Arguments against Relocating Polluting Industries in the Third World Countries - Essay Example

Running Header: Against Relocating Polluting Industries in the Third World Countries Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code & Name: Date of Submission: Against Relocating Polluting Industries in the Third World Countries Introduction Pollution from the increasing polluting industries in the third World Countries has been a critical ethical issue that the world is experiencing today. Indeed, many are the industries that cause pollution in the developed world, and the costs of such pollution has been on the increase due to increased legislation and tax on such pollution. Essentially, it is very expensive to run any kind of polluting industry6 in the developed countries due to the high costs that come with it due to the increased legislation touching in the areas of tax, insurance, and other legal requirements that may be costly for the proprietors to meet. The increased awareness of the impacts of the polluting industries in the developed countries has acted greatly towards their various authorities and agencies in these countries to come up with measures to deal with the menace. Environmental security concerns have also taken a big air space with regard to the attention that it has drawn from the different countries. Polluting industries directly impacts the environment with regard to the people and the animals that live within the vicinity, and also to a larger extend it affects other key areas of environment such as the destruction of the ozone layer due to the toxic gases that are emitted to the environment. In many of the developed countries, relevant legislation with regard to policy that govern the existence of such industries has made running such industries to be very expensive due to the high cost that are tagged to the pollution (Sengar, 2007). This has made a number of people to propose that since the costs of pollution are relatively cheap in the third world countries then such industries should be relocated to this industry. I want to argue against this argument by putting forth various reasons why relocating the polluting industries would not be a solution to the challenge of increased costs of pollution from these industries (Hardoy & Satterthwaite, 1992). Many of the third world countries based on their economic and technological inability to access machinery and capital goods have remained agricultural economies. In many of these countries particularly those in Africa produce agricultural products including cash crops, fruits, flowers and other plants which are the raw materials of the industries that are located in the developed economies. The developed economies import these products as raw materials for further processing or manufacturing at their industries. Most of these industries are polluting industries and this becomes a challenge to the owners of the industries, the environmentalists, and the governing authorities which brings out the voice of the people. It has been challenging to manage polluting industries in developed countries due to many reasons, however the costs of pollution in these countries comes top of the list bearing in mind the increased legislation that have been passed in these countries, the insurance demands that is linked to such companies, and the high tax that is levied to these industries to limit or prevent their existence in these countries. Regardless of these, I am not of the opinion to relocate the polluting industries from developed to third world countries because such relocation would ethically not be sound, for it would not solve the impeding problem but instead will transfer various problems that have been experienced in those countries to the third world countries (Smith, 1992). Arguments against Relocation of the Polluting Industries from Developed to Third World Countries Based on consequentialist theories where the validity of a moral judgment about an action is tagged to the consequences of the action being undertaken, I hold it that the polluting industries should not be relocated to the third world countries since if they are relocated to these countries, they would bear a number of negative consequences not only to the third world countries they have been relocated into, but also to the developed countries where the industries have been relocated from. The moral judgment of the act of relocating the polluting industries from the developed countries to third world countries is questionable. This is because of the consequences that will follow decisions of such nature, and the kind of image that will be sent when such companies are relocated to the third world countries. It is important to note that the act to relocate an industry of whatever nature from one location to another is not a mean act that should be underestimated by the parties concerned. In particular, to relocate a polluting industry from one place to another even carries more weight, and thus to relocate this type of industry from the developed to third world countries even raised much alarm over the motive of such an action. It is not enough to take one consideration of the increased costs of pollution in the developing world to choose to relocate the polluting industries. This is for the reason that polluting industries have more negative impacts to the environment and the people, and this should be considered prior to the costs that the polluting industries have to meet for them to operate in a given country (Dickenson, 1996). Consequentialist theories puts forth clearly that for proper judgment of any decision and action with regard to if it is ethical or not should not be tagged to the very action but to the consequences that would come forth as a result of the action. In other words, the consequences of the action should be considered prior to the action when it comes to the determination of how ethical the action undertaken is rated. Based on this theoretical argument, it is held that the act to relocate polluting industries from developed to third world countries is unethical regardless of the low cost of pollution in these countries. Relocation of the polluting industries to the third world countries is held to be unethical with regard to this theory due to the negative consequences that would come as a result of such an action being undertaken. Without mincing words, polluting industries pollute the environment, and it is this environment that forms the habit of wild animals, birds, fish and other creatures. The emitted pollutants are emitted to the atmosphere; this corrupts the natural air that is important for the existence of man alongside other harmful impacts such as the destruction of the ozone layer which shields the earth from the harmful rays of the sun. These impacts would not change if the polluting industries are relocated to the third world countries instead it would shift a few of these problems to the third world countries. This means that the sufferers would be the ecosystem in these countries, and the people who live and work in these countries. In other words, the consequences of relocating the polluting industries to the third world countries is much more negative, and thus such an action is considered to be ethically wrong. The action to relocate polluting industries to third world countries based on the consequentialist theories would not pass the ethics test, and thus should not be undertaken (Bernstam, 1991). It is important to look at the sad consequences that would result if the polluting industries are relocated from the developed countries to the third world countries. These consequences would shed light to how unethical this action would be, and the reason why it should not just be undertaken but should not be considered at all. It is these consequences that are going to be outlined that discredit the action to relocate polluting industries to third world countries based on the consequentialist theory. The first consequence of such an action relates to the transfer of pollution from developed countries to the third world countries. The action to relocate the polluting industries from the developed to third world countries will not just relocate the industries but will also cause the relocation of the pollutants that are emitted by these companies from the developed to these third world countries (Sarkar, 2006).The pollutants that will now be emitted in the third world countries where the polluting industries will have been relocated to raises ethical concerns such as; what happens to the people who live in this countries? Are they any better or worse than those who are in developed countries where the industries have been relocated from? Is this pollution also harmful to them in the same way it is to the people in the developed countries where the polluting industries has been relocated from? Do they deserve to be burdened by the pollution which in the first place they were not party to? These questions raises ethical concerns with regard to the human dignity irrespective of where one lives it (developed underdeveloped or third world countries). The answers to these questions outlines the consequences of that comes as a result of the pollution that the people in the third world countries will have to bear with as a result of the relocation. Ina nut shell, the people living in the places where the industries will have been relocated with will have to suffer for the consequences of the action to relocate these industries yet they may not have been party to the decision to relocate such industries. This clearly outlines that the act to relocate the polluting industries is unethical for it leads to a negative consequence of pollution being transferred to other people in these third world countries who also have the right to live in pollution free environment. Human dignity will be completely out of place with such actions (Low, 2002). The second consequence of the relocation is that the people who run and are employed in these industries may lose their jobs, and thus the source of their daily bread may be shattered. With regard to this consequence, the act to relocate the polluting industries from developed to third world countries is said to be selfish and not for the common good of the employees and other stakeholders of the industries. This is because such relocation may be pushed forward by the wonders/directors of the industries that will be running away from the high costs of pollution that they have to meet without taking consideration of the people who would suffer as a consequence of this action. As much as the industries will meet less costs of pollution when they are relocated to the third world countries, this should not be a factor to overrule other very important consequences that would come as a result of the action (Williams, 1991). Having in mind how far most developed countries are positioned from the third world countries, it is logical to say that only a few employees would make it to move with the industry due to many logistical issues. This may render many of such employees without employment, and thus cause a negative problem back in the developed countries where the industry will have been relocated from. Therefore, the action to relocate the polluting industries from developed to third world countries on the reason that the costs of pollution are cheaper may be seen to be a selfish move by the directors or owners of the industries who want to increase their profit margins at the expense of other key players as employees who may lose out on their jobs. This is unethical and e perfect reason why such relocation should not be considered at all. It is ethically correct that people cannot suffer at the expense of increased returns of the company; instead owners of such polluting industries should consider other ethically acceptable means to go round the challenge of the high costs of pollution in the developed economies. It is clear that based on the consequentialist theory, such negative consequence that the people and employees have to face as a result of the relocation points out on how unethical the action is, and the reason why it should not be considered (Nordström, 1999). The third consequence of the relocation of the polluting industries to the third world countries is that such an action would amount to exploitation of the resources of the people in these countries. Relocating the polluting industries in to the third world is a sheer act that is directed towards increasing exploitation of the resources of the people in these countries and thus it is unethical. Exploitation comes in the following ways. First, when the industries in these countries are relocated they do not change ownership; they just change the location meaning they would still be owned by the foreign tycoons in the developed world. Secondly, high percentages of the profits and the revenue received are likely to be channeled back to the host country where the industry came from since the industry did not come as a form of investment, but was located in these places to run away from the high costs of pollution in the developed world (Brookes, 1990). Thirdly, there is high likelihood that high skilled jobs, and professionals who would serve in the industry will be expatriates who would have come from the developed country where the industry will have come from; this leaves the low carder jobs to the locals, and these jobs are characterized by low pay, being prone to accidents and impacts of the toxic gases released. This is exploitative indeed. In addition, the intention to run away from the high costs of pollution by relocating the polluting industry to third world countries where the costs of pollution is said to be low, and yet subject the people to low paying jobs, pollution from the industries and its related impacts clearly demonstrates that such an act is exploitative in nature, and thus unethical. This is one of the key consequences that relocation of the polluting industries from developed to third world countries would imply. Thus based on the consequentialist theory, the action of relocating the polluting industries from developed to third world countries is unethical, and thus should not be carried out (Morris, 1997). The other key theory that may be of importance to ethically argue against the relocation of polluting industries from developed countries to third world countries based on the cheaper cost of pollution in the later countries are the non-consequentialist theories. These are the theories that do not look at how ethical an action is by considering the consequences by looking at the line of duty that one is obliged to abide by. Immanuel Kant is one of the key proponents of this theory and he claims that an action may be said to be ethically correct when they are carried done out of duty. In other words, the existence of the free space for one to do right or wrong is important to be available, so that when a person goes out of duty to do the right thing, then that action is considered to be ethically and morally acceptable (Shaw, Barry & Sansbury, 2009). A perfect example may be derived from a drunk driver who arrives home safe. In this theory, as much as he has arrived safe, it is not ethically correct to get drunk while driving for it violates the duty to do no harm to anyone while driving. The intention of the driver that was drunk though he reached home safe was not right, he did not go out of duty to do what was right, and that was to avoid drinking while drunk. The proponents of this theory argue that for any action to be ethically sound, it should meet at least the following three conditions. The person taking the action should act out of duty, the person taking the action should act with the same reasoning as if the action was done to him/her, and thirdly the action should not be characterized by the person undertaking it using it as a means to an end. Looking at the decision to relocate polluting industries from developed to third world countries based on the cheaper pollution cost that is in the later countries with regard to this theory, much may be said. First, this kind of relocation may be said to be unethical based on the fact that polluting industries emit pollution to the atmosphere regardless of their location, and thus it is the duty of owners of such industries as well as the governing authorities concerned to come up with the measures to curb the pollution as opposed to transferring the location of the industries. When the polluting industries are relocated from the developed countries to the third world countries, it does not stop the pollution instead it transfers the pollution problem to the countries where the industries have been relocated to, and this means that the people concerned will not have gone out of their duty to solve the problem instead transfer the problem. The high cost of pollution in the developed countries overshadows the real problem of pollution that the concerned authorities in the developed countries would want to address. The authorities concerned with industries in the developed countries would go ahead to increase pollution costs in these countries not for the purposes of the industries to be relocated but for the industries to work out on the mechanisms to reduce the pollution that is emitted by these industries. In other words, the stakeholders of the polluting industries in the developed world are asked to work on means to curb the pollution, and not to transfer the industries to third world countries. Therefore, based on the fact that relocating the polluting industries from developed countries to third world countries amounts to the people concerned avoiding to go out of duty to do what is expected of them; then it makes this action to be unethical and thus should not be practiced (Wapner & Edwin, 2000). The second argument with regard to these non-consequentialist theories is that relocation of the polluting industries is an attempt of the people concerned to evade paying the high costs of pollution, and this means they do not acknowledge the negative impacts that the pollution from these industries cause to the environment. It is common knowledge that pollution is harmful, and thus because of this consequence there will be high costs tagged to it. The costs of pollution are applied so as to protect the people working and or living near the industries and also to be a wake up signal for the owners of the industries to work out means by which the pollution may be minimized. This means that the act to relocate the polluting industries from the developed to third world countries is a deliberate move to acknowledge the harm that they cause to the environment and the people. The stakeholders of these industries have a duty to ensure that they work out means to minimize pollution, and ensure that the environment and people are safe from the impacts of the toxic gases that are released by these industries. The decision to relocate the polluting industries shows that they do not want to go out of their duty to do what is right, but instead they want to shift the problem of pollution to the third world countries. This makes their actions unethical and thus should not be considered at all. Conclusion Pollution is harmful regardless of the source, nature and extends of its existence. Industries that emit pollutants to the atmosphere pose a great threat not only to the people who live around the industries but to the wider global community due to the impacts it has to the environment. Essentially, pollutants that are emitted by the various industries into the environment often would lead to instability of the natural ecosystem and composition of gases that is in the atmosphere. This has gross impacts to the global environment. It is no news that the pollution from industries has had so many negative impacts to the environment that has caused many nations to institute legal and diplomatic measures to combat the impact that the industries have to their environments and thus their people. Most developed countries such as the United States, France, Germany and so on host many industries which pollute their environments in as much as they also provide sufficient amounts of revenue to the economy (Jenkins, 2000). The economic experts would look into the impacts of these polluting industries and the increased costs of pollution that the industries have to meet and this becomes the basis by which the suggestion to relocate these industries to the third world countries. Perhaps the fact that sufficient amounts of the raw materials that are also used in these industries also originate from the third countries, many of which are agricultural based (Rao, 1999). When all is said and done, it is unethical to relocate polluting industries from developed to third world countries. References Bernstam, M. (1991) "The Wealth of Nations and the Environment." London: Institute of Economic Affairs, London. Brookes, W. (1990). An Economic Silent Spring. London: Routledge. David Morris, "The materials we need to create a sustainable society lie close to home," The Utne Reader, Vol. 2, no. 3, p. 84. Dickenson, J. (1996). A geography of the third world. London: Routledge. Hardoy, E. & Satterthwaite, D. (1992). Environmental problems in Third World cities. London: Earthscan. Jenkins, R. (2000). Industry and environment in Latin America. London; Routledge. Leonard, H. J. (2002). Pollution and the struggle for the world product: multinational corporations, environment, and international comparative advantage. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Low, N. (2002). Global Ethics and Environment. London: Routledge. Nordström, H. (1999).Trade and environment. New York, NY: WTO. Rao, R. (1999). Air Pollution. Ottawa: Tata McGraw-Hill Education. Shaw, W., Barry, V., & Sansbury, G. (2009) Moral Issues in Business (1st Asia-Pacific ed.),. Melbourne: Cengage Learning. Smith, F. (1992) "Environmental Quality, Economic Growth, and Trade."Mexico: Cato Conference Press. Sengar, S. (2007). Environmental Law. London: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Sarkar, S. (2006). Investigating the relationship between air pollution, population, and landuse patterns in the city of Kolkata. New York, NY: ProQuest. Williams L. "Mexican Trade Deal: Fallout or Fantasy?" The Washington Times, December 22, 1991. Journal of Commerce, Vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 5. Wapner, P. & Edwin J. (2000). Principled world politics: the challenge of normative international relations. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield. Read More

The developed economies import these products as raw materials for further processing or manufacturing at their industries. Most of these industries are polluting industries and this becomes a challenge to the owners of the industries, the environmentalists, and the governing authorities which brings out the voice of the people. It has been challenging to manage polluting industries in developed countries due to many reasons, however the costs of pollution in these countries comes top of the list bearing in mind the increased legislation that have been passed in these countries, the insurance demands that is linked to such companies, and the high tax that is levied to these industries to limit or prevent their existence in these countries.

Regardless of these, I am not of the opinion to relocate the polluting industries from developed to third world countries because such relocation would ethically not be sound, for it would not solve the impeding problem but instead will transfer various problems that have been experienced in those countries to the third world countries (Smith, 1992). Arguments against Relocation of the Polluting Industries from Developed to Third World Countries Based on consequentialist theories where the validity of a moral judgment about an action is tagged to the consequences of the action being undertaken, I hold it that the polluting industries should not be relocated to the third world countries since if they are relocated to these countries, they would bear a number of negative consequences not only to the third world countries they have been relocated into, but also to the developed countries where the industries have been relocated from.

The moral judgment of the act of relocating the polluting industries from the developed countries to third world countries is questionable. This is because of the consequences that will follow decisions of such nature, and the kind of image that will be sent when such companies are relocated to the third world countries. It is important to note that the act to relocate an industry of whatever nature from one location to another is not a mean act that should be underestimated by the parties concerned.

In particular, to relocate a polluting industry from one place to another even carries more weight, and thus to relocate this type of industry from the developed to third world countries even raised much alarm over the motive of such an action. It is not enough to take one consideration of the increased costs of pollution in the developing world to choose to relocate the polluting industries. This is for the reason that polluting industries have more negative impacts to the environment and the people, and this should be considered prior to the costs that the polluting industries have to meet for them to operate in a given country (Dickenson, 1996).

Consequentialist theories puts forth clearly that for proper judgment of any decision and action with regard to if it is ethical or not should not be tagged to the very action but to the consequences that would come forth as a result of the action. In other words, the consequences of the action should be considered prior to the action when it comes to the determination of how ethical the action undertaken is rated. Based on this theoretical argument, it is held that the act to relocate polluting industries from developed to third world countries is unethical regardless of the low cost of pollution in these countries.

Relocation of the polluting industries to the third world countries is held to be unethical with regard to this theory due to the negative consequences that would come as a result of such an action being undertaken. Without mincing words, polluting industries pollute the environment, and it is this environment that forms the habit of wild animals, birds, fish and other creatures. The emitted pollutants are emitted to the atmosphere; this corrupts the natural air that is important for the existence of man alongside other harmful impacts such as the destruction of the ozone layer which shields the earth from the harmful rays of the sun.

Read More