Corporate Social Responsibility in the Tobacco Industry - Essay Example

Running head: Corporate Social Responsibility in the Tobacco Industry By using corporate social responsibility (CSR) the tobacco industry is seeking to change their unethical public image. Evaluate this strategy using three ethical principles of the Global Business Standards Codex. Insert Name Insert Grade Course Insert Tutor’s Name 19 May 2012 The tobacco industry has consistently increased its corporate social responsibility presence in the society as a public relations exercise. This is with the intention of negating the ills of its operations on the society. Nevertheless, regardless of its efforts, smoking continues to cause death (Friedman, 2009), deforestation, child labor and environmental degradation at a level that should be stopped by all means possible (Jepson et al., 2008). The tobacco industry has capitalized on the health, social, economic and environmental problems its causes as a business opportunity to promote its image without sincerely addressing the problems CSR is supposed to tackle. Therefore, the industry’s CSRP are not ethical and defeat the key essence of CSR principles in the business world (Hirschhorn, 2004). The corporate social responsibility attempts by the British American Tobacco Malaysia, which involved assistance to tobacco farmers, charitable donations, scholarships grants, and anti smuggling enforcement, succeeded in improving the company’s image in the public and negating criticism directed at its activities (Barraclough and Morrow, 2008). The continued uncensored operations would lead to more public health and environmental problems for the world. Tobacco farming worldwide directly causes environmental degradation through soil depletion and erosion, and water table pollution (Geist et al., 2009). In developing countries, child laborers exposed to harmful pesticides and nicotine poisoning characterize tobacco farming. This is unethical and unacceptable. There are serious concerns for environmental sustainability as tobacco farming causes around 4 % of the world’s annual global deforestation (Jepson et al., 2008) and the company has no effective measures of dealing with these problems. Transnational tobacco companies CSR initiatives are deceptive and seek to increase smoking and tobacco farming, which Increases their profits. In my view, the transnational tobacco companies have violated various global business standards in their persistent effort to defeat the various strategies and regulations aimed at controlling the tobacco industry. The world health organization advances most of these schemes. The companies have primarily abused the dignity principle as they have consistently denied the linkage of tobacco smoking and health problems. It is unethical to sell or promote any product that affects the health of consumers. Through their CSRP, they have created numerous controversies about the risks assessment and the scientific substantiation of the risks of tobacco consumption and passive smoke to health (Yach and Bialous, 2001). This is despite 5.4 million individuals passing on yearly around the globe from tobacco related diseases (WHO, 2008). There have even been reports of these companies hiring scientists in some regions to counter scientific evidence of the wellbeing consequences of smoking so as to delay the introduction of tobacco control legislation (WHO, 2003). This proves their disregard for customers as they fully know the harmful effects of tobacco smoking. The youths deterrent smoking campaigns aimed at reducing smoking in young people are largely ineffective as they increase smoking in young people. Their public relations exercises are only effective in promoting smoking products sale and hood wink governments into reducing restrictions on tobacco advertisements, which is ethically wrong in view of the ill effects to young smokers. This company also disregards the fiduciary principle that requires all businesses to operate professionally and diligently at all levels. Transnational tobacco industries have had extensive knowledge of tobacco smuggling networks and markets and they purposefully advanced an agenda of profiting from these markets through structuring marketing campaigns and distribution routes around the smuggling routes (WHO, 2003). This violates acceptable business ethics and is not acceptable at all; this defeats all tobacco legislation in place and denies governments tobacco tax necessary for other economic activities. These companies have no professionalism at all. They consistently allude that tobacco advertisement do not increase smoking in the youthful populace. At the same time, they complain that regulations aimed at cutting down these advertisements will reduce tobacco sales. The company’s CSRP also abuse the citizenship principle that requires all businesses to operate ethically free from corruption, bribery, and involvement in politics. Tobacco CSRS officials have varied access to policy makers, and this can provide an avenue for corruption and bribery (Fooks et al., 2011) and necessitates effective mechanisms to prevent this manipulation as it is tantamount to political interference. This is because the contact with the government has the capability of shifting focus from the ill effects of the tobacco industry, which can reduce speed and tone of tobacco regulations and Legislations. Officials who have had contact with officials from the tobacco industry cannot make sound public policies as they may be influenced by the input from these officials (Fooks et al., 2011). Tobacco smoking control is essential in alleviating poverty especially in developing countries (Slama, 2010). This is because the environmental and public health costs arising from the industry are many times costlier than the benefits from employment and taxation of the industry. Better alternatives to tobacco farming should form the basis of tobacco companies CSR initiatives with the help of other stakeholders. Transnational companies’ main priority, as a business, is the promotion of tobacco consumption all over the world, which would increase their profit margins notwithstanding the public health concerns, labor concerns and environmental concerns. Their CRS policies aim at weakening tobacco legislation and regulation that seeks to limit the harms done by tobacco consumption and tobacco farming. Therefore, in the real sense their CRS serves only their interests. The responsible bodies should come up with more stringent regulations and registrations. This will help control the tobacco industry at all levels and minimize the risks and harmful effects in the society. The tax garnered from the industry is not sufficient to cater for harms done. Therefore, they should never be given any incentives or opportunities to dictate their terms during policy making. By virtues of the industry violating the Global Business Standards Codex principles, the industry should not be given any recognition in the corporate social responsibility category which would deny them any additional investments and recognition from organizations that value sincere CSR polices in the business world. References Barraclough, S., and Morrow, M., 2008. A Grim Contradiction: The Practice and Consequences of Corporate Social Responsibility by British American Tobacco in Malaysia. Soc Sci Med; 66:1784–96. Fooks et al., 2011. Corporate Social Responsibility and Access to Policy Élites: An Analysis of Tobacco Industry Documents. PLoS Med 8(8): e1001076. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001076 Friedman, L., 2009. Tobacco Industry Use Of Corporate Social Responsibility Tactics As A Sword And A Shield On Secondhand Smoke Issues. J Law Med Ethics. Winter; 37(4):819-27. Geist et al., 2009. Tobacco Growers at the Crossroads: Towards A Comparison of Diversification and Ecosystem Impacts. Land Use Policy 2009; 26:1066–79. Hirschhorn, N., 2004. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Tobacco Industry: Hope or Hype? Tob Control 13: 447–453 Jepson et al., 2008. The Tobacco Industry in Malawi: A Globalized Driver of Local Land Change. In: Jepson W, Millington A, eds. Land Change Modifications in the Developing World. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2008:251–68. Slama, K., 2010. Tobacco Control and Health Equality. Global Health Promotion June 2010 vol. 17 no. 1 suppl 03-6 WHO, 2008. The WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic. Geneva: World Health Organization [Online]. Available at: www.who.int/tobacco/mpower/mpower_report_full_2008.pdf. [Accessed 19 May 19, 2012] WHO, 2003. Tobacco Industry and Corporate Responsibility...An Inherent Contradiction [Online]. Available at: http://www.who.int/tobacco/media/en/tob-industry.pdf [Accessed on 19th May 2012]. Yach, D., and Bialous, S., 2001. Junking Science to Promote Tobacco, American Journal of Public Health, November 2001, Vol 91, No. 11, 1745-1748 Read More