The paper "Remedies for the Injustices Faced by Coffee Stakeholders " is an outstanding example of a marketing case study. It is no doubt that coffee is one of the leading commodity exports. It is produced by over fifty developing countries across the world. Its production plays a significant role in economic development. Notably, over 90% of the world’ s coffee is produced by 20 million small scale farmers making it an important source of income and employment. The coffee agribusiness has been faced with a lot of challenges that have greatly affected its stakeholders including farmers and the shareholders.
For instance, the crisis that befell the coffee industry across the world that occurs between 2000 and 2004 saw its prices fall to the lowest levels, and producers saw their export earning reduce by half. This crisis was detrimental to the coffee industry and had negative economic, political, and social consequences for the leading coffee producing countries (Giovannucci & Koekoek, 2003). It resulted in some coffee farms being abandoned which led to increased poverty in developing countries such as Asia and Africa. This essay seeks to discuss the remedies for the injustices faced by coffee stakeholders. Some of the problems experienced in the coffee industry are a result of the injustices that its stakeholders undergo.
Injustice can be defined as an unfair treatment that results in underserved outcomes. The injustices facing the coffee stakeholders can be categorized into the Macro, Meso, and Micro contextual levels. The micro contextual level involves the challenges that face the internal environment of a coffee firm. The most prevalent injustices to coffee farmers at this level mainly involve limited capital to establish a coffee farm.
Shareholders at this stage mainly experience delayed and underpayments and expensive farm inputs. Consumers are overcharged by the retailers whereas the sellers face a shortage of coffee beans, fluctuating prices, and manipulation of terminal markets in nations like the United States of America. The Meso contextual level mainly encompasses the market forces. The injustices that the stakeholders the experience at this level involves stiff competition from other coffee-producing countries. At the Macro level, the stakeholders experience injustices such as limited access to credit facilities.
A country’ s demographics, technological developments, economic developments, and politics affect coffee stakeholders. The collapse of the coffee industry will have negative consequences on the economy. Therefore, there is a need for coffee stakeholders to come up with effective solutions to combat the injustices. Some of the possible solutions to these injustices include; States to protect farmers from exploiters, provide subsidies on farm inputs and train more coffee and agricultural advisors to facilitate mass production of quality coffee beans(Biswas-Tortajada, 2015). Stakeholders such as consumers, producers, and manufacturers should form unions to represent their interests and fight for their rights.
Adoption of solutions to the challenges and injustices that face the industry will result in the protection of humans’ rights, increased production, reduced the cost of operation, and maximize revenue. Remedies for the Injustices faced by coffee stakeholders The injustices experienced by coffee stakeholders can be corrected by implementing effective strategies. Ruggie’ s framework provides an effective outline of how injustices can be prevented and fully addressed (Adeyeye, 2012). The framework provides a global standard for addressing the risks of injustices to business stakeholders. It is mainly pegged on three main principles; protection, respect, and remedy.
Protection entails the state’ s role to protect the stakeholder’ s rights through effective regulation, policies, and adjudication. Respect involves the corporate responsibility to act diligently in respecting the rights of its stakeholders to avoid harboring the rights of others while remedy involves the role of the business and the state in providing greater access by stakeholders to appropriate remedy (Adeyeye, 2012). The discussion will also base its arguments on the theory of utilitarianism and the theory of consequentialism.
The theory of Utilitarianism primarily stresses the idea of happiness and how it can be attained. The theory of consequentialism aims at a desirable ending. It is based on the fact that a good act will result in a good outcome. Some of the injustices and possible remedies to the coffee injustices include;
ADEYEYE, A. (2012). Corporate social responsibility of multinational corporations in developing countries: perspectives on anti-corruption. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Biswas-Tortajada, A., and Biswas, A. K. 2015.Sustainability in Coffee Production: Creating Shared Value Chains in Colombia. London, England: Routledge.
FRIDELL, G. (2007). Fair trade coffee: the prospects and pitfalls of market-driven social justice. Toronto, University of Toronto Press.
Giovannucci, D., and Koekoek, F. J. 2003. The state of sustainable coffee: A study of twelve major markets. The State Of Sustainable Coffee: A Study Of Twelve Major Markets, IISD, UNCTAD, ICO.
Linton, A. 2005.Partnering for Sustainability: business–NGO alliances in the coffee industry. Development in Practice, 15(3-4), pp. 600-614.
RAFFAELLI, M. (2005). Rise and demise of commodity agreements: an investigation into the breakdown of international commodity agreements. Cambridge, Woodhead.
UNITED STATES.(1963). International coffee agreement, 1962. Washington, U.S., Govt. Print. Off.
WORLD COFFEE INFORMATION CENTER. (2006). Economic impact of coffee; how the International coffee agreement contributes to the progress of the developing countries and the United States.