The two retail companies picked are Walmart and Costco whose 2017 Financial statement links are provided below: WALMART https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ wmt/financials?query=income- statement COSTCO https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ cost/financials?query=income- statement Both organizations are well known brands and position themselves well with their customer base. Walmart’s value proposition is “We save people money so they can live better”. On the other hand, Costco’s value proposition is “All-in-one convenience and everyday affordability”. Both retailers focus on cost saving for their customers. Looking at their financial statements and by analyzing them a few key areas are evident when comparing the two organization. Looking at the current ratio and quick ratio we can determine the short-term solvency of each organization. The current ratio can be determined by dividing the assets by the liabilities. Walmart’s current ratio sits at 0.86 while Costco’s sits at 0.99. The quick ratio is c
Facts, values, and arguments are three principle parts of business ethics according to the textbook Business Ethics(2012). Today we
will look at another ethical question and argue the pros and cons regarding the production and distribution of an agent banned for use in
the U.S. but not in the rest of the world. That agent is DDT or Dichloro-diphenyl-
insecticide. Let’s talk about DDT.
DDT was manufactured in 1874 and established as an effective insecticide in 1942 according to Danley (2002). The author described
General Douglas MacArthur’s frustration with his troops contracting malaria in World War II. In 1943 the Allies intensively tested one
thousand pounds of DDT with remarkable success and Danley said purchases of DDT soared to three million pounds by 1945. The success
of this pesticide was threefold.
According to Danley, DDT has three significant characteristics:
1. DDT has the lowest toxicity among other pesticides
2. DDT does not break down quickly and stays in the environment longer, even longer than more highly toxic agents.
3. Insects develop resistant strains after a brief time period; higher doses are needed. By the 50’s the dosages of DDT used
were two to three times higher in strength.
DDT use was banned from the US in 1972 but the manufacture and distribution of DDT is not banned in the U.S. (Danley, 2002). Next,
we’ll use Mexico as an example for our discussion questions.
Collins (n.d.) wrotethe point of business is to please customers and satisfied customers buy products. In this case, Mexico benefits
from the employment opportunities the DDT manufacturer provides. Employees will distribute the DDT. Mexico benefits from the taxes
being paid for land purchase or lease. Crops that are grown in Mexico are harvested in the country and employment opportunities
increase. Crops are sold in Mexico and also exported to the USA. Sales tax and income tax is collected and paid to Mexico and the US
Treasury. Without considering the health hazards and risks to the environment, this seems appropriate and legal. Now we’ll discuss the
ethical duties corporations have.
Kofi Annan, former President of the United Nations (UN) presented nine standards covering rights of humans, norms for labor, and
the environment to the UN according to Hartman (2005). These principles are known as the UN Global Impact and were adopted by
over 649 countries according to Hartman. Corporations are bound by these principles and therefore, need to be responsible for providing
information about use of DDT with specific attention to dose and long-term use of the product. Safety precautions need to be followed.
Land that is sprayed should not be used repeatedly to grow other foods as the byproducts of DDT remain in the soil and landfills. Women
of child-bearing years and pregnant women need to avoid contact with DDT. Children are susceptible to health risks from exposure.
Spraying should be monitored and limited to mitigate risks to health and safety. Food needs to be labeled with precautions to wash fruits
and vegetables that neutralize harmful pesticides. Health information must be provided to all stakeholders. Education about DDT needs to
be repeated and user friendly. Mexico still has many people who are illiterate and teaching the people needs to include a variety of tools:
audiovisuals, interactions, and staff who will answer questions.
There was a study in Mexico that included DDT and other pesticides agents. Domínguez-Cortinas et al (2013) noted the levels used to
identify heavy exposure to DDT were not those related to health risks alone. The authors further state there are questions about the
“cocktail” or mixed effect of the different agents in the study. The study was not solely about DDT. The study mentioned the poverty of the
people and its environmental effects. It is common knowledge that impoverished individuals are prone to illnesses that are due to lacking
resources. The poor may have inadequate housing and may be exposed to other environmental elements that have nothing
to do with pesticides. All these need to be considered. Let’s look at ethical duties next.
Is there an ethical duty of DDT manufactures related to their export of DDT to countries that do not ban its use as the USA does?
We will explore some consumer rights presented by President John F. Kennedy to Congress years ago. President Kennedy talked about the following:
1. We have the right to have products that are safe
2. We have the right to have information about products
3. We have the right to choose what to buy
4. We have the right to be heard (Collins, n.d.).
Each of these rights applies to all consumers and countries that do not ban the use of DDT are consumers also. Keeping these four
consumer rights in mind will help corporations to do the right thing for all. Shum (2011) says that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a
normal, essential theme and firms have a responsibility to society beyond profit maximization. Protecting the consumer just makes good
business sense. The recommendations for Mexico can be applied here as well. Emphasis needs to be on education and safety for all. Do not
forget that DDT is effectively killing mosquitoes that carry Zika virus, malaria, plague, and other viruses that are equally dangerous to
humans. Countries have the right to decide to use products that will protect the greater good. We have to give them the safest way to
manage dangerous agents as needed.
Conclusion
We have explored ethics and business with a challenging situation. When products are banned from use in one country and not
another, one has to think about how business will act. Customers demand service and when satisfied, they buy products. When products
are banned in one country sometimes another country steps in to fill the void. No one is absolved of behaving responsibly and ethics will
provide solutions to meet demands and protect consumers. We have to look at the benefit to all in cases like the DDT ban. Viruses that are
carried by mosquitoes pose a significant danger to humans and non-humans alike. Sometimes DDT is the answer.
References:
Business Ethics (2012). This book is licensed under a Creative Commonsby-nc-sa 3.0 license.
Retrieved from: http://2012books.
Collins, K. (n.d.). Exploring Business. Nuack, NY: Flat World Knowledge, Inc.
Danley, J. (2002). Balancing risks: Mosquitoes, malaria, morality, and DDT. Business and Society Review, 107(1), 145-170.
doi:10.1111/0045-3609.00130
Domínguez-Cortinas, G., Díaz-Barriga, F., Martínez-Salinas, R. I., Cossío, P., & Pérez-Maldonado, I. N. (2013). Exposure to chemical mixtures
in Mexican children: High-risk scenarios. Environme
Hartman, L. P. (2005). Perspectives in Business Ethics,3rd Ed. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, NY
Shum, P. K., & Yam, S. L. (2011). Ethics and law: Guiding the invisible hand to correct corporate social responsibility externalities. Journal of
Business Ethics, 98(4), 549-571. doi:10.1007/s10551-
Comments