Unethical Business by Cocacola, case study of Kaladera Village about the water Depletion

1. Unethical Practices in
Companies
NETHAN.P

2. Overview…..
• The Indian government forced Coca-Cola out of the country in 1977.
• The company returned in 1993
• Each bottling plants extracts up to 1.5m litres of water everyday from the
ground.
• It takes nine litres of clean water to manufacture a litre of Coke.

3. Kala Dera Case

4. Kala Dera - Thirsting from Coca-Cola
• Kala Dera is a large village outside the city of Jaipur.
• Agriculture is the primary source of livelihood.
• Coca-Cola started its bottling operations in Kala Dera in 2004, and within a
year, the community started to notice a rapid decline in groundwater levels

5. Kala Dera lies in an overexploited groundwater area and access
to water has been difficult.
Summers are particularly intense in the area, when water
shortages are most acute.
Moreover summer months are also when Coca-Cola reaches its
peak production.
Coca-Cola bottling plant in Kala Dera continues extracts the most
water, making already existing water shortages even worse.

6. Waterbed got depleted

7. • For farmers, loss of groundwater translated directly into loss of income.
• For many children it meant leaving schools to provide a much needed
helping hand in household since the women had additional burdens.

8. Community response
The community in Kala Dera organized itself to challenge the Coca-Cola
company for the worsening water conditions - through extraction and
pollution - and demanded the closure of the Coca-Cola bottling plant.

9. The company, in usual
fashion, denied any
wrongdoing, blaming
"outsiders" for the
increasing local community
opposition. They claimed to
have conducted an
environmental study and
found the project safe to the
village
Company Response

10. The assessment noted that the plant's operations would continue to
worsen water situation
Coca-Cola should no longer utilize the overexploited groundwater
resource in Kala Dera
1. Transport water from the nearest aquifer that may not be
stressed
2. Store water from low-stress seasons
3. Relocate the plant to a water-surplus area
4. Shut down this facility
• The community in Kala Dera welcomed the recommendations and
waited for company’s response.
Assessments

11. Ground water Level : Published by Central
Groundwater Board

12. • Coca-cola took seven month to respond
• Coca-cola not respond to the concern raised
• Unethical and dishonest campaign
• Chosen to continue the operation
• Continued in misery of thousand people
Coca-Cola's Response Unethical and Dishonest

13. • Coca-Cola is supposed to have conducted an Environmental
Impact assessment.
• Company started its operations even though it found to be
"overexploited 1998.
• Describes itself as a "hydration" company.
Criminal Negligence

14. COKE’S Corporate Social Responsibility - A Scam?
The Coca-Cola steps up its corporate social responsibility
announcing to the world that it is a “green and socially
responsible company.” --- but was not the case at kala dera
Rainwater harvesting --- Dilapidated and a Bluff

15. Some serious concerns about Coca-Cola's
claims on rainwater harvesting
• The company announced that it has recharged five times the amount of
water it has used.
• When asked to back it up with numbers, Coca-Cola does not provide any.
• Coca-Cola states that they "will install measuring devices that will verify the
amount of water recharged.”
• If they do not have measuring devices installed to verify the amount of water
recharged, how can they make a claim of recharging five times the water that
they have extracted?

16. • Coca-Cola started rainwater harvesting to overcome response to the
growing campaigns against its water mismanagement.
• Coca-Cola was bluffing people with its rainwater harvesting.
• The rainfall in the area is too low, and the amount of rainfalls fluctuates a
lot contributing to 30 days of rains every year
• 80% of those rains come in just two or three days and hence rainwater
harvesting is simply not efficient

17. Coca-Cola Threatens Top Indian
Photographer with Lawsuit Billboard
by: Sharad Haksar

18. • In 2005, Coca-Cola's Indian subsidiary, sent a letter to Mr. Haksar
threatening him with serious legal actions unless the billboard was replaced
'unconditionally and immediately'.
• Coca-Cola would seek Indian Rupees 2 million (US$ 45,000) for “the
damage to the goodwill and reputation" of Coca-Cola, and also demanded an
'unconditional apology in writing'.
• Mr. Haksar said that he had no intentions of issuing any apology because he
has not committed anything wrong.

19. http://www.indiaresource.org/news/2011/1008.html
http://www.polarisinstitute.org/farmers_vs_cocacola_in_water_wars
Executive summary of the study on independent third party
assessment of Coca-Cola facilities in India, by TERI - The Energy and
Resources Institute
Reference