Read Case 3.2: Battling Over Bottled Water, located here or on page 109 in your

Question

Read Case 3.2: Battling Over Bottled Water, located here or on page 109 in your textbook. Nestlé holds a 99-year lease for the land that the Sanctuary Spring sits on. While lease-holders are generally understood to be able to make full use of their land, when public resources are involved, they are limited to “reasonable uses.” Review the case study and formulate an argument either supporting or challenging this distinction. Support your reasoning by addressing key ways in which benefits and burdens are being distributed between Nestlé and the community in this case.

Link to case

https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/BUS/309/1152/BUS309_Case_Study_3.2.pdf

Explanation / Answer

According the US government ground water is common resource, You cannot just exploit all of it for commercial reasons.

Ground water is key resource of the state, without ground water there is no alternate supply of water in many places, People in those areas depend on water for every need.

Nestle might own leasing rights to land that they sit on, but certainly they do not have right to exploit all the resources beneath land. They do not enjoy exclusive rights to resources underneath. There certainly are many limitations considering property rights.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse R
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.