waterways as well to the environment.
Stakeholders
Employees in the Fonterra Company mostly come from around the company, and since they share the same environment, they are affected by the polluted fresh waters as well as their families. It is also the desire of each employee to work with a company which concerns itself with the well-being of the environment. Working with Fonterra may not be the pride of an employee regarding the issue of pollution of the surroundings by the firm. The employee might also be affected to being goal oriented since the outcome behind the firm’s success is ugly.
Dirty dairying similarly affects the dealers of the Fonterra firm. This effect comes from the excess dumping of the urea in waterbodies. If the same water is given to the animals for drinking, those animals might get infected with diseases. A sick dairy animal means a reduction of milk per cow. Reduction of milk collected per cow implies a decrease in dairy products, and this directly affects the supplier through the shortage. Normal profits incurred will reduce since the supplier will have few products compared to the times all cows are healthy.
Fonterra has a sum of 35 shareholders who act as the council body in New Zealand. The shareholders of Fonterra company are affected by the reduction of the supply of the dairy products in case the animals get sick from the contamination of water by urea. The company may incur losses because liters of milk per cow reduce as well as the money committed to treating the animals. Damages in a company are dived equally as well as the profits. In this case, the shareholders will have to cater for the expenses hence incurring a loss opposite of their expectations (Lowea & Mars, 2016)
The society comprises of those people surrounding the company. These people are affected directly by water pollution by the company. Nitrogen in the form of urea from the animals affects the freshwater bodies since its composition covers a high percentage based on the large farms and many animals. The society lacks fresh drinking water, therefore, incurring extra expenses to buy clean water which it could be unnecessary if the company were cautious of the effects of its activities. The society also faces the problem of environment degradation (Bain & Dandachi, 2015).
Fonterra industry has adversely affected the environment of New Zealand. In the report given is that about 28 % pollution of the situation was from those large farms used in dairy farming. The Aotearoa report shows that water pollution in these areas is the most ideal of the entire aspect of pollution. This pollution is from the animal’s waste mostly urea that makes the fresh waters toxic and unsafe for human consumption (Tipples, Hill, Wilson & Greenhalgh, 2013). Considering that one cow can give waste products 15 more times than an individual makes the matters worst due to the large herd of cattle at hand. Regarding the report from the national institute of water and atmosphere research has confirmed that dairy farming which has occupied 40% or more of the country’s land area is the critical source of pollution and the pollution of the water bodies around New Zealand is increasing (Tipples, Hill, Wilson & Greenhalgh, 2013).
Effects of dirty dairying issues on the company
Ethical behavior enhances the smooth running of the business; it entails the act of practicing the moral principles which include equality, honesty, dignity, fairness, and human rights. In the employment set up, ethics and behavior are the most crucial ingredients for success (Holland, 2015).
The Fonterra management has a last closed-door approach to the public, for instance, its involvement in the mass poisoning that aroused in China that dissatisfied their market and their stakeholders. Due to many reasons, Fonterra lost its sense of pride, and the management had an enormous task of restoring back their customers’ credibility, investors and the urge to secure their market position globally (Robson and Edmeades, 2010). Consequently, the melamine crisis in China damaged Fonterra product status based on the audience who interrogated the Fonterra executive reputation (Tipples, Hill, Wilson & Greenhalgh, 2013).
Laws and regulations apply to their business operation that takes care of the suppliers’ compliance be it locally, nationally and globally.
The Fonterra stakeholders are both internal and external, they anticipate for a supreme friendly environment process that will enhance them achieve great dairy products. This will, in turn, increase their sales in the market (Ryan, 2014).
Farmers supply the maximum amount of the dairy products to the Fonterra Company to achieve an adequate profit. Consequently, as their doubts on the company arise they, in turn, urge the company to apply the ethical behavior measures that consider the suppliers (Stahl and Pless, 2013).
The audience expects the company, to produce the goods that are of good quality and standard, harmless on human consumption. Manufacturing process should be environmentally friendly to avoid pollution. Fonterra should ensure ethical behaviors are upheld to prevent employees’ discrimination and to ensure their safety and rights are followed to the later (Haung, 2016).
New Zealand is significantly affected by the dirty dairying activity. The organization has to find a solution to the problem to avoid significant damage to farmers and suppliers. Fonterra should ensure environmental safety by enacting disposal legislation and appropriate measures to enhance emission, noise and waste reduction.
Every organization has its set ethics that has to govern each employee; the expectations often vary from one individual to another regarding one’s perception. Employees thus prefer working in an organization that fully deploys its ethical behavior within the environment (Tipples, Hill, Wilson & Greenhalgh, 2013).
To provide farmers with minimum standards which are clear, education on environment issues and a better information practice, Fonterra has initiated the supply Fonterra Program which govern the waterway, nitrogen and effluent management which are detailed in 2012/2013 Suppliers Handbook that entails the rules and regulations as well as the terms and conditions of supplying Fonterra (Bird & Mendenhall, 2016)
Organizational expectations for ethical behavior
The Fonterra’s moral behavior and appraisal are deliberately outlined, they came up with new programs namely:
1) Waterway management
2) Effluent management
3) Nitrogen Management
Mike Joy says that nitrogen from the farms has become one of the challenges in the NZ. Increasing application of nitrogen and phosphorous in the last 25 years has been a downside immense (Jiménez, Winkler & Dunkl, 2017). The leach of the nutrients from the soils into the waterways has increased the growth of plants and algae in the waters. Cadmium had been another problem which is found in the phosphates mined overseas and imported to New Zealand. Fonterra as an industry has set policies to assist in nutrients management. Fonterra advice the farmers to be aware of the rules and regulations applicable in the dairy farms. There is no theory of “wasted water” as a concept and the one way to change the scenario is to ensure that people are made to believe there is water and that is it not available to everyone. This will diminish the chances of pollution. efficient use of nutrients, the Fonterra Nitrogen management program should achieve the set objectives. This is attained by collecting statistics from farmers on nitrogen loss and nitrogen efficiency conversion (Smale, 2014). Farmers’ performance can be done about the nitrogen efficiency conversion and the nitrogen leaking risk to generate clear reports. There is a lot if life in these waters and therefore it is very important to preserve the water. The water bodies have evolved over time and they have constantly grown with the help of the biology. The natural flow of waters have also ensured that water be preserved and it be allowed to blow back to where it started. The aim is to claim that there has been no pollution and that the waterways have not degraded. The state of the art equipment be allowed to advocate for a safer environment and to allow a proper state of affairs for the environment. the right standard to accept the levels of freshwater is to maximize the essentiality of scientific approach for the water bodies. The new MfE regime also allows a set level of algae that is said to be 6.9 mg/l. this level is higher than the prescribed guidelines of Anzec. The 6.9 mg/l is the set at a higher level of 15 times the guidelines. There are a few ‘water quality brands’ that talk about nitrate and claim them to be farcical because sites which have nitrate level more than the actual and previous score which has been prescribed by Anzec. These are called an A whereas the sites which have a score of four times the original are marked with a score of B and the ones where the ranks are as high as 15 times, it is marked with a score of C. The Government has been very defiant in dealing with this issue and they have not considered the facts but when the same thing comes from the general public, the situation gets out of hand. The public at large believe in the logic and the statistics are completely ignored by the ministry. The general people have started to believe in the same logic which has been forwarded by the ministry.
Areas of ethical expectation from Fonterra
Mikes joy information on effluent was that the damage will take 15 billion dollars to clean up the mess by the dairy farming which is more than the industry worth to the economy. He claims that the small streams that feed into the larger streams should be fence to avoid rubbish getting into the major rivers and lakes. He insists on concentration of the smaller streams to deal with the root of the problem. Fonterra information was that it has sets standards for effluent management. All suppliers are required to manage all the effluents sources to comply with the council rules. The farms and the waterways have ben polluted over time and there has been no proper method for cleaning. The pollutants have ruined the water bodies and the process of cleaning will take an immense amount of time.
Dairy effluents cut down the fertilizer cost and increase pasture production if appropriately managed. Effluent management program enacts laws that have to be followed whenever a land needs to be done. This meets the organizational objectives by conducting an environmental assessment on farms annually (Feldman, 2013). On the other hand, the farmers have to approve the set programs to enhance the resolution of issues. The dairy effluents are a good substitute to the use of fertilizer and the method of cleaning the pollutants should be actively taken up by the Government. There are stringent legislature that look into the use of products and therefore whenever it is seen that the pollution is getting out of hand, it is best to impose more laws that help in the prevention of pollution.
Mike joy says that pollution of water has costed the society a lot. the health of the society is at risks due the effluent and nitrogen in the waters. A management of these hazards is to be initiated to clean up water which human depends on.
The Fonterra waterway management should have the initiative to lessen the water loss in rivers and waterways. This is achieved by bringing about the risk farms under control to decline the water quality in streams. On the other hand, to safeguard the rivers for the forthcoming generation. Fonterra aims to attain 100% stock segregation. According to Fonterra waterways being the primary water source, it is more than a meter wide and 30cm deep (Feldman, 2013).
Choice 1
Fonterra Company ought to come up with strategies and plans to find lasting solutions to the primary challenge of pollution. Stakeholders of the company should also give a hand to fight the enemy that endangers the company’s reputation. In this case, the company has come up with ways such as nitrogen management policy, effluent management, waterways management, water usage management as well as the environmental management (Pless, Sabatella & Maak, 2017). With the outlined policies, Fonterra is fighting the challenge of pollution to minimize the issue of dirt dairying. The company should look for other ways to combat pollution.
Choice 2
Fonterra can use the Collins optimal system of ethics. The system will help the company to achieve proper ethical practices that will aid in fighting its challenges (Collins, 2010). The moral system has various categories of methods which includes,
Training practice
Hiring practices
Operating practice
Orientation practice
Evaluation practice.
The outlined practices give in a process and requirements of recruiting employees into the company. It also includes some of the steps in the code of ethics to the employees and the implementation of such ethics in the company (Collins, 2012).
For Fonterra to cut off the issue of pollution of the waterways as well as the environment at large will have to implement procedures that are ethical. For example, for nitrogen management, the company should initiate a program of urine and manure harvesting instead of exposing the waste products into the soil. The harvested waste will be collected into big containers and converted into biogas. An advantage of biogas is that it is environmentally friendly. With this method, nitrogen in the soil will be minimized as well as biogas will be produced. Biogas is a renewable source of energy which can be used as power in the machinery in the company. Evaluation of the practice and implementation of ethical procedures at the end will make the environment better (Huimin & Ryan, 2011).
Conclusion.
A conclusion can be made as discussed broadly on the effects of the organizations on the environment that one, a large group of various people are directly affected and pose them in dangers of living in a polluted vicinity. Two, solutions and ways to minimize if not total eradication of causes of pollution which also should be ethical. Fonterra should instead of setting directions on how to clean up the waterways, to avoid that pollutant from getting into the water in the first place.
Despite Fonterra Company being one of the largest company for a very long time, the company has not fully structured on ways of eradicating pollution in New Zealand. Dirty dairying is one of the most significant challenges the company faces and up to date has not come up with a workable plan on how to minimize its effects on the environment. It is up to the company to employ ethical practices and implement on them in saving the already mess it has put New Zealand as a country of environmental issues. With the ethical practices, permanent ecological problems will be avoided.
As discussed broadly on the effects of the organizations on the environment, a large group of various people are directly affected and pose them in dangers of living in a polluted vicinity. Solutions and ways to minimize if not total eradication of causes of pollution which also should be ethical. Fonterra should instead of setting directions on how to clean up the waterways, to avoid that pollutant from getting into the water in the first place.
The location of the organizations should be far away from the rivers to avoid direct spillage in the water bodies. Environment is of paramount importance and therefore it is the responsibility of every organization to undertake steps that are essential in preserving the nature. With the rampant growth of industries, it has become very difficult to ascertain a proper solution to the growing pollution.
Fonterra should implement all the ethical issues discussed to avoid irreversible consequences that will have a permanent adverse effect on the environment as well as the society. Another way to ensure that there is reduced population is to hatch a plan where the wrongdoers are punished. Also, another important way to bring a stop to the abuse of environment by the factories and the organization is to incorporate strict laws and legislations. The laws should be very strict and the punishment should be harsh to ensure that all the wrongdoers are penalized.
References
Bain, C., & Dandachi, T. (2015). 2.“100% pure”? Private governance efforts to mitigate the effects of “dirty dairying” on New Zealand’s environment. Handbook of the International Political Economy of Agriculture and Food, 40.
Balaraman, P. (2017). Qualitative Review of Ethics from Religion, Culture and Corporate Scandals. Feldman, S. P. (2013). Trouble in the middle: American-Chinese business relations, culture, conflict, and ethics. Routledge.
Bird, A., & Mendenhall, M. E. (2016). From cross-cultural management to global leadership: Evolution and adaptation. Journal of World Business, 51(1), 115-126.
Coghlan, S., Balzarova, M., & McWilliam, W. Evaluation of voluntary agro-environmental schemes adopted by dairy industry in Canterbury, New Zealand. Tagungsband 2014, 91.
Collins, D. (2010). Designing ethical organizations for spiritual growth and superior performance: An organization systems approach. Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, 7(2), 95-117.
Collins, D. (2012). Business ethics: How to design and manage ethical organizations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Dissabandaraa, H. (2014, February). Handling Key Issues in Corporate Governance and Business Ethics: To be True to Self & Beyond Rules and Regulations. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Management and Economics(Vol. 26, p. 27).
Henson, R. (2016). The road ahead: The future of global leadership and implications for research and practice. In Successful Global Leadership (pp. 285-301). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Holland, P. (2015). The Dirty Dairying Campaign and the Clean Streams Accord. Lincoln Planning Review, 6(1-2), 63-69.
Huang, Q. (2016). The Role of Institutional Trust in Country-of-Origin Effect: A Comparative Study of Two Milk Powder Contamination Incidents. China Media Research, 12(2).
Huimin, G., & Ryan, C. (2011). Ethics and corporate social responsibility–An analysis of the views of Chinese hotel managers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(4), 875-885.
Jiménez, P., Winkler, B., & Dunkl, A. (2017). Creating a healthy working environment with leadership: The concept of health-promoting leadership. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(17), 2430-2448.
Le Heron, R., & Blackett, P. (2016). Maintaining the ‘Clean Green’Image: Governance of On-Farm Environmental Practices in the New Zealand Dairy Industry. In Agri-Food Commodity Chains and Globalising Networks (pp. 89-102). Routledge.
Lowea, H., & Mars, C. (2016). THE CONUNDRUM OF REALISING FERTILISER BENEFITS OF WASTEWATER FOR GREATER SUSTAINABILITY–OPPORTUNITY VS REALITY. Integrated nutrient and water management for sustainable farming. Occasional Report, (29).
Mendenhall, M. E., Osland, J., Bird, A., Oddou, G. R., Stevens, M. J., Maznevski, M., & Stahl, G. K. (Eds.). (2017). Global leadership: Research, practice, and development. Routledge.
Pless, N., Sabatella, F., & Maak, T. (2017). Mindfulness, Reperceiving, and Ethical Decision Making: A Neurological Perspective. In Responsible Leadership and Ethical Decision-Making (pp. 1-20). Emerald Publishing Limited.
Robson, M., & Edmeades, D. (2010). Is Dairying Sustainable? A case study. September 2010 NZIAHS Forum, Lincoln University.
Ryan, J. (2014). Farming in a fishbowl: Insights from environmental leaders.
Smale, H. (2014). New Zealand Aquaculture Industry Initiative: Collingwood Case Study. In Molluscan Shellfish Safety (pp. 65-71). Springer, Dordrecht.
Stahl, G. K., Pless, N. M., & Maak, T. H. O. M. A. S. (2013). Responsible global leadership. Global leadership: Research, practice, and development, 240-259.
Tall, I., & Campbell, H. (2018). 10 The “dirty dairying” campaign in New Zealand. Agri-environmental Governance as an Assemblage: Multiplicity, Power, and Transformation, 67.
Tipples, R. S., Hill, R., Wilson, K., & Greenhalgh, I. J. (2013). ‘Decent dairying’-Findings from a Change Laboratory process to reduce fatigue on New Zealand dairy farms.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
