Unethical Business by Cocacola

32,402 views

Published on

Unethical Business by Cocacola, case study of Kaladera Village about the water Depletion

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
12 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
32,402
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
54
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1,554
Comments
0
Likes
12
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The conditional licence granted by the local panchayatauthorised the use of motorised pumps. But the company drilled more than six wells & illegally installed high-powered electric pumps to extract millions of litres of pure water.The level of the water table fell from 45 to 150 metres below the surface.
  • Unethical Business by Cocacola

    1. 1. Unethical Practices in Companies NETHAN.P
    2. 2. Overview….. • The Indian government forced Coca-Cola out of the country in 1977. • The company returned in 1993 • Each bottling plants extracts up to 1.5m litres of water everyday from the ground. • It takes nine litres of clean water to manufacture a litre of Coke.
    3. 3. Kala Dera Case
    4. 4. Kala Dera - Thirsting from Coca-Cola • Kala Dera is a large village outside the city of Jaipur. • Agriculture is the primary source of livelihood. • Coca-Cola started its bottling operations in Kala Dera in 2004, and within a year, the community started to notice a rapid decline in groundwater levels
    5. 5. Kala Dera lies in an overexploited groundwater area and access to water has been difficult. Summers are particularly intense in the area, when water shortages are most acute. Moreover summer months are also when Coca-Cola reaches its peak production. Coca-Cola bottling plant in Kala Dera continues extracts the most water, making already existing water shortages even worse.
    6. 6. Waterbed got depleted
    7. 7. • For farmers, loss of groundwater translated directly into loss of income. • For many children it meant leaving schools to provide a much needed helping hand in household since the women had additional burdens.
    8. 8. Community response The community in Kala Dera organized itself to challenge the Coca-Cola company for the worsening water conditions - through extraction and pollution - and demanded the closure of the Coca-Cola bottling plant.
    9. 9. The company, in usual fashion, denied any wrongdoing, blaming "outsiders" for the increasing local community opposition. They claimed to have conducted an environmental study and found the project safe to the village Company Response
    10. 10. The assessment noted that the plant's operations would continue to worsen water situation Coca-Cola should no longer utilize the overexploited groundwater resource in Kala Dera 1. Transport water from the nearest aquifer that may not be stressed 2. Store water from low-stress seasons 3. Relocate the plant to a water-surplus area 4. Shut down this facility • The community in Kala Dera welcomed the recommendations and waited for company’s response. Assessments
    11. 11. Ground water Level : Published by Central Groundwater Board
    12. 12. • Coca-cola took seven month to respond • Coca-cola not respond to the concern raised • Unethical and dishonest campaign • Chosen to continue the operation • Continued in misery of thousand people Coca-Cola's Response Unethical and Dishonest
    13. 13. • Coca-Cola is supposed to have conducted an Environmental Impact assessment. • Company started its operations even though it found to be "overexploited 1998. • Describes itself as a "hydration" company. Criminal Negligence
    14. 14. COKE’S Corporate Social Responsibility - A Scam? The Coca-Cola steps up its corporate social responsibility announcing to the world that it is a “green and socially responsible company.” --- but was not the case at kala dera Rainwater harvesting --- Dilapidated and a Bluff
    15. 15. Some serious concerns about Coca-Cola's claims on rainwater harvesting • The company announced that it has recharged five times the amount of water it has used. • When asked to back it up with numbers, Coca-Cola does not provide any. • Coca-Cola states that they "will install measuring devices that will verify the amount of water recharged.” • If they do not have measuring devices installed to verify the amount of water recharged, how can they make a claim of recharging five times the water that they have extracted?
    16. 16. • Coca-Cola started rainwater harvesting to overcome response to the growing campaigns against its water mismanagement. • Coca-Cola was bluffing people with its rainwater harvesting. • The rainfall in the area is too low, and the amount of rainfalls fluctuates a lot contributing to 30 days of rains every year • 80% of those rains come in just two or three days and hence rainwater harvesting is simply not efficient
    17. 17. Coca-Cola Threatens Top Indian Photographer with Lawsuit Billboard by: Sharad Haksar
    18. 18. • In 2005, Coca-Cola's Indian subsidiary, sent a letter to Mr. Haksar threatening him with serious legal actions unless the billboard was replaced 'unconditionally and immediately'. • Coca-Cola would seek Indian Rupees 2 million (US$ 45,000) for “the damage to the goodwill and reputation" of Coca-Cola, and also demanded an 'unconditional apology in writing'. • Mr. Haksar said that he had no intentions of issuing any apology because he has not committed anything wrong.
    19. 19. http://www.indiaresource.org/news/2011/1008.html http://www.polarisinstitute.org/farmers_vs_cocacola_in_water_wars Executive summary of the study on independent third party assessment of Coca-Cola facilities in India, by TERI - The Energy and Resources Institute Reference

    ×