Pepsi Co Case Analysis in Relation to Environment
______________ Case Analysis of PepsiCo in relation to the environment
In today’s society, people are now more aware and concern about the products they purchase. So much so that many big corporations can no longer disregard their activities that may or are already causing massive harm to the environment (Success of Palm Oil Brings Plantations Under Pressure to Preserve Habitats 2009). Moreover with the power of the media, it is made easier for both the corporation itself and the environmentalist to publicise the activities corporations are involved in and the impact of these activities, be it positive or negative (Aaron 2008). An international corporation like Unilever, which is also the largest food company in United States (Greenpeace 2008), can affect the environment and its people both positively and negatively. An analysis was conducted on Unilever, detailing the impact of their actions in relation to the environment. Two cases for and against Unilever were examined.
____________________________________________________________
__________
Palm oil is an economical and widely used ingredient for food and cosmetic products (Greenpeace 2008; The other oil spill; The campaign against palm oil 2010, 71) that is highly targeted by Greenpeace, recognised as the ‘protector’ of the environment (Greenpeace n.d.), in 2008. Many palm oil suppliers were conducting deforestation of Indonesia’s rainforest and peatlands to make space for palm trees (Greenpeace 2008; The other oil spill; The campaign against palm oil 2010, 71). This is due to the rising demand of palm oil, which is expected to be double that of 2008 by 2030 (Greenpeace 2008; Paul 2008). Owing to deforestation, Indonesia is now the third largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions (Greenpeace 2008; Greenpeace Campaign Forces Unilever U-Turn on Palm Oil 2008), next to USA & China. She has contributed 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions (Greenpeace 2008; Greenpeace Campaign Forces Unilever
In today’s society, people are now more aware and concern about the products they purchase. So much so that many big corporations can no longer disregard their activities that may or are already causing massive harm to the environment (Success of Palm Oil Brings Plantations Under Pressure to Preserve Habitats 2009). Moreover with the power of the media, it is made easier for both the corporation itself and the environmentalist to publicise the activities corporations are involved in and the impact of these activities, be it positive or negative (Aaron 2008). An international corporation like Unilever, which is also the largest food company in United States (Greenpeace 2008), can affect the environment and its people both positively and negatively. An analysis was conducted on Unilever, detailing the impact of their actions in relation to the environment. Two cases for and against Unilever were examined.
____________________________________________________________
__________
Palm oil is an economical and widely used ingredient for food and cosmetic products (Greenpeace 2008; The other oil spill; The campaign against palm oil 2010, 71) that is highly targeted by Greenpeace, recognised as the ‘protector’ of the environment (Greenpeace n.d.), in 2008. Many palm oil suppliers were conducting deforestation of Indonesia’s rainforest and peatlands to make space for palm trees (Greenpeace 2008; The other oil spill; The campaign against palm oil 2010, 71). This is due to the rising demand of palm oil, which is expected to be double that of 2008 by 2030 (Greenpeace 2008; Paul 2008). Owing to deforestation, Indonesia is now the third largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions (Greenpeace 2008; Greenpeace Campaign Forces Unilever U-Turn on Palm Oil 2008), next to USA & China. She has contributed 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions (Greenpeace 2008; Greenpeace Campaign Forces Unilever