Business Ethics

As the product manager for a line of insecticides and pesticides my responsibility is for both the domestic and foreign sales. Lately though, foreign sales have been declining recently due to global competition. Recently, I have had an unusual opportunity to increase the sales and profit by selling a pesticide known as Dieldrin to a group of foreign customers. The area we are selling this pesticide to, has been plagued for centuries by swarms of locusts. These locusts are destructive and can strip crop land and trees bare then move on to a new area. With the spring and early summer being the most critical time for agriculture in this region, the crops are being destroyed by the locust swarms and cannot be replanted. This is because crops are grown on water stored in the soil from the winter rains. The locust contribute to the poverty of the region, but they do not cause starvation, unless accompanied by a drought. The Dieldrin kill the locust and other insects which go through the grub stage, in the soil. The problem is that with Dieldrin it is a water soluble chemical and does build up in the food chain showing harm to humans as well as the wildlife. In this situation ethical principles are being tested because we are faced with a situation in which there is no obvious right or wrong decision.

In this situation there are three groups that would be benefited by an outcome. The groups benefited would be the U.S. chemical company, the pour farmers, and the community of the foreign country. The reasons the U.S. chemical company would be benefited would be because they would receive a profit of 25 million dollars. Since sales have been declining lately because of global completion, this would help the company meet their sales goal. Another group benefited would be the pour farmers. This is because if the locust were killed the farmer’s crops will not be destroyed. In a bad year 20% to 30% of the total crop is destroyed and the landowners are the ones who suffer the financial losses. So if the locust were killed off, the farmers would not suffer any losses along with the poor in cities who are subject to price increases. The last group helped would be this foreign country's community/people. This kind of ties into the last benefit about the farmers. This is because if the farmers can have a successful crop season then prices will not increase for the pour. Since the locust could potentially contribute to the poverty of the region, it would cause starvation if a larger swarm is accompanied by a drought or political instability and war.

Now that we have talked about the groups benefited let’s look at the groups that would be harmed. The groups that could be harmed would be the health of the farmers, the U.S. chemical company, and the health of the community. The farmers’ health is harmed because they will be working around the chemical that could possibly build up in the liver and cause illness. It is reported