Environmental and human rights groups have accused Monsanto of manipulating the Indian cotton industry. Over 90 per cent of cotton-growing land in India is seeded with Monsanto seeds. These seeds are either hybrid varieties or have been genetically modified, ostensibly for the purpose of increasing quality, yield, and resistance to pests and disease. For many poor Indian cotton farmers who borrowed money to purchase the significantly more expensive seeds in the hope of reaping the promised benefits, these benefits did not appear to relieve farmers' significant debt and they certainly did nothing to repay it. A significant number of these farmers have resorted to suicide as a result of their predicament.
Monsanto blames improper or insufficient irrigation and improper use of pesticides for the underperformance of their seeds in the hands of poorer farmers and point to the increased yields achieved by wealthier farmers.
1. MNCs have a history of moving into emerging markets with considerable disruption to local agricultural market conditions. What are the responsibilities of companies, if any, with respect to people adversely affected by these disruptions?
2. Monsanto had introduced a variety of genetically-modified seeds with a suicide gene to prevent future regrowth, and this created a situation where farmers were unable to save seeds for future years. They were forced to purchase new seeds each year. The motivation for that genetic modification was viewed by several environmental and human rights groups as a vehicle for increasing Monsanto's profit at the expense of the farmer without any ensuing agricultural benefit. Is Monsanto's action of genetically modifying the cotton seeds morally right or morally wrong? Explain, considering the effects of the ways in which they are modified