Sustainable Agriculture and Corporate Environment Responsibility Approach by Monsanto - Coursework Example

Critical Essay - Monsanto Name: Course: Institution: Tutor: Sustainable Agriculture and Corporate Environment Responsibility Approach by Monsanto Introduction Monsanto’s sustainable agriculture policy integrates three important goals: environmental consciousness; economic profitability and economic and social equity. A variety of policies and practices have contributed to the realization of these goals. As a result, people in different capacities (from farmers to consumers) have shared Monsanto’s vision and have contributed to it. Essentially, Monsanto’s agricultural sustainability initiatives rest on the principle that the company’s practices must be able to meet the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs (Monsanto, 2012). Therefore, the company has pioneered stewardship of natural and human resources. Stewardship of human resources entails consideration of social responsibilities such as consumer safety and health and the needs of rural communities both the present and the future. On the other hand, stewardship of land and other natural resources involves enhancing the utility of these natural resources for the long term. Monsanto takes a system perspective in its agricultural sustainability efforts. In its broadest sense, the system is envisioned from the individual system to the local ecosystem and communities affected by the company’s agricultural practices both regionally and globally. Monsanto’s system approach to agricultural sustainability also involves interdisciplinary collaboration in research and development efforts, which require the input of researches from various disciplines and stakeholders such as farmers, policymakers, consumers and farm workers. Although Monsanto has pioneered several agricultural sustainability efforts, it is important to acknowledge that reaching the goal of sustainable agriculture is a responsibility of all stakeholders and participants with each of them having a specific duty to play. Environmental and Social Responsibility: Case for Monsanto Monsanto is a leading agricultural research company that supplies agricultural chemicals and biotechnology crops. Due to the nature of its products and services, Monsanto has taken efforts to institute environmental management programs that will contribute to the goals of sustainable agriculture. These programs are in response to the unique social and environmental impacts of the company’s products. Through its environmental management initiative, the company aims to support programs and projects that could involve more people in the economy and which will ensure that its business prospers (Smith & Menalled, 2006). As an agricultural company, Monsanto is greatly involved in secondary agriculture and is therefore part of the food chain. Accordingly, the company supports community based developmental organizations that work to develop practical solutions to the perennial problems of food security as well as unemployment and environmental issues. Moreover, the company is committed to providing full transparency about its business processes as a way of playing a positive role in the market place. The goals of Monsanto’s sustainable agricultural policy are to enhance the net benefits that the society receives from agricultural production of food products and fiber, and also from ecosystem services. This will undoubtedly require increased efficiency in nitrogen and phosphorus usage as well as ecological based management practices. Advances in the fundamental understanding of biochemistry, agroecology and biotechnology have been of immense benefits to Monsanto’s sustainable agricultural practices. Perhaps, the most important environmental contribution by Monsanto is its efforts in decreasing pest and weeds. Improvements in the control of weeds, herbivores and crop diseases and pathogens could significantly increase crop yields. For instance, improved production of wheat, corn and rice has made the three cereals to be the most important food crops in the world. In fact, the three provide about two thirds of human food (Kassie, Zikhali, Pender & Köhlin, 2008). The low incidence rate of diseases outbreaks on these cereal crops are testimony to good plant breeding and cultivation practices, some of which have for a long time been encouraged by Monsanto. For all the three food crops, Monsanto has been successful in improving resistance to pathogens and diseases and abiotic stresses. The company has also been successful in deploying these defenses in time and space in order to maintain yield stability despite low crop diversity in some cereal systems. Although it is not clear if such breeding approaches will work indefinitely, Monsanto is strongly committed to improved integrated pest control management and biotechnology systems, which will identify durable resistance through multiple sources (Uphoff, 2007). Generally, Monsanto’s agricultural practices are based on the consideration that improvement in crop resistance to pathogens is likely to be transitory with each defense mechanism sowing the evolutionary seeds of its own demise. For instance, maize hybrids in the US produced by Monsanto have a useful lifetime of 4 years. This presents a double increase in what the lifetime was 20 years ago. Similarly, resistance to agrochemicals such as fungicides, insecticides, herbicides and antibiotics has been greatly reduced through use of spatial and temporal crop diversity (Ceesay, Reid, Fernandes and Uphoff, 2006: 8-11). Recently, Monsanto has shown that costly pathogens of rice can be controlled by planting alternating rows of two different rice varieties. This strategy not only increases yield and profitability but also reduces the adverse impact of using potent pesticides. The company is also advocating for intermingled planting of plant genotypes with varying pathogen resistant profiles. This will effectively decrease or eliminate pathogens. For Monsanto, farmer incentive is a central issue as far as environmentally sustainable agriculture is concerned. Incentives have been found to increase agricultural production while at the same time contributing to reduced environmental impact. Research studies indicate that fertilizer-use efficiency can increase greatly by matching crop demand to nutrient inputs. However, essential investments in nutrient management researches and also in extension activities can promote investment in such important areas. In fact, immense opportunities for increased fertilizer efficiency exist for both small scale and large scale cropping systems throughout the world (Uphoff, 2007). The Case against Monsanto's Corporate Environmental Responsibility Approach Although Monsanto is the world’s largest food producer, the company’s corporate environmental responsibility approaches have been criticized severally. For instance, researchers in the United States have recently discovered cases of crop-eating bugs developing resistance to Monsanto's genetically modified maize plants. This discovery has validated the concerns that genetically modified (biotech) crops could give rise to a new species of pesticide-resistant bugs, which will in turn worsen the perennial food crisis experienced in the world (Smith & Menalled, 2006). Monsanto has also been accused of marketing products that have the potential to cause massive environmental impacts. For instance, since 1990, Monsanto has been producing and marketing special seeds capable of surviving exposure to the company’s Roundup herbicide. This herbicide is a powerful chemical with a strong reputation of killing weeds effectively. The problem with Monsanto’s Roundup resistant seeds is that they made it easy for farmers to abandon other weed managing techniques in favor of the Monsanto herbicide. However, a number of research reports have indicated that superweeds with immunity to Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide have spread to millions of farms in North America and Asia. It is therefore the case that Monsanto’s biotech products are presenting their own sets of environmental challenges (Kassie, Zikhali, Pender & Köhlin, 2008). Another important corporate environmental concern for Monsanto is that the company has not adopted globally accepted best practices when it comes to environmental reporting and oversight. For instance, Monsanto has not adopted the ISO 14001 certified environmental management system and as result does not report its carbon dioxide and green house gas emission levels. In 2011, Monsanto was found guilty by the US Environmental Protection Agency of contaminating water resources near its facilities in the United States. The company is also being investigated by the United States Securities and Commission Exchange for offering cash incentives to farmers for using its pesticides and herbicides (Ceesay, Reid, Fernandes and Uphoff, 2006: 6-8). Some of Monsanto’s agricultural inputs and practices have been found to reduce the ability of ecosystems to provide goods and services. For instance, high application of pesticides and herbicides can increase toxins and nutrients in ground and surface waters. This in turn increases purification and health costs and decreases recreational and fishery values. According to Monsanto (2012), agricultural practices that degrade soil quality can contribute to rapid eutrophication of aquatic ecosystems and may necessitate the expense of increased irrigation and fertilization to maintain high productivity levels on depleted soils. Heavy application of agricultural chemicals may change species composition and hence change bio-diversity in non-agricultural systems. Consequently, this may diminish goods obtained from ecosystems. Conclusion Sustainable agriculture remains the only long term solution to the world’s persistent food shortages and water crises. Monsanto, a leading agricultural input producer has taken bold steps in making sustainable agricultural practices real. The company has been at the forefront in advocating for sustainable food production. Specific approaches that the company promotes include soil characteristics, pests and weed control, local availability of sustainable inputs and growers’ goals. Despite the individual and site specific nature of sustainable agricultural practices, Monsanto promotes various principles to help farmers and communities select appropriate environmental practices. These practices include careful selection of crop species and varieties that are suited to the local conditions of the farm. Other practices include management of soil to enhance economic and biological stability of farms. Despite these efforts, Monsanto’s initiatives have occasionally resulted in adverse environmental impacts. For instance, some of the chemicals produced by the company have been known to contribute to development of chemical resistant weeds and bugs, some of which are difficulty and costly to control. References Ceesay, M., Reid, W.S., Fernandes, E.C.M. and Uphoff N. 2006. “The effects of repeated soil wetting and drying on lowland rice yield with System of Rice Intensification (SRI) methods”. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 4: 5-14. Kassie, M., Zikhali, P., Pender, J., and Köhlin, G. 2008. “Organic Farming Technologies and Agricultural Productivity: The case of Ethiopia.” Gothenburg University, Memo. Monsanto, Improving Agriculture. Retrieved from: http://www.monsanto.com/improvingagriculture/Pages/why-does-agriculture-need-to-be- improved.aspx Smith, R. and F. Menalled. 2006. Integrated strategies for managing agricultural weeds: making cropping systems less susceptible to weed colonization and establishment. Montana State University Extension Montguide MT 200601. http://www.ipm.montana.edu/CropWeeds/ montguides/IWM%20MT200601AG.pdf Uphoff, N. 2007. “Reducing the vulnerability of rural house­holds through agroecological practice: Considering the System of Rice Intensification (SRI)”. Mondes en - Développement 35: 4-14. Read More