Introduction and Situation Analysis
The ethical dilemma regarding the moral obligation of poverty reduction is that it is the responsibility of the poor as well as the society. A section of the population holds the view that poverty reduction entirely depends on an individual effort while the rest believes that the burden lies on social responsibility. Thus, ethical concern demands the need for the development of all-inclusive measures in the allocation of recourses to control social exclusion and biases (Devereux, 2016). In this context, the group that holds the perception of individual responsibility argues that each member of the society has the chance to work, earn, and financially spend well. This argument is valid to some degree as it is arguable that a small category of people wants to rely on social institutions for development. However, poverty is in itself a misery and deprives individual opportunities for good life.
In contrast, a considerable percentage of the populations believe the society has the moral obligation to eradicate poverty, and thus, they hold the view that the solution to poverty reduction lies in the socioeconomic policies. In this view, the moral obligation is dependent on the social norms influenced by political institutions and processes (Shaw, 2013). These two varying views of moral obligation have steered up the ethical dilemma on the right measures and steps required to address poverty and improve human rights amongst the population. Öhman (2016) argues that the concept relating to a wrong and right action is relative and depends on moral values of society. Therefore, the ethical dilemma surrounds the consideration of measures to eradicate poverty that does not portray any bias towards a particular group of the population.
Stakeholder Analysis
Poverty and poverty eradication depends on various stakeholders that include the government, private institutions, community, and the affected individuals. According to Barnett (2016), every organization has the responsibility to promote the welfare of the society to guarantee sustainable business performance. In this view, the consequences of a course taken by a stakeholder form the basis for determining morality. The core principle is that stakeholders have the mandate to transform and improve social standards by addressing poverty causes such as social injustices, laziness, discrimination, and exclusion (Shaw, 2013). However, proponents of individual responsibility do perceive any form of support that the government gives to the poor in the form of policy and legislative processes as a biased approach. In contrast, the lack of government’s policies to reduce poverty receives criticisms relating to inaction from the opponents of individual responsibility.
On the other hand, private and community-based organizations face criticism on the need for flexible policies on the corporate social responsibility and the expansion of business to provide job opportunities for the poor. Owing to the ethical dilemma faced by the stakeholders, the major challenge facing poverty reduction is the formulation of policies by the government and private organizations towards the support of the poor population. Among others, the beneficial approaches to poverty eradication by the stakeholders are the modification of policies to empower the poor through the creation of business opportunities, the establishment of job vacancies, and the provision of financial support through charity programs, training, and education opportunities.
Analysis Based on Ethical Theories
The concept of ethical dilemma faced by the stakeholders over their moral obligation in the eradication of poverty relates to the need to develop balanced measures leading to an improved society for all without attracting any form of bias and exclusion. Kamruzzaman (2016) asserts that the process of poverty eradication requires consistent review and amendment of past measures to facilitate the realization of the set goals. The theoretical perspective of the consequentialist approach surrounding the moral obligation of the stakeholders from the context indicates that the core ethical dilemma revolves around the impact of the measures of the poverty reduction towards the relevant stakeholders. A category of the population believes that life presents equal opportunities to all, and that, the poor may have just failed to utilize these opportunities to improve their wellbeing for any form of support means an encouragement of the dependency culture. Therefore, the legislative arm of government has the responsibility to modify policies that guide and support charity but discourage the improper behaviors of dependency.
However, the consequence of this policy implementation leads to criticism over the effect of the wellbeing of the population. The observation of the result of this measure indicates a low dependency ratio of the population. Interestingly, the implications of this policy amendment disregard the concept of unresolved poverty issues despite a forcefully terminated support to the poor population. Based on the theoretical perspective of the consequentialist approach, the ethical dilemma concerns the government’s willingness to formulate appropriate measures that solve poverty issues without undermining the rights, needs, and perception of all citizens.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The ethical dilemma of poverty reduction cuts across all stakeholders. Nevertheless, the moral concept of poverty eradication lies on both the individuals and the entire society. Based on this concept, while every individual has the moral obligation to work and find opportunities to improve their social well-being, it is equally the responsibility of the government and private organizations to formulate policies and measures to support the unprivileged in the society.
Therefore, to avoid similar ethical dilemmas in future, the case analysis recommends that:
- The government should formulate appropriate and flexible policies that consider the outcome of poverty reduction interventions to ensure termination of any individual from a support program and initiate an alternative program that populations use to alleviate poverty.
- Nongovernmental organizations should actively participate and formulate effective policies on corporate social responsibility to provide training, share technologies, and offer job opportunities to the poor population.
References
Barnett, M. (2016). Mind: The gap to advance CSR research, think about stakeholder cognition. Annals in Social Responsibility, 2(1), 4-17. Web.
Devereux, S. (2016). Is targeting ethical? Global Social Policy, 16(2), 166-181. Web.
Kamruzzaman, P. (2016). A critical note on poverty eradication target of sustainable development goals. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 5(2), 87-110. Web.
Shaw, W. (2013). Business ethics: A textbook with cases (8th ed.). New York, NY: Cengage Learning.
Öhman, J. (2016). New ethical challenges within environmental and sustainability education. Environmental Education Research, 22(6), 765-770. Web.