Introduction
Monsanto is an American-based corporation whose main offices are located in Creve Coeur, Greater St. Louis, Missouri. With almost 120 years of operation since its inception in 1901, this organization is one of the globally recognized producers of genetically modified commodities. However, it mainly focuses on the production of agricultural seeds. Despite its many years of manufacturing GMOs, Monsanto has recently faced criticisms because of its failure to uphold various ethical standards. Cases of bullying farmers, posting forged commercials, producing substandard chemical sprays, and causing alarming pollution are among issues linked to Monsanto. As a result, this company poses a huge danger to the global flora and fauna. This paper analyzes Monsanto’s case by focusing on the company’s ethical culture, the costs and benefits of growing genetically modified seeds, and the management of harm caused to plants and animals.
Efficacy of Monsanto’s Ethical Culture
The production of genetically modified foods is a practice that has given rise to various ethical issues in modern society. Consumers have raised their fears about toxic levels of biotech foods resulting from the cultivation of Monsanto’s seeds. According to Finston (2013), this company uses particular genes that enable it to prepare seeds with herbicide properties. Consumers have raised concerns several times about the resultant effects of feeding on such products. Some skeptics regard foods developed through biotechnological means as abnormal while others claim that interfering with the genetic composition of such crops is changing God’s divine plans and intentions. Specifically, in verse 31 of the book of Genesis chapter 31, God intended to have every creature remain the way He had established. People have diverse moral standards and/or beliefs that dictate what is right or wrong for society (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2017). Animal and plant life has existed on earth for many centuries. Humans have tried as much as possible not to carry out activities that tamper with nature. Even with advanced research in genetic engineering, there is still a perception that genetically customized crops cannot replace the value of conventional nourishments.
In addition, Monsanto Company has also had problems with its corporate ethics. Due to the implementation of poor strategies, this organization pressurizes its workers to engage in immoral practices to make profits (Ferrell et al., 2017). This situation has led to a reduction in Monsanto’s sales by approximately 50% whereby $2 billion was lost in 2002 alone (Lamphere & East, 2017). This company’s patents and licenses have often resulted in impropriety. Hugh Grant, who became the CEO in 2003, has been grappling with Monsanto’s declining reputation. However, this organization is regaining popularity perhaps due to amplified research on biotechnology. Presently, Monsanto stands out as an ethical business whose chief goal is to lead genetic engineering to promote agricultural production while at the same time improving food security not only locally, but also internationally (Lamphere & East, 2017). Through the Monsanto Fund, the company has also conducted food security studies in various parts of the world to establish the availability and accessibility of food. Nonetheless, persistent criticisms from some consumers and health agencies have continued to instill greater fear in the company’s stakeholders.
Costs and Benefits of Growing GMO Seeds
Genetic engineering has transformed the agricultural sector. This situation can be seen in the company’s seed sales of over 10 billion dollars. Many agriculturalists in the United States ceased worrying about failed harvests since the introduction of genetically customized seeds in the growing of cash crops. This state of affairs has increased Monsanto’s consumer base due to many farmers’ desire to maximize agricultural production. In particular, they can capitalize on the use of land by planting more crops since Monsanto’s seeds have not only lowered farming risks immensely but also increased chances of making huge harvests. Farmers record high revenues from Monsanto’s innovative agronomic technology. This financial factor has increased the number of farmers who purchase seeds from the company under investigation. It is possible that these numbers will continue to increase due to the guaranteed profitability, thanks to Monsanto’s genetically modified seeds. Overall, this company’s objective is to increase agricultural production to meet human food demands in the near future.
Nonetheless, this company’s practices have raised controversial debates linked to possible adverse effects on human health following the increased use of its seeds. The science of developing genetically modified foods also comes with various costs that cannot be disregarded based on the underlying impact on human health. Many consumers have no idea of the consequences that can arise from the consumption of genetically customized foods. Some biotech researchers have proven that the change of the genetic composition of cash crops can give rise to adverse health effects on the human body. There is also the fear that non-genetically transformed crops and insects may be affected by the cross-pollination of plants grown from these customized seeds (Adenle et al., 2018; Komen, 2018). Although Huge Grant played a big role in addressing various criticisms by concentrating on indirect products such as animal feeds, fertilizers, and corn syrup, new opponents still maintain that the ingestion of biotech foodstuffs may have unknown health implications. They believe no biologically effective standards have been set to establish the safety of genetically engineered foods. According to Lamphere and East (2017), pest-resistant properties induced in Monsanto’s seeds have unfavorable effects on body cells. This company’s products are feared to give rise to more resistant weeds.
Management of Harm to Plants and Animals
Monsanto Company should desist from the dishonest marketing of glyphosate-based products. For instance, according to Lamphere and East (2017), the “Roundup Ready” seeds prepared by this company are portrayed as safe for the natural world. However, the production procedure deployed does not consider health risks that can result from inducing broad-spectrum systemic herbicides in seeds. The organophosphorus compound has had far-reaching effects on California-based employees working on agricultural farms (Lamphere & East, 2017). Research conducted on workers suffering from glyphosate exposure shows that the chemical can remain in the body for more than 10 months (Lamphere & East, 2017). The harm that this company has caused is seemingly detrimental to the health of many individuals. This situation has resulted in significant controversies concerning the improved sale of Roundup Ready products both locally and globally. For instance, according to Robaey (2017), Monsanto has faced various lawsuits that are linked to the ownership of its Roundup seeds. This study confirms that the utilization of genetically engineered seeds poses threats to people’s well-being.
Conclusion
The manufacture of genetically engineered crops is a subject that calls for the formulation of regulatory policies based on the existing biotech research before the stated negative impacts of using such products reach irrepressible levels. The acceptance of Monsanto’s products has improved tremendously. Farmers are now using Roundup crops to reduce costs incurred in averting weeds. Agronomists have become dependent on this product to the extent that they risk lessening its capability to deter the growth of weeds. Skeptical scientists and health professionals not only blame Monsanto Company, but also the U.S. government for sloppiness in the regulation of genetically customized crops.
References
Adenle, A. A., Morris, E. J., Murphy, D. J., Phillips, P. W., Trigo, E., Kearns, P.,… Komen, J. (2018). Rationalizing governance of genetically modified products in developing countries. Nature Biotechnology, 36(2), 137-139. Web.
Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2017). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Finston, S. (2013). Bowman v. Monsanto: Revisiting the exhaustion doctrine and its application to biotechnology and digital technologies. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 19(2), 64-67. Web.
Lamphere, J. A., & East, E. A. (2017). Monsanto’s biotechnology politics: Discourses of legitimation. Environmental Communication, 11(1), 75-89.
Robaey, Z. (2017). Rethinking ownership of genetically modified seeds. Asian Biotechnology & Development Review, 19(2), 25-37.