Yemen is often in the news because of the escalating rebellions. Now it is also in the news because it has water problems. It is expected that Yemen is on the short term a big city without water.
There are several factors that are partly responsible for this dilemma.
Firstly, farmers use underground aquifers instead of rainwater which lose a vast amount of water. And secondly, most farmers are growing khat (a kind of drugs) instead of food crops which needs more water than food crops. But on khat they earn more money than on food, but it has to be noticed that they can’t live without the money earned by khat.
This is an interesting case, because I think it is a good example of a moral dilemma.
The farmers have the choice of between growing khat a drug which needs a lot of water which will lead cause on the short term to a water problem, or grow food crops which needs less water but will generate less money and probably even too little to live from.
If they choose for the first option they act in self-interest and not in the public interest. They live more according the business discourse and not according the moral discourse. Thus these farmers are acting morally wrong. If all farmers do this there will be in short time no water in the city. The only problem is that the farmers don’t see the direct effect of their actions, because the really water problems start after a period of time. This could be a reason that they don’t see that it is morally wrong what they are doing. They can think that there is water enough. But the most important thing is that they are indirectly more or less forced to grow khat because otherwise they haven’t enough money to live.
Do farmers really act morally wrong when they choose to grow khat instead of food crops? The principal says that food crops will generate probably too little to survive. If this is true, can we blame farmers that they choose the option that enables them to survive? Assuming this information is true for this case, I do not think we can blame them.
In the principal comment it is stated that farmers do not see the direct effect of their actions. Therefore, they do not know that they are causing water shortages which they also need to survive. Therefore, I do not think that they act morally wrong if they choose for this option for survival reasons.
As my point of view, the Yemen government should limit famers to grow the khat to deal with the dilemma. Government should choose some lands can grow the khat but others cannot be permit. Although it is not morally wrong for famers to maximum their profit, no plenty of water in one country is also a big problem. People need water to continuous their life. Farmers have responsibility to use less water to grow khat if the government has no enough water to the people. People can maximum their profit legally and morally right under the situation they will not hurt others’ benefits.
NOTE: Principal comments should be send toM.E.Bosma@uvt.nl; secondary comments can be posted directly onto the weblog.
NOTE: The deadline for sending in principal comments is Friday, April 16, 2010; the deadline for posting secondary comments is Thursday, April 29, 2010.
NOTE: The articles linked to the principal comments should be in English, no other languages are allowed.
NOTE: Secondary comments should include an ANR, otherwise they cannot be traced back to a particular student and bonus points cannot be assigned.
NOTE: Only secondary comments on principal comments posted in 2010 will receive bonus points.
Welcome to the Business Ethics IB weblog! This weblog is meant for and managed by International Business students following the course in Business Ethics (360026) at Tilburg University. Students can use this weblog supporting the course in Business Ethics, discussing for instance the theory lectured in the course in relation to a current topic in business.
Through the effort of the students, the teaching staff hopes that this weblog will become a high quality weblog in the field of business ethics. There are two possibilities for students to participate in this weblog:
3 comments:
Do farmers really act morally wrong when they choose to grow khat instead of food crops? The principal says that food crops will generate probably too little to survive. If this is true, can we blame farmers that they choose the option that enables them to survive? Assuming this information is true for this case, I do not think we can blame them.
In the principal comment it is stated that farmers do not see the direct effect of their actions. Therefore, they do not know that they are causing water shortages which they also need to survive. Therefore, I do not think that they act morally wrong if they choose for this option for survival reasons.
U1236310
ANR 702653
As my point of view, the Yemen government should limit famers to grow the khat to deal with the dilemma. Government should choose some lands can grow the khat but others cannot be permit. Although it is not morally wrong for famers to maximum their profit, no plenty of water in one country is also a big problem. People need water to continuous their life. Farmers have responsibility to use less water to grow khat if the government has no enough water to the people. People can maximum their profit legally and morally right under the situation they will not hurt others’ benefits.
499432
Post a Comment