Nestle's Ethical Choices

I believe that Nestle should change its course of action and start looking at other spaces to source their water. There may be several courses of action to take. Understanding what they need all this water for and how to source the water needed in an environmentally friendly way. The Markkula Center Framework is behind my reasoning. There are 5 approaches and I am looking at 2 in particular within this specific framework. I think the Common Good Approach and the Utilitarianism Approach are the most important when thinking about this issue. The Nestle Company should think about the needs of the greatest number of people and should promote the wellness of public life. Water affects all people, and needs to be considered for all the people it affects. Another approach that might work is the Blanchard-Peale Framework. This framework should have a positive impact on the way that the company pursues its future endeavors if they are honest. What they’re doing might pass as legal, but it isn’t

Local environmentalists say the pipeline is removing precious water that would otherwise flow in Strawberry Creek and nourish the ecosystem. After nearly seven years of fighting against the extraction of water, the activists hope California regulators will eventually order BlueTriton Brands to drastically reduce their operation in the national forest. Amanda Frye, one of the leading activists, believes that if all the springs were just allowed to naturally flow, there would be a lot of water in the area. I agree with Amanda's position. A company should bear minimum responsibility for the land that they are using to profit. In this situation, Nestle pays a $600 annual license fee to make billions off harming the land. Government officials should have the power to step in and balance the power of such corporations. California's State Water Resources Control Board has issued a draft Cease and Desist order against Nestlé. The order is the culmination of a years-long battle