Palm Oil and Nestle

{draw:g} {draw:rect}

{draw:frame} {draw:frame} {draw:frame}

As technology continues to connect people and make the world a smaller place, corporations must operate with a much higher level of transparency than they have in the past and they are held accountable for conducting operations with ethics and social responsibility. While the world has increased access to this information, beliefs and values are not held universal and what is a priority for consumers in the Western world may not have the same level of significance in Southeastern Asia.

Background

Nestle has recently come under fire from Greenpeace for purchasing palm oil from suppliers in Indonesia who Greenpeace believes are contributing to environmental destruction. (Greenpeace, 2010) Large areas of Indonesia are being deforested in order to grow more palm oil plantations. By cutting down the natural trees in the region, they are ruining the rainforest and peat fields in Indonesia. The palm oil plantations are replacing the natural trees which are causing the area to be uninhabitable by the animal populations in the region. Greenpeace began its anti-Nestle campaign by posting an article on their website as well as releasing a graphic video about giving the orangutangs “a break”, a play off of Nestle’s KitKat branding. (Armstrong) Consumer reactions were immediate as the video has received over one million hits. Via social media outlets such as FaceBook, MySpace, and Twitter, complaints began flooding in to Nestle and their pages have been flooded by questions asking where they receive their palm oil from. Protests also took place at Nestle plants in London, Amsterdam, and Frankfurt. (Greenpeace, 2010)

Nestle’s immediate response was to drop their Indonesian palm oil supplier, Sinar Mas. In response to this move by Nestle, Indonesian palm oil suppliers are now up in arms at what they see as a threat to their livelihood. (Antara News, 2010)

The situation with Greenpeace was amplified by...