BATTLING OVER BOTTLED

WATER

Group Members:• Mahmuda Ali • Aman Deng • Hamdi Omar • Naemah Roeti • Maha Mahmoud• Jihan Ali

Brief history of Nestlé's water battles in Michigan

• In North America, bottled water companies like Nestlé Waters have been able to secure control over underground aquifers and streams by taking advantage of an outdated patch work of regulatory regimes.

• Nestlé bottling plant in Mecosta started pumping 130 gallons of water every minute from the spring when they started, with plans to increase that to 400 gallons per minute, or about 262 million gallons a year.

• Some local people were thrilled to have job opportunities, some however were not so much. They were concerned about the effects of pumping excessive amount of water.

• Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation (MCWC), a local Mecosta group filed suit contesting Nestlé's right to the spring's waters. MCWC ended its ten-year battle against Nestlé/Ice Mountain in 2009 and won.

• Nestlé agreed to lower its spring pumping in Mecosta earlier in the spring during fish spawning and continue low pumping during the summer months to protect the already stressed stream and lake.

Question 1:Should people in

Michigan be concerned about

how, and by whom, the state’s

ground water is used?

• To survive all the living creatures need water. From trees to animals to insects, all need water to live.

• If the ground water level of a place goes down trees will not be able to get water to grow, which will eventually lead the place to desert. As a result of that that area will become unsuitable for living.

• In Michigan, Nestle planned to pump 400+ gallons of water per minute from the springs.

• Pumping excessive water may and would lead to groundwater depletion or long-term water level depletion.

• In long run dried up lands of Michigan would not be able to sustain trees or forests and living creatures in. Eventually it would lead to drought.

• Which is why Michigan citizens had and still have all the rights to be concerned about how and by whom the state's ground is used. Their very sustainability depends on it.

Question 2What issues of justice does this case raise?

Identify and explain three ethical issues in the case :

It is unfair to the resident and environment because Nestle is using their water supply without limitation and that may affect them in the future which will lead to water shortage, and they are the one who will be affected directly. In addition, exporting of water could possibly damage American Indian Tribes fishery.

Another issue is the government is irresponsible :

It is stated by MCWC contends that the water itself is a public resource. It is resident’s right to use the water for long term for drinking, boating, swimming, or anything else rather than transport the water to other distant land for other use that is why they should shorten the lease into acceptable period which can benefit both parties.

Planning to increase it up to 400 gallons per minute

It is not about the fact that Nestle wants to pump water from the spring, but is about the lavishness amount of water they are pumping every minute from the spring to suit its large demand fitting. It is not reasonable to pump 130 gallons of water every minute and their plan to increase it up to 400 gallons per minute. The huge amount of pumping water is not acceptable regardless of what the company need is.

Conventional ethical principles

It is practice in Michigan as unethical even though it may bring benefit today but it will create water shortage in the future and it will affect the society at large in long term.

It may affect the environment which include the plant, animals and human.

Nestle is privatize a public resource and take many advantage as possible and make profit out of it which consider unethical practice.

Tawhidic paradigm

•Action (‘amal) of stockholder :

Conscience (dhamir). Rationality (‘aqlaniayah). Understanding (fahm). Trust (Al- amanah).

• The water as a natural recourse, is the mean and Nestle has the responsibility.

Stockholder Vs. Stakeholders

Daruriyat

• Protection of life, there is no life without water that is why it should be protected by the society and not accepting the damage of their life, and Allah said:

ي�﴾ ح� ء� ي� ح ح� ك� ء� ح�ا ي� ا ح� ء� ح�ا ي� ح� ح� ح� ﴿

“Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and

made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe”?

Surat Al-'Anbyā'(21:30)

• protection of the environment, even though if you have a lot of wealth you should concern about the environment and the need of other creators. Islamically we should not misuse the water as natural recourses even if we know we will never face shortages of waters. And the profit said:

ح� ح�ا �ح ك�ا ح�� ح ح! ح" ح ك# ح� ء$ ي� ح% ء& ح�' ح� ح) ح�� ح( ح� ء* ي+ ح� ح, ك* �� ح ا� ح��ى ح. ح�� ء/ �� ح ا� :�ذ�كء2) : : ( ح�ا ء' ي3 ح4 ح�ى ح, ح5 ي� ك� ي6 ء7ا ح� ي)، ح� ح4 ح� ح9ا ف;؟ ح' ح( ء� ك� ك ي� ا ��ء ح�ا ح� ح9ا ك$؟ ي� ح( ح"ا ك; ح' ح�% ا� حذا ح# ح�ا

The Messenger of Allah passed by Sa'd when he was performing ablution, and he said: 'What is this extravagance?' He said: 'Can there be any extravagance in ablution?' He said: 'Yes, even if you are on the bank of a flowing river.

• protection of wealth ( mal) the water consider the wealth of the country in Michigan that is why the stakeholder should be concern about their wealth by utilizing water wisely and control the amount of water used for business and public recourses.

Question 3:Identify one of the three (3) sources of

conventional morality that could

address one the three ethical issues in the case. (Note:

Conventional refers to non-Islamic perspectives.)?

• The facts of the case is about that Water is one of the foremost dynamic in the world and economy; however, if the usage of water continues at this rate then, the U.N. deems that by 2025 two thirds of the population may have water shortage issues.

• We assess this case from theperspective of Utilitarian, then the

question that need to be asked should be is this going to maximize good over evil, and the answer would be no. Utilitarian’s views situations by the morally correct actions, so if pumping 400 gallons

of water were benefitting others such as being shipped to Africa to assist with a drought then pumping that amount of water would be acceptable.

► It refers to individual rights as well as freedom. So, Nestle would have the right to pump any amount of water due to the fact that authority is not a factor from this perspective and they believe that a change is good.

►On the other hand at first many residents were thrilled because they would have a better opportunity to make more money and possibly obtain a job but we think they are beginning to realize that the long term affect, potential water shortage, is worse than the short term outcomes like employment.

►This case also in relation to the Risk, Reward, and Responsibility have significant similarities such as profit. Both is a good example of ethics in business. Whether it's bottled of water or a cruise ship, most business should work for profit, but that shouldn’t be the main focus. The point of the company is to please their customer. Therefore, the company shouldn't be profit driven.

We conclude the best outcome

could be viewed for an Utilitarian

perspective because they would

want to achieve the maximum

amount of good for all therefore,

they would not look at the jobs the

plant creates or the amount of

money Nestle pays in taxes, but

the long term effect which is

Michigan experiencing a water

deficiency.

THE CONCLUSION

Nestles’ bottled water companies have take advantage from

watersheds in Michigan. They get more profit and become a bottled

water leadership. In the same time, Nestle brought havoc to

watersheds, pumping excessive water may lead drought.

Thus, considering the size of the resource and the fit is so

most important in the operation of the business and lifestyle.

ك� اا ح< ح" ح��ا ء2 ر ح$ �ح ء& ك� ز@ ح� ك" �Bء لح� ح� Dء ي2 E�ح Fي ٱ ء�ى اا ي Iح ح/ ح� ءKۦ Lء ح/ا ء� ء� Mح Nي ز' ٱ� ك* �� ح ٱ� Oح ح% ح& ي ح� ءKۦ � Lء ح/ا ء� ء& ك*ۥ 4� ح ء7اف' +Rء ح& ف' ر ء/+ Sح

And if Allah had extended [excessively] provision for His servants, they would have committed tyranny throughout the earth. But He sends [it] down in an amount which He wills. Indeed He is, of His servants, Acquainted and seeing (of things that benefit them).

Ash-Shuraa 42:27

THE RECOMMENDATION

Mans who have their own business no matter

what kind of business is he/she should concerns

about the effects on other people, other creatures,

environment as well as natural ecosystem. If the

business that mans do may affect others, the effect

can return back to the owner in the future whether

direct way or indirect way.

THANK YOU