Environmental Impact of Products - Essay Example

The Environment Impact of Products In order to reduce the environmental impact of their activities, organisations should take into account environmental considerations when designing their products. Introduction While companies seek to maximise their profits in the face of increasing competition, they may start cutting corners and even start to ignore regulations and environmental protection laws that have been placed on them (Lachapelle, 2005). However, while such companies become more interesting for those who study law and the process of government regulation, there are cases in which companies have not broken any laws but still have been forced to change the design and creation of their products to make them more environmentally friendly. Two such companies are Apple Inc. and Cadbury Schweppes. Their examples can be used to show how companies had to change their products and their processes in order to become more environmentally friendly. Environmental degradation has become a very important topic for the world today watch dog groups as well as concerned bodies focus on various ways and means in which they can force giant companies to help the environment rather than harm it (Green, 2005). Government regulation, think tank pressure as well as the opinions of various consumer groups can force companies to become friendlier towards the environment (Schulte, 2006). Undoubtedly, human activities including the actions taken by corporations have had a visible impact on the global environment and this has been noted by the scientific community at large. While government can make laws to regulate a bare minimum to be done by corporations, consumers have to ensure that they do not support those companies which are hurting the environment (VonAncken, 2006). Consumers who have access to vast amounts of information about the companies they make purchases from can demand that the brands or businesses which they support behave ethically and show their responsibility for not hurting the environment. Organisations have to show that they are ethical producers since consumer wish to be ethical themselves and may make the purchase decisions based on knowing if the company is helping the environment rather than hurting it (Ethical Consumer, 2006). By being friendly to the environment, companies such as Apple and Cadbury Schweppes are helping their shareholders and investors (Phillips, 2003). Cadbury Schwepps Through the scientific developments in recycling, proper water conservation, and more efficient technologies for generating energy, individuals and companies have made great advances in becoming more environmentally responsible. At the same time, these efforts fall short of what will be needed in the world for sustained long term prosperity. While the global ecosystem has some inherent abilities to correct and heal itself with time, the limitations on the damage it can sustain are also quite clear. Individuals may not be able to do what corporations are able to do and that puts a lot of the responsibility of saving the planet on the corporations of the world (Gupta, 2004). In such circumstances, It is important that and companies begin to recognize the seriousness of environmental issues and start taking responsibility for the damage they have done in the past. Within such parameters, Cadbury Schweppes is one of the many organisations involved in taking a proactive approach towards the protection of the human environment. Through several projects distributed all over the world, the company is involved in cleaning and developing fresh water resources, improving recycling situations, and contributing towards the health concerns which may be generated by the use of their product. A quick examination of the company website shows that the company is quite aware of the ethical issues which come with the design and development of their products. Therefore, the company appears to making a lot of effort to announce that they support environment related causes and even make it point to inform the consumers that even the vehicles they use to truck their products from one point to the other are environmentally safe. They also say that the relationships they have with Cocoa farmers are all socially friendly and do not seek to exploit the farmers (Cadbury Schweppes, 2008). While the company does not make it obvious if the trucks are being operated with alternative fuels and they do not describe the nature of the contracts they have with cocoa farmers, it could be comforting for consumers to know that their products and their production methods are environmentally friendly. It is nearly obvious that companies such as Cadbury Schweppes make significant investments when they need to maintain a supply line for their products and their bottling plants are only setup with the objective of making profits. However, it is interesting to note how ethics have become a key issue for many companies who never considered them to be a requirement for doing business. Cadbury for example, ensure the customers that they push for recycling drives, help in development nature preserves and even provide financial assistance to poor cocoa farmers in different locations around the world (Cadbury Schweppes, 2008). Despite the company’s attempts to show that it is an ethical company, it seems that all these steps are being taken only because the company wants to look like it is ethical and friendly to the environment. Apple Inc. Another such case seems to be Apple Inc. Where the product itself and the packaging of the product came under fire for being environmentally damaging, Apple quickly changed the packaging to make itself more environmentally friendly. Planque (2006) discusses this change in Apple in depth and shows how Steve Jobs (The CEO of Apple) changed his tune when it came to launching the new version of the iPod Nano by focusing on the packaging and saying, “Weve got some new packaging for the new Nano as well. And its 52% less volume. This turns out to be an environmentally great thing. Because it dramatically reduces the amount of fossil fuels we have to spend to move these things around the planet (Planque, 2006, Pg. 1)”. Undoubtedly, Apple could have had an environmentally friendly package even before it launched the earlier version of its product and could have made a lot of people happy with the company. However, the design of the product and the packaging itself were supposed to attract buyers and were not concerned with environmental issues. In fact Greenpeace still has concernes regarding the operations of Apple including issues such as: Overuse of toxic chemicals such as brominated flame retardants and PVC. No declared timeline to phase out such chemicals. The recycling programme is limited to America or where Apple is legally bound to have recycling programmes Apple products are designed to have a short life span. Noting the low ranking Apple had with regard to environmental and ethical issues, Greenpeace also notes that, “It is disappointing to see Apple ranking so low in the overall guide. They are meant to be world leaders in design and marketing, they should also be world leaders in environmental innovation (Planque, 2006, Pg. 1)”. However, Apple’s own website seems to sideline these issues and give more importance to thinner packages which are supposed to help the environment more than hazardous chemicals (Apple, 2008). Nevertheless, they have to be given some credit for trying their best to be friendly to the environment. Conclusion It seems quite clear that had there been no regulations or no bodies to oversee what corporations were doing with regard to their environmental responsibility, things might have been quite different. However, as much as the cajoling of these bodies helps the environment, the individuals who govern companies and lead them from strength to strength will have to make it their personal responsibility to help the cause of recycling and limiting dangerous pollutants. Without that, no amount of awareness can help the environmental situation. Finally, even if the process by which the companies and organisations of the business world make themselves ethical and environmentally friendly is based on corporate greed, it should be supported because this corporate greed is doing its best to help the environment as much as possible. As long as we have whistle blowers and other bodies looking over these companies, they will think twice before using dangerous chemicals, exploiting workers in under developed countries and keep themselves in check before succumbing to the lure of ever higher profits and returns. Word Count: 1,525 Works Cited Apple. 2008, ‘Apple and the Environment’, [Online] Available at: http://www.apple.com/environment/design/ Cadbury Schweppes. 2008, ‘Environment, health and safety’, [Online] Available at: http://www.cadburyschweppes.com/EN/EnvironmentSociety/Environment/ Ethical Consumer. 2006, ‘Why Buy Ethically?’ EthicalConsumer.org, [Online] Available at: http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/aboutec/whybuyethically.htm Green, J. 2005, Reducing Air Pollution. Gareth Stevens Publishing. Gupta, A. 2004. Human Values In Management, Ashgate Publishing. Lachapelle, E. 2005, ‘Morality, Ethics, and Globalization: Lessons from Kant, Hegel, Rawls, and Habermas’, Perspectives on Global Development & Technology, vol. 4, no. 4, p. 603-644. Phillips, R. 2003. Stakeholder Theory and Organizational Ethics, Berrett-Koehler. Planque, F. 2006, ‘How Apple got green overnight...’, [Online] Available at: http://fplanque.com/info-tech/it-business/apple_not_very_environment_friendly Schulte, B. 2006, ‘Turning up the Heat’, U.S. News & World Report, vol. 140, no. 13, pp. 34-37. VonAncken, E. 2006, ‘Air Pollution: Our Impact on the Planet’, School Library Journal, vol. 52, no. 4 pp. 67-68. Read More