Monsanto: Corporate Social Responsibility
Monsanto
Sustainable Responsible Business:
A study of the performances of Monsanto
In today’s modern business world, commerce implements operation, drive and manner notions with endorsement and adoption of corporate social responsibility as a matter of course (David Henderson 2004). The stakeholder groups, for instance, governments, communities, suppliers, employees, customers and stockholders persistently claim administrators to dedicate capitals to corporate social responsibility (McWilliams and Siegel 2001, 117). Despite the fact, strategic corporate social responsibility is far more selective on being a standing corporation rate citizen and also addressing the social issues that the corporate creates (Micheal E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer 2006).
Monsanto, along with its subsidiaries, is a company runs business in two sections which are Seeds and Genomics, and Agricultural Productivity to offer famers agricultural products in United States and internationally (Monsanto Co. 2011). Undoubtedly, corporate social responsibility is a must for such corporate organization. This paper targets to examine the social performances of the company in particular of its genetic engineering. It also seeks to give an idea about the balanced argument into advantage and disadvantages which the genetically modified foods has on the new era stakeholders.
Failings of Monsanto’s Genetic Engineering
Genetic engineering is an artificial breeding technique by modifying the genetic codes of organisms (Patrick Dixon 2011). Part of the society is proud of this advanced technology; however, as regards to its negative impacts, it gives rise to numerous scandals. Farid E. Ahmed (2002, 215) also alleged that, consumer distrust occasioning from former foods and environmental anxieties, apparent monitoring omission and uncertainty in government administrations, all influences which driven arguments about the environmental and public health safety issues, e.g. latent gene flow to
Sustainable Responsible Business:
A study of the performances of Monsanto
In today’s modern business world, commerce implements operation, drive and manner notions with endorsement and adoption of corporate social responsibility as a matter of course (David Henderson 2004). The stakeholder groups, for instance, governments, communities, suppliers, employees, customers and stockholders persistently claim administrators to dedicate capitals to corporate social responsibility (McWilliams and Siegel 2001, 117). Despite the fact, strategic corporate social responsibility is far more selective on being a standing corporation rate citizen and also addressing the social issues that the corporate creates (Micheal E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer 2006).
Monsanto, along with its subsidiaries, is a company runs business in two sections which are Seeds and Genomics, and Agricultural Productivity to offer famers agricultural products in United States and internationally (Monsanto Co. 2011). Undoubtedly, corporate social responsibility is a must for such corporate organization. This paper targets to examine the social performances of the company in particular of its genetic engineering. It also seeks to give an idea about the balanced argument into advantage and disadvantages which the genetically modified foods has on the new era stakeholders.
Failings of Monsanto’s Genetic Engineering
Genetic engineering is an artificial breeding technique by modifying the genetic codes of organisms (Patrick Dixon 2011). Part of the society is proud of this advanced technology; however, as regards to its negative impacts, it gives rise to numerous scandals. Farid E. Ahmed (2002, 215) also alleged that, consumer distrust occasioning from former foods and environmental anxieties, apparent monitoring omission and uncertainty in government administrations, all influences which driven arguments about the environmental and public health safety issues, e.g. latent gene flow to