Effects of the Bottled Water Industry - Essay Example

The Bottled Water Industry and its Effects Among the thousands of users of foods, beverages and commercial water is the bottled water industry. The industry is an active supporter of the extensive, science-based management practices of ground water that are aimed at the equitable treatment of all users, multi-jurisdictional and ensure the provision of future needs of water (Eshleman 6). Bottled water firms manage and make responsible use of water resources in various ways. One of these is through investments in widely putative science and technology for the purposes of improving the quality of water. Another is by strengthening the practices of water conservation. By the year 2012, consumption of bottled water in the United States had risen to almost ten billion gallons representing 5.3% per capita consumption. It was estimated that every individual drank about thirty gallons yearly. Packaged water saw an upsurge in real volume more than any other category of beverage in the country. Sales had increased by 6.7 per cent totaling about eleven billion dollars (Eshleman, 7). The reasons provided for the monumental consumption of this water are that most consumers pay close attention to healthy choices for themselves as well as their families and are assured that a refreshing, safe and convenient bottle of water contains no calories, making it the most suitable choice on the menu. Many also appreciate the reliability and consistency of its quality. Both federal and state governments comprehensively regulate bottled water. The FDA (Food & Drug Administration) regulates it in the food product category, with guidelines that govern its quality as well as its safety, which are as rigorous as those of the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) of tap water (Andrews et al., 174). In spite of this, the bottled water industry has been facing a few challenges with regard to the field of sustainability. In the recent past, colossal opposition against bottled water has developed among an eclectic assortment of such advocates as restaurateurs, activists and even religious leaders. The propositions of the sector’s operations have evoked vocal protestation from local communities. Their rationale is that the production of bottled water requires a lot of energy and generates large amounts of waste that could have long-term environmental effects. Various cities like Chicago have begun taking up action in this respect by taxing bottled water. Others, such as San Francisco have completely banned bottled water from official functions. Toronto has not only banned the distribution of the product, but has also devoted some of its resources to make sure that there is sufficient access to tap water in all facilities of the city. These are only but a few of the legal challenges that have mounted for the industry. For the above reason, tap water appears to be gaining more ground. Also, given the rising concern about the manufacture, purchase as well as the disposal of the bottled beverage, the product may experience a decline in the area of consumer popularity (Vasilescu & Rojanschi, 54). There have been certain pro-tap campaigns feeding consumers with information pertaining to the safe, environmental-friendly and cost-effective practice of taking tap water. Environmentalists, industry leaders, even politicians countrywide are taking action in a bid to educate consumers about the advantages of tap water over its bottled counterpart. It seems as if the efforts of pro-tap water advocates are not in vain, because instead of comparing bottled water to other beverages as soda or beer and laying emphasis on the health benefits of bottled water, people have begun to compare it to the inexpensive and responsible option of tap water consumption. State governments have also followed suit and are now in favor of tap water. In the year 2006, nine states considered the implementation of a groundwater withdrawal statute and this adversely impacted the bottled industry. Most of the bill proposals, particularly targeted the infinitesimal groundwater use of the industry, which was at about 0.2 percent, and used it as a poster child for groundwater resource problems of the state. In New Hampshire, for instance, there was a local feud against one bottled water company that had a ripple impact on users of groundwater in general. There was an introduction of a couple of bills to place a moratorium on huge groundwater extraction permits for the industry. A Maine activist group that was unsuccessful in the placement of a twenty-cents-per-gallon redundancy pay on the bottled beverage worked on an entirely new initiative to focus on four points at the heart of groundwater policies namely: control, ownership, citizen equity in addition to sustainability. The group indicated that it would pursue the issue of “public trust” – and change, groundwater ownership from private to common proprietorship for Maine citizens (“Bottled Water Industry Faces Challenges at State level, 8). The success of such proposals denies both the industry and other land owners any right to the reasonable utilization of groundwater on their property. The famous Think outside the Bottle campaign was also another attempt to defame bottled water. The project challenged the marketing influence of bottled water companies and worked with various communities all over the nation to choose tap water over bottled water. The campaign has witnessed a few victories; about 30 percent of the population has switched to tap water consumption, various university campuses and colleges have cut down their expenditure on bottled water and some communities in McCloud, California and Wacissa in Florida blocked Nestlé from bottling their sources of water. Under the pressure of this operation bottled water companies, the likes of Pepsi and Nestlé, have been forced to change their labels as well as provide further information on the subject of their water source. Pepsi was compelled to own up that Aquafina is, in actual sense, tap water. Nestlé also said the same about the PureLife brand. All the negative publicity along with activist campaigns against bottled water has questioned the sustainability of the industry. Companies are scuttling to transpose their products by raising their green identity so as to fend off the backlash of the consumer fermenting in places of worship, institutions of higher learning plus city halls all over the country in a bid to remain sustainable. According to one advertising executive in the New York, JWT Intelligence, “All big business is under siege, and at this point it would be remiss to not react to environmental concerns (Vasilescu & Rojanschi, 65).” In response to the various detractions, water brands have attempted to revive their green image. FIJI Water is one example of these corporations that just recently made an announcement of its plans to work towards becoming carbon-negative through the use of renewable energies along with counterbalancing emissions via projects of land preservation. There are various actions that the sector could undertake to ensure its sustainability. First of all, there is the need for water corporations to understand sustainability trends as well as best practices. They could conduct researches pertaining to emergent and frontier trends, issues, impacts and drum up support from members on key sustainability challenges or concerns. This information could play a great role in the development of overarching set of issues as well as opportunities for them to deal with collectively. The result is usually a ‘call to action’ to construct buy-in and backing from the extensive membership. After members agree on the need for joint efforts, the organizations consult with members as well as external stakeholders for the determination of top priorities a sustainability program must address in addition to any fissures in the current programs. The bottled water industry often overlooks the step involving the development of a sector-wide principle set or vision of sustainability. The long-term guidance of the CSR initiative of a corporation helps to direct the attention of future programming towards important issues for the industry. Also, in order to defend sustainability management to associates effectively, companies may adopt their very own in-house sustainability programs. They could develop guides, tools, plus platforms of learning so as to support members along the path of sustainability. Mentoring and peer learning are crucial steps in not only the education of the sector, but also bringing all members au fait on CSR. For a program to be successful, it has to be comprised of education and training. The industry also needs to stay ahead of government regulations and/or improve its license to operate – some companies develop mandatory or voluntary codes of both social and environmental practices. It can back-cast to evaluate different barriers plus opportunities to realize its vision. By consulting stakeholders, it is able to identify partners to aid in the tackling of systematic challenges to sustainability. The establishment of industry working assemblies is one way to go and this could assist in liaising with other businesses, state and federal governments and, most importantly, civil society about sustainability projects. Bottled water firms could do with a level playing field for effective operation. There has been considerable uncertainty pertaining to the role of the government to require the industry to address both social and environmental effects fully. Corporation authorities can proactively reach out to the government to back the creations of effective and efficient frameworks of public policy that not only improve sustainability, but also help the industry compete and thrive. Works Cited Andrews, Gerald D, and Pallatheri M. Subramanian. Emerging Technologies in Plastics Recycling: Developed from a Symposium Sponsored by the Division of Polymer Chemistry, Inc., of the American Chemical Society at the Polymer Technology Conference, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and June 3-5, 1991. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 1992. Print. "Bottled Water Industry Faces Challenges at State Level." Water Technology. 29.8 (2006): 46 49. Print. Eshleman, Keith N. Bottled Water Production in the United States: How Much Groundwater Is Actually Being Used? Alexandria, VA: Drinking Water Research Foundation, 2007. Print. Vasilescu, M, and V Rojanschi. "Tap Water vs. Bottled Water." Environmental Engineering and Management Journal. 9.11 (2010): 1525-1530. Print. Read More