SUBMITTED ON: 23/09/2013

SUBMITTED BY: Siddhant Sarup 400907027 2MB2

INTRODUCTION
The case of Cashew production and pesticides is about public sector Company named Plantation Corporation of Kerala (PCK) which takes care of cashew plantation in Kerala. The PCK has been engaged in the aerial spraying of the pesticide named Endosulfan for the last 18 to 20 years to control tea mosquito in cashew plantation. The cashew exports contribute significantly with exports of 131760 metric tonnes valued at Rs 4390 crores in 2011-2012. However, the aerial spraying of pesticides on cashew plantations has become an ethical and moral issue very recently when people in that area started feeling unhealthy. For the local people it is a hard time because of the illnesses which followed spraying mainly breathlessness, vomiting, bleeding from the nose, fatigue and other effects. Later in 1998, a few people from the locality including an agriculture assistant working in the agriculture department filed a case in the Hon. Munsifs judgment. Following this judgment, there was a year of losses for the cashew growers in general because of a sudden change in climate during flowering. The Key Actors/Stakeholders are: Local people/Residents PCK PMFAI) Environmental groups

UTILITARIAN ANALYSIS
The basic idea of this theory is based on The Greatest Happiness Principle: Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness John Stuart Mill Happiness Unhappiness = = pleasure, and the absence of pain pain, and the absence of pleasure

KANTIAN ANALYSIS
Issue: Is it ethical for PCK to engage in aerial spraying of pesticides? The rule is morally incorrect as it contradicts Kants conclusion that the only thing in the world can be called good without qualification is good will. The main aim of the company here is to earn profits and it does not care about the dangerous health hazards posed on the people of that area by this act.

Hence, it is unethical for PCK to engage in aerial spraying of pesticides.

Fernando: Business ethics and Indian governance

Kantian

Moral Rule: The ill-effects on health of people can be compromised/ overlooked if an industrial activity earns more money. Universal Rule: Good revenue earning industrial activity with bad after effects on human health should be allowed. Analysis: Health is wealth. Kantian supports that every human being is rational and has a right to live. If industrial activities are allowed in all areas , against the will of people and also neglecting its negative ill-effects on humans for sake of revenue earning thereby as a consequence, human being will not find any apt pollution free area to live where they can breathe fresh air. The notion that human beings are rational would prove wrong, because no human beings prefer to live in polluted areas. The right to live is also violated at the same time. The moral rule violates the duty of human beings to frame rules for welfare of people and not just money earning. Thus the moral rule formed is self-contradictory and thereby it defeats itself. The moral rule is not adhering to key principle of Kantian ethics. Therefore trying to universalize rule leads to contradiction. Conclusion: Therefore PCK activity being engaging in pesticide spray is immoral as this money earning activity is leading to ill-effects on human health. Therefore methods to earn money at the cost of human health are unethical.

Utilitarian Theory:
Act Utilitarianism We aim to check the net happiness of all the effected parties. Action: Continuous spray of pesticides in the cashew plantation region. The affected parties to be considered are: Actors 1 Local people 2 PCK 3 PMFAI Net: Unhappiness Analysis: The number of people suffering from acute health problems living in the Eloor Industrial region is much more than the people being happy. Wealth will be would be concentrated in hands of few people i.e. mainly employees of the organization. Also the PFMAI could have thought of earning the revenues by using some other pesticide sales rather than this specific one as this could have helped in preventing the health problems in these areas. The profits achieved are short term and may get affected over a long period of time .But the ill health effects with which the people will suffer are long term. So if we take into consideration the net/ total effect of three parties we would say that action of continuation of spray is bad because it is leading to unhappiness of the affected parties. Therefore it is unethical to continue spray of pesticide. b) It is framed in language of rights and which are governed by moral rules. It states that moral rules are simply the rules that are necessary if we are to gain the benefits of social living. Rule: Every individual has right to good health. Analysis: Each human being has a right to good health therefore others have duty to make sure that you receive it. It is a positive right .In the given scenario the action PCK abate local people from their right .The rule stated is not a moral rule if benefits of social living are not gained and hence cannot be enforced. Consequence Unhappy Happy Happy Reason Suffering from acute health problems, Earning continues with low input cost Sales of pesticides continues

It is immoral to follow such rule. Therefore it is unethical to by PCK to continue spray of pesticide.
KANTIANS FIRST FORMULATION

Is it ethical for PCK to engage in aerial spraying of pesticides? Proposed Rule: PCK can make use of aerial spraying for producing bumper production of cashew and earning higher profits. PCK wants to earn profit by exporting more and more cashew and thus earning more returns from it, for this they need to produce good crop or cashew yield and for that they need pesticides like Endosulfan to prevent crop from tea mosquito. The companies who are producer of these chemicals also influence and encourage these companies to use the chemicals and finally they also wants to earn profit. Universal Rule: All companies like PCK can use products like pesticide to enhance their yield and make profit as their only aim. Contradiction: If every company starts using things like pesticide that harms nature as well as the health of human beings then every business would be only meant for profit making and nobody would be actually care for development of nation and well being of people. With this, one day all natural resources and reserves would be destroyed and people would suffer from many diseases. The proposed moral rule by the company PCK is self defeating. Therefore, it is wrong for PCK to engage in use of aerial spraying without considering nature and health aspects of people.

KANTIANS SECOND FORMULATION

By engaging in aerial spraying, PCK has treated common people and nature as means to end. They have deceived the nature by harming the biodiversity of the region and common people by affecting their health. It was wrong for PCK to neglect the importance of nature and the problems of people, rather the company should have followed the decision made by court for not using pesticides and instead use alternative or other improved methods for cashew production. Therefore, according to Kantian Theory, PCK should discontinue the use of Aerial spraying as it is unethical because health of the people living nearby is at stake.

SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

Social contract theory, nearly as old as philosophy itself, is the view that persons moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live. According to social contract theory (SCT), morality consists in the set of rules governing behavior, that rational people would accept, on the condition that others accept them as well. According to Social Contract Theory, there was no contract between PCK, people and the Government. So, due to this people were facing many health problems such as: A noxious smell fills the air, difficulties with breathing. Eyes burning and itching, sometimes bringing tears to eyes. Headaches, dizziness, and at times suffocation and a choking feeling. Skin itching, with swelling when scratched. People have become generally weak and grow tired quickly. They complain that they are not able to work continuously for more than two hours. Women and children have become anemic and are ailing from frequent fevers and diseases.

Also, PCK acquired the land in which people were living and did not provide any compensation and did not even ask Government for it.

Therefore, the use of Aerial Spraying should be stopped as the above problems are more important than the economic concerns.

CONCLUSION
According to Utilitarian theory, if the Aerial Spraying is continued then the people living nearby should be given accommodation somewhere else. According to Kantian theory, it is unethical for PCK to continue Aerial Spraying. Also PMFAI is using as a means which is unethical according to Kantians second formulation. According to Social Contract theory, it is unethical if PCK continues with Aerial Spraying as there is no contract between Government, PCK and People.

ACADEMIC REFERENCES
Fernando, Business Ethics: An Indian Perspective, Pearson Education.
http://www.csus.edu/indiv/g/gaskilld/ethics/sct.htm

http://www.springer.com/social+sciences/applied+ethics/journal/10551