Michelle Cheung2

Some brands are very successful in tying its brand to its product. For example, Kleenex is almost equal to tissues. Similarly, Starbucks has also established its superior status in the coffee industry. However, unlike Kleenex, which produces its products (i.e. tissues) in their own pulp manufacturing mills, Starbucks, on the other hands, imports most of its coffee beans from the farmers in African countries. While Starbucks is making a huge profit off the famous Ethiopian coffee beans, it has tried to stop the Ethiopia’s farmers from trademarking their most famous coffee names, which could potentially bring them revenue of up to £47m/year!

First of all, before criticizing this “unethical” act, we have to define what social responsibility means to a corporation. If that only means that businesses should not break any laws, discriminate any groups or do anything harmful to the environment, then Starbucks has totally passed. In a free market, businesses make decisions that can generate the most profits. They are not obliged to make huge financial commitments to charities. Although Starbucks seemed to be unethical according to most people’s standard, it fulfilled its role in the free market.

Surprisingly, Starbucks changed its position in response to social riots!

Work Cited

Seager,  Ashley.  “Starbucks, the coffee beans and the copyright row that cost Ethiopia £47m.”  The Guardian 26 Oct.

2006.