International Business | Internet Assignments

International Business : The Challenge of Global Competition, 8/e

Donald Ball
Wendell H. McCulloch, California State University Long Beach
Paul L. Frantz, California State University Long Beach
Michael Geringer, California Polytechnic State University
Michael S. Minor, University of Texas Pan American

Internet Assignments

Students:

Included here are some internet/case assignments that you can use to review or that your instructor may give as assignments. Your instructors have been given the answers to these questions and may choose to give them out to you or not.

This case is designed to:

Expose you to legal forces that impact companies operating in the international environment;
Provide you with insight into how Monsanto's operations became intertwined with legal forces around the world; and
Place you in a decision-making role regarding Monsanto's future activities in light of its current situation.

Until several years ago, Monsanto was a chemicals company with operations around the world. However, its former CEO, Robert Shapiro had visions of a brave new world where science, specifically agricultural biotechnology, would once again prove Malthus wrong. (Malthus, writing around the time of the industrial revolution in England, warned of impending environmental disaster and famine. He argued that the population was increasing geometrically, but that food was increasing arithmetically.) Therefore, in 1997, Monsanto spun off its chemicals business as Solutia, to concentrate on the life sciences. In 2000, Monsanto became a wholly owned subsidiary of Pharmacia. Shortly after that, consumer apprehension over the so-called "Frankenfoods" prompted Pharmacia to re-launch Monsanto as a public company.

Today, Monsanto continues its quest to become the world's leader in the new industry called life sciences. The driving force is biotechnology. This allows scientists to alter the genetic makeup of plants and animals, with the desired outcome being a "better" product. Generally, "better" is defined in terms of either increased yield or greater resistance to disease or insects.

Biotechnology enhanced products currently marketed by Monsanto include the following: (source: Monsanto: Biotechnology: Promise for a Brighter Future).

Insect-protected cotton with the Bollgard gene protects itself against cotton bollworms, pink bollworms and tobacco budworms. As a result, cotton growers can use significantly less chemical insecticides over their fields.

NewLeaf insect-protected potatoes offer protection against the Colorado potato beetle, the most damaging insect pest to potato crops.

YieldGard insect-protected corn protects itself against the European corn borer and related insect pests such as the Southwestern corn borer.

Soybeans, cotton, corn, and canola with the Roundup Ready gene are genetically improved to tolerate Roundup herbicide. These technologies make it possible for growers to use Roundup in place of other herbicides that may be less effective or less desirable. Roundup herbicide can reduce the number of weed treatments and can also help reduce tillage to conserve soil moisture and reduce erosion of valuable topsoil.

Posilac bovine somatotropin helps dairy cows produce milk more efficiently, without any loss in quality or natural wholesomeness.

A product which Monsanto ultimately agreed not to market because of the furor that it created was the so-called terminator seed. The terminator seed utilized a genetic technique that rendered farm-saved seed sterile. If commercially used, the seed-sterilizing technology would prevent farmers from saving seed from their harvest to use in following years. This would force farmers to return to the commercial seed market every year.

Many agree that biotechnology truly is the wave of the future. However, the legal quagmire that Monsanto found itself in threatened the very survival of the company. Monsanto's arrogant and seemingly reckless response to consumer concerns over genetically altered food products opened a Pandora's box. The focus of the debate shifted from "feeding the world" to "poisoning the world with Frankenfood". Environmental groups, politicians and governments all entered the debate.

To see what happened go here for Part 1 http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/monprob.html , and here for part 2 http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/monprob2.html .

Case Instructions:

Answer the following questions.

Describe the legal environment that Monsanto found itself in with respect to the terminator seed.
Do you feel that Monsanto was correct in its decision not to commercialize the terminator seed technology? Why or why not?
If you were part of Monsanto's senior management, what specific steps would you take in light of your answer to #2? Why would you take these steps?
If you were part of Monsanto's senior management, what would be your long-term strategy for the company?

Sources:

Flynn, Julia, John Carey and William Echikson. February 2, 1998. "Seeds of Discontent." Business Week.

Kluger, Jeffrey. February 1, 1999. "The Suicide Seeds." Time.