coca-cola cs english final final

Upload: hrishikesh-kulkarni

Post on 05-Apr-2018

221 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/2/2019 Coca-cola Cs English Final Final

    1/4

    [TYPE THE COMPANY NAME]

    Coca-Cola in India

    Case Study produced by ELS

  • 8/2/2019 Coca-cola Cs English Final Final

    2/4

    Coca-Cola in India

    The Coca-Cola Company has operated in India since 1993 through its subsidiary, theHindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Private Limited). Coca-Cola operates around 49 bottlingplants in India. The primary source of water for Coca-Cola bottling plants in India is

    groundwater. India is already facing a water crisis in large parts of the country and as aresult of climate change and mismanagement of water resources the crisis is expected togrow. Coca-Cola has located many of its bottling plants in drought prone areas in India,and its bottling operations in these areas have made existing water crises even worse.

    In the village of Kala Dera in the state of Rajasthan, the Central Ground Water Authority(CGWA) declared the areas groundwater resources as overexploited in 1998. Yet,Coca-Cola built a new bottling plant in Kala Dera in 1999. In the nine years since Coca-Cola has been operating in Kala Dera, the groundwater levels have dropped 22.36 meters.

    The rapidly declining groundwater levels have taken a huge toll on the local population

    mostly farmers. Agricultural yields have declined significantly, women have to walklonger to fetch potable water to meet the basic water needs. The quality of thegroundwater has also deteriorated in terms of smell, color and turbidity.

    1Since 2003,

    communities living around the Coca-Cola bottling plant in Kala Dera have organized acampaign to demand the closure of the plant. Massive demonstrations have taken placeagainst Coca-Colas bottling plant.2 Despite the opposition, Coca-Cola has continued toextract groundwater, and that too for almost free, paying a few hundred dollars a year.The CGWA in 2004 also confirmed that the company not only depletes the groundwaterbut also pollutes it by pumping contaminants.3

    Similar to Kaladera is the situation in Mehdiganj. Coca Cola started to operate here in2000. The community of Mehdiganj started to experience sharp drops in groundwaterlevels soon after Coca-Cola started bottling operations. The groundwater levels at Coca-Cola's bottling plant were at 23.75 meters below ground level in 2008. Independentstudies have confirmed in 2006 that in the area closest to the factory, contamination byheavy metals was much higher than the rest of the area.4

    The company defends itself by any means, and claims the water depletion is caused byagriculture and lack of rain. That is however not enough for protesting organizations andmany universities worldwide, that are banning contracts with Coca-Cola because ofcompany's irresponsible attitude towards environment and human rights. The Universityof Michigan demanded a third party study on Coca-Cola's water management practices inIndia and Coca-Cola asked TERI, a renowned scientific institute to conduct the study.Findings of the study in many cases confirmed the claims of affected communities. ForKala Dera, TERI suggested that Coca-Cola shut down the plant or relocate it or get water

    1 http://www.teriin.org/cocacola_report_toc.php2 http://www.hindu.com/2004/09/29/stories/2004092902220500.htm3 http://www.indiaresource.org/news/2004/1020.html4 Report on environmental quality monitoring in surrounding areas of Hindustan Coca Cola bottling plant

    at Mehdiganj, Varanasi; Peopless science institute, Dehra doon hazard centre, New Delhi, 2006

    [Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the

    contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a

    short summary of the contents of the document.]

  • 8/2/2019 Coca-cola Cs English Final Final

    3/4

    from surplus aquifer outside the area.5 Coca-Cola has not complied with any suggestionas of today.

    Coca-Cola in India has been already criticized for its irresponsible behavior. In 2003, oneof Coca-Colas largest bottling plants in India was shut down by the government because

    of pollution after a sustained campaign by the community. A government committeehas just recommended that Coca-Cola pay US$47 million as compensation for thedamages caused.6

    None of this would happen to the company or the local people if more responsibleapproach was undertaken. But the situation in India is complicated and possible influenceon Indian authorities is not out of question. The official that had granted the license toCoca-Cola in Mehdiganj was caught getting bribed.

    7And despite the evidence against

    Coca-Cola in the case of Plachimada, a US official commented it as unlucky for Indianeconomic climate.8 Under the pressure of economic progress, business is prior to humanrights and environment. Without a complex legal framework of corporate responsibility,

    results of such approach will lead to losses in terms of environment and human rightsabuses, but also to losses on side of the companies such as bad corporate name or highpenalties.

    The case study above demonstrates why the Rights for People Rules for Businesscampaign aims to hold companies legally accountable for their operations in andoutside the EU. The campaign calls for the EU and its Member States to changeEuropean law in order to:

    Ensure that companies operating in the EU are legally accountable for any harm

    they cause to people and the environment in and outside the EU.

    Many European companies are multinational corporations. Many others are owned by or

    do business with foreign companies. Multinational corporations operate through many

    subsidiaries, subcontractors and suppliers. Currently, a corporations headquarters makes

    profits without having to consider how its companies negatively impact peoples lives

    and the environment. Examples include profiting from unfair labour conditions, human

    rights violations and environmental destruction.

    Ensure that European companies disclose accurate information about their impacts

    on people and the environment. They should be transparent about what they havedone, what they are doing and what they plan to do.

    5 http://www.teriin.org/cocacola_report_toc.php6 http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSGE62M0AV201003237 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Pollution-officer-caught-accepting-bribe/articleshow/4323229.cms8 http://uk.oneworld.net/article/view/138102/1/5795

  • 8/2/2019 Coca-cola Cs English Final Final

    4/4

    Generally, companies are not obliged to report on the social and environmental impactsof their operations and future activities. Since there are not enough reporting rules, theinformation disclosed is often misleading or incomplete. What are the impacts of a steelmill on neighbouring farmland? How do suppliers of European fashion brands treat theirworkers? Mandatory disclosure of such information would allow affected and concerned

    people to hold companies to account.

    Ensure that non-EU citizens, who are victims of the operations of European

    companies, have access to justice in the EU.

    Too often people, whose lives have been affected by companies, face many barriers intaking legal action. For example, it is too expensive, it is very difficult to find legalrepresentation and sometimes impossible to obtain all required evidence. In addition, theycan face serious intimidation for taking action.

    The Rights for People Rules for Business campaign aims to change European law.

    The campaigns legal proposals have been developed by The European Coalitionfor Corporate Justice.

    The European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) promotes corporate accountability(CA) by bringing together national platforms of civil society organizations (CSOs)including NGOs, trade unions, consumer advocacy groups and academic institutionsfrom all over Europe.

    ECCJ represents over 250 CSOs present in 15 European countries such as FIDH andnational chapters of Oxfam, Greenpeace, Amnesty International and Friends of the Earth.

    ECCJ believes CA and also Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) mechanisms shouldbe based on international legal frameworks and principles, serving as the foundation forand of corporate justice.

    Overall, ECCJ aims to increase European co-operation among NGOs working on CA.The coalition seeks to raise public awareness about the role of the European Union (EU)in regulating companies both in and outside the EU.

    Given the global reach of European companies, it is crucial to ensure that they are heldlegally accountable for the impacts their operations have on people and the environment.This can be achieved though not exclusively through the endorsement and

    implementation of European and international standards. Legal standards provide thepotential to better ensure global social justice, poverty alleviation and environmentalconservation. ECCJ is convinced that turning the EU into a leading actor on CA would,in turn, greatly influence discussions on CA and CSR at the global level.

    ECCJ is convinced that a regulatory approach towards CA is needed. The EU shouldestablish legal measures to hold EU-based companies accountable for the costs andimpacts their operations have on peoples human rights and the environment worldwide.