Sustainable Development and Underlying Contradictions - Essay Example

Sustainable Development and Underlying Contradictions Introduction Sustainable development is the practice of fair trade activities within the reception, production, supply and consumption of the products from the factories. The responsibilities of the persons involved in the production of the products is therefore to improve the efficiency in the production of the products in line with reduced abilities to impact negatively on the factors within the environments. Several factors are related within the environments and the production of the products has no differences from the interrelationships of parts of a machine which works together to contribute to the generation of a product (Timmann 2014, p 12). Sustainable development within the concepts and prospects of industrial production implies the use of energy friendly, eco friendly and non natural exploitative methods of production to help in the production of products that do not impact intensively on the environment when they are consumed (Monsanto Case Study, 5). Sustainable Development As Pless, Thomas & Günter, sustainable development commences at the time of producing the raw materials and here the farmers are the owners of the projects, which foster on sustainable development. The experts inform the farmers on the need and the importance of using the eco-friendly means to produce the raw materials with fewer impacts on the lives of the people. After this consideration, the sustainability strikes up to the industrial handling of the products (Pless, Thomas & Günter 2012, p 902). The products before they are processed or even after should not be contaminated in the process of manufacturing it. The sustainable means of production in the industries should be fully incorporated into the production of the products (Monsanto Case Study, 12). Though at the point of production, the company should try all its best to be efficient in the production, but should also consider the effects of the production on the lives of the people and the entire environment. The supply of the products should be environmentally and socially friendly in the sense that the process of supplying the products should be free from any form of pollutant or contaminate the products in the course of transporting the products to the consumers (Taman 2014, p 15). The consumption methods of the consumers are also of great implications to the achievement of objective; sustainability. When given mode of consumption contributes to the contamination of the environment (Monsanto Case Study, 23). Consequently from the view points of the above claimed procedures and factors to consider when tackling sustainable development, companies who are the producers and the consumers are in better positions to improve the status of the environment in terms of sustainability of the outcomes of the environment (Monsanto Case Study, 14). The overall goal of sustainability is the realization or meeting the needs of the present generations without impairing the abilities of the future generations to meet their own needs or demands within the ecosystems. The companies should therefore be mindful in their production cycle and methods of production. The sustainability principle when incorporated into industrial manufacturing and all the other aspects related to it, the results are the reduced impacts of production in the environment (Krstović, Tamara & SlavicaCicvarić 2012, p 68). For efficient curbing of the environmental impacts of the operational activities of the company to the environment, the industry must try at all levels to reduce the possibilities of pollutions. Land pollution should be prevented or minimized through the inculcation of better means of disposing the by-products and the wastages. Water pollution should also be avoided at all cost, through the prevention of leakage of chemicals from the factory to the surfaces of the land which can later be washed away by surface run offs into the water bodies and this the improvement of the water resources handling (Timmann 2014, p 18). Air pollution should be controlled in the factories through the reduction of the carbon particles which destroy the ozone immensely. The workers should also be protected from the dangers of the contamination of the chemicals that may be produced by the company (Whitacre 2013, p 36). Addressing the Contradictions Embedded in the Practice of Sustainability According to the situation in the Monsanto Company, it is very evident the companies and the stakeholders do not do anything to realize sustainable development is accomplished. The increasing number of people, the changes in the climatic pattern, intergenerational and intra-generational inequalities and disparities are some of the factors that have led the maximization of the production and with very little care about the others who are not present at the point and time of production (Monsanto Case Study, 34). The companies, in the most developed states of the world, like the United States, have vested their production on the genetically modified by products. All these are indicators of not complying with the demands of sustainable development (Krstović, Tamara & SlavicaCicvarić 2012, p 72-73). The urge to maximize the profit through the production of excess produce to the markets will imply that the companies use mechanisms, which are not supported sustainably. Increase in the demands in the markets has compelled the industries to exploit the resources within the natural environment to produce to meet the demands of the people (Bulevska 2014, p 103). If the principles and guidelines of sustainable development were to be implied in, the productivity of the products, then many regulations would prevent the companies from overstretching on the exploitation of the resources (Whitacre 2013, p 43). This increased demands by the industries producing the final products to the people, compels the farmers and other primary producers to use mechanisms that are not sustainable. The use of the genetically mechanized products within the communities is triggered by from the agricultural production and practices of such products. The farmers have resorted to the agricultural production of genetically modified products. This has led to the GMO pollution in the health systems of the environments and especially within the communities. Many GM products have been supplied in markets by the companies, which seek for markets for their products (Bulevska 2014, p 97). As much as the companies may allege that the gene modification of plant products and other agricultural products protect the products from herbicides, the reality is that the major motive of introducing the GM products in the production line is to improve the production. Genetically modified agricultural products are presently taken to be the best means to meet the increased demands in the market. The GM products are present everywhere within the production and consumption spheres and the unawareness status of the consumers, makes them easily sold top them (Durdevic, Cory & Stanislav 2013, 103). Great numbers of people do not know on the negative health and environmental impacts of the genetically engineered products in the markets. These products have high impacts in the health of the people and the environments upon which they are produced and disposed. People, especially the local farmers understand them as the cheaply produced produce from the farms and this has amplified the implications on the lives of people. This is because they ignorantly handle the GM products even the ones with contaminations. The information that the producing companies give to the people is the underlying factor over the persistent use of the GM. They allege that the production of high quality products is guaranteed when they use the GM product as the raw materials (Wolf 2013, p 105). From the point of contamination of the soil by the products of the industries, the agricultural sector suffers gradually but persistently. The production of the herbicides and other forms of inorganic fertilizers in the agricultural production of crops, the soils are contaminated and polluted consequently (Wolf 2013, p 101). The dominance of the industries producing the GM products from the farms to the finished goods by single companies supplying the fertilizers and finally producing the products is perfect enrichment of the soil with the GM. Stelian and Camelia, reveal about the tactics the companies use to maintain their economic development, companies are not committed to address the contradictions contained in the production and consumption of the GM products (Stelian & Camelia 2012, p 827). In the Case Study, Monsanto Company has failed to address the misunderstanding in the technological production of the products. This is the paradox of the technology. They have continued to technologically produce the genetically modified products by embracing the technologies involved in the production of such products. The industries have been feeling so much contented with the production of the non-environmentally friendly GM products and seem to value the outcomes in the market as people tend to have no option to select on the naturally produced products. They have also failed to provide sustainable solution to the existing problem of genetically modified products to the people (Zuindeau 2006, p 468). From the case study of Monsanto Company, the company has failed to evaluate the economic growth that compels the use of the GM products alongside the ecological integrity and limits. Most of the industries and economies in the world today have focused on economic development without substantial consideration of the environment and the nature in it. The strive to maximize economic growth in the development paradigms implies the increase in the level of natural resource exploitation thereby depleting the potentials of the natural environments to restore itself and continue with the realization of the ecological processes within it. The time and quality of the products in the GM producing industries have escalated the progress in the uptake of the genetically modified products in the markets. The pollution extend of these products is often assumed by the producing companies, while people often feel alterations in the digestive and other health bodily complications due to the effect posed by the GM products (Wolf 2013, p 95). The companies have been focused in improving the economies of the regions through the efficiency and the high profits earned in shot wile of the production cycle. The efficiency that the GM products give the company many profits and therefore the realization of the objectives of economic development drives to the motive to continue to pollute the environment (Zuindeau 2006, p 462). Another principle in sustainable development is intergenerational and intra-generational equity. This implies the concern that should be given to the availability of the resources to the present and future generations. The use of the GM products in the production life stream pollute the environment as the soils are contaminated and may not be able to support the production and produce enough resources to sustain the lives of the future generations. The companies do not concern for even the present generations as the health of the communities keep on deteriorating and causing many deaths to the people (Stelian & Camelia 2012, p 826). As Pless, Thomas and Günter, intervene to reveal the misconceptions about corporate social responsibility among the entities, the companies have the potential to reverse the trends in their impacts to the environment to reduce social disintegration. The ideology that the future is in the hands of the present generations is politically criticized in that the political organisations seem to support development just presently. People are left with minimal choices in what to in concern to the prospects of sustainable development. The GM products contaminate the products supplied to them, being that these are the only products, they have to use, the contamination of the lives, and the environment is escalated by this (Lion, Jerome & Rowan 2013, p 799). The possible health hazards to humans are projected to be the GM tumours tested in rats due to the consumption of the genetically modified food products (Durdevic, Cory & Stanislav 2013, 108). Environmental Impact Assessments and Auditing should be done be free and coherent means therefore clearly identifying the impacts of the business on the environment. This will direct measures to reverse and reduce the impacts that contaminate the environment (Lion, Jerome & Rowan 2013, p 793). Another contradiction linked to the escalated use of the GM products is the reconciliation between individual objectives in the intent of manufacturing the GM products with collective interest of the people. There have been diversities in the interests of people using the GM products and this cannot be realigned with the possible interests of the entire community. The GM products are used for different reasons in the society but the use in the production of food to humanity is double the impact on the negative side. This has led to poor health conditions and persistence of allergies in people (Wolf 2013, p 98). The answers to the questions such as, Does optimization go against sustainability. Should be provided to the society and awareness created as a result. The optimisation of benefits due to overproduction triggered by the use of the GM products should be understood as going against the goals of sustainability. The major reason as to why the companies are using the GM products is to increase the production scale of the products and this is not concerned with the considerations about the environment and the possible impacts of the processes of production (Stelian & Camelia, 827). According to the production mechanisms in the present days, the companies optimizes the produce without taking due concern on the effects of such activities. If the process of optimizing the produce could incorporate the environmental concern and issues within it could be sustainable, but the situation is contrary to the expectations of sustainability. The companies do not want to spend much in the research on the new and better ways to optimize their production but rather want to optimize the profits by spending less and not posing contradictions (Pless, Thomas & Günter 2012, p 884). To protect the health of the environments and those of the people, the companies are to adhere to government check-ups on the products of the companies. This will inquire the several tests on the possible effects of the GM products and this will regulate the impact through reduced supply to the consumers. Regulations should be placed on the GM products through improved government restrictions to the production and supply conditions of the products. Most companies dealing in the GM products like the Monsanto Company are reluctant to expose their products to the regulations posed by the governments and this is a clear indication that they are not ready to address and explain the contradictions in sustainability of the environment (Durdevic, Cory & Stanislav 2013, p 100). The decisions made on the GM products in the nations have been flawed by the ability of the biggest companies to influence the processes of decision making within the contexts of GM products and their impacts in sustainability of the environment. The intent to interrupt the process is a revelation of the unwillingness of the companies to address the underlying issues of contradiction on sustainable development and the links in the health systems within the environments. If they are to address the problems of complexities in the understanding of sustainable development, they should not bar or influence the process of making decisions on the products that seem harmful to lives (Pless, Thomas & Günter 2012, p 889). These companies continue to give false campaigns to the consumers and the farmers on the better sides of the products they produce. This is linked to the campaigns that the Monsanto Company gives of the farmers to influence their decisions to depend on the GM products that the company produces (Zdanyte & Bronius 2014, p 128). A clear indication that the companies are only committed in the increase of the sales of the unhealthy products to the people without considering the effects in the lives of the consumers. The farmers are given false information on the use and significance of the products that the companies produce and the only option they are left with is to buy these products. This will increase the intensity of the effect of the GM products as they are persistently sold to the people who induce them to the environment through the soil (Pless, Thomas & Günter 2012, p 875). The campaigns of the Monsanto Company and the affiliated industries in the production of the GM seeds were themed to be the reduction of chemicals in agricultural systems and processes. They were deemed to be more efficient in the reduction of the impacts of the chemicals the farmers often use (Zdanyte & Bronius 2014, p 127). The reality was that the company was striving towards increasing the use of the industrial agriculture and to increase the use of the genetically modified seeds. This is the strategy that the industries use tin order to increase the markets for the unhealthy and unsustainable products to the people. The companies, industries and organizations which produce the GM products and other products which derail the health of the environment and those of the people, are not touched by the impacts of the products they sell to the customers to stop the unhealthy business (Durdevic, Cory & Stanislav 2013, p 106). They are totally not willing to clear the contradictions in understanding the aspects of sustainable development in their practices. Conclusion According to the current reactions towards the use of GM products reveal that people are triggered towards the realization of the principles of sustainability with the customers avoiding the GM products in the markets. Different reactions have been linked to the use and implications of the GM products in the environments and the lives of the consumers. Most of the consumers have realized that the interests of the producers of the products are to get economic benefits but considerate about the health of the consumers at all. This has pissed the customers. Different organizations have been in strategic campaigns on creating awareness on the impact of the GM products on the lives of the people and therefore warn them from buying such products. Bibliography Bulevska, A, 2014, "The Role Of Venture Capital Finanicng In Promoting Sustainable Development." Journal Of Sustainable Development (1857-8519) vol. 5. Pp.91-104. Business Source Complete Case Study, Monsanto Company. Pp 1-47 Durdevic, T, Cory S, & Stanislav K, 2013, "The Role Of ISO 14001 In Sustainable Enterprise Excellence." Proceedings Of The International Conference On Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management & Organizational Learning. pp. 99-107 Krstović, Tamara, & SlavicaCicvarić, 2012, "The Role Of Business In The Society." Management (1820-0222) vol. 62. Pp. 67-72. Business Source Complete Lion, H, Jerome, D & Rowan, B, 2013, "Environmental Impact Assessments from A Business Perspective: Extending Knowledge And Guiding Business Practice." Journal Of Business Ethics vol. 117, no. 4. Pp. 789-805 Pless, N, Thomas M, & Günter, S, 2012, "Promoting Corporate Social Responsibility And Sustainable Development Through Management Development: What Can Be Learned From International Service Learning Programs?." Human Resource Management vol.51, no. 6. Pp. 873-903. Stelian, P, & Camelia D, 2012, The Considerations of The Sustainable Development And Eco-Development In National And Zonal Context." Review Of International Comparative Management / Revista De Management Comparat International vol. 13, no. 5. Pp. 823-831. Timmann, P, 2014, Sustainable development requires ‘checks and balances’ EurActiv Germany, Retrievedhttp://www.euractiv.com/sections/development-policy/un-expert-sustainable-development-requires-checks-and-balances-301106 Whitacre, M. 2013, Reviews Of Environmental Contamination And Toxicology. New York: Springer, Discovery eBooks. Web. Wolf, J, 2013, "Improving the Sustainable Development Of Firms: The Role Of Employees." Business Strategy & The Environment (John Wiley & Sons, Inc) vol. 22. No.2. pp. 92-108. Business Source Complete. Zuindeau, B, 2006, "Spatial Approach to Sustainable Development: Challenges Of Equity And Efficacy." Regional Studies vol.40, no. 5. pp. 459-470. Business Source Complete. Zdanyte, K, & Bronius, N, 2014, "Ensuring Of Sustainable Development For Contemporary Organizations Development." Economics & Management vol.19, no.1. pp. 120-128. Read More